“Having set forth the teaching on the spiritual life by which Christ gives life to those who have been regenerated, the Evangelist consequently deals with the spiritual nourishment by which Christ sustains those he has given life to; and first he sets forth the visible miracle which Christ performed by providing bodily nourishment; second he deals with spiritual nourishment, at the place, "Jesus answered them and said: Amen, amen, I say to you, you seek me, not because..." etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he sets forth the visible miracle of bodily nourishment; second he shows the effect of the miracle, at the place, "Those men therefore, when they had seen..." etc. Concerning the miracle he sets forth two things: namely its circumstances, and its performance, at the place, "And when Jesus had lifted up his eyes..." Concerning the first he does three things. First he describes the multitude which he fed; second he determines the place where he fed them, at the place, "Jesus therefore went up into the mountain"; third the time when he fed them, at the place, "Now the Passover was near," etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First he determines the place to which the multitude follows him; second, the crowd following; third he assigns the cause of their following. Now as to where the crowd followed the Lord, the Evangelist indicates this when he says, "After these things Jesus went away across the sea of Galilee"; that is, after the mystical words which the Lord had spoken concerning his power. Now this sea of Galilee is frequently named in Scripture, and in different places. But because this sea is not salty, but is a certain gathering of waters from the inflow of the Jordan, it is therefore called a lake by Luke, as is found in Luke 5:1; but because, according to the property of the Hebrew idiom, all gatherings of waters are called seas, according to that text of Genesis 1:10, "and the gatherings of waters he called seas," it is therefore called a sea. But it is surnamed Gennesareth from the nature of the place: for it is much agitated by the buffeting of winds, which are generated from the very evaporations of the water; hence Gennesareth in Greek is the same as "generating a breeze." It is also named "of Galilee" from the province of Galilee, in which it is. But "of Tiberias" from the city so called, which was on one side of this sea, having opposite it the city of Capernaum on the other side; which city was formerly called Zenereth, but was afterward restored by Herod the tetrarch in honor of Tiberius Caesar, and was called Tiberias. Now the literal reason why Jesus went away across the sea is assigned by Chrysostom: that Christ might yield to the fury and disturbance of the Jews, which they had conceived against Christ on account of the things he had said above concerning himself. Hence, as he himself says, just as missiles, when they strike against something hard, strike more heavily, but those which have nothing to meet them, once launched, are quickly spent and come to rest; so too, when we advance impetuously and by resisting against bold men, they rage the more; but if we yield to them, we easily soften their madness. For this reason Christ, by withdrawing across the sea, mitigated the fury of the Jews that had arisen from his foregoing words, giving us in this an example of doing likewise. Ecclesiasticus 8:14: "Do not stand against the face of an insolent man." Mystically, however, by the sea, the present turbulent world is signified; Psalm 103:25: "This sea, great and wide of hands." The Lord crossed this sea when he took on the sea of mortality and of penalty by being born, trod it underfoot by dying, and, crossing over by rising, arrived at the glory of the resurrection. Concerning this passing-over it is said below, John 13:1: "Jesus knowing that his hour had come, that he should pass from this world to the Father." As he passed over, great crowds followed him, by believing and by imitating, gathered from both peoples; Isaiah 60:5: "Then your heart shall wonder and be enlarged, when the multitude of the sea shall be turned to you"; Psalm 7:7: "Arise, O Lord, in the command which you have commanded, and the assembly of peoples shall surround you." The following crowd is described therefore as abundant, because "a great multitude followed him." Now the cause on account of which they followed was the working of miracles; hence he says, "because they saw the signs which he performed upon those who were sick." It should be known that some followed him on account of his teaching, namely those who were better disposed; but others, more imperfect, followed him out of admiration for the visible signs, being of a coarser mind. For signs, as is said in 1 Corinthians 14:22, "are not given to believers, but to unbelievers." Some also followed him out of devotion and faith, namely those whom he had healed in body: for they were healed by the Lord in body in such a way that they were also perfectly healed in soul; Deuteronomy 32:4: "The works of God are perfect." And this is clear, because to the paralytic (above, 8:11) he said pointedly: "Go, and sin no more"; and Matthew 9:2: "Son, your sins are forgiven you"; words which pertain more to the health of the soul than of the body. Now it should be noted that, whereas the Evangelist has made mention only of three miracles, namely of the wedding, of the ruler's son, and of the paralytic, here nevertheless he speaks indefinitely of "the signs which he was performing," so as to give one to understand that Christ performed many other signs, as is said below, at the end, of which he makes no mention in this book. For he intended especially to make known the teaching of Christ. Next he determines the place of the miracle, which is the mountain; hence he says, "He therefore went up into the mountain," that is, Jesus ascended privately, "and there he sat with his disciples." And indeed the mountain is a quite fitting place for a refreshment: for by the mountain is signified the perfection of justice, according to that text of Psalm 35:7: "Your justice is like the mountains of God." Since, therefore, these earthly things do not satisfy — indeed "whoever drinks of this water will thirst again," as is said above, II, 13 — but spiritual things do satisfy; therefore the Lord ascended to higher things with his disciples, to show that satiety is found in spiritual things, and the perfection of justice: concerning which mountain it is said in Psalm 67:16: "A mountain of God, a fat mountain." Hence there too he exercised the office of teacher, sitting with his disciples: for he it is who teaches every man knowledge. Next the time is described, when he says, "Now the Passover was near," which time indeed befits a refreshment. For Passover is interpreted as "passing-over": Exodus 12:11: "For it is the Phase, that is, the passing-over of the Lord," so as to give one to understand that whoever desires to be refreshed with the bread of the divine Word and the body and blood of the Lord must pass over from vices to virtues. 1 Corinthians 5:7: "Christ our Passover is sacrificed; therefore let us feast on the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth." Ecclesiasticus 24:26, divine Wisdom says: "Pass over to me, all you who desire me." Now this is the second Passover of which the Evangelist makes mention: to which, indeed, according to the precept of the law, which is found in Exodus 23:17, the Lord did not go up to Jerusalem. The reason for this is that Christ was God and man: and inasmuch as man he was indeed subject to the law; inasmuch as God he was above the law. Therefore, that he might show himself to be man, he sometimes kept the law; but that he might show himself to be God, he set the law aside. Hence also, by the fact that he did not go, he gave one to understand that the observances of the law would little by little, and shortly, cease. Next he deals with the performance of the miracle, when he says, "When Jesus therefore had lifted up his eyes, and had seen," etc.; and first the necessity of performing the miracle is shown; second the performance itself is added, at the place, "Jesus therefore says: Make the men sit down," etc. Now the necessity of the miracle's being performed is taken from the Lord's question and the disciples' answer; and therefore first the Lord's question is set forth; second the disciples' answer, at the place, "Philip answered him," etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First the occasion for questioning is set forth; second Christ's question is added; and third the intention of the one questioning is disclosed. Now the occasion for questioning was the sight of the multitude coming to Christ. And therefore he says, "When Jesus had lifted up his eyes," being on the mountain with his disciples as with those who were more perfect, "and had seen," etc. In which two things are to be considered concerning the Lord. One, that we may learn the maturity of Christ, who did not raise his eyes here and there, but sat modestly and attentively with his disciples: contrary to which it is said in Proverbs 30:13: "A generation whose eyes are lofty, and whose eyelids are lifted up on high"; and Ecclesiasticus 19:26: "A man is known by his look." The second, that we may learn that he did not sit idly with his disciples either; but, teaching them attentively, and turning their hearts to himself, he looked upon the disciples whom he was teaching; Luke 6:20: "And he, lifting up his eyes upon his disciples, said," etc. And therefore it is said, "When Jesus had lifted up his eyes," etc. Mystically, however, the eyes of the Lord are the spiritual gifts which, when he mercifully grants them to his elect, then he lifts up his eyes upon them, that is, he bestows a look of loving-kindness. This is what Psalm 85:16 asked, saying: "Look upon me, O Lord, and have mercy on me." Now the question concerns the feeding of the multitude; hence he said to Philip: "Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat?" He presupposes one thing, and asks about another. He presupposes indeed their want, because they did not have the means to provide food for so great a multitude; but he asks the manner of finding it, when he says, "Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat?" Here it should be noted that every teacher must spiritually feed the crowd that comes to him. And because no man has of himself the means to feed it, he must therefore buy it from elsewhere, by labor, by study, by assiduity in prayers; Isaiah 55:1: "You who have no money, make haste, buy, without any exchange, wine and milk." And again: "Why do you weigh out your money" — that is, your eloquence — "and not for bread" — that is, not for true wisdom, which refreshes (Ecclesiasticus 15:5: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding") — "and your labor not unto fullness," by learning things that do not satisfy, but rather empty out? Now the intention of the one questioning is disclosed when he says, "But this he said trying him," etc. Here the Evangelist, excluding one doubt, leads into another. For it could have been doubted that the Lord questioned Philip as though he were ignorant; but he excludes this, saying, "for he himself knew what he would do." But since to try someone seems also to belong to one who is ignorant, since it is the same as taking a trial of something, it seems that the Evangelist introduces another doubt when he says, "trying him." But it must be said that one person tries another in different ways, so as to take a trial of him: for a man tries in one way, in order to learn; the Devil in another way, in order to deceive; 1 Peter 5:8: "Your adversary the Devil, as a roaring lion, goes about seeking whom he may devour." But God, and Christ, indeed try not in order to learn, since he it is who searches hearts and minds; nor in order to deceive, since "he tries no one," as is said in James 1:13; but he tries in order to give to others a trial-proof of the one tried. Thus God tried Abraham; Genesis 22:1: "God tried Abraham," etc., and it follows: "Now I know that you fear the Lord" — that is, I have made it known that you fear the Lord. Thus from this he tries Philip in order that he might make known to others his answer, leading them thereby into the most certain knowledge of the sign to come. Next the disciples' answer is set forth, when he says, "Philip answered him," and first Philip's answer; second Andrew's answer, at the place, "One of his disciples says to him," etc. Now it should be known concerning the first, that Philip was, among the others, rather slow and untrained, and therefore among the others he questioned the Lord more frequently; below, John 14:8: "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us." But in the questioning of these two, as far as the letter is concerned, Andrew was better disposed than Philip, because Philip seems to have had no intention or disposition toward the miracle's being performed. And therefore he introduces that manner by which all those men could be fed, namely by money, saying, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them" — which we do not have, and therefore we cannot give them to eat. In which the poverty of Christ is suggested, who did not even have two hundred denarii. Andrew, however, seems to have regard to the miracle's being performed. For perhaps he had in memory the sign which Elisha had performed with barley loaves, when he fed a hundred men with twenty loaves, as is read in 4 Kings 4:42 and following, and therefore he says, "There is a boy here who has five barley loaves." But nevertheless he supposed that Christ would not perform a greater miracle than Elisha. For he reckoned that from fewer loaves fewer would be miraculously produced, and from more, more (although for him who does not need the underlying matter, it is equally easy to feed the crowds from more or from fewer), and therefore he adds, "But what are these among so many?" As if to say: even if they are multiplied as Elisha multiplied them, it is not sufficient. Mystically, spiritual refreshment is signified by wisdom. Now there is one wisdom, which Christ taught, who is true wisdom; 1 Corinthians 1:24: "Christ, the power of God and the wisdom of God." But before the coming of Christ there was a twofold teaching. One human, which the philosophers had; the other of the written law. Of the first, therefore, Philip makes mention, and therefore uses the term of buying, saying, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them." For human wisdom is possessed through acquisition. The number one hundred imports perfection. Hence two hundred suggests the twofold perfection necessary for this wisdom; for its perfection is arrived at by a twofold path: namely, by experience and by contemplation. He says therefore, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them," because whatever human reason can experience and think concerning truth is not sufficient for the perfect satiety of wisdom; Jeremiah 9:23: "Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, and let not the strong man glory in his strength, and let not the rich man glory in his riches; but let him who glories, glory in this, to know and understand me." For no philosopher's wisdom was so great that men could be recalled from error by it; rather they lead many into error. Of the second, however, Andrew makes mention; and therefore he did not wish that other loaves be bought, but that the crowd be fed from what was at hand, namely from those things which the law contained; hence he was better disposed than Philip; and therefore he says, "There is a boy here who has five barley loaves." This boy can be called Moses, on account of the imperfection of the state of the law: Hebrews 7:19: "The law brought no one to perfection"; or the people of the Jews, who served under the elements of the world, as is said in Galatians 4:3. This boy, therefore, has five loaves, that is, the teaching of the law: either because it is contained in the five books of Moses — above, John 1:17: "The law was given through Moses" — or because it was given to men occupied with sensible things, which are expressed by the five senses: and they are of barley, because the law itself was given so that in it the vital nourishment might be covered over by bodily sacraments — for the pith of barley is covered by a very clinging husk — or because the people of the Jews were not yet stripped of carnal desire, but clung to their hearts like husk: for in the Old Testament they experienced an outward hardness, on account of the ceremonial observances; Acts 15:10: "This is a burden which neither we, nor our fathers, were able to bear." And the Jews themselves, given over to bodily things, did not grasp the spiritual sense of the law; 2 Corinthians 3:15: "A veil is placed over their hearts." Now by the two fish, which gave a pleasant flavor to the bread, is understood the teaching of the Psalms and the prophets: and thus the Old Law had not only loaves, namely the five books of Moses, but also two fish, namely the prophets and the Psalms. Hence the Scripture of the Old Testament is divided into these three, Luke 24:44: "the things which are written in the Law and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning me." Or by the two fish, according to Augustine, two persons are signified: namely the royal and the priestly, by whom that people was ruled; which two persons, however, prefigured Christ, who was true king and priest. "But what are these among so many?" Because through these the human race could not be perfectly led to the knowledge of truth: for although God was known in Judea, the nations nevertheless did not know him. Next, when it says, "Jesus therefore said," the performance of the miracle is dealt with, and first the arrangement of the men is set forth; second their feeding, at the place, "Jesus therefore took the loaves," etc.; third the gathering of the fragments, at the place, "But when they were filled," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First the command concerning the arrangement of the crowds is set forth; second the opportuneness of the arrangement; and third the number of those arranged. Now the command was from the Lord to the disciples, that they should arrange the crowd for eating; hence Jesus says, "Make the men sit down," that is, sit down to eat. For, as was said above, II, in ancient times men used to dine reclining on couches, whence the custom grew up that those who sit down to eat are said to "recline." By which is mystically signified the rest which is necessary for the perfection of wisdom; Ecclesiasticus 38:25: "He who is diminished in activity will perfect wisdom." This arrangement is made through the disciples, because through them the knowledge of truth has been passed down to us; Psalm 71:3: "Let the mountains receive peace for the people." Now the opportuneness of the arrangement is drawn from the place: "now there was much grass in the place," which, according to the letter, is convenient for those reclining. Mystically, however, by the grass, flesh is signified, Isaiah 40:6: "All flesh is grass"; and according to this it can be referred to two things. It fits the teaching of the Old Testament, which was given to one resting in carnal things, and to a people wise in a carnal way; Isaiah 1:19: "If you be willing, and will hearken to me, you shall eat the good things of the land"; Deuteronomy 33:28: "The eye of Jacob upon a land of wheat, wine, and oil." Or it fits one who perceives true wisdom, to which one cannot come except by treading carnal things underfoot; Romans 12:2: "Do not be conformed to this age." Now the number was great; hence he says, "The men therefore sat down, in number about five thousand." The Evangelist numbers only the men, following the custom of the law, in which Moses numbered the people from twenty years old and upward, with no mention made of women, as is said in Numbers 1. This the Evangelist did for this reason, because these alone are capable of perfect teaching; 1 Corinthians 2:6: "We speak wisdom among the perfect"; Hebrews 5:14: "Solid food is for the perfect." Next, when he says, "Jesus therefore took the loaves," he deals with the feeding, and first the disposition of the one feeding is suggested; second the matter of the feeding; and third the perfect satiety. Now in the disposition of Jesus as he feeds them, first indeed his humility is noted; second, his giving of thanks. Humility indeed, because he took the loaves, and distributed them. And indeed Christ, about to perform the miracle, could have fed the crowds with loaves created out of nothing. But by dispensation he multiplied pre-existing loaves for the feeding of the crowds. First, indeed, that he might show that sensible things are not from the Devil, as the erring Manichees say. For if this were true, the Lord would not use sensible things for the work of divine praise, especially since he himself came "that he might destroy the works of the Devil," as is said in 1 John 3:8. Second, that he might show it to be false what they themselves say, namely that the teaching of the Old Testament is not from God, but from the Devil. Therefore, in order to show that the teaching of the New Testament is no other than that which was prefigured and contained in the teaching of the Old Testament, he multiplied the pre-existing loaves, indicating that it is he who perfects and fulfills the law; Matthew 5:17: "I have not come to destroy the law." Now the giving of thanks, because he gave thanks, so as to show that he has from another, namely from the Father, whatever he has: in which he shows us an example of doing likewise. He gave thanks especially, however, so as to give us an example that, when we begin a meal, we ought to give thanks to God; 1 Timothy 4:4: "Nothing is to be rejected which is received with the giving of thanks"; Psalm 21:27: "The poor shall eat, and shall be filled, and they shall praise the Lord." Likewise, that he might show that he was not praying for his own sake, but for the sake of the crowd, which was present, and it was necessary to persuade them that he had come from God. And therefore, when he performs a miracle before many, he prays, so as to show that he is not contrary to God, but works according to his will. It is said, however, in Mark, that Christ distributed the loaves to the crowds through the apostles. But here it is said that he himself distributed them, because he is seen to have done what he did through others. But both, according to the mystery, are true, because he alone refreshes inwardly, and others refresh outwardly and as ministers. Now the matter of the refreshment was bread and fish, concerning which enough has been said above. The satiety of the refreshment, however, was perfect, because they had "as much as they wanted." For Christ alone is he who feeds the empty soul, and fills the hungry soul with good things; Psalm 16:15: "I shall be satisfied when your glory shall appear." Others, however, as having grace by measure, perform miracles; but Christ, by absolute power, worked all things with great overabundance: hence it is said that "they were filled." Next, when he says, "But when they were filled, he said to his disciples," etc., the gathering of the fragments is dealt with, and first the Lord's command is set forth; second the disciples' execution of it, at the place, "They gathered therefore," etc. He says therefore, "But when they were filled, he said to his disciples: Gather up the fragments that remain." This indeed the Lord did not do for superfluous ostentation, but so as to show that the miracle performed was not illusory, through the fact that the remains, once gathered, were kept for a long time, and served as food for others. He also wished by this that that miracle should cling more firmly to the hearts of the disciples, whom he also commanded to carry the fragments; since he wished especially to instruct those who were to be the teachers of the whole world. But the disciples faithfully carry it out; hence it follows, "They gathered therefore," etc. Here it should be noted that the remains left over were not just any amount, nor by chance, but according to a fixed measure: because he made neither more nor less, but as much as he willed, to be superfluous. A sign of this is that each apostle's basket was full. Now a basket is a vessel assigned to rustic service. The twelve baskets, therefore, signify the twelve apostles and their imitators, who, although in the present they are held in contempt, are nevertheless inwardly filled with the riches of the spiritual sacraments: and they are said to be twelve, because the faith of the Holy Trinity was to be preached by them in the four parts of the world.”

“We have here an account of Christ's feeding five thousand men with five loaves and two fishes, which miracle is in this respect remarkable, that it is the only passage of the actions of Christ's life that is recorded by all the four evangelists. John, who does not usually relate what had been recorded by those who wrote before him, yet relates this, because of the reference the following discourse has to it. Observe, I. The place and time where and when this miracle was wrought, which are noted for the greater evidence of the truth of the story; it is not said that it was done once upon a time, nobody knows where, but the circumstances are specified, that the fact might be enquired into. 1. The country that Christ was in (Joh 6:1): He went over the sea of Galilee, called elsewhere the lake of Gennesareth, here the sea of Tiberias, from a city adjoining, which Herod had lately enlarged and beautified, and called so in honour of Tiberius the emperor, and probably had made his metropolis. Christ did not go directly over cross this inland sea, but made a coasting voyage to another place on the same side. It is not tempting God to choose to go by water, when there is convenience for it, even to those places whither we might go by land; for Christ never tempted the Lord his God, Mat 4:7. 2. The company that he was attended with: A great multitude followed him, because they saw his miracles, Joh 6:2. Note, (1.) Our Lord Jesus, while he went about doing good, lived continually in a crowd, which gave him more trouble than honour. Good and useful men must not complain of a hurry of business, when they are serving God and their generation; it will be time enough to enjoy ourselves when we come to that world where we shall enjoy God. (2.) Christ's miracles drew many after him that were not effectually drawn to him. They had their curiosity gratified by the strangeness of them, who had not their consciences convinced by the power of them. 3. Christ's posting himself advantageously to entertain them (Joh 6:3): He went up into a mountain, and there he sat with his disciples, that he might the more conveniently be seen and heard by the multitude that crowded after him; this was a natural pulpit, and not, like Ezra's, made for the purpose. Christ was now driven to be a field preacher; but his word was never the worse, nor the less acceptable, for that, to those who knew how to value it, who followed him still, not only when he went out to a desert place, but when he went up to a mountain, though up-hill be against heart. He sat there, as teachers do in cathedra - in the chair of instruction. He did not sit at ease, not sit in state, yet he sat as one having authority, sat ready to receive addresses that were made to him; whoever would might come, and find him there. He sat with his disciples; he condescended to take them to sit with him, to put a reputation upon them before the people, and give them an earnest of the glory in which they should shortly sit with him. We are said to sit with him, Eph 2:6. 4. The time when it was. The first words, After those things, do not signify that this immediately followed what was related in the foregoing chapter, for it was a considerable time after, and they signify no more than in process of time; but we are told (Joh 6:4) that it was when the passover was nigh, which is here noted, (1.) Because, perhaps, that had brought in all the apostles from their respective expeditions, whither they were sent as itinerant preachers, that they might attend their Master to Jerusalem, to keep the feast. (2.) Because it was a custom with the Jews religiously to observe the approach of the passover thirty days before, with some sort of solemnity; so long before they had it in their eye, repaired the roads, mended bridges, if there was occasion, and discoursed of the passover and the institution of it. (3.) Because, perhaps, the approach of the passover, when every one knew Christ would go up to Jerusalem, and be absent for some time, made the multitude flock the more after him and attend the more diligently on him. Note, The prospect of losing our opportunities should quicken us to improve them with double diligence; and, when solemn ordinances are approaching, it is good to prepare for them by conversing with the word of Christ. II. The miracle itself. And here observe, 1. The notice Christ took of the crowd that attended him (Joh 6:5): He lifted up his eyes, and saw a great company come to him, poor, mean, ordinary people, no doubt, for such make up the multitudes, especially in such remote corners of the country; yet Christ showed himself pleased with their attendance, and concerned for their welfare, to teach us to condescend to those of low estate, and not to set those with the dogs of our flock whom Christ hath set with the lambs of his. The souls of the poor are as precious to Christ, and should be so to us, as those of the rich. 2. The enquiry he made concerning the way of providing for them. He directed himself to Philip, who had been his disciple from the first, and had seen all his miracles, and particularly that of his turning water into wine, and therefore it might be expected that he should have said, "Lord, if thou wilt, it is easy to thee to feed them all." Those that, like Israel, have been witnesses of Christ's works, and have shared in the benefit of them, are inexcusable if they say, Can he furnish a table in the wilderness? Philip was of Bethsaida, in the neighbourhood of which town Christ now was, and therefore he was most likely to help them to provision at the best hand; and probably much of the company was known to him, and he was concerned for them. Now Christ asked, Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat? (1.) He takes it for granted that they must all eat with him. One would think that when he had taught and healed them he had done his part; and that now they should rather have been contriving how to treat him and his disciples, for some of the people were probably rich, and we are sure that Christ and his disciples were poor; yet he is solicitous to entertain them. Those that will accept Christ's spiritual gifts, instead of paying for them, shall be paid for their acceptance of them. Christ, having fed their souls with the bread of life, feeds their bodies also with food convenient, to show that the Lord is for the body, and to encourage us to pray for our daily bread, and to set us an example of compassion to the poor, Jam 2:15, Jam 2:16. (2.) His enquiry is, Whence shall we buy bread? One would think, considering his poverty, that he should rather have asked, Where shall we have money to buy for them? But he will rather lay out all he has than they shall want. He will buy to give, and we must labour, that we may give, Eph 4:28. 3. The design of this enquiry; it was only to try the faith of Philip, for he himself knew what he would do, Joh 6:6. Note, (1.) Our Lord Jesus is never at a loss in his counsels; but, how difficult soever the case is, he knows what he has to do and what course he will take, Act 15:18. He knows the thoughts he has towards his people (Jer 29:11) and is never at uncertainty; when we know not, he himself knows what he will do. (2.) When Christ is pleased to puzzle his people, it is only with a design to prove them. The question put Philip to a nonplus, yet Christ proposed it, to try whether he would say, "Lord, if thou wilt exert thy power for them, we need not buy bread." 4. Philip's answer to this question: "Two hundred pennyworth of bread is not sufficient, Joh 6:7. Master, it is to no purpose to talk of buying bread for them, for neither will the country afford so much bread, nor can we afford to lay out so much money; ask Judas, who carries the bag." Two hundred pence of their money amount to about six pounds of ours, and, if they lay out all that at once, it will exhaust their fund, and break them, and they must starve themselves. Grotius computes that two hundred pennyworth of bread would scarcely reach to two thousand, but Philip would go as near hand as he could, would have every one to take a little; and nature, we say, is content with a little. See the weakness of Philip's faith, that in this strait, as if the Master of the family had been an ordinary person, he looked for supply only in an ordinary way. Christ might now have said to him, as he did afterwards, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? Or, as God to Moses in a like case, Is the Lord's hand waxen short? We are apt thus to distrust God's power when visible and ordinary means fail, that is, to trust him no further than we can see him. 5. The information which Christ received from another of his disciples concerning the provision they had. It was Andrew, here said to be Simon Peter's brother; though he was senior to Peter in discipleship, and instrumental to bring Peter to Christ, yet Peter afterwards so far outshone him that he is described by his relation to Peter: he acquainted Christ with what they had at hand; and in this we may see, (1.) The strength of his love to those for whom he saw his Master concerned, in that he was willing to bring out all they had, though he knew not but they might want themselves, and any one would have said, Charity begins at home. He did not go about to conceal it, under pretence of being a better husband of their provision than the master was, but honestly gives in an account of all they had. There is a lad here, paidarion - a little lad, probably one that used to follow this company, as settlers do the camp, with provisions to sell, and the disciples had bespoken what he had for themselves; and it was five barley-loaves, and two small fishes. Here, [1.] The provision was coarse and ordinary; they were barley loaves. Canaan was a land of wheat (Deu 8:8); its inhabitants were commonly fed with the finest wheat (Psa 81:16), the kidneys of wheat (Deu 32:14); yet Christ and his disciples were glad of barley-bread. It does not follow hence that we should tie ourselves to such coarse fare, and place religion in it (when God brings that which is finer to our hands, let us receive it, and be thankful); but it does follow that therefore we must not be desirous of dainties (Psa 23:3); nor murmur if we be reduced to coarse fare, but be content and thankful, and well reconciled to it; barley-bread is what Christ had, and better than we deserve. Nor let us despise the mean provision of the poor, nor look upon it with contempt, remembering how Christ was provided for. [2.] It was but short and scanty; there were but five loaves, and those so small that one little lad carried them all; and we find (Kg2 4:42, Kg2 4:43) that twenty barley-loaves, with some other provision to help out, would not dine a hundred men without a miracle. There were but two fishes, and those small ones (duo opsaria), so small that one of them was but a morsel, pisciculi assati. I take the fish to have been pickled, or soused, for they had not fire to dress them with. The provision of bread was little, but that of fish was less in proportion to it, so that many a bit of dry bread they must eat before they could make a meal of this provision; but they were content with it. Bread is meat for our hunger; but of those that murmured for flesh it is said, They asked meat for their lust, Psa 78:18. Well, Andrew was willing that the people should have this, as far as it would go. Note, A distrustful fear of wanting ourselves should not hinder us from needful charity to others. (2.) See here the weakness of his faith in that word, "But what are they among so many? To offer this to such a multitude is but to mock them." Philip and he had not that actual consideration of the power of Christ (of which they had had such large experience) which they should have had. Who fed the camp of Israel in the wilderness? He that could make one man chase a thousand could make one loaf feed a thousand. 6. The directions Christ gave the disciples to seat the guests (Joh 6:10): "Make the men sit down, though you have nothing to set before them, and trust me for that." This was like sending providence to market, and going to buy without money: Christ would thus try their obedience. Observe, (1.) The furniture of the dining-room: there was much grass in that place, though a desert place; see how bountiful nature is, it makes grass to grow upon the mountains, Psa 147:8. This grass was uneaten; God gives not only enough, but more then enough. Here was this plenty of grass where Christ was preaching; the gospel brings other blessings along with it: Then shall the earth yield her increase, Psa 67:6. This plenty of grass made the place the more commodious for those that must sit on the ground, and served them for cushions, or beds (as they called what they sat on at meat, Est 1:6), and, considering what Christ says of the grass of the field (Mat 6:29, Mat 6:30), these beds excelled those of Ahasuerus: nature's pomp is the most glorious. (2.) The number of the guests: About five thousand: a great entertainment, representing that of the gospel, which is a feast for all nations (Isa 25:6), a feast for all comers. 7. The distribution of the provision, Joh 6:11. Observe, (1.) It was done with thanksgiving: He gave thanks. Note, [1.] We ought to give thanks to God for our food, for it is a mercy to have it, and we have it from the hand of God, and must receive it with thanksgiving, Ti1 4:4, Ti1 4:5. And this is the sweetness of our creature-comforts, that they will furnish us with matter, and give us occasion, for that excellent duty of thanksgiving. [2.] Though our provision be coarse and scanty, though we have neither plenty nor dainty, yet we must give thanks to God for what we have. (2.) It was distributed from the hand of Christ by the hands of his disciples, Joh 6:11. Note, [1.] All our comforts come to us originally from the hand of Christ; whoever brings them, it is he that sends them, he distributes to those who distribute to us. [2.] In distributing the bread of life to those that follow him, he is pleased to make use of the ministration of his disciples; they are the servitors at Christ's table, or rather rulers in his household, to give to every one his portion of meat in due season. (3.) It was done to universal satisfaction. They did not every one take a little, but all had as much as they would; not a short allowance, but a full meal; and considering how long they had fasted, with what an appetite they sat down, how agreeable this miraculous food may be supposed to have been, above common food, it was not a little that served them when they ate as much as they would and on free cost. Those whom Christ feeds with the bread of life he does not stint, Psa 81:10. There were but two small fishes, and yet they had of them too as much as they would. He did not reserve them for the better sort of the guests, and put off the poor with dry bread, but treated them all alike, for they were all alike welcome. Those who call feeding upon fish fasting reproach the entertainment Christ here made, which was a full feast. 8. The care that was taken of the broken meat. (1.) The orders Christ gave concerning it (Joh 6:12): When they were filled, and every man had within him a sensible witness to the truth of the miracle, Christ said to the disciples, the servants he employed, Gather up the fragments. Note, We must always take care that we make no waste of any of God's good creatures; for the grant we have of them, though large and full, is with this proviso, wilful waste only excepted. It is just with God to bring us to the want of that which we make waste of. The Jews were very careful not to lose any bread, nor let it fall to the ground, to be trodden upon. Qui panem contemnit in gravem incidit paupertatem - He who despises bread falls into the depths of poverty, was a saying among them. Though Christ could command supplies whenever he pleased, yet he would have the fragments gathered up. When we are filled we must remember that others want, and we may want. Those that would have wherewith to be charitable must be provident. Had this broken meat been left upon the grass, the beasts and fowls would have gathered it up; but that which is fit to be meat for men is wasted and lost if it be thrown to the brute-creatures. Christ did not order the broken meat to be gathered up till all were filled; we must not begin to hoard and lay up till all is laid out that ought to be, for that is withholding more than is meet. Mr. Baxter notes here, "How much less should we lose God's word, or helps, or our time, or such greater mercies!" (2.) The observance of these orders (Joh 6:13): They filled twelve baskets with the fragments, which was an evidence not only of the truth of the miracle, that they were fed, not with fancy, but with real food (witness those remains), but of the greatness of it; they were not only filled, but there was all this over and above. See how large the divine bounty is; it not only fills the cup, but makes it run over; bread enough, and to spare, in our Father's house. The fragments filled twelve baskets, one for each disciple; they were thus repaid with interest for their willingness to part with what they had for public service; see Ch2 31:10. The Jews lay it as a law upon themselves, when they have eaten a meal, to be sure to leave a piece of bread upon the table, upon which the blessing after meat may rest; for it is a curse upon the wicked man (Job 20:21) that there shall none of his meat be left. III. Here is the influence which this miracle had upon the people who tasted of the benefit of it (Joh 6:14): They said, This is of a truth that prophet. Note, 1. Even the vulgar Jews with great assurance expected the Messiah to come into the world, and to be a great prophet, They speak here with assurance of his coming. The Pharisees despised them as not knowing the law; but, it should seem, they knew more of him that is the end of the law than the Pharisees did. 2. The miracles which Christ wrought did clearly demonstrate that he was the Messiah promised, a teacher come from God, the great prophet, and could not but convince the amazed spectators that this was he that should come. There were many who were convinced he was that prophet that should come into the world who yet did not cordially receive his doctrine, for they did not continue in it. Such a wretched incoherence and inconsistency there is between the faculties of the corrupt unsanctified soul, that it is possible for men to acknowledge that Christ is that prophet, and yet to turn a deaf ear to him.”

“Having set forth the teaching on the spiritual life by which Christ gives life to those who have been regenerated, the Evangelist consequently deals with the spiritual nourishment by which Christ sustains those he has given life to; and first he sets forth the visible miracle which Christ performed by providing bodily nourishment; second he deals with spiritual nourishment, at the place, "Jesus answered them and said: Amen, amen, I say to you, you seek me, not because..." etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he sets forth the visible miracle of bodily nourishment; second he shows the effect of the miracle, at the place, "Those men therefore, when they had seen..." etc. Concerning the miracle he sets forth two things: namely its circumstances, and its performance, at the place, "And when Jesus had lifted up his eyes..." Concerning the first he does three things. First he describes the multitude which he fed; second he determines the place where he fed them, at the place, "Jesus therefore went up into the mountain"; third the time when he fed them, at the place, "Now the Passover was near," etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First he determines the place to which the multitude follows him; second, the crowd following; third he assigns the cause of their following. Now as to where the crowd followed the Lord, the Evangelist indicates this when he says, "After these things Jesus went away across the sea of Galilee"; that is, after the mystical words which the Lord had spoken concerning his power. Now this sea of Galilee is frequently named in Scripture, and in different places. But because this sea is not salty, but is a certain gathering of waters from the inflow of the Jordan, it is therefore called a lake by Luke, as is found in Luke 5:1; but because, according to the property of the Hebrew idiom, all gatherings of waters are called seas, according to that text of Genesis 1:10, "and the gatherings of waters he called seas," it is therefore called a sea. But it is surnamed Gennesareth from the nature of the place: for it is much agitated by the buffeting of winds, which are generated from the very evaporations of the water; hence Gennesareth in Greek is the same as "generating a breeze." It is also named "of Galilee" from the province of Galilee, in which it is. But "of Tiberias" from the city so called, which was on one side of this sea, having opposite it the city of Capernaum on the other side; which city was formerly called Zenereth, but was afterward restored by Herod the tetrarch in honor of Tiberius Caesar, and was called Tiberias. Now the literal reason why Jesus went away across the sea is assigned by Chrysostom: that Christ might yield to the fury and disturbance of the Jews, which they had conceived against Christ on account of the things he had said above concerning himself. Hence, as he himself says, just as missiles, when they strike against something hard, strike more heavily, but those which have nothing to meet them, once launched, are quickly spent and come to rest; so too, when we advance impetuously and by resisting against bold men, they rage the more; but if we yield to them, we easily soften their madness. For this reason Christ, by withdrawing across the sea, mitigated the fury of the Jews that had arisen from his foregoing words, giving us in this an example of doing likewise. Ecclesiasticus 8:14: "Do not stand against the face of an insolent man." Mystically, however, by the sea, the present turbulent world is signified; Psalm 103:25: "This sea, great and wide of hands." The Lord crossed this sea when he took on the sea of mortality and of penalty by being born, trod it underfoot by dying, and, crossing over by rising, arrived at the glory of the resurrection. Concerning this passing-over it is said below, John 13:1: "Jesus knowing that his hour had come, that he should pass from this world to the Father." As he passed over, great crowds followed him, by believing and by imitating, gathered from both peoples; Isaiah 60:5: "Then your heart shall wonder and be enlarged, when the multitude of the sea shall be turned to you"; Psalm 7:7: "Arise, O Lord, in the command which you have commanded, and the assembly of peoples shall surround you." The following crowd is described therefore as abundant, because "a great multitude followed him." Now the cause on account of which they followed was the working of miracles; hence he says, "because they saw the signs which he performed upon those who were sick." It should be known that some followed him on account of his teaching, namely those who were better disposed; but others, more imperfect, followed him out of admiration for the visible signs, being of a coarser mind. For signs, as is said in 1 Corinthians 14:22, "are not given to believers, but to unbelievers." Some also followed him out of devotion and faith, namely those whom he had healed in body: for they were healed by the Lord in body in such a way that they were also perfectly healed in soul; Deuteronomy 32:4: "The works of God are perfect." And this is clear, because to the paralytic (above, 8:11) he said pointedly: "Go, and sin no more"; and Matthew 9:2: "Son, your sins are forgiven you"; words which pertain more to the health of the soul than of the body. Now it should be noted that, whereas the Evangelist has made mention only of three miracles, namely of the wedding, of the ruler's son, and of the paralytic, here nevertheless he speaks indefinitely of "the signs which he was performing," so as to give one to understand that Christ performed many other signs, as is said below, at the end, of which he makes no mention in this book. For he intended especially to make known the teaching of Christ. Next he determines the place of the miracle, which is the mountain; hence he says, "He therefore went up into the mountain," that is, Jesus ascended privately, "and there he sat with his disciples." And indeed the mountain is a quite fitting place for a refreshment: for by the mountain is signified the perfection of justice, according to that text of Psalm 35:7: "Your justice is like the mountains of God." Since, therefore, these earthly things do not satisfy — indeed "whoever drinks of this water will thirst again," as is said above, II, 13 — but spiritual things do satisfy; therefore the Lord ascended to higher things with his disciples, to show that satiety is found in spiritual things, and the perfection of justice: concerning which mountain it is said in Psalm 67:16: "A mountain of God, a fat mountain." Hence there too he exercised the office of teacher, sitting with his disciples: for he it is who teaches every man knowledge. Next the time is described, when he says, "Now the Passover was near," which time indeed befits a refreshment. For Passover is interpreted as "passing-over": Exodus 12:11: "For it is the Phase, that is, the passing-over of the Lord," so as to give one to understand that whoever desires to be refreshed with the bread of the divine Word and the body and blood of the Lord must pass over from vices to virtues. 1 Corinthians 5:7: "Christ our Passover is sacrificed; therefore let us feast on the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth." Ecclesiasticus 24:26, divine Wisdom says: "Pass over to me, all you who desire me." Now this is the second Passover of which the Evangelist makes mention: to which, indeed, according to the precept of the law, which is found in Exodus 23:17, the Lord did not go up to Jerusalem. The reason for this is that Christ was God and man: and inasmuch as man he was indeed subject to the law; inasmuch as God he was above the law. Therefore, that he might show himself to be man, he sometimes kept the law; but that he might show himself to be God, he set the law aside. Hence also, by the fact that he did not go, he gave one to understand that the observances of the law would little by little, and shortly, cease. Next he deals with the performance of the miracle, when he says, "When Jesus therefore had lifted up his eyes, and had seen," etc.; and first the necessity of performing the miracle is shown; second the performance itself is added, at the place, "Jesus therefore says: Make the men sit down," etc. Now the necessity of the miracle's being performed is taken from the Lord's question and the disciples' answer; and therefore first the Lord's question is set forth; second the disciples' answer, at the place, "Philip answered him," etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First the occasion for questioning is set forth; second Christ's question is added; and third the intention of the one questioning is disclosed. Now the occasion for questioning was the sight of the multitude coming to Christ. And therefore he says, "When Jesus had lifted up his eyes," being on the mountain with his disciples as with those who were more perfect, "and had seen," etc. In which two things are to be considered concerning the Lord. One, that we may learn the maturity of Christ, who did not raise his eyes here and there, but sat modestly and attentively with his disciples: contrary to which it is said in Proverbs 30:13: "A generation whose eyes are lofty, and whose eyelids are lifted up on high"; and Ecclesiasticus 19:26: "A man is known by his look." The second, that we may learn that he did not sit idly with his disciples either; but, teaching them attentively, and turning their hearts to himself, he looked upon the disciples whom he was teaching; Luke 6:20: "And he, lifting up his eyes upon his disciples, said," etc. And therefore it is said, "When Jesus had lifted up his eyes," etc. Mystically, however, the eyes of the Lord are the spiritual gifts which, when he mercifully grants them to his elect, then he lifts up his eyes upon them, that is, he bestows a look of loving-kindness. This is what Psalm 85:16 asked, saying: "Look upon me, O Lord, and have mercy on me." Now the question concerns the feeding of the multitude; hence he said to Philip: "Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat?" He presupposes one thing, and asks about another. He presupposes indeed their want, because they did not have the means to provide food for so great a multitude; but he asks the manner of finding it, when he says, "Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat?" Here it should be noted that every teacher must spiritually feed the crowd that comes to him. And because no man has of himself the means to feed it, he must therefore buy it from elsewhere, by labor, by study, by assiduity in prayers; Isaiah 55:1: "You who have no money, make haste, buy, without any exchange, wine and milk." And again: "Why do you weigh out your money" — that is, your eloquence — "and not for bread" — that is, not for true wisdom, which refreshes (Ecclesiasticus 15:5: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding") — "and your labor not unto fullness," by learning things that do not satisfy, but rather empty out? Now the intention of the one questioning is disclosed when he says, "But this he said trying him," etc. Here the Evangelist, excluding one doubt, leads into another. For it could have been doubted that the Lord questioned Philip as though he were ignorant; but he excludes this, saying, "for he himself knew what he would do." But since to try someone seems also to belong to one who is ignorant, since it is the same as taking a trial of something, it seems that the Evangelist introduces another doubt when he says, "trying him." But it must be said that one person tries another in different ways, so as to take a trial of him: for a man tries in one way, in order to learn; the Devil in another way, in order to deceive; 1 Peter 5:8: "Your adversary the Devil, as a roaring lion, goes about seeking whom he may devour." But God, and Christ, indeed try not in order to learn, since he it is who searches hearts and minds; nor in order to deceive, since "he tries no one," as is said in James 1:13; but he tries in order to give to others a trial-proof of the one tried. Thus God tried Abraham; Genesis 22:1: "God tried Abraham," etc., and it follows: "Now I know that you fear the Lord" — that is, I have made it known that you fear the Lord. Thus from this he tries Philip in order that he might make known to others his answer, leading them thereby into the most certain knowledge of the sign to come. Next the disciples' answer is set forth, when he says, "Philip answered him," and first Philip's answer; second Andrew's answer, at the place, "One of his disciples says to him," etc. Now it should be known concerning the first, that Philip was, among the others, rather slow and untrained, and therefore among the others he questioned the Lord more frequently; below, John 14:8: "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us." But in the questioning of these two, as far as the letter is concerned, Andrew was better disposed than Philip, because Philip seems to have had no intention or disposition toward the miracle's being performed. And therefore he introduces that manner by which all those men could be fed, namely by money, saying, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them" — which we do not have, and therefore we cannot give them to eat. In which the poverty of Christ is suggested, who did not even have two hundred denarii. Andrew, however, seems to have regard to the miracle's being performed. For perhaps he had in memory the sign which Elisha had performed with barley loaves, when he fed a hundred men with twenty loaves, as is read in 4 Kings 4:42 and following, and therefore he says, "There is a boy here who has five barley loaves." But nevertheless he supposed that Christ would not perform a greater miracle than Elisha. For he reckoned that from fewer loaves fewer would be miraculously produced, and from more, more (although for him who does not need the underlying matter, it is equally easy to feed the crowds from more or from fewer), and therefore he adds, "But what are these among so many?" As if to say: even if they are multiplied as Elisha multiplied them, it is not sufficient. Mystically, spiritual refreshment is signified by wisdom. Now there is one wisdom, which Christ taught, who is true wisdom; 1 Corinthians 1:24: "Christ, the power of God and the wisdom of God." But before the coming of Christ there was a twofold teaching. One human, which the philosophers had; the other of the written law. Of the first, therefore, Philip makes mention, and therefore uses the term of buying, saying, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them." For human wisdom is possessed through acquisition. The number one hundred imports perfection. Hence two hundred suggests the twofold perfection necessary for this wisdom; for its perfection is arrived at by a twofold path: namely, by experience and by contemplation. He says therefore, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them," because whatever human reason can experience and think concerning truth is not sufficient for the perfect satiety of wisdom; Jeremiah 9:23: "Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, and let not the strong man glory in his strength, and let not the rich man glory in his riches; but let him who glories, glory in this, to know and understand me." For no philosopher's wisdom was so great that men could be recalled from error by it; rather they lead many into error. Of the second, however, Andrew makes mention; and therefore he did not wish that other loaves be bought, but that the crowd be fed from what was at hand, namely from those things which the law contained; hence he was better disposed than Philip; and therefore he says, "There is a boy here who has five barley loaves." This boy can be called Moses, on account of the imperfection of the state of the law: Hebrews 7:19: "The law brought no one to perfection"; or the people of the Jews, who served under the elements of the world, as is said in Galatians 4:3. This boy, therefore, has five loaves, that is, the teaching of the law: either because it is contained in the five books of Moses — above, John 1:17: "The law was given through Moses" — or because it was given to men occupied with sensible things, which are expressed by the five senses: and they are of barley, because the law itself was given so that in it the vital nourishment might be covered over by bodily sacraments — for the pith of barley is covered by a very clinging husk — or because the people of the Jews were not yet stripped of carnal desire, but clung to their hearts like husk: for in the Old Testament they experienced an outward hardness, on account of the ceremonial observances; Acts 15:10: "This is a burden which neither we, nor our fathers, were able to bear." And the Jews themselves, given over to bodily things, did not grasp the spiritual sense of the law; 2 Corinthians 3:15: "A veil is placed over their hearts." Now by the two fish, which gave a pleasant flavor to the bread, is understood the teaching of the Psalms and the prophets: and thus the Old Law had not only loaves, namely the five books of Moses, but also two fish, namely the prophets and the Psalms. Hence the Scripture of the Old Testament is divided into these three, Luke 24:44: "the things which are written in the Law and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning me." Or by the two fish, according to Augustine, two persons are signified: namely the royal and the priestly, by whom that people was ruled; which two persons, however, prefigured Christ, who was true king and priest. "But what are these among so many?" Because through these the human race could not be perfectly led to the knowledge of truth: for although God was known in Judea, the nations nevertheless did not know him. Next, when it says, "Jesus therefore said," the performance of the miracle is dealt with, and first the arrangement of the men is set forth; second their feeding, at the place, "Jesus therefore took the loaves," etc.; third the gathering of the fragments, at the place, "But when they were filled," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First the command concerning the arrangement of the crowds is set forth; second the opportuneness of the arrangement; and third the number of those arranged. Now the command was from the Lord to the disciples, that they should arrange the crowd for eating; hence Jesus says, "Make the men sit down," that is, sit down to eat. For, as was said above, II, in ancient times men used to dine reclining on couches, whence the custom grew up that those who sit down to eat are said to "recline." By which is mystically signified the rest which is necessary for the perfection of wisdom; Ecclesiasticus 38:25: "He who is diminished in activity will perfect wisdom." This arrangement is made through the disciples, because through them the knowledge of truth has been passed down to us; Psalm 71:3: "Let the mountains receive peace for the people." Now the opportuneness of the arrangement is drawn from the place: "now there was much grass in the place," which, according to the letter, is convenient for those reclining. Mystically, however, by the grass, flesh is signified, Isaiah 40:6: "All flesh is grass"; and according to this it can be referred to two things. It fits the teaching of the Old Testament, which was given to one resting in carnal things, and to a people wise in a carnal way; Isaiah 1:19: "If you be willing, and will hearken to me, you shall eat the good things of the land"; Deuteronomy 33:28: "The eye of Jacob upon a land of wheat, wine, and oil." Or it fits one who perceives true wisdom, to which one cannot come except by treading carnal things underfoot; Romans 12:2: "Do not be conformed to this age." Now the number was great; hence he says, "The men therefore sat down, in number about five thousand." The Evangelist numbers only the men, following the custom of the law, in which Moses numbered the people from twenty years old and upward, with no mention made of women, as is said in Numbers 1. This the Evangelist did for this reason, because these alone are capable of perfect teaching; 1 Corinthians 2:6: "We speak wisdom among the perfect"; Hebrews 5:14: "Solid food is for the perfect." Next, when he says, "Jesus therefore took the loaves," he deals with the feeding, and first the disposition of the one feeding is suggested; second the matter of the feeding; and third the perfect satiety. Now in the disposition of Jesus as he feeds them, first indeed his humility is noted; second, his giving of thanks. Humility indeed, because he took the loaves, and distributed them. And indeed Christ, about to perform the miracle, could have fed the crowds with loaves created out of nothing. But by dispensation he multiplied pre-existing loaves for the feeding of the crowds. First, indeed, that he might show that sensible things are not from the Devil, as the erring Manichees say. For if this were true, the Lord would not use sensible things for the work of divine praise, especially since he himself came "that he might destroy the works of the Devil," as is said in 1 John 3:8. Second, that he might show it to be false what they themselves say, namely that the teaching of the Old Testament is not from God, but from the Devil. Therefore, in order to show that the teaching of the New Testament is no other than that which was prefigured and contained in the teaching of the Old Testament, he multiplied the pre-existing loaves, indicating that it is he who perfects and fulfills the law; Matthew 5:17: "I have not come to destroy the law." Now the giving of thanks, because he gave thanks, so as to show that he has from another, namely from the Father, whatever he has: in which he shows us an example of doing likewise. He gave thanks especially, however, so as to give us an example that, when we begin a meal, we ought to give thanks to God; 1 Timothy 4:4: "Nothing is to be rejected which is received with the giving of thanks"; Psalm 21:27: "The poor shall eat, and shall be filled, and they shall praise the Lord." Likewise, that he might show that he was not praying for his own sake, but for the sake of the crowd, which was present, and it was necessary to persuade them that he had come from God. And therefore, when he performs a miracle before many, he prays, so as to show that he is not contrary to God, but works according to his will. It is said, however, in Mark, that Christ distributed the loaves to the crowds through the apostles. But here it is said that he himself distributed them, because he is seen to have done what he did through others. But both, according to the mystery, are true, because he alone refreshes inwardly, and others refresh outwardly and as ministers. Now the matter of the refreshment was bread and fish, concerning which enough has been said above. The satiety of the refreshment, however, was perfect, because they had "as much as they wanted." For Christ alone is he who feeds the empty soul, and fills the hungry soul with good things; Psalm 16:15: "I shall be satisfied when your glory shall appear." Others, however, as having grace by measure, perform miracles; but Christ, by absolute power, worked all things with great overabundance: hence it is said that "they were filled." Next, when he says, "But when they were filled, he said to his disciples," etc., the gathering of the fragments is dealt with, and first the Lord's command is set forth; second the disciples' execution of it, at the place, "They gathered therefore," etc. He says therefore, "But when they were filled, he said to his disciples: Gather up the fragments that remain." This indeed the Lord did not do for superfluous ostentation, but so as to show that the miracle performed was not illusory, through the fact that the remains, once gathered, were kept for a long time, and served as food for others. He also wished by this that that miracle should cling more firmly to the hearts of the disciples, whom he also commanded to carry the fragments; since he wished especially to instruct those who were to be the teachers of the whole world. But the disciples faithfully carry it out; hence it follows, "They gathered therefore," etc. Here it should be noted that the remains left over were not just any amount, nor by chance, but according to a fixed measure: because he made neither more nor less, but as much as he willed, to be superfluous. A sign of this is that each apostle's basket was full. Now a basket is a vessel assigned to rustic service. The twelve baskets, therefore, signify the twelve apostles and their imitators, who, although in the present they are held in contempt, are nevertheless inwardly filled with the riches of the spiritual sacraments: and they are said to be twelve, because the faith of the Holy Trinity was to be preached by them in the four parts of the world.”

“Having set forth the teaching on the spiritual life by which Christ gives life to those who have been regenerated, the Evangelist consequently deals with the spiritual nourishment by which Christ sustains those he has given life to; and first he sets forth the visible miracle which Christ performed by providing bodily nourishment; second he deals with spiritual nourishment, at the place, "Jesus answered them and said: Amen, amen, I say to you, you seek me, not because..." etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he sets forth the visible miracle of bodily nourishment; second he shows the effect of the miracle, at the place, "Those men therefore, when they had seen..." etc. Concerning the miracle he sets forth two things: namely its circumstances, and its performance, at the place, "And when Jesus had lifted up his eyes..." Concerning the first he does three things. First he describes the multitude which he fed; second he determines the place where he fed them, at the place, "Jesus therefore went up into the mountain"; third the time when he fed them, at the place, "Now the Passover was near," etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First he determines the place to which the multitude follows him; second, the crowd following; third he assigns the cause of their following. Now as to where the crowd followed the Lord, the Evangelist indicates this when he says, "After these things Jesus went away across the sea of Galilee"; that is, after the mystical words which the Lord had spoken concerning his power. Now this sea of Galilee is frequently named in Scripture, and in different places. But because this sea is not salty, but is a certain gathering of waters from the inflow of the Jordan, it is therefore called a lake by Luke, as is found in Luke 5:1; but because, according to the property of the Hebrew idiom, all gatherings of waters are called seas, according to that text of Genesis 1:10, "and the gatherings of waters he called seas," it is therefore called a sea. But it is surnamed Gennesareth from the nature of the place: for it is much agitated by the buffeting of winds, which are generated from the very evaporations of the water; hence Gennesareth in Greek is the same as "generating a breeze." It is also named "of Galilee" from the province of Galilee, in which it is. But "of Tiberias" from the city so called, which was on one side of this sea, having opposite it the city of Capernaum on the other side; which city was formerly called Zenereth, but was afterward restored by Herod the tetrarch in honor of Tiberius Caesar, and was called Tiberias. Now the literal reason why Jesus went away across the sea is assigned by Chrysostom: that Christ might yield to the fury and disturbance of the Jews, which they had conceived against Christ on account of the things he had said above concerning himself. Hence, as he himself says, just as missiles, when they strike against something hard, strike more heavily, but those which have nothing to meet them, once launched, are quickly spent and come to rest; so too, when we advance impetuously and by resisting against bold men, they rage the more; but if we yield to them, we easily soften their madness. For this reason Christ, by withdrawing across the sea, mitigated the fury of the Jews that had arisen from his foregoing words, giving us in this an example of doing likewise. Ecclesiasticus 8:14: "Do not stand against the face of an insolent man." Mystically, however, by the sea, the present turbulent world is signified; Psalm 103:25: "This sea, great and wide of hands." The Lord crossed this sea when he took on the sea of mortality and of penalty by being born, trod it underfoot by dying, and, crossing over by rising, arrived at the glory of the resurrection. Concerning this passing-over it is said below, John 13:1: "Jesus knowing that his hour had come, that he should pass from this world to the Father." As he passed over, great crowds followed him, by believing and by imitating, gathered from both peoples; Isaiah 60:5: "Then your heart shall wonder and be enlarged, when the multitude of the sea shall be turned to you"; Psalm 7:7: "Arise, O Lord, in the command which you have commanded, and the assembly of peoples shall surround you." The following crowd is described therefore as abundant, because "a great multitude followed him." Now the cause on account of which they followed was the working of miracles; hence he says, "because they saw the signs which he performed upon those who were sick." It should be known that some followed him on account of his teaching, namely those who were better disposed; but others, more imperfect, followed him out of admiration for the visible signs, being of a coarser mind. For signs, as is said in 1 Corinthians 14:22, "are not given to believers, but to unbelievers." Some also followed him out of devotion and faith, namely those whom he had healed in body: for they were healed by the Lord in body in such a way that they were also perfectly healed in soul; Deuteronomy 32:4: "The works of God are perfect." And this is clear, because to the paralytic (above, 8:11) he said pointedly: "Go, and sin no more"; and Matthew 9:2: "Son, your sins are forgiven you"; words which pertain more to the health of the soul than of the body. Now it should be noted that, whereas the Evangelist has made mention only of three miracles, namely of the wedding, of the ruler's son, and of the paralytic, here nevertheless he speaks indefinitely of "the signs which he was performing," so as to give one to understand that Christ performed many other signs, as is said below, at the end, of which he makes no mention in this book. For he intended especially to make known the teaching of Christ. Next he determines the place of the miracle, which is the mountain; hence he says, "He therefore went up into the mountain," that is, Jesus ascended privately, "and there he sat with his disciples." And indeed the mountain is a quite fitting place for a refreshment: for by the mountain is signified the perfection of justice, according to that text of Psalm 35:7: "Your justice is like the mountains of God." Since, therefore, these earthly things do not satisfy — indeed "whoever drinks of this water will thirst again," as is said above, II, 13 — but spiritual things do satisfy; therefore the Lord ascended to higher things with his disciples, to show that satiety is found in spiritual things, and the perfection of justice: concerning which mountain it is said in Psalm 67:16: "A mountain of God, a fat mountain." Hence there too he exercised the office of teacher, sitting with his disciples: for he it is who teaches every man knowledge. Next the time is described, when he says, "Now the Passover was near," which time indeed befits a refreshment. For Passover is interpreted as "passing-over": Exodus 12:11: "For it is the Phase, that is, the passing-over of the Lord," so as to give one to understand that whoever desires to be refreshed with the bread of the divine Word and the body and blood of the Lord must pass over from vices to virtues. 1 Corinthians 5:7: "Christ our Passover is sacrificed; therefore let us feast on the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth." Ecclesiasticus 24:26, divine Wisdom says: "Pass over to me, all you who desire me." Now this is the second Passover of which the Evangelist makes mention: to which, indeed, according to the precept of the law, which is found in Exodus 23:17, the Lord did not go up to Jerusalem. The reason for this is that Christ was God and man: and inasmuch as man he was indeed subject to the law; inasmuch as God he was above the law. Therefore, that he might show himself to be man, he sometimes kept the law; but that he might show himself to be God, he set the law aside. Hence also, by the fact that he did not go, he gave one to understand that the observances of the law would little by little, and shortly, cease. Next he deals with the performance of the miracle, when he says, "When Jesus therefore had lifted up his eyes, and had seen," etc.; and first the necessity of performing the miracle is shown; second the performance itself is added, at the place, "Jesus therefore says: Make the men sit down," etc. Now the necessity of the miracle's being performed is taken from the Lord's question and the disciples' answer; and therefore first the Lord's question is set forth; second the disciples' answer, at the place, "Philip answered him," etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First the occasion for questioning is set forth; second Christ's question is added; and third the intention of the one questioning is disclosed. Now the occasion for questioning was the sight of the multitude coming to Christ. And therefore he says, "When Jesus had lifted up his eyes," being on the mountain with his disciples as with those who were more perfect, "and had seen," etc. In which two things are to be considered concerning the Lord. One, that we may learn the maturity of Christ, who did not raise his eyes here and there, but sat modestly and attentively with his disciples: contrary to which it is said in Proverbs 30:13: "A generation whose eyes are lofty, and whose eyelids are lifted up on high"; and Ecclesiasticus 19:26: "A man is known by his look." The second, that we may learn that he did not sit idly with his disciples either; but, teaching them attentively, and turning their hearts to himself, he looked upon the disciples whom he was teaching; Luke 6:20: "And he, lifting up his eyes upon his disciples, said," etc. And therefore it is said, "When Jesus had lifted up his eyes," etc. Mystically, however, the eyes of the Lord are the spiritual gifts which, when he mercifully grants them to his elect, then he lifts up his eyes upon them, that is, he bestows a look of loving-kindness. This is what Psalm 85:16 asked, saying: "Look upon me, O Lord, and have mercy on me." Now the question concerns the feeding of the multitude; hence he said to Philip: "Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat?" He presupposes one thing, and asks about another. He presupposes indeed their want, because they did not have the means to provide food for so great a multitude; but he asks the manner of finding it, when he says, "Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat?" Here it should be noted that every teacher must spiritually feed the crowd that comes to him. And because no man has of himself the means to feed it, he must therefore buy it from elsewhere, by labor, by study, by assiduity in prayers; Isaiah 55:1: "You who have no money, make haste, buy, without any exchange, wine and milk." And again: "Why do you weigh out your money" — that is, your eloquence — "and not for bread" — that is, not for true wisdom, which refreshes (Ecclesiasticus 15:5: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding") — "and your labor not unto fullness," by learning things that do not satisfy, but rather empty out? Now the intention of the one questioning is disclosed when he says, "But this he said trying him," etc. Here the Evangelist, excluding one doubt, leads into another. For it could have been doubted that the Lord questioned Philip as though he were ignorant; but he excludes this, saying, "for he himself knew what he would do." But since to try someone seems also to belong to one who is ignorant, since it is the same as taking a trial of something, it seems that the Evangelist introduces another doubt when he says, "trying him." But it must be said that one person tries another in different ways, so as to take a trial of him: for a man tries in one way, in order to learn; the Devil in another way, in order to deceive; 1 Peter 5:8: "Your adversary the Devil, as a roaring lion, goes about seeking whom he may devour." But God, and Christ, indeed try not in order to learn, since he it is who searches hearts and minds; nor in order to deceive, since "he tries no one," as is said in James 1:13; but he tries in order to give to others a trial-proof of the one tried. Thus God tried Abraham; Genesis 22:1: "God tried Abraham," etc., and it follows: "Now I know that you fear the Lord" — that is, I have made it known that you fear the Lord. Thus from this he tries Philip in order that he might make known to others his answer, leading them thereby into the most certain knowledge of the sign to come. Next the disciples' answer is set forth, when he says, "Philip answered him," and first Philip's answer; second Andrew's answer, at the place, "One of his disciples says to him," etc. Now it should be known concerning the first, that Philip was, among the others, rather slow and untrained, and therefore among the others he questioned the Lord more frequently; below, John 14:8: "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us." But in the questioning of these two, as far as the letter is concerned, Andrew was better disposed than Philip, because Philip seems to have had no intention or disposition toward the miracle's being performed. And therefore he introduces that manner by which all those men could be fed, namely by money, saying, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them" — which we do not have, and therefore we cannot give them to eat. In which the poverty of Christ is suggested, who did not even have two hundred denarii. Andrew, however, seems to have regard to the miracle's being performed. For perhaps he had in memory the sign which Elisha had performed with barley loaves, when he fed a hundred men with twenty loaves, as is read in 4 Kings 4:42 and following, and therefore he says, "There is a boy here who has five barley loaves." But nevertheless he supposed that Christ would not perform a greater miracle than Elisha. For he reckoned that from fewer loaves fewer would be miraculously produced, and from more, more (although for him who does not need the underlying matter, it is equally easy to feed the crowds from more or from fewer), and therefore he adds, "But what are these among so many?" As if to say: even if they are multiplied as Elisha multiplied them, it is not sufficient. Mystically, spiritual refreshment is signified by wisdom. Now there is one wisdom, which Christ taught, who is true wisdom; 1 Corinthians 1:24: "Christ, the power of God and the wisdom of God." But before the coming of Christ there was a twofold teaching. One human, which the philosophers had; the other of the written law. Of the first, therefore, Philip makes mention, and therefore uses the term of buying, saying, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them." For human wisdom is possessed through acquisition. The number one hundred imports perfection. Hence two hundred suggests the twofold perfection necessary for this wisdom; for its perfection is arrived at by a twofold path: namely, by experience and by contemplation. He says therefore, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them," because whatever human reason can experience and think concerning truth is not sufficient for the perfect satiety of wisdom; Jeremiah 9:23: "Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, and let not the strong man glory in his strength, and let not the rich man glory in his riches; but let him who glories, glory in this, to know and understand me." For no philosopher's wisdom was so great that men could be recalled from error by it; rather they lead many into error. Of the second, however, Andrew makes mention; and therefore he did not wish that other loaves be bought, but that the crowd be fed from what was at hand, namely from those things which the law contained; hence he was better disposed than Philip; and therefore he says, "There is a boy here who has five barley loaves." This boy can be called Moses, on account of the imperfection of the state of the law: Hebrews 7:19: "The law brought no one to perfection"; or the people of the Jews, who served under the elements of the world, as is said in Galatians 4:3. This boy, therefore, has five loaves, that is, the teaching of the law: either because it is contained in the five books of Moses — above, John 1:17: "The law was given through Moses" — or because it was given to men occupied with sensible things, which are expressed by the five senses: and they are of barley, because the law itself was given so that in it the vital nourishment might be covered over by bodily sacraments — for the pith of barley is covered by a very clinging husk — or because the people of the Jews were not yet stripped of carnal desire, but clung to their hearts like husk: for in the Old Testament they experienced an outward hardness, on account of the ceremonial observances; Acts 15:10: "This is a burden which neither we, nor our fathers, were able to bear." And the Jews themselves, given over to bodily things, did not grasp the spiritual sense of the law; 2 Corinthians 3:15: "A veil is placed over their hearts." Now by the two fish, which gave a pleasant flavor to the bread, is understood the teaching of the Psalms and the prophets: and thus the Old Law had not only loaves, namely the five books of Moses, but also two fish, namely the prophets and the Psalms. Hence the Scripture of the Old Testament is divided into these three, Luke 24:44: "the things which are written in the Law and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning me." Or by the two fish, according to Augustine, two persons are signified: namely the royal and the priestly, by whom that people was ruled; which two persons, however, prefigured Christ, who was true king and priest. "But what are these among so many?" Because through these the human race could not be perfectly led to the knowledge of truth: for although God was known in Judea, the nations nevertheless did not know him. Next, when it says, "Jesus therefore said," the performance of the miracle is dealt with, and first the arrangement of the men is set forth; second their feeding, at the place, "Jesus therefore took the loaves," etc.; third the gathering of the fragments, at the place, "But when they were filled," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First the command concerning the arrangement of the crowds is set forth; second the opportuneness of the arrangement; and third the number of those arranged. Now the command was from the Lord to the disciples, that they should arrange the crowd for eating; hence Jesus says, "Make the men sit down," that is, sit down to eat. For, as was said above, II, in ancient times men used to dine reclining on couches, whence the custom grew up that those who sit down to eat are said to "recline." By which is mystically signified the rest which is necessary for the perfection of wisdom; Ecclesiasticus 38:25: "He who is diminished in activity will perfect wisdom." This arrangement is made through the disciples, because through them the knowledge of truth has been passed down to us; Psalm 71:3: "Let the mountains receive peace for the people." Now the opportuneness of the arrangement is drawn from the place: "now there was much grass in the place," which, according to the letter, is convenient for those reclining. Mystically, however, by the grass, flesh is signified, Isaiah 40:6: "All flesh is grass"; and according to this it can be referred to two things. It fits the teaching of the Old Testament, which was given to one resting in carnal things, and to a people wise in a carnal way; Isaiah 1:19: "If you be willing, and will hearken to me, you shall eat the good things of the land"; Deuteronomy 33:28: "The eye of Jacob upon a land of wheat, wine, and oil." Or it fits one who perceives true wisdom, to which one cannot come except by treading carnal things underfoot; Romans 12:2: "Do not be conformed to this age." Now the number was great; hence he says, "The men therefore sat down, in number about five thousand." The Evangelist numbers only the men, following the custom of the law, in which Moses numbered the people from twenty years old and upward, with no mention made of women, as is said in Numbers 1. This the Evangelist did for this reason, because these alone are capable of perfect teaching; 1 Corinthians 2:6: "We speak wisdom among the perfect"; Hebrews 5:14: "Solid food is for the perfect." Next, when he says, "Jesus therefore took the loaves," he deals with the feeding, and first the disposition of the one feeding is suggested; second the matter of the feeding; and third the perfect satiety. Now in the disposition of Jesus as he feeds them, first indeed his humility is noted; second, his giving of thanks. Humility indeed, because he took the loaves, and distributed them. And indeed Christ, about to perform the miracle, could have fed the crowds with loaves created out of nothing. But by dispensation he multiplied pre-existing loaves for the feeding of the crowds. First, indeed, that he might show that sensible things are not from the Devil, as the erring Manichees say. For if this were true, the Lord would not use sensible things for the work of divine praise, especially since he himself came "that he might destroy the works of the Devil," as is said in 1 John 3:8. Second, that he might show it to be false what they themselves say, namely that the teaching of the Old Testament is not from God, but from the Devil. Therefore, in order to show that the teaching of the New Testament is no other than that which was prefigured and contained in the teaching of the Old Testament, he multiplied the pre-existing loaves, indicating that it is he who perfects and fulfills the law; Matthew 5:17: "I have not come to destroy the law." Now the giving of thanks, because he gave thanks, so as to show that he has from another, namely from the Father, whatever he has: in which he shows us an example of doing likewise. He gave thanks especially, however, so as to give us an example that, when we begin a meal, we ought to give thanks to God; 1 Timothy 4:4: "Nothing is to be rejected which is received with the giving of thanks"; Psalm 21:27: "The poor shall eat, and shall be filled, and they shall praise the Lord." Likewise, that he might show that he was not praying for his own sake, but for the sake of the crowd, which was present, and it was necessary to persuade them that he had come from God. And therefore, when he performs a miracle before many, he prays, so as to show that he is not contrary to God, but works according to his will. It is said, however, in Mark, that Christ distributed the loaves to the crowds through the apostles. But here it is said that he himself distributed them, because he is seen to have done what he did through others. But both, according to the mystery, are true, because he alone refreshes inwardly, and others refresh outwardly and as ministers. Now the matter of the refreshment was bread and fish, concerning which enough has been said above. The satiety of the refreshment, however, was perfect, because they had "as much as they wanted." For Christ alone is he who feeds the empty soul, and fills the hungry soul with good things; Psalm 16:15: "I shall be satisfied when your glory shall appear." Others, however, as having grace by measure, perform miracles; but Christ, by absolute power, worked all things with great overabundance: hence it is said that "they were filled." Next, when he says, "But when they were filled, he said to his disciples," etc., the gathering of the fragments is dealt with, and first the Lord's command is set forth; second the disciples' execution of it, at the place, "They gathered therefore," etc. He says therefore, "But when they were filled, he said to his disciples: Gather up the fragments that remain." This indeed the Lord did not do for superfluous ostentation, but so as to show that the miracle performed was not illusory, through the fact that the remains, once gathered, were kept for a long time, and served as food for others. He also wished by this that that miracle should cling more firmly to the hearts of the disciples, whom he also commanded to carry the fragments; since he wished especially to instruct those who were to be the teachers of the whole world. But the disciples faithfully carry it out; hence it follows, "They gathered therefore," etc. Here it should be noted that the remains left over were not just any amount, nor by chance, but according to a fixed measure: because he made neither more nor less, but as much as he willed, to be superfluous. A sign of this is that each apostle's basket was full. Now a basket is a vessel assigned to rustic service. The twelve baskets, therefore, signify the twelve apostles and their imitators, who, although in the present they are held in contempt, are nevertheless inwardly filled with the riches of the spiritual sacraments: and they are said to be twelve, because the faith of the Holy Trinity was to be preached by them in the four parts of the world.”

“Having set forth the teaching on the spiritual life by which Christ gives life to those who have been regenerated, the Evangelist consequently deals with the spiritual nourishment by which Christ sustains those he has given life to; and first he sets forth the visible miracle which Christ performed by providing bodily nourishment; second he deals with spiritual nourishment, at the place, "Jesus answered them and said: Amen, amen, I say to you, you seek me, not because..." etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he sets forth the visible miracle of bodily nourishment; second he shows the effect of the miracle, at the place, "Those men therefore, when they had seen..." etc. Concerning the miracle he sets forth two things: namely its circumstances, and its performance, at the place, "And when Jesus had lifted up his eyes..." Concerning the first he does three things. First he describes the multitude which he fed; second he determines the place where he fed them, at the place, "Jesus therefore went up into the mountain"; third the time when he fed them, at the place, "Now the Passover was near," etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First he determines the place to which the multitude follows him; second, the crowd following; third he assigns the cause of their following. Now as to where the crowd followed the Lord, the Evangelist indicates this when he says, "After these things Jesus went away across the sea of Galilee"; that is, after the mystical words which the Lord had spoken concerning his power. Now this sea of Galilee is frequently named in Scripture, and in different places. But because this sea is not salty, but is a certain gathering of waters from the inflow of the Jordan, it is therefore called a lake by Luke, as is found in Luke 5:1; but because, according to the property of the Hebrew idiom, all gatherings of waters are called seas, according to that text of Genesis 1:10, "and the gatherings of waters he called seas," it is therefore called a sea. But it is surnamed Gennesareth from the nature of the place: for it is much agitated by the buffeting of winds, which are generated from the very evaporations of the water; hence Gennesareth in Greek is the same as "generating a breeze." It is also named "of Galilee" from the province of Galilee, in which it is. But "of Tiberias" from the city so called, which was on one side of this sea, having opposite it the city of Capernaum on the other side; which city was formerly called Zenereth, but was afterward restored by Herod the tetrarch in honor of Tiberius Caesar, and was called Tiberias. Now the literal reason why Jesus went away across the sea is assigned by Chrysostom: that Christ might yield to the fury and disturbance of the Jews, which they had conceived against Christ on account of the things he had said above concerning himself. Hence, as he himself says, just as missiles, when they strike against something hard, strike more heavily, but those which have nothing to meet them, once launched, are quickly spent and come to rest; so too, when we advance impetuously and by resisting against bold men, they rage the more; but if we yield to them, we easily soften their madness. For this reason Christ, by withdrawing across the sea, mitigated the fury of the Jews that had arisen from his foregoing words, giving us in this an example of doing likewise. Ecclesiasticus 8:14: "Do not stand against the face of an insolent man." Mystically, however, by the sea, the present turbulent world is signified; Psalm 103:25: "This sea, great and wide of hands." The Lord crossed this sea when he took on the sea of mortality and of penalty by being born, trod it underfoot by dying, and, crossing over by rising, arrived at the glory of the resurrection. Concerning this passing-over it is said below, John 13:1: "Jesus knowing that his hour had come, that he should pass from this world to the Father." As he passed over, great crowds followed him, by believing and by imitating, gathered from both peoples; Isaiah 60:5: "Then your heart shall wonder and be enlarged, when the multitude of the sea shall be turned to you"; Psalm 7:7: "Arise, O Lord, in the command which you have commanded, and the assembly of peoples shall surround you." The following crowd is described therefore as abundant, because "a great multitude followed him." Now the cause on account of which they followed was the working of miracles; hence he says, "because they saw the signs which he performed upon those who were sick." It should be known that some followed him on account of his teaching, namely those who were better disposed; but others, more imperfect, followed him out of admiration for the visible signs, being of a coarser mind. For signs, as is said in 1 Corinthians 14:22, "are not given to believers, but to unbelievers." Some also followed him out of devotion and faith, namely those whom he had healed in body: for they were healed by the Lord in body in such a way that they were also perfectly healed in soul; Deuteronomy 32:4: "The works of God are perfect." And this is clear, because to the paralytic (above, 8:11) he said pointedly: "Go, and sin no more"; and Matthew 9:2: "Son, your sins are forgiven you"; words which pertain more to the health of the soul than of the body. Now it should be noted that, whereas the Evangelist has made mention only of three miracles, namely of the wedding, of the ruler's son, and of the paralytic, here nevertheless he speaks indefinitely of "the signs which he was performing," so as to give one to understand that Christ performed many other signs, as is said below, at the end, of which he makes no mention in this book. For he intended especially to make known the teaching of Christ. Next he determines the place of the miracle, which is the mountain; hence he says, "He therefore went up into the mountain," that is, Jesus ascended privately, "and there he sat with his disciples." And indeed the mountain is a quite fitting place for a refreshment: for by the mountain is signified the perfection of justice, according to that text of Psalm 35:7: "Your justice is like the mountains of God." Since, therefore, these earthly things do not satisfy — indeed "whoever drinks of this water will thirst again," as is said above, II, 13 — but spiritual things do satisfy; therefore the Lord ascended to higher things with his disciples, to show that satiety is found in spiritual things, and the perfection of justice: concerning which mountain it is said in Psalm 67:16: "A mountain of God, a fat mountain." Hence there too he exercised the office of teacher, sitting with his disciples: for he it is who teaches every man knowledge. Next the time is described, when he says, "Now the Passover was near," which time indeed befits a refreshment. For Passover is interpreted as "passing-over": Exodus 12:11: "For it is the Phase, that is, the passing-over of the Lord," so as to give one to understand that whoever desires to be refreshed with the bread of the divine Word and the body and blood of the Lord must pass over from vices to virtues. 1 Corinthians 5:7: "Christ our Passover is sacrificed; therefore let us feast on the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth." Ecclesiasticus 24:26, divine Wisdom says: "Pass over to me, all you who desire me." Now this is the second Passover of which the Evangelist makes mention: to which, indeed, according to the precept of the law, which is found in Exodus 23:17, the Lord did not go up to Jerusalem. The reason for this is that Christ was God and man: and inasmuch as man he was indeed subject to the law; inasmuch as God he was above the law. Therefore, that he might show himself to be man, he sometimes kept the law; but that he might show himself to be God, he set the law aside. Hence also, by the fact that he did not go, he gave one to understand that the observances of the law would little by little, and shortly, cease. Next he deals with the performance of the miracle, when he says, "When Jesus therefore had lifted up his eyes, and had seen," etc.; and first the necessity of performing the miracle is shown; second the performance itself is added, at the place, "Jesus therefore says: Make the men sit down," etc. Now the necessity of the miracle's being performed is taken from the Lord's question and the disciples' answer; and therefore first the Lord's question is set forth; second the disciples' answer, at the place, "Philip answered him," etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First the occasion for questioning is set forth; second Christ's question is added; and third the intention of the one questioning is disclosed. Now the occasion for questioning was the sight of the multitude coming to Christ. And therefore he says, "When Jesus had lifted up his eyes," being on the mountain with his disciples as with those who were more perfect, "and had seen," etc. In which two things are to be considered concerning the Lord. One, that we may learn the maturity of Christ, who did not raise his eyes here and there, but sat modestly and attentively with his disciples: contrary to which it is said in Proverbs 30:13: "A generation whose eyes are lofty, and whose eyelids are lifted up on high"; and Ecclesiasticus 19:26: "A man is known by his look." The second, that we may learn that he did not sit idly with his disciples either; but, teaching them attentively, and turning their hearts to himself, he looked upon the disciples whom he was teaching; Luke 6:20: "And he, lifting up his eyes upon his disciples, said," etc. And therefore it is said, "When Jesus had lifted up his eyes," etc. Mystically, however, the eyes of the Lord are the spiritual gifts which, when he mercifully grants them to his elect, then he lifts up his eyes upon them, that is, he bestows a look of loving-kindness. This is what Psalm 85:16 asked, saying: "Look upon me, O Lord, and have mercy on me." Now the question concerns the feeding of the multitude; hence he said to Philip: "Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat?" He presupposes one thing, and asks about another. He presupposes indeed their want, because they did not have the means to provide food for so great a multitude; but he asks the manner of finding it, when he says, "Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat?" Here it should be noted that every teacher must spiritually feed the crowd that comes to him. And because no man has of himself the means to feed it, he must therefore buy it from elsewhere, by labor, by study, by assiduity in prayers; Isaiah 55:1: "You who have no money, make haste, buy, without any exchange, wine and milk." And again: "Why do you weigh out your money" — that is, your eloquence — "and not for bread" — that is, not for true wisdom, which refreshes (Ecclesiasticus 15:5: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding") — "and your labor not unto fullness," by learning things that do not satisfy, but rather empty out? Now the intention of the one questioning is disclosed when he says, "But this he said trying him," etc. Here the Evangelist, excluding one doubt, leads into another. For it could have been doubted that the Lord questioned Philip as though he were ignorant; but he excludes this, saying, "for he himself knew what he would do." But since to try someone seems also to belong to one who is ignorant, since it is the same as taking a trial of something, it seems that the Evangelist introduces another doubt when he says, "trying him." But it must be said that one person tries another in different ways, so as to take a trial of him: for a man tries in one way, in order to learn; the Devil in another way, in order to deceive; 1 Peter 5:8: "Your adversary the Devil, as a roaring lion, goes about seeking whom he may devour." But God, and Christ, indeed try not in order to learn, since he it is who searches hearts and minds; nor in order to deceive, since "he tries no one," as is said in James 1:13; but he tries in order to give to others a trial-proof of the one tried. Thus God tried Abraham; Genesis 22:1: "God tried Abraham," etc., and it follows: "Now I know that you fear the Lord" — that is, I have made it known that you fear the Lord. Thus from this he tries Philip in order that he might make known to others his answer, leading them thereby into the most certain knowledge of the sign to come. Next the disciples' answer is set forth, when he says, "Philip answered him," and first Philip's answer; second Andrew's answer, at the place, "One of his disciples says to him," etc. Now it should be known concerning the first, that Philip was, among the others, rather slow and untrained, and therefore among the others he questioned the Lord more frequently; below, John 14:8: "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us." But in the questioning of these two, as far as the letter is concerned, Andrew was better disposed than Philip, because Philip seems to have had no intention or disposition toward the miracle's being performed. And therefore he introduces that manner by which all those men could be fed, namely by money, saying, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them" — which we do not have, and therefore we cannot give them to eat. In which the poverty of Christ is suggested, who did not even have two hundred denarii. Andrew, however, seems to have regard to the miracle's being performed. For perhaps he had in memory the sign which Elisha had performed with barley loaves, when he fed a hundred men with twenty loaves, as is read in 4 Kings 4:42 and following, and therefore he says, "There is a boy here who has five barley loaves." But nevertheless he supposed that Christ would not perform a greater miracle than Elisha. For he reckoned that from fewer loaves fewer would be miraculously produced, and from more, more (although for him who does not need the underlying matter, it is equally easy to feed the crowds from more or from fewer), and therefore he adds, "But what are these among so many?" As if to say: even if they are multiplied as Elisha multiplied them, it is not sufficient. Mystically, spiritual refreshment is signified by wisdom. Now there is one wisdom, which Christ taught, who is true wisdom; 1 Corinthians 1:24: "Christ, the power of God and the wisdom of God." But before the coming of Christ there was a twofold teaching. One human, which the philosophers had; the other of the written law. Of the first, therefore, Philip makes mention, and therefore uses the term of buying, saying, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them." For human wisdom is possessed through acquisition. The number one hundred imports perfection. Hence two hundred suggests the twofold perfection necessary for this wisdom; for its perfection is arrived at by a twofold path: namely, by experience and by contemplation. He says therefore, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them," because whatever human reason can experience and think concerning truth is not sufficient for the perfect satiety of wisdom; Jeremiah 9:23: "Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, and let not the strong man glory in his strength, and let not the rich man glory in his riches; but let him who glories, glory in this, to know and understand me." For no philosopher's wisdom was so great that men could be recalled from error by it; rather they lead many into error. Of the second, however, Andrew makes mention; and therefore he did not wish that other loaves be bought, but that the crowd be fed from what was at hand, namely from those things which the law contained; hence he was better disposed than Philip; and therefore he says, "There is a boy here who has five barley loaves." This boy can be called Moses, on account of the imperfection of the state of the law: Hebrews 7:19: "The law brought no one to perfection"; or the people of the Jews, who served under the elements of the world, as is said in Galatians 4:3. This boy, therefore, has five loaves, that is, the teaching of the law: either because it is contained in the five books of Moses — above, John 1:17: "The law was given through Moses" — or because it was given to men occupied with sensible things, which are expressed by the five senses: and they are of barley, because the law itself was given so that in it the vital nourishment might be covered over by bodily sacraments — for the pith of barley is covered by a very clinging husk — or because the people of the Jews were not yet stripped of carnal desire, but clung to their hearts like husk: for in the Old Testament they experienced an outward hardness, on account of the ceremonial observances; Acts 15:10: "This is a burden which neither we, nor our fathers, were able to bear." And the Jews themselves, given over to bodily things, did not grasp the spiritual sense of the law; 2 Corinthians 3:15: "A veil is placed over their hearts." Now by the two fish, which gave a pleasant flavor to the bread, is understood the teaching of the Psalms and the prophets: and thus the Old Law had not only loaves, namely the five books of Moses, but also two fish, namely the prophets and the Psalms. Hence the Scripture of the Old Testament is divided into these three, Luke 24:44: "the things which are written in the Law and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning me." Or by the two fish, according to Augustine, two persons are signified: namely the royal and the priestly, by whom that people was ruled; which two persons, however, prefigured Christ, who was true king and priest. "But what are these among so many?" Because through these the human race could not be perfectly led to the knowledge of truth: for although God was known in Judea, the nations nevertheless did not know him. Next, when it says, "Jesus therefore said," the performance of the miracle is dealt with, and first the arrangement of the men is set forth; second their feeding, at the place, "Jesus therefore took the loaves," etc.; third the gathering of the fragments, at the place, "But when they were filled," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First the command concerning the arrangement of the crowds is set forth; second the opportuneness of the arrangement; and third the number of those arranged. Now the command was from the Lord to the disciples, that they should arrange the crowd for eating; hence Jesus says, "Make the men sit down," that is, sit down to eat. For, as was said above, II, in ancient times men used to dine reclining on couches, whence the custom grew up that those who sit down to eat are said to "recline." By which is mystically signified the rest which is necessary for the perfection of wisdom; Ecclesiasticus 38:25: "He who is diminished in activity will perfect wisdom." This arrangement is made through the disciples, because through them the knowledge of truth has been passed down to us; Psalm 71:3: "Let the mountains receive peace for the people." Now the opportuneness of the arrangement is drawn from the place: "now there was much grass in the place," which, according to the letter, is convenient for those reclining. Mystically, however, by the grass, flesh is signified, Isaiah 40:6: "All flesh is grass"; and according to this it can be referred to two things. It fits the teaching of the Old Testament, which was given to one resting in carnal things, and to a people wise in a carnal way; Isaiah 1:19: "If you be willing, and will hearken to me, you shall eat the good things of the land"; Deuteronomy 33:28: "The eye of Jacob upon a land of wheat, wine, and oil." Or it fits one who perceives true wisdom, to which one cannot come except by treading carnal things underfoot; Romans 12:2: "Do not be conformed to this age." Now the number was great; hence he says, "The men therefore sat down, in number about five thousand." The Evangelist numbers only the men, following the custom of the law, in which Moses numbered the people from twenty years old and upward, with no mention made of women, as is said in Numbers 1. This the Evangelist did for this reason, because these alone are capable of perfect teaching; 1 Corinthians 2:6: "We speak wisdom among the perfect"; Hebrews 5:14: "Solid food is for the perfect." Next, when he says, "Jesus therefore took the loaves," he deals with the feeding, and first the disposition of the one feeding is suggested; second the matter of the feeding; and third the perfect satiety. Now in the disposition of Jesus as he feeds them, first indeed his humility is noted; second, his giving of thanks. Humility indeed, because he took the loaves, and distributed them. And indeed Christ, about to perform the miracle, could have fed the crowds with loaves created out of nothing. But by dispensation he multiplied pre-existing loaves for the feeding of the crowds. First, indeed, that he might show that sensible things are not from the Devil, as the erring Manichees say. For if this were true, the Lord would not use sensible things for the work of divine praise, especially since he himself came "that he might destroy the works of the Devil," as is said in 1 John 3:8. Second, that he might show it to be false what they themselves say, namely that the teaching of the Old Testament is not from God, but from the Devil. Therefore, in order to show that the teaching of the New Testament is no other than that which was prefigured and contained in the teaching of the Old Testament, he multiplied the pre-existing loaves, indicating that it is he who perfects and fulfills the law; Matthew 5:17: "I have not come to destroy the law." Now the giving of thanks, because he gave thanks, so as to show that he has from another, namely from the Father, whatever he has: in which he shows us an example of doing likewise. He gave thanks especially, however, so as to give us an example that, when we begin a meal, we ought to give thanks to God; 1 Timothy 4:4: "Nothing is to be rejected which is received with the giving of thanks"; Psalm 21:27: "The poor shall eat, and shall be filled, and they shall praise the Lord." Likewise, that he might show that he was not praying for his own sake, but for the sake of the crowd, which was present, and it was necessary to persuade them that he had come from God. And therefore, when he performs a miracle before many, he prays, so as to show that he is not contrary to God, but works according to his will. It is said, however, in Mark, that Christ distributed the loaves to the crowds through the apostles. But here it is said that he himself distributed them, because he is seen to have done what he did through others. But both, according to the mystery, are true, because he alone refreshes inwardly, and others refresh outwardly and as ministers. Now the matter of the refreshment was bread and fish, concerning which enough has been said above. The satiety of the refreshment, however, was perfect, because they had "as much as they wanted." For Christ alone is he who feeds the empty soul, and fills the hungry soul with good things; Psalm 16:15: "I shall be satisfied when your glory shall appear." Others, however, as having grace by measure, perform miracles; but Christ, by absolute power, worked all things with great overabundance: hence it is said that "they were filled." Next, when he says, "But when they were filled, he said to his disciples," etc., the gathering of the fragments is dealt with, and first the Lord's command is set forth; second the disciples' execution of it, at the place, "They gathered therefore," etc. He says therefore, "But when they were filled, he said to his disciples: Gather up the fragments that remain." This indeed the Lord did not do for superfluous ostentation, but so as to show that the miracle performed was not illusory, through the fact that the remains, once gathered, were kept for a long time, and served as food for others. He also wished by this that that miracle should cling more firmly to the hearts of the disciples, whom he also commanded to carry the fragments; since he wished especially to instruct those who were to be the teachers of the whole world. But the disciples faithfully carry it out; hence it follows, "They gathered therefore," etc. Here it should be noted that the remains left over were not just any amount, nor by chance, but according to a fixed measure: because he made neither more nor less, but as much as he willed, to be superfluous. A sign of this is that each apostle's basket was full. Now a basket is a vessel assigned to rustic service. The twelve baskets, therefore, signify the twelve apostles and their imitators, who, although in the present they are held in contempt, are nevertheless inwardly filled with the riches of the spiritual sacraments: and they are said to be twelve, because the faith of the Holy Trinity was to be preached by them in the four parts of the world.”

“Having set forth the teaching on the spiritual life by which Christ gives life to those who have been regenerated, the Evangelist consequently deals with the spiritual nourishment by which Christ sustains those he has given life to; and first he sets forth the visible miracle which Christ performed by providing bodily nourishment; second he deals with spiritual nourishment, at the place, "Jesus answered them and said: Amen, amen, I say to you, you seek me, not because..." etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he sets forth the visible miracle of bodily nourishment; second he shows the effect of the miracle, at the place, "Those men therefore, when they had seen..." etc. Concerning the miracle he sets forth two things: namely its circumstances, and its performance, at the place, "And when Jesus had lifted up his eyes..." Concerning the first he does three things. First he describes the multitude which he fed; second he determines the place where he fed them, at the place, "Jesus therefore went up into the mountain"; third the time when he fed them, at the place, "Now the Passover was near," etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First he determines the place to which the multitude follows him; second, the crowd following; third he assigns the cause of their following. Now as to where the crowd followed the Lord, the Evangelist indicates this when he says, "After these things Jesus went away across the sea of Galilee"; that is, after the mystical words which the Lord had spoken concerning his power. Now this sea of Galilee is frequently named in Scripture, and in different places. But because this sea is not salty, but is a certain gathering of waters from the inflow of the Jordan, it is therefore called a lake by Luke, as is found in Luke 5:1; but because, according to the property of the Hebrew idiom, all gatherings of waters are called seas, according to that text of Genesis 1:10, "and the gatherings of waters he called seas," it is therefore called a sea. But it is surnamed Gennesareth from the nature of the place: for it is much agitated by the buffeting of winds, which are generated from the very evaporations of the water; hence Gennesareth in Greek is the same as "generating a breeze." It is also named "of Galilee" from the province of Galilee, in which it is. But "of Tiberias" from the city so called, which was on one side of this sea, having opposite it the city of Capernaum on the other side; which city was formerly called Zenereth, but was afterward restored by Herod the tetrarch in honor of Tiberius Caesar, and was called Tiberias. Now the literal reason why Jesus went away across the sea is assigned by Chrysostom: that Christ might yield to the fury and disturbance of the Jews, which they had conceived against Christ on account of the things he had said above concerning himself. Hence, as he himself says, just as missiles, when they strike against something hard, strike more heavily, but those which have nothing to meet them, once launched, are quickly spent and come to rest; so too, when we advance impetuously and by resisting against bold men, they rage the more; but if we yield to them, we easily soften their madness. For this reason Christ, by withdrawing across the sea, mitigated the fury of the Jews that had arisen from his foregoing words, giving us in this an example of doing likewise. Ecclesiasticus 8:14: "Do not stand against the face of an insolent man." Mystically, however, by the sea, the present turbulent world is signified; Psalm 103:25: "This sea, great and wide of hands." The Lord crossed this sea when he took on the sea of mortality and of penalty by being born, trod it underfoot by dying, and, crossing over by rising, arrived at the glory of the resurrection. Concerning this passing-over it is said below, John 13:1: "Jesus knowing that his hour had come, that he should pass from this world to the Father." As he passed over, great crowds followed him, by believing and by imitating, gathered from both peoples; Isaiah 60:5: "Then your heart shall wonder and be enlarged, when the multitude of the sea shall be turned to you"; Psalm 7:7: "Arise, O Lord, in the command which you have commanded, and the assembly of peoples shall surround you." The following crowd is described therefore as abundant, because "a great multitude followed him." Now the cause on account of which they followed was the working of miracles; hence he says, "because they saw the signs which he performed upon those who were sick." It should be known that some followed him on account of his teaching, namely those who were better disposed; but others, more imperfect, followed him out of admiration for the visible signs, being of a coarser mind. For signs, as is said in 1 Corinthians 14:22, "are not given to believers, but to unbelievers." Some also followed him out of devotion and faith, namely those whom he had healed in body: for they were healed by the Lord in body in such a way that they were also perfectly healed in soul; Deuteronomy 32:4: "The works of God are perfect." And this is clear, because to the paralytic (above, 8:11) he said pointedly: "Go, and sin no more"; and Matthew 9:2: "Son, your sins are forgiven you"; words which pertain more to the health of the soul than of the body. Now it should be noted that, whereas the Evangelist has made mention only of three miracles, namely of the wedding, of the ruler's son, and of the paralytic, here nevertheless he speaks indefinitely of "the signs which he was performing," so as to give one to understand that Christ performed many other signs, as is said below, at the end, of which he makes no mention in this book. For he intended especially to make known the teaching of Christ. Next he determines the place of the miracle, which is the mountain; hence he says, "He therefore went up into the mountain," that is, Jesus ascended privately, "and there he sat with his disciples." And indeed the mountain is a quite fitting place for a refreshment: for by the mountain is signified the perfection of justice, according to that text of Psalm 35:7: "Your justice is like the mountains of God." Since, therefore, these earthly things do not satisfy — indeed "whoever drinks of this water will thirst again," as is said above, II, 13 — but spiritual things do satisfy; therefore the Lord ascended to higher things with his disciples, to show that satiety is found in spiritual things, and the perfection of justice: concerning which mountain it is said in Psalm 67:16: "A mountain of God, a fat mountain." Hence there too he exercised the office of teacher, sitting with his disciples: for he it is who teaches every man knowledge. Next the time is described, when he says, "Now the Passover was near," which time indeed befits a refreshment. For Passover is interpreted as "passing-over": Exodus 12:11: "For it is the Phase, that is, the passing-over of the Lord," so as to give one to understand that whoever desires to be refreshed with the bread of the divine Word and the body and blood of the Lord must pass over from vices to virtues. 1 Corinthians 5:7: "Christ our Passover is sacrificed; therefore let us feast on the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth." Ecclesiasticus 24:26, divine Wisdom says: "Pass over to me, all you who desire me." Now this is the second Passover of which the Evangelist makes mention: to which, indeed, according to the precept of the law, which is found in Exodus 23:17, the Lord did not go up to Jerusalem. The reason for this is that Christ was God and man: and inasmuch as man he was indeed subject to the law; inasmuch as God he was above the law. Therefore, that he might show himself to be man, he sometimes kept the law; but that he might show himself to be God, he set the law aside. Hence also, by the fact that he did not go, he gave one to understand that the observances of the law would little by little, and shortly, cease. Next he deals with the performance of the miracle, when he says, "When Jesus therefore had lifted up his eyes, and had seen," etc.; and first the necessity of performing the miracle is shown; second the performance itself is added, at the place, "Jesus therefore says: Make the men sit down," etc. Now the necessity of the miracle's being performed is taken from the Lord's question and the disciples' answer; and therefore first the Lord's question is set forth; second the disciples' answer, at the place, "Philip answered him," etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First the occasion for questioning is set forth; second Christ's question is added; and third the intention of the one questioning is disclosed. Now the occasion for questioning was the sight of the multitude coming to Christ. And therefore he says, "When Jesus had lifted up his eyes," being on the mountain with his disciples as with those who were more perfect, "and had seen," etc. In which two things are to be considered concerning the Lord. One, that we may learn the maturity of Christ, who did not raise his eyes here and there, but sat modestly and attentively with his disciples: contrary to which it is said in Proverbs 30:13: "A generation whose eyes are lofty, and whose eyelids are lifted up on high"; and Ecclesiasticus 19:26: "A man is known by his look." The second, that we may learn that he did not sit idly with his disciples either; but, teaching them attentively, and turning their hearts to himself, he looked upon the disciples whom he was teaching; Luke 6:20: "And he, lifting up his eyes upon his disciples, said," etc. And therefore it is said, "When Jesus had lifted up his eyes," etc. Mystically, however, the eyes of the Lord are the spiritual gifts which, when he mercifully grants them to his elect, then he lifts up his eyes upon them, that is, he bestows a look of loving-kindness. This is what Psalm 85:16 asked, saying: "Look upon me, O Lord, and have mercy on me." Now the question concerns the feeding of the multitude; hence he said to Philip: "Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat?" He presupposes one thing, and asks about another. He presupposes indeed their want, because they did not have the means to provide food for so great a multitude; but he asks the manner of finding it, when he says, "Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat?" Here it should be noted that every teacher must spiritually feed the crowd that comes to him. And because no man has of himself the means to feed it, he must therefore buy it from elsewhere, by labor, by study, by assiduity in prayers; Isaiah 55:1: "You who have no money, make haste, buy, without any exchange, wine and milk." And again: "Why do you weigh out your money" — that is, your eloquence — "and not for bread" — that is, not for true wisdom, which refreshes (Ecclesiasticus 15:5: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding") — "and your labor not unto fullness," by learning things that do not satisfy, but rather empty out? Now the intention of the one questioning is disclosed when he says, "But this he said trying him," etc. Here the Evangelist, excluding one doubt, leads into another. For it could have been doubted that the Lord questioned Philip as though he were ignorant; but he excludes this, saying, "for he himself knew what he would do." But since to try someone seems also to belong to one who is ignorant, since it is the same as taking a trial of something, it seems that the Evangelist introduces another doubt when he says, "trying him." But it must be said that one person tries another in different ways, so as to take a trial of him: for a man tries in one way, in order to learn; the Devil in another way, in order to deceive; 1 Peter 5:8: "Your adversary the Devil, as a roaring lion, goes about seeking whom he may devour." But God, and Christ, indeed try not in order to learn, since he it is who searches hearts and minds; nor in order to deceive, since "he tries no one," as is said in James 1:13; but he tries in order to give to others a trial-proof of the one tried. Thus God tried Abraham; Genesis 22:1: "God tried Abraham," etc., and it follows: "Now I know that you fear the Lord" — that is, I have made it known that you fear the Lord. Thus from this he tries Philip in order that he might make known to others his answer, leading them thereby into the most certain knowledge of the sign to come. Next the disciples' answer is set forth, when he says, "Philip answered him," and first Philip's answer; second Andrew's answer, at the place, "One of his disciples says to him," etc. Now it should be known concerning the first, that Philip was, among the others, rather slow and untrained, and therefore among the others he questioned the Lord more frequently; below, John 14:8: "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us." But in the questioning of these two, as far as the letter is concerned, Andrew was better disposed than Philip, because Philip seems to have had no intention or disposition toward the miracle's being performed. And therefore he introduces that manner by which all those men could be fed, namely by money, saying, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them" — which we do not have, and therefore we cannot give them to eat. In which the poverty of Christ is suggested, who did not even have two hundred denarii. Andrew, however, seems to have regard to the miracle's being performed. For perhaps he had in memory the sign which Elisha had performed with barley loaves, when he fed a hundred men with twenty loaves, as is read in 4 Kings 4:42 and following, and therefore he says, "There is a boy here who has five barley loaves." But nevertheless he supposed that Christ would not perform a greater miracle than Elisha. For he reckoned that from fewer loaves fewer would be miraculously produced, and from more, more (although for him who does not need the underlying matter, it is equally easy to feed the crowds from more or from fewer), and therefore he adds, "But what are these among so many?" As if to say: even if they are multiplied as Elisha multiplied them, it is not sufficient. Mystically, spiritual refreshment is signified by wisdom. Now there is one wisdom, which Christ taught, who is true wisdom; 1 Corinthians 1:24: "Christ, the power of God and the wisdom of God." But before the coming of Christ there was a twofold teaching. One human, which the philosophers had; the other of the written law. Of the first, therefore, Philip makes mention, and therefore uses the term of buying, saying, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them." For human wisdom is possessed through acquisition. The number one hundred imports perfection. Hence two hundred suggests the twofold perfection necessary for this wisdom; for its perfection is arrived at by a twofold path: namely, by experience and by contemplation. He says therefore, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them," because whatever human reason can experience and think concerning truth is not sufficient for the perfect satiety of wisdom; Jeremiah 9:23: "Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, and let not the strong man glory in his strength, and let not the rich man glory in his riches; but let him who glories, glory in this, to know and understand me." For no philosopher's wisdom was so great that men could be recalled from error by it; rather they lead many into error. Of the second, however, Andrew makes mention; and therefore he did not wish that other loaves be bought, but that the crowd be fed from what was at hand, namely from those things which the law contained; hence he was better disposed than Philip; and therefore he says, "There is a boy here who has five barley loaves." This boy can be called Moses, on account of the imperfection of the state of the law: Hebrews 7:19: "The law brought no one to perfection"; or the people of the Jews, who served under the elements of the world, as is said in Galatians 4:3. This boy, therefore, has five loaves, that is, the teaching of the law: either because it is contained in the five books of Moses — above, John 1:17: "The law was given through Moses" — or because it was given to men occupied with sensible things, which are expressed by the five senses: and they are of barley, because the law itself was given so that in it the vital nourishment might be covered over by bodily sacraments — for the pith of barley is covered by a very clinging husk — or because the people of the Jews were not yet stripped of carnal desire, but clung to their hearts like husk: for in the Old Testament they experienced an outward hardness, on account of the ceremonial observances; Acts 15:10: "This is a burden which neither we, nor our fathers, were able to bear." And the Jews themselves, given over to bodily things, did not grasp the spiritual sense of the law; 2 Corinthians 3:15: "A veil is placed over their hearts." Now by the two fish, which gave a pleasant flavor to the bread, is understood the teaching of the Psalms and the prophets: and thus the Old Law had not only loaves, namely the five books of Moses, but also two fish, namely the prophets and the Psalms. Hence the Scripture of the Old Testament is divided into these three, Luke 24:44: "the things which are written in the Law and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning me." Or by the two fish, according to Augustine, two persons are signified: namely the royal and the priestly, by whom that people was ruled; which two persons, however, prefigured Christ, who was true king and priest. "But what are these among so many?" Because through these the human race could not be perfectly led to the knowledge of truth: for although God was known in Judea, the nations nevertheless did not know him. Next, when it says, "Jesus therefore said," the performance of the miracle is dealt with, and first the arrangement of the men is set forth; second their feeding, at the place, "Jesus therefore took the loaves," etc.; third the gathering of the fragments, at the place, "But when they were filled," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First the command concerning the arrangement of the crowds is set forth; second the opportuneness of the arrangement; and third the number of those arranged. Now the command was from the Lord to the disciples, that they should arrange the crowd for eating; hence Jesus says, "Make the men sit down," that is, sit down to eat. For, as was said above, II, in ancient times men used to dine reclining on couches, whence the custom grew up that those who sit down to eat are said to "recline." By which is mystically signified the rest which is necessary for the perfection of wisdom; Ecclesiasticus 38:25: "He who is diminished in activity will perfect wisdom." This arrangement is made through the disciples, because through them the knowledge of truth has been passed down to us; Psalm 71:3: "Let the mountains receive peace for the people." Now the opportuneness of the arrangement is drawn from the place: "now there was much grass in the place," which, according to the letter, is convenient for those reclining. Mystically, however, by the grass, flesh is signified, Isaiah 40:6: "All flesh is grass"; and according to this it can be referred to two things. It fits the teaching of the Old Testament, which was given to one resting in carnal things, and to a people wise in a carnal way; Isaiah 1:19: "If you be willing, and will hearken to me, you shall eat the good things of the land"; Deuteronomy 33:28: "The eye of Jacob upon a land of wheat, wine, and oil." Or it fits one who perceives true wisdom, to which one cannot come except by treading carnal things underfoot; Romans 12:2: "Do not be conformed to this age." Now the number was great; hence he says, "The men therefore sat down, in number about five thousand." The Evangelist numbers only the men, following the custom of the law, in which Moses numbered the people from twenty years old and upward, with no mention made of women, as is said in Numbers 1. This the Evangelist did for this reason, because these alone are capable of perfect teaching; 1 Corinthians 2:6: "We speak wisdom among the perfect"; Hebrews 5:14: "Solid food is for the perfect." Next, when he says, "Jesus therefore took the loaves," he deals with the feeding, and first the disposition of the one feeding is suggested; second the matter of the feeding; and third the perfect satiety. Now in the disposition of Jesus as he feeds them, first indeed his humility is noted; second, his giving of thanks. Humility indeed, because he took the loaves, and distributed them. And indeed Christ, about to perform the miracle, could have fed the crowds with loaves created out of nothing. But by dispensation he multiplied pre-existing loaves for the feeding of the crowds. First, indeed, that he might show that sensible things are not from the Devil, as the erring Manichees say. For if this were true, the Lord would not use sensible things for the work of divine praise, especially since he himself came "that he might destroy the works of the Devil," as is said in 1 John 3:8. Second, that he might show it to be false what they themselves say, namely that the teaching of the Old Testament is not from God, but from the Devil. Therefore, in order to show that the teaching of the New Testament is no other than that which was prefigured and contained in the teaching of the Old Testament, he multiplied the pre-existing loaves, indicating that it is he who perfects and fulfills the law; Matthew 5:17: "I have not come to destroy the law." Now the giving of thanks, because he gave thanks, so as to show that he has from another, namely from the Father, whatever he has: in which he shows us an example of doing likewise. He gave thanks especially, however, so as to give us an example that, when we begin a meal, we ought to give thanks to God; 1 Timothy 4:4: "Nothing is to be rejected which is received with the giving of thanks"; Psalm 21:27: "The poor shall eat, and shall be filled, and they shall praise the Lord." Likewise, that he might show that he was not praying for his own sake, but for the sake of the crowd, which was present, and it was necessary to persuade them that he had come from God. And therefore, when he performs a miracle before many, he prays, so as to show that he is not contrary to God, but works according to his will. It is said, however, in Mark, that Christ distributed the loaves to the crowds through the apostles. But here it is said that he himself distributed them, because he is seen to have done what he did through others. But both, according to the mystery, are true, because he alone refreshes inwardly, and others refresh outwardly and as ministers. Now the matter of the refreshment was bread and fish, concerning which enough has been said above. The satiety of the refreshment, however, was perfect, because they had "as much as they wanted." For Christ alone is he who feeds the empty soul, and fills the hungry soul with good things; Psalm 16:15: "I shall be satisfied when your glory shall appear." Others, however, as having grace by measure, perform miracles; but Christ, by absolute power, worked all things with great overabundance: hence it is said that "they were filled." Next, when he says, "But when they were filled, he said to his disciples," etc., the gathering of the fragments is dealt with, and first the Lord's command is set forth; second the disciples' execution of it, at the place, "They gathered therefore," etc. He says therefore, "But when they were filled, he said to his disciples: Gather up the fragments that remain." This indeed the Lord did not do for superfluous ostentation, but so as to show that the miracle performed was not illusory, through the fact that the remains, once gathered, were kept for a long time, and served as food for others. He also wished by this that that miracle should cling more firmly to the hearts of the disciples, whom he also commanded to carry the fragments; since he wished especially to instruct those who were to be the teachers of the whole world. But the disciples faithfully carry it out; hence it follows, "They gathered therefore," etc. Here it should be noted that the remains left over were not just any amount, nor by chance, but according to a fixed measure: because he made neither more nor less, but as much as he willed, to be superfluous. A sign of this is that each apostle's basket was full. Now a basket is a vessel assigned to rustic service. The twelve baskets, therefore, signify the twelve apostles and their imitators, who, although in the present they are held in contempt, are nevertheless inwardly filled with the riches of the spiritual sacraments: and they are said to be twelve, because the faith of the Holy Trinity was to be preached by them in the four parts of the world.”

“Having set forth the teaching on the spiritual life by which Christ gives life to those who have been regenerated, the Evangelist consequently deals with the spiritual nourishment by which Christ sustains those he has given life to; and first he sets forth the visible miracle which Christ performed by providing bodily nourishment; second he deals with spiritual nourishment, at the place, "Jesus answered them and said: Amen, amen, I say to you, you seek me, not because..." etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he sets forth the visible miracle of bodily nourishment; second he shows the effect of the miracle, at the place, "Those men therefore, when they had seen..." etc. Concerning the miracle he sets forth two things: namely its circumstances, and its performance, at the place, "And when Jesus had lifted up his eyes..." Concerning the first he does three things. First he describes the multitude which he fed; second he determines the place where he fed them, at the place, "Jesus therefore went up into the mountain"; third the time when he fed them, at the place, "Now the Passover was near," etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First he determines the place to which the multitude follows him; second, the crowd following; third he assigns the cause of their following. Now as to where the crowd followed the Lord, the Evangelist indicates this when he says, "After these things Jesus went away across the sea of Galilee"; that is, after the mystical words which the Lord had spoken concerning his power. Now this sea of Galilee is frequently named in Scripture, and in different places. But because this sea is not salty, but is a certain gathering of waters from the inflow of the Jordan, it is therefore called a lake by Luke, as is found in Luke 5:1; but because, according to the property of the Hebrew idiom, all gatherings of waters are called seas, according to that text of Genesis 1:10, "and the gatherings of waters he called seas," it is therefore called a sea. But it is surnamed Gennesareth from the nature of the place: for it is much agitated by the buffeting of winds, which are generated from the very evaporations of the water; hence Gennesareth in Greek is the same as "generating a breeze." It is also named "of Galilee" from the province of Galilee, in which it is. But "of Tiberias" from the city so called, which was on one side of this sea, having opposite it the city of Capernaum on the other side; which city was formerly called Zenereth, but was afterward restored by Herod the tetrarch in honor of Tiberius Caesar, and was called Tiberias. Now the literal reason why Jesus went away across the sea is assigned by Chrysostom: that Christ might yield to the fury and disturbance of the Jews, which they had conceived against Christ on account of the things he had said above concerning himself. Hence, as he himself says, just as missiles, when they strike against something hard, strike more heavily, but those which have nothing to meet them, once launched, are quickly spent and come to rest; so too, when we advance impetuously and by resisting against bold men, they rage the more; but if we yield to them, we easily soften their madness. For this reason Christ, by withdrawing across the sea, mitigated the fury of the Jews that had arisen from his foregoing words, giving us in this an example of doing likewise. Ecclesiasticus 8:14: "Do not stand against the face of an insolent man." Mystically, however, by the sea, the present turbulent world is signified; Psalm 103:25: "This sea, great and wide of hands." The Lord crossed this sea when he took on the sea of mortality and of penalty by being born, trod it underfoot by dying, and, crossing over by rising, arrived at the glory of the resurrection. Concerning this passing-over it is said below, John 13:1: "Jesus knowing that his hour had come, that he should pass from this world to the Father." As he passed over, great crowds followed him, by believing and by imitating, gathered from both peoples; Isaiah 60:5: "Then your heart shall wonder and be enlarged, when the multitude of the sea shall be turned to you"; Psalm 7:7: "Arise, O Lord, in the command which you have commanded, and the assembly of peoples shall surround you." The following crowd is described therefore as abundant, because "a great multitude followed him." Now the cause on account of which they followed was the working of miracles; hence he says, "because they saw the signs which he performed upon those who were sick." It should be known that some followed him on account of his teaching, namely those who were better disposed; but others, more imperfect, followed him out of admiration for the visible signs, being of a coarser mind. For signs, as is said in 1 Corinthians 14:22, "are not given to believers, but to unbelievers." Some also followed him out of devotion and faith, namely those whom he had healed in body: for they were healed by the Lord in body in such a way that they were also perfectly healed in soul; Deuteronomy 32:4: "The works of God are perfect." And this is clear, because to the paralytic (above, 8:11) he said pointedly: "Go, and sin no more"; and Matthew 9:2: "Son, your sins are forgiven you"; words which pertain more to the health of the soul than of the body. Now it should be noted that, whereas the Evangelist has made mention only of three miracles, namely of the wedding, of the ruler's son, and of the paralytic, here nevertheless he speaks indefinitely of "the signs which he was performing," so as to give one to understand that Christ performed many other signs, as is said below, at the end, of which he makes no mention in this book. For he intended especially to make known the teaching of Christ. Next he determines the place of the miracle, which is the mountain; hence he says, "He therefore went up into the mountain," that is, Jesus ascended privately, "and there he sat with his disciples." And indeed the mountain is a quite fitting place for a refreshment: for by the mountain is signified the perfection of justice, according to that text of Psalm 35:7: "Your justice is like the mountains of God." Since, therefore, these earthly things do not satisfy — indeed "whoever drinks of this water will thirst again," as is said above, II, 13 — but spiritual things do satisfy; therefore the Lord ascended to higher things with his disciples, to show that satiety is found in spiritual things, and the perfection of justice: concerning which mountain it is said in Psalm 67:16: "A mountain of God, a fat mountain." Hence there too he exercised the office of teacher, sitting with his disciples: for he it is who teaches every man knowledge. Next the time is described, when he says, "Now the Passover was near," which time indeed befits a refreshment. For Passover is interpreted as "passing-over": Exodus 12:11: "For it is the Phase, that is, the passing-over of the Lord," so as to give one to understand that whoever desires to be refreshed with the bread of the divine Word and the body and blood of the Lord must pass over from vices to virtues. 1 Corinthians 5:7: "Christ our Passover is sacrificed; therefore let us feast on the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth." Ecclesiasticus 24:26, divine Wisdom says: "Pass over to me, all you who desire me." Now this is the second Passover of which the Evangelist makes mention: to which, indeed, according to the precept of the law, which is found in Exodus 23:17, the Lord did not go up to Jerusalem. The reason for this is that Christ was God and man: and inasmuch as man he was indeed subject to the law; inasmuch as God he was above the law. Therefore, that he might show himself to be man, he sometimes kept the law; but that he might show himself to be God, he set the law aside. Hence also, by the fact that he did not go, he gave one to understand that the observances of the law would little by little, and shortly, cease. Next he deals with the performance of the miracle, when he says, "When Jesus therefore had lifted up his eyes, and had seen," etc.; and first the necessity of performing the miracle is shown; second the performance itself is added, at the place, "Jesus therefore says: Make the men sit down," etc. Now the necessity of the miracle's being performed is taken from the Lord's question and the disciples' answer; and therefore first the Lord's question is set forth; second the disciples' answer, at the place, "Philip answered him," etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First the occasion for questioning is set forth; second Christ's question is added; and third the intention of the one questioning is disclosed. Now the occasion for questioning was the sight of the multitude coming to Christ. And therefore he says, "When Jesus had lifted up his eyes," being on the mountain with his disciples as with those who were more perfect, "and had seen," etc. In which two things are to be considered concerning the Lord. One, that we may learn the maturity of Christ, who did not raise his eyes here and there, but sat modestly and attentively with his disciples: contrary to which it is said in Proverbs 30:13: "A generation whose eyes are lofty, and whose eyelids are lifted up on high"; and Ecclesiasticus 19:26: "A man is known by his look." The second, that we may learn that he did not sit idly with his disciples either; but, teaching them attentively, and turning their hearts to himself, he looked upon the disciples whom he was teaching; Luke 6:20: "And he, lifting up his eyes upon his disciples, said," etc. And therefore it is said, "When Jesus had lifted up his eyes," etc. Mystically, however, the eyes of the Lord are the spiritual gifts which, when he mercifully grants them to his elect, then he lifts up his eyes upon them, that is, he bestows a look of loving-kindness. This is what Psalm 85:16 asked, saying: "Look upon me, O Lord, and have mercy on me." Now the question concerns the feeding of the multitude; hence he said to Philip: "Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat?" He presupposes one thing, and asks about another. He presupposes indeed their want, because they did not have the means to provide food for so great a multitude; but he asks the manner of finding it, when he says, "Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat?" Here it should be noted that every teacher must spiritually feed the crowd that comes to him. And because no man has of himself the means to feed it, he must therefore buy it from elsewhere, by labor, by study, by assiduity in prayers; Isaiah 55:1: "You who have no money, make haste, buy, without any exchange, wine and milk." And again: "Why do you weigh out your money" — that is, your eloquence — "and not for bread" — that is, not for true wisdom, which refreshes (Ecclesiasticus 15:5: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding") — "and your labor not unto fullness," by learning things that do not satisfy, but rather empty out? Now the intention of the one questioning is disclosed when he says, "But this he said trying him," etc. Here the Evangelist, excluding one doubt, leads into another. For it could have been doubted that the Lord questioned Philip as though he were ignorant; but he excludes this, saying, "for he himself knew what he would do." But since to try someone seems also to belong to one who is ignorant, since it is the same as taking a trial of something, it seems that the Evangelist introduces another doubt when he says, "trying him." But it must be said that one person tries another in different ways, so as to take a trial of him: for a man tries in one way, in order to learn; the Devil in another way, in order to deceive; 1 Peter 5:8: "Your adversary the Devil, as a roaring lion, goes about seeking whom he may devour." But God, and Christ, indeed try not in order to learn, since he it is who searches hearts and minds; nor in order to deceive, since "he tries no one," as is said in James 1:13; but he tries in order to give to others a trial-proof of the one tried. Thus God tried Abraham; Genesis 22:1: "God tried Abraham," etc., and it follows: "Now I know that you fear the Lord" — that is, I have made it known that you fear the Lord. Thus from this he tries Philip in order that he might make known to others his answer, leading them thereby into the most certain knowledge of the sign to come. Next the disciples' answer is set forth, when he says, "Philip answered him," and first Philip's answer; second Andrew's answer, at the place, "One of his disciples says to him," etc. Now it should be known concerning the first, that Philip was, among the others, rather slow and untrained, and therefore among the others he questioned the Lord more frequently; below, John 14:8: "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us." But in the questioning of these two, as far as the letter is concerned, Andrew was better disposed than Philip, because Philip seems to have had no intention or disposition toward the miracle's being performed. And therefore he introduces that manner by which all those men could be fed, namely by money, saying, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them" — which we do not have, and therefore we cannot give them to eat. In which the poverty of Christ is suggested, who did not even have two hundred denarii. Andrew, however, seems to have regard to the miracle's being performed. For perhaps he had in memory the sign which Elisha had performed with barley loaves, when he fed a hundred men with twenty loaves, as is read in 4 Kings 4:42 and following, and therefore he says, "There is a boy here who has five barley loaves." But nevertheless he supposed that Christ would not perform a greater miracle than Elisha. For he reckoned that from fewer loaves fewer would be miraculously produced, and from more, more (although for him who does not need the underlying matter, it is equally easy to feed the crowds from more or from fewer), and therefore he adds, "But what are these among so many?" As if to say: even if they are multiplied as Elisha multiplied them, it is not sufficient. Mystically, spiritual refreshment is signified by wisdom. Now there is one wisdom, which Christ taught, who is true wisdom; 1 Corinthians 1:24: "Christ, the power of God and the wisdom of God." But before the coming of Christ there was a twofold teaching. One human, which the philosophers had; the other of the written law. Of the first, therefore, Philip makes mention, and therefore uses the term of buying, saying, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them." For human wisdom is possessed through acquisition. The number one hundred imports perfection. Hence two hundred suggests the twofold perfection necessary for this wisdom; for its perfection is arrived at by a twofold path: namely, by experience and by contemplation. He says therefore, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them," because whatever human reason can experience and think concerning truth is not sufficient for the perfect satiety of wisdom; Jeremiah 9:23: "Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, and let not the strong man glory in his strength, and let not the rich man glory in his riches; but let him who glories, glory in this, to know and understand me." For no philosopher's wisdom was so great that men could be recalled from error by it; rather they lead many into error. Of the second, however, Andrew makes mention; and therefore he did not wish that other loaves be bought, but that the crowd be fed from what was at hand, namely from those things which the law contained; hence he was better disposed than Philip; and therefore he says, "There is a boy here who has five barley loaves." This boy can be called Moses, on account of the imperfection of the state of the law: Hebrews 7:19: "The law brought no one to perfection"; or the people of the Jews, who served under the elements of the world, as is said in Galatians 4:3. This boy, therefore, has five loaves, that is, the teaching of the law: either because it is contained in the five books of Moses — above, John 1:17: "The law was given through Moses" — or because it was given to men occupied with sensible things, which are expressed by the five senses: and they are of barley, because the law itself was given so that in it the vital nourishment might be covered over by bodily sacraments — for the pith of barley is covered by a very clinging husk — or because the people of the Jews were not yet stripped of carnal desire, but clung to their hearts like husk: for in the Old Testament they experienced an outward hardness, on account of the ceremonial observances; Acts 15:10: "This is a burden which neither we, nor our fathers, were able to bear." And the Jews themselves, given over to bodily things, did not grasp the spiritual sense of the law; 2 Corinthians 3:15: "A veil is placed over their hearts." Now by the two fish, which gave a pleasant flavor to the bread, is understood the teaching of the Psalms and the prophets: and thus the Old Law had not only loaves, namely the five books of Moses, but also two fish, namely the prophets and the Psalms. Hence the Scripture of the Old Testament is divided into these three, Luke 24:44: "the things which are written in the Law and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning me." Or by the two fish, according to Augustine, two persons are signified: namely the royal and the priestly, by whom that people was ruled; which two persons, however, prefigured Christ, who was true king and priest. "But what are these among so many?" Because through these the human race could not be perfectly led to the knowledge of truth: for although God was known in Judea, the nations nevertheless did not know him. Next, when it says, "Jesus therefore said," the performance of the miracle is dealt with, and first the arrangement of the men is set forth; second their feeding, at the place, "Jesus therefore took the loaves," etc.; third the gathering of the fragments, at the place, "But when they were filled," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First the command concerning the arrangement of the crowds is set forth; second the opportuneness of the arrangement; and third the number of those arranged. Now the command was from the Lord to the disciples, that they should arrange the crowd for eating; hence Jesus says, "Make the men sit down," that is, sit down to eat. For, as was said above, II, in ancient times men used to dine reclining on couches, whence the custom grew up that those who sit down to eat are said to "recline." By which is mystically signified the rest which is necessary for the perfection of wisdom; Ecclesiasticus 38:25: "He who is diminished in activity will perfect wisdom." This arrangement is made through the disciples, because through them the knowledge of truth has been passed down to us; Psalm 71:3: "Let the mountains receive peace for the people." Now the opportuneness of the arrangement is drawn from the place: "now there was much grass in the place," which, according to the letter, is convenient for those reclining. Mystically, however, by the grass, flesh is signified, Isaiah 40:6: "All flesh is grass"; and according to this it can be referred to two things. It fits the teaching of the Old Testament, which was given to one resting in carnal things, and to a people wise in a carnal way; Isaiah 1:19: "If you be willing, and will hearken to me, you shall eat the good things of the land"; Deuteronomy 33:28: "The eye of Jacob upon a land of wheat, wine, and oil." Or it fits one who perceives true wisdom, to which one cannot come except by treading carnal things underfoot; Romans 12:2: "Do not be conformed to this age." Now the number was great; hence he says, "The men therefore sat down, in number about five thousand." The Evangelist numbers only the men, following the custom of the law, in which Moses numbered the people from twenty years old and upward, with no mention made of women, as is said in Numbers 1. This the Evangelist did for this reason, because these alone are capable of perfect teaching; 1 Corinthians 2:6: "We speak wisdom among the perfect"; Hebrews 5:14: "Solid food is for the perfect." Next, when he says, "Jesus therefore took the loaves," he deals with the feeding, and first the disposition of the one feeding is suggested; second the matter of the feeding; and third the perfect satiety. Now in the disposition of Jesus as he feeds them, first indeed his humility is noted; second, his giving of thanks. Humility indeed, because he took the loaves, and distributed them. And indeed Christ, about to perform the miracle, could have fed the crowds with loaves created out of nothing. But by dispensation he multiplied pre-existing loaves for the feeding of the crowds. First, indeed, that he might show that sensible things are not from the Devil, as the erring Manichees say. For if this were true, the Lord would not use sensible things for the work of divine praise, especially since he himself came "that he might destroy the works of the Devil," as is said in 1 John 3:8. Second, that he might show it to be false what they themselves say, namely that the teaching of the Old Testament is not from God, but from the Devil. Therefore, in order to show that the teaching of the New Testament is no other than that which was prefigured and contained in the teaching of the Old Testament, he multiplied the pre-existing loaves, indicating that it is he who perfects and fulfills the law; Matthew 5:17: "I have not come to destroy the law." Now the giving of thanks, because he gave thanks, so as to show that he has from another, namely from the Father, whatever he has: in which he shows us an example of doing likewise. He gave thanks especially, however, so as to give us an example that, when we begin a meal, we ought to give thanks to God; 1 Timothy 4:4: "Nothing is to be rejected which is received with the giving of thanks"; Psalm 21:27: "The poor shall eat, and shall be filled, and they shall praise the Lord." Likewise, that he might show that he was not praying for his own sake, but for the sake of the crowd, which was present, and it was necessary to persuade them that he had come from God. And therefore, when he performs a miracle before many, he prays, so as to show that he is not contrary to God, but works according to his will. It is said, however, in Mark, that Christ distributed the loaves to the crowds through the apostles. But here it is said that he himself distributed them, because he is seen to have done what he did through others. But both, according to the mystery, are true, because he alone refreshes inwardly, and others refresh outwardly and as ministers. Now the matter of the refreshment was bread and fish, concerning which enough has been said above. The satiety of the refreshment, however, was perfect, because they had "as much as they wanted." For Christ alone is he who feeds the empty soul, and fills the hungry soul with good things; Psalm 16:15: "I shall be satisfied when your glory shall appear." Others, however, as having grace by measure, perform miracles; but Christ, by absolute power, worked all things with great overabundance: hence it is said that "they were filled." Next, when he says, "But when they were filled, he said to his disciples," etc., the gathering of the fragments is dealt with, and first the Lord's command is set forth; second the disciples' execution of it, at the place, "They gathered therefore," etc. He says therefore, "But when they were filled, he said to his disciples: Gather up the fragments that remain." This indeed the Lord did not do for superfluous ostentation, but so as to show that the miracle performed was not illusory, through the fact that the remains, once gathered, were kept for a long time, and served as food for others. He also wished by this that that miracle should cling more firmly to the hearts of the disciples, whom he also commanded to carry the fragments; since he wished especially to instruct those who were to be the teachers of the whole world. But the disciples faithfully carry it out; hence it follows, "They gathered therefore," etc. Here it should be noted that the remains left over were not just any amount, nor by chance, but according to a fixed measure: because he made neither more nor less, but as much as he willed, to be superfluous. A sign of this is that each apostle's basket was full. Now a basket is a vessel assigned to rustic service. The twelve baskets, therefore, signify the twelve apostles and their imitators, who, although in the present they are held in contempt, are nevertheless inwardly filled with the riches of the spiritual sacraments: and they are said to be twelve, because the faith of the Holy Trinity was to be preached by them in the four parts of the world.”

“Having set forth the teaching on the spiritual life by which Christ gives life to those who have been regenerated, the Evangelist consequently deals with the spiritual nourishment by which Christ sustains those he has given life to; and first he sets forth the visible miracle which Christ performed by providing bodily nourishment; second he deals with spiritual nourishment, at the place, "Jesus answered them and said: Amen, amen, I say to you, you seek me, not because..." etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he sets forth the visible miracle of bodily nourishment; second he shows the effect of the miracle, at the place, "Those men therefore, when they had seen..." etc. Concerning the miracle he sets forth two things: namely its circumstances, and its performance, at the place, "And when Jesus had lifted up his eyes..." Concerning the first he does three things. First he describes the multitude which he fed; second he determines the place where he fed them, at the place, "Jesus therefore went up into the mountain"; third the time when he fed them, at the place, "Now the Passover was near," etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First he determines the place to which the multitude follows him; second, the crowd following; third he assigns the cause of their following. Now as to where the crowd followed the Lord, the Evangelist indicates this when he says, "After these things Jesus went away across the sea of Galilee"; that is, after the mystical words which the Lord had spoken concerning his power. Now this sea of Galilee is frequently named in Scripture, and in different places. But because this sea is not salty, but is a certain gathering of waters from the inflow of the Jordan, it is therefore called a lake by Luke, as is found in Luke 5:1; but because, according to the property of the Hebrew idiom, all gatherings of waters are called seas, according to that text of Genesis 1:10, "and the gatherings of waters he called seas," it is therefore called a sea. But it is surnamed Gennesareth from the nature of the place: for it is much agitated by the buffeting of winds, which are generated from the very evaporations of the water; hence Gennesareth in Greek is the same as "generating a breeze." It is also named "of Galilee" from the province of Galilee, in which it is. But "of Tiberias" from the city so called, which was on one side of this sea, having opposite it the city of Capernaum on the other side; which city was formerly called Zenereth, but was afterward restored by Herod the tetrarch in honor of Tiberius Caesar, and was called Tiberias. Now the literal reason why Jesus went away across the sea is assigned by Chrysostom: that Christ might yield to the fury and disturbance of the Jews, which they had conceived against Christ on account of the things he had said above concerning himself. Hence, as he himself says, just as missiles, when they strike against something hard, strike more heavily, but those which have nothing to meet them, once launched, are quickly spent and come to rest; so too, when we advance impetuously and by resisting against bold men, they rage the more; but if we yield to them, we easily soften their madness. For this reason Christ, by withdrawing across the sea, mitigated the fury of the Jews that had arisen from his foregoing words, giving us in this an example of doing likewise. Ecclesiasticus 8:14: "Do not stand against the face of an insolent man." Mystically, however, by the sea, the present turbulent world is signified; Psalm 103:25: "This sea, great and wide of hands." The Lord crossed this sea when he took on the sea of mortality and of penalty by being born, trod it underfoot by dying, and, crossing over by rising, arrived at the glory of the resurrection. Concerning this passing-over it is said below, John 13:1: "Jesus knowing that his hour had come, that he should pass from this world to the Father." As he passed over, great crowds followed him, by believing and by imitating, gathered from both peoples; Isaiah 60:5: "Then your heart shall wonder and be enlarged, when the multitude of the sea shall be turned to you"; Psalm 7:7: "Arise, O Lord, in the command which you have commanded, and the assembly of peoples shall surround you." The following crowd is described therefore as abundant, because "a great multitude followed him." Now the cause on account of which they followed was the working of miracles; hence he says, "because they saw the signs which he performed upon those who were sick." It should be known that some followed him on account of his teaching, namely those who were better disposed; but others, more imperfect, followed him out of admiration for the visible signs, being of a coarser mind. For signs, as is said in 1 Corinthians 14:22, "are not given to believers, but to unbelievers." Some also followed him out of devotion and faith, namely those whom he had healed in body: for they were healed by the Lord in body in such a way that they were also perfectly healed in soul; Deuteronomy 32:4: "The works of God are perfect." And this is clear, because to the paralytic (above, 8:11) he said pointedly: "Go, and sin no more"; and Matthew 9:2: "Son, your sins are forgiven you"; words which pertain more to the health of the soul than of the body. Now it should be noted that, whereas the Evangelist has made mention only of three miracles, namely of the wedding, of the ruler's son, and of the paralytic, here nevertheless he speaks indefinitely of "the signs which he was performing," so as to give one to understand that Christ performed many other signs, as is said below, at the end, of which he makes no mention in this book. For he intended especially to make known the teaching of Christ. Next he determines the place of the miracle, which is the mountain; hence he says, "He therefore went up into the mountain," that is, Jesus ascended privately, "and there he sat with his disciples." And indeed the mountain is a quite fitting place for a refreshment: for by the mountain is signified the perfection of justice, according to that text of Psalm 35:7: "Your justice is like the mountains of God." Since, therefore, these earthly things do not satisfy — indeed "whoever drinks of this water will thirst again," as is said above, II, 13 — but spiritual things do satisfy; therefore the Lord ascended to higher things with his disciples, to show that satiety is found in spiritual things, and the perfection of justice: concerning which mountain it is said in Psalm 67:16: "A mountain of God, a fat mountain." Hence there too he exercised the office of teacher, sitting with his disciples: for he it is who teaches every man knowledge. Next the time is described, when he says, "Now the Passover was near," which time indeed befits a refreshment. For Passover is interpreted as "passing-over": Exodus 12:11: "For it is the Phase, that is, the passing-over of the Lord," so as to give one to understand that whoever desires to be refreshed with the bread of the divine Word and the body and blood of the Lord must pass over from vices to virtues. 1 Corinthians 5:7: "Christ our Passover is sacrificed; therefore let us feast on the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth." Ecclesiasticus 24:26, divine Wisdom says: "Pass over to me, all you who desire me." Now this is the second Passover of which the Evangelist makes mention: to which, indeed, according to the precept of the law, which is found in Exodus 23:17, the Lord did not go up to Jerusalem. The reason for this is that Christ was God and man: and inasmuch as man he was indeed subject to the law; inasmuch as God he was above the law. Therefore, that he might show himself to be man, he sometimes kept the law; but that he might show himself to be God, he set the law aside. Hence also, by the fact that he did not go, he gave one to understand that the observances of the law would little by little, and shortly, cease. Next he deals with the performance of the miracle, when he says, "When Jesus therefore had lifted up his eyes, and had seen," etc.; and first the necessity of performing the miracle is shown; second the performance itself is added, at the place, "Jesus therefore says: Make the men sit down," etc. Now the necessity of the miracle's being performed is taken from the Lord's question and the disciples' answer; and therefore first the Lord's question is set forth; second the disciples' answer, at the place, "Philip answered him," etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First the occasion for questioning is set forth; second Christ's question is added; and third the intention of the one questioning is disclosed. Now the occasion for questioning was the sight of the multitude coming to Christ. And therefore he says, "When Jesus had lifted up his eyes," being on the mountain with his disciples as with those who were more perfect, "and had seen," etc. In which two things are to be considered concerning the Lord. One, that we may learn the maturity of Christ, who did not raise his eyes here and there, but sat modestly and attentively with his disciples: contrary to which it is said in Proverbs 30:13: "A generation whose eyes are lofty, and whose eyelids are lifted up on high"; and Ecclesiasticus 19:26: "A man is known by his look." The second, that we may learn that he did not sit idly with his disciples either; but, teaching them attentively, and turning their hearts to himself, he looked upon the disciples whom he was teaching; Luke 6:20: "And he, lifting up his eyes upon his disciples, said," etc. And therefore it is said, "When Jesus had lifted up his eyes," etc. Mystically, however, the eyes of the Lord are the spiritual gifts which, when he mercifully grants them to his elect, then he lifts up his eyes upon them, that is, he bestows a look of loving-kindness. This is what Psalm 85:16 asked, saying: "Look upon me, O Lord, and have mercy on me." Now the question concerns the feeding of the multitude; hence he said to Philip: "Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat?" He presupposes one thing, and asks about another. He presupposes indeed their want, because they did not have the means to provide food for so great a multitude; but he asks the manner of finding it, when he says, "Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat?" Here it should be noted that every teacher must spiritually feed the crowd that comes to him. And because no man has of himself the means to feed it, he must therefore buy it from elsewhere, by labor, by study, by assiduity in prayers; Isaiah 55:1: "You who have no money, make haste, buy, without any exchange, wine and milk." And again: "Why do you weigh out your money" — that is, your eloquence — "and not for bread" — that is, not for true wisdom, which refreshes (Ecclesiasticus 15:5: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding") — "and your labor not unto fullness," by learning things that do not satisfy, but rather empty out? Now the intention of the one questioning is disclosed when he says, "But this he said trying him," etc. Here the Evangelist, excluding one doubt, leads into another. For it could have been doubted that the Lord questioned Philip as though he were ignorant; but he excludes this, saying, "for he himself knew what he would do." But since to try someone seems also to belong to one who is ignorant, since it is the same as taking a trial of something, it seems that the Evangelist introduces another doubt when he says, "trying him." But it must be said that one person tries another in different ways, so as to take a trial of him: for a man tries in one way, in order to learn; the Devil in another way, in order to deceive; 1 Peter 5:8: "Your adversary the Devil, as a roaring lion, goes about seeking whom he may devour." But God, and Christ, indeed try not in order to learn, since he it is who searches hearts and minds; nor in order to deceive, since "he tries no one," as is said in James 1:13; but he tries in order to give to others a trial-proof of the one tried. Thus God tried Abraham; Genesis 22:1: "God tried Abraham," etc., and it follows: "Now I know that you fear the Lord" — that is, I have made it known that you fear the Lord. Thus from this he tries Philip in order that he might make known to others his answer, leading them thereby into the most certain knowledge of the sign to come. Next the disciples' answer is set forth, when he says, "Philip answered him," and first Philip's answer; second Andrew's answer, at the place, "One of his disciples says to him," etc. Now it should be known concerning the first, that Philip was, among the others, rather slow and untrained, and therefore among the others he questioned the Lord more frequently; below, John 14:8: "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us." But in the questioning of these two, as far as the letter is concerned, Andrew was better disposed than Philip, because Philip seems to have had no intention or disposition toward the miracle's being performed. And therefore he introduces that manner by which all those men could be fed, namely by money, saying, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them" — which we do not have, and therefore we cannot give them to eat. In which the poverty of Christ is suggested, who did not even have two hundred denarii. Andrew, however, seems to have regard to the miracle's being performed. For perhaps he had in memory the sign which Elisha had performed with barley loaves, when he fed a hundred men with twenty loaves, as is read in 4 Kings 4:42 and following, and therefore he says, "There is a boy here who has five barley loaves." But nevertheless he supposed that Christ would not perform a greater miracle than Elisha. For he reckoned that from fewer loaves fewer would be miraculously produced, and from more, more (although for him who does not need the underlying matter, it is equally easy to feed the crowds from more or from fewer), and therefore he adds, "But what are these among so many?" As if to say: even if they are multiplied as Elisha multiplied them, it is not sufficient. Mystically, spiritual refreshment is signified by wisdom. Now there is one wisdom, which Christ taught, who is true wisdom; 1 Corinthians 1:24: "Christ, the power of God and the wisdom of God." But before the coming of Christ there was a twofold teaching. One human, which the philosophers had; the other of the written law. Of the first, therefore, Philip makes mention, and therefore uses the term of buying, saying, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them." For human wisdom is possessed through acquisition. The number one hundred imports perfection. Hence two hundred suggests the twofold perfection necessary for this wisdom; for its perfection is arrived at by a twofold path: namely, by experience and by contemplation. He says therefore, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them," because whatever human reason can experience and think concerning truth is not sufficient for the perfect satiety of wisdom; Jeremiah 9:23: "Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, and let not the strong man glory in his strength, and let not the rich man glory in his riches; but let him who glories, glory in this, to know and understand me." For no philosopher's wisdom was so great that men could be recalled from error by it; rather they lead many into error. Of the second, however, Andrew makes mention; and therefore he did not wish that other loaves be bought, but that the crowd be fed from what was at hand, namely from those things which the law contained; hence he was better disposed than Philip; and therefore he says, "There is a boy here who has five barley loaves." This boy can be called Moses, on account of the imperfection of the state of the law: Hebrews 7:19: "The law brought no one to perfection"; or the people of the Jews, who served under the elements of the world, as is said in Galatians 4:3. This boy, therefore, has five loaves, that is, the teaching of the law: either because it is contained in the five books of Moses — above, John 1:17: "The law was given through Moses" — or because it was given to men occupied with sensible things, which are expressed by the five senses: and they are of barley, because the law itself was given so that in it the vital nourishment might be covered over by bodily sacraments — for the pith of barley is covered by a very clinging husk — or because the people of the Jews were not yet stripped of carnal desire, but clung to their hearts like husk: for in the Old Testament they experienced an outward hardness, on account of the ceremonial observances; Acts 15:10: "This is a burden which neither we, nor our fathers, were able to bear." And the Jews themselves, given over to bodily things, did not grasp the spiritual sense of the law; 2 Corinthians 3:15: "A veil is placed over their hearts." Now by the two fish, which gave a pleasant flavor to the bread, is understood the teaching of the Psalms and the prophets: and thus the Old Law had not only loaves, namely the five books of Moses, but also two fish, namely the prophets and the Psalms. Hence the Scripture of the Old Testament is divided into these three, Luke 24:44: "the things which are written in the Law and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning me." Or by the two fish, according to Augustine, two persons are signified: namely the royal and the priestly, by whom that people was ruled; which two persons, however, prefigured Christ, who was true king and priest. "But what are these among so many?" Because through these the human race could not be perfectly led to the knowledge of truth: for although God was known in Judea, the nations nevertheless did not know him. Next, when it says, "Jesus therefore said," the performance of the miracle is dealt with, and first the arrangement of the men is set forth; second their feeding, at the place, "Jesus therefore took the loaves," etc.; third the gathering of the fragments, at the place, "But when they were filled," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First the command concerning the arrangement of the crowds is set forth; second the opportuneness of the arrangement; and third the number of those arranged. Now the command was from the Lord to the disciples, that they should arrange the crowd for eating; hence Jesus says, "Make the men sit down," that is, sit down to eat. For, as was said above, II, in ancient times men used to dine reclining on couches, whence the custom grew up that those who sit down to eat are said to "recline." By which is mystically signified the rest which is necessary for the perfection of wisdom; Ecclesiasticus 38:25: "He who is diminished in activity will perfect wisdom." This arrangement is made through the disciples, because through them the knowledge of truth has been passed down to us; Psalm 71:3: "Let the mountains receive peace for the people." Now the opportuneness of the arrangement is drawn from the place: "now there was much grass in the place," which, according to the letter, is convenient for those reclining. Mystically, however, by the grass, flesh is signified, Isaiah 40:6: "All flesh is grass"; and according to this it can be referred to two things. It fits the teaching of the Old Testament, which was given to one resting in carnal things, and to a people wise in a carnal way; Isaiah 1:19: "If you be willing, and will hearken to me, you shall eat the good things of the land"; Deuteronomy 33:28: "The eye of Jacob upon a land of wheat, wine, and oil." Or it fits one who perceives true wisdom, to which one cannot come except by treading carnal things underfoot; Romans 12:2: "Do not be conformed to this age." Now the number was great; hence he says, "The men therefore sat down, in number about five thousand." The Evangelist numbers only the men, following the custom of the law, in which Moses numbered the people from twenty years old and upward, with no mention made of women, as is said in Numbers 1. This the Evangelist did for this reason, because these alone are capable of perfect teaching; 1 Corinthians 2:6: "We speak wisdom among the perfect"; Hebrews 5:14: "Solid food is for the perfect." Next, when he says, "Jesus therefore took the loaves," he deals with the feeding, and first the disposition of the one feeding is suggested; second the matter of the feeding; and third the perfect satiety. Now in the disposition of Jesus as he feeds them, first indeed his humility is noted; second, his giving of thanks. Humility indeed, because he took the loaves, and distributed them. And indeed Christ, about to perform the miracle, could have fed the crowds with loaves created out of nothing. But by dispensation he multiplied pre-existing loaves for the feeding of the crowds. First, indeed, that he might show that sensible things are not from the Devil, as the erring Manichees say. For if this were true, the Lord would not use sensible things for the work of divine praise, especially since he himself came "that he might destroy the works of the Devil," as is said in 1 John 3:8. Second, that he might show it to be false what they themselves say, namely that the teaching of the Old Testament is not from God, but from the Devil. Therefore, in order to show that the teaching of the New Testament is no other than that which was prefigured and contained in the teaching of the Old Testament, he multiplied the pre-existing loaves, indicating that it is he who perfects and fulfills the law; Matthew 5:17: "I have not come to destroy the law." Now the giving of thanks, because he gave thanks, so as to show that he has from another, namely from the Father, whatever he has: in which he shows us an example of doing likewise. He gave thanks especially, however, so as to give us an example that, when we begin a meal, we ought to give thanks to God; 1 Timothy 4:4: "Nothing is to be rejected which is received with the giving of thanks"; Psalm 21:27: "The poor shall eat, and shall be filled, and they shall praise the Lord." Likewise, that he might show that he was not praying for his own sake, but for the sake of the crowd, which was present, and it was necessary to persuade them that he had come from God. And therefore, when he performs a miracle before many, he prays, so as to show that he is not contrary to God, but works according to his will. It is said, however, in Mark, that Christ distributed the loaves to the crowds through the apostles. But here it is said that he himself distributed them, because he is seen to have done what he did through others. But both, according to the mystery, are true, because he alone refreshes inwardly, and others refresh outwardly and as ministers. Now the matter of the refreshment was bread and fish, concerning which enough has been said above. The satiety of the refreshment, however, was perfect, because they had "as much as they wanted." For Christ alone is he who feeds the empty soul, and fills the hungry soul with good things; Psalm 16:15: "I shall be satisfied when your glory shall appear." Others, however, as having grace by measure, perform miracles; but Christ, by absolute power, worked all things with great overabundance: hence it is said that "they were filled." Next, when he says, "But when they were filled, he said to his disciples," etc., the gathering of the fragments is dealt with, and first the Lord's command is set forth; second the disciples' execution of it, at the place, "They gathered therefore," etc. He says therefore, "But when they were filled, he said to his disciples: Gather up the fragments that remain." This indeed the Lord did not do for superfluous ostentation, but so as to show that the miracle performed was not illusory, through the fact that the remains, once gathered, were kept for a long time, and served as food for others. He also wished by this that that miracle should cling more firmly to the hearts of the disciples, whom he also commanded to carry the fragments; since he wished especially to instruct those who were to be the teachers of the whole world. But the disciples faithfully carry it out; hence it follows, "They gathered therefore," etc. Here it should be noted that the remains left over were not just any amount, nor by chance, but according to a fixed measure: because he made neither more nor less, but as much as he willed, to be superfluous. A sign of this is that each apostle's basket was full. Now a basket is a vessel assigned to rustic service. The twelve baskets, therefore, signify the twelve apostles and their imitators, who, although in the present they are held in contempt, are nevertheless inwardly filled with the riches of the spiritual sacraments: and they are said to be twelve, because the faith of the Holy Trinity was to be preached by them in the four parts of the world.”

“Philip answered him,.... Very quick and short, and in a carnal and unbelieving way: two hundred pennyworth of bread is not sufficient for them. Two hundred pence, or "Roman denarii", which may be here meant, amount to six pounds five shillings of our money; and this sum is mentioned, because it might be the whole stock that was in the bag, or that Christ and his disciples had; or because this was a round sum, much in use among the Jews; See Gill on Mar 6:37. Or this may be said by Philip, to show how impracticable it was to provide for such a company; that supposing they had two hundred pence to lay out in this way; though where should they have that, he suggests? yet if they had it, as much bread as that would purchase would not be sufficient: that everyone of them might take a little; it would be so far from giving them a meal, or proper refreshment, that everyone could not have a small bit to taste of, or in the least to stay or blunt his appetite: a penny, with the Jews, would buy as much bread as would serve ten men; so that two hundred pence would buy bread enough for two thousand men; but here were three thousand more, besides women and children, who could not have been provided for with such a sum of money.”

“Having set forth the teaching on the spiritual life by which Christ gives life to those who have been regenerated, the Evangelist consequently deals with the spiritual nourishment by which Christ sustains those he has given life to; and first he sets forth the visible miracle which Christ performed by providing bodily nourishment; second he deals with spiritual nourishment, at the place, "Jesus answered them and said: Amen, amen, I say to you, you seek me, not because..." etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he sets forth the visible miracle of bodily nourishment; second he shows the effect of the miracle, at the place, "Those men therefore, when they had seen..." etc. Concerning the miracle he sets forth two things: namely its circumstances, and its performance, at the place, "And when Jesus had lifted up his eyes..." Concerning the first he does three things. First he describes the multitude which he fed; second he determines the place where he fed them, at the place, "Jesus therefore went up into the mountain"; third the time when he fed them, at the place, "Now the Passover was near," etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First he determines the place to which the multitude follows him; second, the crowd following; third he assigns the cause of their following. Now as to where the crowd followed the Lord, the Evangelist indicates this when he says, "After these things Jesus went away across the sea of Galilee"; that is, after the mystical words which the Lord had spoken concerning his power. Now this sea of Galilee is frequently named in Scripture, and in different places. But because this sea is not salty, but is a certain gathering of waters from the inflow of the Jordan, it is therefore called a lake by Luke, as is found in Luke 5:1; but because, according to the property of the Hebrew idiom, all gatherings of waters are called seas, according to that text of Genesis 1:10, "and the gatherings of waters he called seas," it is therefore called a sea. But it is surnamed Gennesareth from the nature of the place: for it is much agitated by the buffeting of winds, which are generated from the very evaporations of the water; hence Gennesareth in Greek is the same as "generating a breeze." It is also named "of Galilee" from the province of Galilee, in which it is. But "of Tiberias" from the city so called, which was on one side of this sea, having opposite it the city of Capernaum on the other side; which city was formerly called Zenereth, but was afterward restored by Herod the tetrarch in honor of Tiberius Caesar, and was called Tiberias. Now the literal reason why Jesus went away across the sea is assigned by Chrysostom: that Christ might yield to the fury and disturbance of the Jews, which they had conceived against Christ on account of the things he had said above concerning himself. Hence, as he himself says, just as missiles, when they strike against something hard, strike more heavily, but those which have nothing to meet them, once launched, are quickly spent and come to rest; so too, when we advance impetuously and by resisting against bold men, they rage the more; but if we yield to them, we easily soften their madness. For this reason Christ, by withdrawing across the sea, mitigated the fury of the Jews that had arisen from his foregoing words, giving us in this an example of doing likewise. Ecclesiasticus 8:14: "Do not stand against the face of an insolent man." Mystically, however, by the sea, the present turbulent world is signified; Psalm 103:25: "This sea, great and wide of hands." The Lord crossed this sea when he took on the sea of mortality and of penalty by being born, trod it underfoot by dying, and, crossing over by rising, arrived at the glory of the resurrection. Concerning this passing-over it is said below, John 13:1: "Jesus knowing that his hour had come, that he should pass from this world to the Father." As he passed over, great crowds followed him, by believing and by imitating, gathered from both peoples; Isaiah 60:5: "Then your heart shall wonder and be enlarged, when the multitude of the sea shall be turned to you"; Psalm 7:7: "Arise, O Lord, in the command which you have commanded, and the assembly of peoples shall surround you." The following crowd is described therefore as abundant, because "a great multitude followed him." Now the cause on account of which they followed was the working of miracles; hence he says, "because they saw the signs which he performed upon those who were sick." It should be known that some followed him on account of his teaching, namely those who were better disposed; but others, more imperfect, followed him out of admiration for the visible signs, being of a coarser mind. For signs, as is said in 1 Corinthians 14:22, "are not given to believers, but to unbelievers." Some also followed him out of devotion and faith, namely those whom he had healed in body: for they were healed by the Lord in body in such a way that they were also perfectly healed in soul; Deuteronomy 32:4: "The works of God are perfect." And this is clear, because to the paralytic (above, 8:11) he said pointedly: "Go, and sin no more"; and Matthew 9:2: "Son, your sins are forgiven you"; words which pertain more to the health of the soul than of the body. Now it should be noted that, whereas the Evangelist has made mention only of three miracles, namely of the wedding, of the ruler's son, and of the paralytic, here nevertheless he speaks indefinitely of "the signs which he was performing," so as to give one to understand that Christ performed many other signs, as is said below, at the end, of which he makes no mention in this book. For he intended especially to make known the teaching of Christ. Next he determines the place of the miracle, which is the mountain; hence he says, "He therefore went up into the mountain," that is, Jesus ascended privately, "and there he sat with his disciples." And indeed the mountain is a quite fitting place for a refreshment: for by the mountain is signified the perfection of justice, according to that text of Psalm 35:7: "Your justice is like the mountains of God." Since, therefore, these earthly things do not satisfy — indeed "whoever drinks of this water will thirst again," as is said above, II, 13 — but spiritual things do satisfy; therefore the Lord ascended to higher things with his disciples, to show that satiety is found in spiritual things, and the perfection of justice: concerning which mountain it is said in Psalm 67:16: "A mountain of God, a fat mountain." Hence there too he exercised the office of teacher, sitting with his disciples: for he it is who teaches every man knowledge. Next the time is described, when he says, "Now the Passover was near," which time indeed befits a refreshment. For Passover is interpreted as "passing-over": Exodus 12:11: "For it is the Phase, that is, the passing-over of the Lord," so as to give one to understand that whoever desires to be refreshed with the bread of the divine Word and the body and blood of the Lord must pass over from vices to virtues. 1 Corinthians 5:7: "Christ our Passover is sacrificed; therefore let us feast on the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth." Ecclesiasticus 24:26, divine Wisdom says: "Pass over to me, all you who desire me." Now this is the second Passover of which the Evangelist makes mention: to which, indeed, according to the precept of the law, which is found in Exodus 23:17, the Lord did not go up to Jerusalem. The reason for this is that Christ was God and man: and inasmuch as man he was indeed subject to the law; inasmuch as God he was above the law. Therefore, that he might show himself to be man, he sometimes kept the law; but that he might show himself to be God, he set the law aside. Hence also, by the fact that he did not go, he gave one to understand that the observances of the law would little by little, and shortly, cease. Next he deals with the performance of the miracle, when he says, "When Jesus therefore had lifted up his eyes, and had seen," etc.; and first the necessity of performing the miracle is shown; second the performance itself is added, at the place, "Jesus therefore says: Make the men sit down," etc. Now the necessity of the miracle's being performed is taken from the Lord's question and the disciples' answer; and therefore first the Lord's question is set forth; second the disciples' answer, at the place, "Philip answered him," etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First the occasion for questioning is set forth; second Christ's question is added; and third the intention of the one questioning is disclosed. Now the occasion for questioning was the sight of the multitude coming to Christ. And therefore he says, "When Jesus had lifted up his eyes," being on the mountain with his disciples as with those who were more perfect, "and had seen," etc. In which two things are to be considered concerning the Lord. One, that we may learn the maturity of Christ, who did not raise his eyes here and there, but sat modestly and attentively with his disciples: contrary to which it is said in Proverbs 30:13: "A generation whose eyes are lofty, and whose eyelids are lifted up on high"; and Ecclesiasticus 19:26: "A man is known by his look." The second, that we may learn that he did not sit idly with his disciples either; but, teaching them attentively, and turning their hearts to himself, he looked upon the disciples whom he was teaching; Luke 6:20: "And he, lifting up his eyes upon his disciples, said," etc. And therefore it is said, "When Jesus had lifted up his eyes," etc. Mystically, however, the eyes of the Lord are the spiritual gifts which, when he mercifully grants them to his elect, then he lifts up his eyes upon them, that is, he bestows a look of loving-kindness. This is what Psalm 85:16 asked, saying: "Look upon me, O Lord, and have mercy on me." Now the question concerns the feeding of the multitude; hence he said to Philip: "Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat?" He presupposes one thing, and asks about another. He presupposes indeed their want, because they did not have the means to provide food for so great a multitude; but he asks the manner of finding it, when he says, "Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat?" Here it should be noted that every teacher must spiritually feed the crowd that comes to him. And because no man has of himself the means to feed it, he must therefore buy it from elsewhere, by labor, by study, by assiduity in prayers; Isaiah 55:1: "You who have no money, make haste, buy, without any exchange, wine and milk." And again: "Why do you weigh out your money" — that is, your eloquence — "and not for bread" — that is, not for true wisdom, which refreshes (Ecclesiasticus 15:5: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding") — "and your labor not unto fullness," by learning things that do not satisfy, but rather empty out? Now the intention of the one questioning is disclosed when he says, "But this he said trying him," etc. Here the Evangelist, excluding one doubt, leads into another. For it could have been doubted that the Lord questioned Philip as though he were ignorant; but he excludes this, saying, "for he himself knew what he would do." But since to try someone seems also to belong to one who is ignorant, since it is the same as taking a trial of something, it seems that the Evangelist introduces another doubt when he says, "trying him." But it must be said that one person tries another in different ways, so as to take a trial of him: for a man tries in one way, in order to learn; the Devil in another way, in order to deceive; 1 Peter 5:8: "Your adversary the Devil, as a roaring lion, goes about seeking whom he may devour." But God, and Christ, indeed try not in order to learn, since he it is who searches hearts and minds; nor in order to deceive, since "he tries no one," as is said in James 1:13; but he tries in order to give to others a trial-proof of the one tried. Thus God tried Abraham; Genesis 22:1: "God tried Abraham," etc., and it follows: "Now I know that you fear the Lord" — that is, I have made it known that you fear the Lord. Thus from this he tries Philip in order that he might make known to others his answer, leading them thereby into the most certain knowledge of the sign to come. Next the disciples' answer is set forth, when he says, "Philip answered him," and first Philip's answer; second Andrew's answer, at the place, "One of his disciples says to him," etc. Now it should be known concerning the first, that Philip was, among the others, rather slow and untrained, and therefore among the others he questioned the Lord more frequently; below, John 14:8: "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us." But in the questioning of these two, as far as the letter is concerned, Andrew was better disposed than Philip, because Philip seems to have had no intention or disposition toward the miracle's being performed. And therefore he introduces that manner by which all those men could be fed, namely by money, saying, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them" — which we do not have, and therefore we cannot give them to eat. In which the poverty of Christ is suggested, who did not even have two hundred denarii. Andrew, however, seems to have regard to the miracle's being performed. For perhaps he had in memory the sign which Elisha had performed with barley loaves, when he fed a hundred men with twenty loaves, as is read in 4 Kings 4:42 and following, and therefore he says, "There is a boy here who has five barley loaves." But nevertheless he supposed that Christ would not perform a greater miracle than Elisha. For he reckoned that from fewer loaves fewer would be miraculously produced, and from more, more (although for him who does not need the underlying matter, it is equally easy to feed the crowds from more or from fewer), and therefore he adds, "But what are these among so many?" As if to say: even if they are multiplied as Elisha multiplied them, it is not sufficient. Mystically, spiritual refreshment is signified by wisdom. Now there is one wisdom, which Christ taught, who is true wisdom; 1 Corinthians 1:24: "Christ, the power of God and the wisdom of God." But before the coming of Christ there was a twofold teaching. One human, which the philosophers had; the other of the written law. Of the first, therefore, Philip makes mention, and therefore uses the term of buying, saying, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them." For human wisdom is possessed through acquisition. The number one hundred imports perfection. Hence two hundred suggests the twofold perfection necessary for this wisdom; for its perfection is arrived at by a twofold path: namely, by experience and by contemplation. He says therefore, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them," because whatever human reason can experience and think concerning truth is not sufficient for the perfect satiety of wisdom; Jeremiah 9:23: "Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, and let not the strong man glory in his strength, and let not the rich man glory in his riches; but let him who glories, glory in this, to know and understand me." For no philosopher's wisdom was so great that men could be recalled from error by it; rather they lead many into error. Of the second, however, Andrew makes mention; and therefore he did not wish that other loaves be bought, but that the crowd be fed from what was at hand, namely from those things which the law contained; hence he was better disposed than Philip; and therefore he says, "There is a boy here who has five barley loaves." This boy can be called Moses, on account of the imperfection of the state of the law: Hebrews 7:19: "The law brought no one to perfection"; or the people of the Jews, who served under the elements of the world, as is said in Galatians 4:3. This boy, therefore, has five loaves, that is, the teaching of the law: either because it is contained in the five books of Moses — above, John 1:17: "The law was given through Moses" — or because it was given to men occupied with sensible things, which are expressed by the five senses: and they are of barley, because the law itself was given so that in it the vital nourishment might be covered over by bodily sacraments — for the pith of barley is covered by a very clinging husk — or because the people of the Jews were not yet stripped of carnal desire, but clung to their hearts like husk: for in the Old Testament they experienced an outward hardness, on account of the ceremonial observances; Acts 15:10: "This is a burden which neither we, nor our fathers, were able to bear." And the Jews themselves, given over to bodily things, did not grasp the spiritual sense of the law; 2 Corinthians 3:15: "A veil is placed over their hearts." Now by the two fish, which gave a pleasant flavor to the bread, is understood the teaching of the Psalms and the prophets: and thus the Old Law had not only loaves, namely the five books of Moses, but also two fish, namely the prophets and the Psalms. Hence the Scripture of the Old Testament is divided into these three, Luke 24:44: "the things which are written in the Law and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning me." Or by the two fish, according to Augustine, two persons are signified: namely the royal and the priestly, by whom that people was ruled; which two persons, however, prefigured Christ, who was true king and priest. "But what are these among so many?" Because through these the human race could not be perfectly led to the knowledge of truth: for although God was known in Judea, the nations nevertheless did not know him. Next, when it says, "Jesus therefore said," the performance of the miracle is dealt with, and first the arrangement of the men is set forth; second their feeding, at the place, "Jesus therefore took the loaves," etc.; third the gathering of the fragments, at the place, "But when they were filled," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First the command concerning the arrangement of the crowds is set forth; second the opportuneness of the arrangement; and third the number of those arranged. Now the command was from the Lord to the disciples, that they should arrange the crowd for eating; hence Jesus says, "Make the men sit down," that is, sit down to eat. For, as was said above, II, in ancient times men used to dine reclining on couches, whence the custom grew up that those who sit down to eat are said to "recline." By which is mystically signified the rest which is necessary for the perfection of wisdom; Ecclesiasticus 38:25: "He who is diminished in activity will perfect wisdom." This arrangement is made through the disciples, because through them the knowledge of truth has been passed down to us; Psalm 71:3: "Let the mountains receive peace for the people." Now the opportuneness of the arrangement is drawn from the place: "now there was much grass in the place," which, according to the letter, is convenient for those reclining. Mystically, however, by the grass, flesh is signified, Isaiah 40:6: "All flesh is grass"; and according to this it can be referred to two things. It fits the teaching of the Old Testament, which was given to one resting in carnal things, and to a people wise in a carnal way; Isaiah 1:19: "If you be willing, and will hearken to me, you shall eat the good things of the land"; Deuteronomy 33:28: "The eye of Jacob upon a land of wheat, wine, and oil." Or it fits one who perceives true wisdom, to which one cannot come except by treading carnal things underfoot; Romans 12:2: "Do not be conformed to this age." Now the number was great; hence he says, "The men therefore sat down, in number about five thousand." The Evangelist numbers only the men, following the custom of the law, in which Moses numbered the people from twenty years old and upward, with no mention made of women, as is said in Numbers 1. This the Evangelist did for this reason, because these alone are capable of perfect teaching; 1 Corinthians 2:6: "We speak wisdom among the perfect"; Hebrews 5:14: "Solid food is for the perfect." Next, when he says, "Jesus therefore took the loaves," he deals with the feeding, and first the disposition of the one feeding is suggested; second the matter of the feeding; and third the perfect satiety. Now in the disposition of Jesus as he feeds them, first indeed his humility is noted; second, his giving of thanks. Humility indeed, because he took the loaves, and distributed them. And indeed Christ, about to perform the miracle, could have fed the crowds with loaves created out of nothing. But by dispensation he multiplied pre-existing loaves for the feeding of the crowds. First, indeed, that he might show that sensible things are not from the Devil, as the erring Manichees say. For if this were true, the Lord would not use sensible things for the work of divine praise, especially since he himself came "that he might destroy the works of the Devil," as is said in 1 John 3:8. Second, that he might show it to be false what they themselves say, namely that the teaching of the Old Testament is not from God, but from the Devil. Therefore, in order to show that the teaching of the New Testament is no other than that which was prefigured and contained in the teaching of the Old Testament, he multiplied the pre-existing loaves, indicating that it is he who perfects and fulfills the law; Matthew 5:17: "I have not come to destroy the law." Now the giving of thanks, because he gave thanks, so as to show that he has from another, namely from the Father, whatever he has: in which he shows us an example of doing likewise. He gave thanks especially, however, so as to give us an example that, when we begin a meal, we ought to give thanks to God; 1 Timothy 4:4: "Nothing is to be rejected which is received with the giving of thanks"; Psalm 21:27: "The poor shall eat, and shall be filled, and they shall praise the Lord." Likewise, that he might show that he was not praying for his own sake, but for the sake of the crowd, which was present, and it was necessary to persuade them that he had come from God. And therefore, when he performs a miracle before many, he prays, so as to show that he is not contrary to God, but works according to his will. It is said, however, in Mark, that Christ distributed the loaves to the crowds through the apostles. But here it is said that he himself distributed them, because he is seen to have done what he did through others. But both, according to the mystery, are true, because he alone refreshes inwardly, and others refresh outwardly and as ministers. Now the matter of the refreshment was bread and fish, concerning which enough has been said above. The satiety of the refreshment, however, was perfect, because they had "as much as they wanted." For Christ alone is he who feeds the empty soul, and fills the hungry soul with good things; Psalm 16:15: "I shall be satisfied when your glory shall appear." Others, however, as having grace by measure, perform miracles; but Christ, by absolute power, worked all things with great overabundance: hence it is said that "they were filled." Next, when he says, "But when they were filled, he said to his disciples," etc., the gathering of the fragments is dealt with, and first the Lord's command is set forth; second the disciples' execution of it, at the place, "They gathered therefore," etc. He says therefore, "But when they were filled, he said to his disciples: Gather up the fragments that remain." This indeed the Lord did not do for superfluous ostentation, but so as to show that the miracle performed was not illusory, through the fact that the remains, once gathered, were kept for a long time, and served as food for others. He also wished by this that that miracle should cling more firmly to the hearts of the disciples, whom he also commanded to carry the fragments; since he wished especially to instruct those who were to be the teachers of the whole world. But the disciples faithfully carry it out; hence it follows, "They gathered therefore," etc. Here it should be noted that the remains left over were not just any amount, nor by chance, but according to a fixed measure: because he made neither more nor less, but as much as he willed, to be superfluous. A sign of this is that each apostle's basket was full. Now a basket is a vessel assigned to rustic service. The twelve baskets, therefore, signify the twelve apostles and their imitators, who, although in the present they are held in contempt, are nevertheless inwardly filled with the riches of the spiritual sacraments: and they are said to be twelve, because the faith of the Holy Trinity was to be preached by them in the four parts of the world.”

“Having set forth the teaching on the spiritual life by which Christ gives life to those who have been regenerated, the Evangelist consequently deals with the spiritual nourishment by which Christ sustains those he has given life to; and first he sets forth the visible miracle which Christ performed by providing bodily nourishment; second he deals with spiritual nourishment, at the place, "Jesus answered them and said: Amen, amen, I say to you, you seek me, not because..." etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he sets forth the visible miracle of bodily nourishment; second he shows the effect of the miracle, at the place, "Those men therefore, when they had seen..." etc. Concerning the miracle he sets forth two things: namely its circumstances, and its performance, at the place, "And when Jesus had lifted up his eyes..." Concerning the first he does three things. First he describes the multitude which he fed; second he determines the place where he fed them, at the place, "Jesus therefore went up into the mountain"; third the time when he fed them, at the place, "Now the Passover was near," etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First he determines the place to which the multitude follows him; second, the crowd following; third he assigns the cause of their following. Now as to where the crowd followed the Lord, the Evangelist indicates this when he says, "After these things Jesus went away across the sea of Galilee"; that is, after the mystical words which the Lord had spoken concerning his power. Now this sea of Galilee is frequently named in Scripture, and in different places. But because this sea is not salty, but is a certain gathering of waters from the inflow of the Jordan, it is therefore called a lake by Luke, as is found in Luke 5:1; but because, according to the property of the Hebrew idiom, all gatherings of waters are called seas, according to that text of Genesis 1:10, "and the gatherings of waters he called seas," it is therefore called a sea. But it is surnamed Gennesareth from the nature of the place: for it is much agitated by the buffeting of winds, which are generated from the very evaporations of the water; hence Gennesareth in Greek is the same as "generating a breeze." It is also named "of Galilee" from the province of Galilee, in which it is. But "of Tiberias" from the city so called, which was on one side of this sea, having opposite it the city of Capernaum on the other side; which city was formerly called Zenereth, but was afterward restored by Herod the tetrarch in honor of Tiberius Caesar, and was called Tiberias. Now the literal reason why Jesus went away across the sea is assigned by Chrysostom: that Christ might yield to the fury and disturbance of the Jews, which they had conceived against Christ on account of the things he had said above concerning himself. Hence, as he himself says, just as missiles, when they strike against something hard, strike more heavily, but those which have nothing to meet them, once launched, are quickly spent and come to rest; so too, when we advance impetuously and by resisting against bold men, they rage the more; but if we yield to them, we easily soften their madness. For this reason Christ, by withdrawing across the sea, mitigated the fury of the Jews that had arisen from his foregoing words, giving us in this an example of doing likewise. Ecclesiasticus 8:14: "Do not stand against the face of an insolent man." Mystically, however, by the sea, the present turbulent world is signified; Psalm 103:25: "This sea, great and wide of hands." The Lord crossed this sea when he took on the sea of mortality and of penalty by being born, trod it underfoot by dying, and, crossing over by rising, arrived at the glory of the resurrection. Concerning this passing-over it is said below, John 13:1: "Jesus knowing that his hour had come, that he should pass from this world to the Father." As he passed over, great crowds followed him, by believing and by imitating, gathered from both peoples; Isaiah 60:5: "Then your heart shall wonder and be enlarged, when the multitude of the sea shall be turned to you"; Psalm 7:7: "Arise, O Lord, in the command which you have commanded, and the assembly of peoples shall surround you." The following crowd is described therefore as abundant, because "a great multitude followed him." Now the cause on account of which they followed was the working of miracles; hence he says, "because they saw the signs which he performed upon those who were sick." It should be known that some followed him on account of his teaching, namely those who were better disposed; but others, more imperfect, followed him out of admiration for the visible signs, being of a coarser mind. For signs, as is said in 1 Corinthians 14:22, "are not given to believers, but to unbelievers." Some also followed him out of devotion and faith, namely those whom he had healed in body: for they were healed by the Lord in body in such a way that they were also perfectly healed in soul; Deuteronomy 32:4: "The works of God are perfect." And this is clear, because to the paralytic (above, 8:11) he said pointedly: "Go, and sin no more"; and Matthew 9:2: "Son, your sins are forgiven you"; words which pertain more to the health of the soul than of the body. Now it should be noted that, whereas the Evangelist has made mention only of three miracles, namely of the wedding, of the ruler's son, and of the paralytic, here nevertheless he speaks indefinitely of "the signs which he was performing," so as to give one to understand that Christ performed many other signs, as is said below, at the end, of which he makes no mention in this book. For he intended especially to make known the teaching of Christ. Next he determines the place of the miracle, which is the mountain; hence he says, "He therefore went up into the mountain," that is, Jesus ascended privately, "and there he sat with his disciples." And indeed the mountain is a quite fitting place for a refreshment: for by the mountain is signified the perfection of justice, according to that text of Psalm 35:7: "Your justice is like the mountains of God." Since, therefore, these earthly things do not satisfy — indeed "whoever drinks of this water will thirst again," as is said above, II, 13 — but spiritual things do satisfy; therefore the Lord ascended to higher things with his disciples, to show that satiety is found in spiritual things, and the perfection of justice: concerning which mountain it is said in Psalm 67:16: "A mountain of God, a fat mountain." Hence there too he exercised the office of teacher, sitting with his disciples: for he it is who teaches every man knowledge. Next the time is described, when he says, "Now the Passover was near," which time indeed befits a refreshment. For Passover is interpreted as "passing-over": Exodus 12:11: "For it is the Phase, that is, the passing-over of the Lord," so as to give one to understand that whoever desires to be refreshed with the bread of the divine Word and the body and blood of the Lord must pass over from vices to virtues. 1 Corinthians 5:7: "Christ our Passover is sacrificed; therefore let us feast on the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth." Ecclesiasticus 24:26, divine Wisdom says: "Pass over to me, all you who desire me." Now this is the second Passover of which the Evangelist makes mention: to which, indeed, according to the precept of the law, which is found in Exodus 23:17, the Lord did not go up to Jerusalem. The reason for this is that Christ was God and man: and inasmuch as man he was indeed subject to the law; inasmuch as God he was above the law. Therefore, that he might show himself to be man, he sometimes kept the law; but that he might show himself to be God, he set the law aside. Hence also, by the fact that he did not go, he gave one to understand that the observances of the law would little by little, and shortly, cease. Next he deals with the performance of the miracle, when he says, "When Jesus therefore had lifted up his eyes, and had seen," etc.; and first the necessity of performing the miracle is shown; second the performance itself is added, at the place, "Jesus therefore says: Make the men sit down," etc. Now the necessity of the miracle's being performed is taken from the Lord's question and the disciples' answer; and therefore first the Lord's question is set forth; second the disciples' answer, at the place, "Philip answered him," etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First the occasion for questioning is set forth; second Christ's question is added; and third the intention of the one questioning is disclosed. Now the occasion for questioning was the sight of the multitude coming to Christ. And therefore he says, "When Jesus had lifted up his eyes," being on the mountain with his disciples as with those who were more perfect, "and had seen," etc. In which two things are to be considered concerning the Lord. One, that we may learn the maturity of Christ, who did not raise his eyes here and there, but sat modestly and attentively with his disciples: contrary to which it is said in Proverbs 30:13: "A generation whose eyes are lofty, and whose eyelids are lifted up on high"; and Ecclesiasticus 19:26: "A man is known by his look." The second, that we may learn that he did not sit idly with his disciples either; but, teaching them attentively, and turning their hearts to himself, he looked upon the disciples whom he was teaching; Luke 6:20: "And he, lifting up his eyes upon his disciples, said," etc. And therefore it is said, "When Jesus had lifted up his eyes," etc. Mystically, however, the eyes of the Lord are the spiritual gifts which, when he mercifully grants them to his elect, then he lifts up his eyes upon them, that is, he bestows a look of loving-kindness. This is what Psalm 85:16 asked, saying: "Look upon me, O Lord, and have mercy on me." Now the question concerns the feeding of the multitude; hence he said to Philip: "Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat?" He presupposes one thing, and asks about another. He presupposes indeed their want, because they did not have the means to provide food for so great a multitude; but he asks the manner of finding it, when he says, "Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat?" Here it should be noted that every teacher must spiritually feed the crowd that comes to him. And because no man has of himself the means to feed it, he must therefore buy it from elsewhere, by labor, by study, by assiduity in prayers; Isaiah 55:1: "You who have no money, make haste, buy, without any exchange, wine and milk." And again: "Why do you weigh out your money" — that is, your eloquence — "and not for bread" — that is, not for true wisdom, which refreshes (Ecclesiasticus 15:5: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding") — "and your labor not unto fullness," by learning things that do not satisfy, but rather empty out? Now the intention of the one questioning is disclosed when he says, "But this he said trying him," etc. Here the Evangelist, excluding one doubt, leads into another. For it could have been doubted that the Lord questioned Philip as though he were ignorant; but he excludes this, saying, "for he himself knew what he would do." But since to try someone seems also to belong to one who is ignorant, since it is the same as taking a trial of something, it seems that the Evangelist introduces another doubt when he says, "trying him." But it must be said that one person tries another in different ways, so as to take a trial of him: for a man tries in one way, in order to learn; the Devil in another way, in order to deceive; 1 Peter 5:8: "Your adversary the Devil, as a roaring lion, goes about seeking whom he may devour." But God, and Christ, indeed try not in order to learn, since he it is who searches hearts and minds; nor in order to deceive, since "he tries no one," as is said in James 1:13; but he tries in order to give to others a trial-proof of the one tried. Thus God tried Abraham; Genesis 22:1: "God tried Abraham," etc., and it follows: "Now I know that you fear the Lord" — that is, I have made it known that you fear the Lord. Thus from this he tries Philip in order that he might make known to others his answer, leading them thereby into the most certain knowledge of the sign to come. Next the disciples' answer is set forth, when he says, "Philip answered him," and first Philip's answer; second Andrew's answer, at the place, "One of his disciples says to him," etc. Now it should be known concerning the first, that Philip was, among the others, rather slow and untrained, and therefore among the others he questioned the Lord more frequently; below, John 14:8: "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us." But in the questioning of these two, as far as the letter is concerned, Andrew was better disposed than Philip, because Philip seems to have had no intention or disposition toward the miracle's being performed. And therefore he introduces that manner by which all those men could be fed, namely by money, saying, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them" — which we do not have, and therefore we cannot give them to eat. In which the poverty of Christ is suggested, who did not even have two hundred denarii. Andrew, however, seems to have regard to the miracle's being performed. For perhaps he had in memory the sign which Elisha had performed with barley loaves, when he fed a hundred men with twenty loaves, as is read in 4 Kings 4:42 and following, and therefore he says, "There is a boy here who has five barley loaves." But nevertheless he supposed that Christ would not perform a greater miracle than Elisha. For he reckoned that from fewer loaves fewer would be miraculously produced, and from more, more (although for him who does not need the underlying matter, it is equally easy to feed the crowds from more or from fewer), and therefore he adds, "But what are these among so many?" As if to say: even if they are multiplied as Elisha multiplied them, it is not sufficient. Mystically, spiritual refreshment is signified by wisdom. Now there is one wisdom, which Christ taught, who is true wisdom; 1 Corinthians 1:24: "Christ, the power of God and the wisdom of God." But before the coming of Christ there was a twofold teaching. One human, which the philosophers had; the other of the written law. Of the first, therefore, Philip makes mention, and therefore uses the term of buying, saying, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them." For human wisdom is possessed through acquisition. The number one hundred imports perfection. Hence two hundred suggests the twofold perfection necessary for this wisdom; for its perfection is arrived at by a twofold path: namely, by experience and by contemplation. He says therefore, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them," because whatever human reason can experience and think concerning truth is not sufficient for the perfect satiety of wisdom; Jeremiah 9:23: "Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, and let not the strong man glory in his strength, and let not the rich man glory in his riches; but let him who glories, glory in this, to know and understand me." For no philosopher's wisdom was so great that men could be recalled from error by it; rather they lead many into error. Of the second, however, Andrew makes mention; and therefore he did not wish that other loaves be bought, but that the crowd be fed from what was at hand, namely from those things which the law contained; hence he was better disposed than Philip; and therefore he says, "There is a boy here who has five barley loaves." This boy can be called Moses, on account of the imperfection of the state of the law: Hebrews 7:19: "The law brought no one to perfection"; or the people of the Jews, who served under the elements of the world, as is said in Galatians 4:3. This boy, therefore, has five loaves, that is, the teaching of the law: either because it is contained in the five books of Moses — above, John 1:17: "The law was given through Moses" — or because it was given to men occupied with sensible things, which are expressed by the five senses: and they are of barley, because the law itself was given so that in it the vital nourishment might be covered over by bodily sacraments — for the pith of barley is covered by a very clinging husk — or because the people of the Jews were not yet stripped of carnal desire, but clung to their hearts like husk: for in the Old Testament they experienced an outward hardness, on account of the ceremonial observances; Acts 15:10: "This is a burden which neither we, nor our fathers, were able to bear." And the Jews themselves, given over to bodily things, did not grasp the spiritual sense of the law; 2 Corinthians 3:15: "A veil is placed over their hearts." Now by the two fish, which gave a pleasant flavor to the bread, is understood the teaching of the Psalms and the prophets: and thus the Old Law had not only loaves, namely the five books of Moses, but also two fish, namely the prophets and the Psalms. Hence the Scripture of the Old Testament is divided into these three, Luke 24:44: "the things which are written in the Law and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning me." Or by the two fish, according to Augustine, two persons are signified: namely the royal and the priestly, by whom that people was ruled; which two persons, however, prefigured Christ, who was true king and priest. "But what are these among so many?" Because through these the human race could not be perfectly led to the knowledge of truth: for although God was known in Judea, the nations nevertheless did not know him. Next, when it says, "Jesus therefore said," the performance of the miracle is dealt with, and first the arrangement of the men is set forth; second their feeding, at the place, "Jesus therefore took the loaves," etc.; third the gathering of the fragments, at the place, "But when they were filled," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First the command concerning the arrangement of the crowds is set forth; second the opportuneness of the arrangement; and third the number of those arranged. Now the command was from the Lord to the disciples, that they should arrange the crowd for eating; hence Jesus says, "Make the men sit down," that is, sit down to eat. For, as was said above, II, in ancient times men used to dine reclining on couches, whence the custom grew up that those who sit down to eat are said to "recline." By which is mystically signified the rest which is necessary for the perfection of wisdom; Ecclesiasticus 38:25: "He who is diminished in activity will perfect wisdom." This arrangement is made through the disciples, because through them the knowledge of truth has been passed down to us; Psalm 71:3: "Let the mountains receive peace for the people." Now the opportuneness of the arrangement is drawn from the place: "now there was much grass in the place," which, according to the letter, is convenient for those reclining. Mystically, however, by the grass, flesh is signified, Isaiah 40:6: "All flesh is grass"; and according to this it can be referred to two things. It fits the teaching of the Old Testament, which was given to one resting in carnal things, and to a people wise in a carnal way; Isaiah 1:19: "If you be willing, and will hearken to me, you shall eat the good things of the land"; Deuteronomy 33:28: "The eye of Jacob upon a land of wheat, wine, and oil." Or it fits one who perceives true wisdom, to which one cannot come except by treading carnal things underfoot; Romans 12:2: "Do not be conformed to this age." Now the number was great; hence he says, "The men therefore sat down, in number about five thousand." The Evangelist numbers only the men, following the custom of the law, in which Moses numbered the people from twenty years old and upward, with no mention made of women, as is said in Numbers 1. This the Evangelist did for this reason, because these alone are capable of perfect teaching; 1 Corinthians 2:6: "We speak wisdom among the perfect"; Hebrews 5:14: "Solid food is for the perfect." Next, when he says, "Jesus therefore took the loaves," he deals with the feeding, and first the disposition of the one feeding is suggested; second the matter of the feeding; and third the perfect satiety. Now in the disposition of Jesus as he feeds them, first indeed his humility is noted; second, his giving of thanks. Humility indeed, because he took the loaves, and distributed them. And indeed Christ, about to perform the miracle, could have fed the crowds with loaves created out of nothing. But by dispensation he multiplied pre-existing loaves for the feeding of the crowds. First, indeed, that he might show that sensible things are not from the Devil, as the erring Manichees say. For if this were true, the Lord would not use sensible things for the work of divine praise, especially since he himself came "that he might destroy the works of the Devil," as is said in 1 John 3:8. Second, that he might show it to be false what they themselves say, namely that the teaching of the Old Testament is not from God, but from the Devil. Therefore, in order to show that the teaching of the New Testament is no other than that which was prefigured and contained in the teaching of the Old Testament, he multiplied the pre-existing loaves, indicating that it is he who perfects and fulfills the law; Matthew 5:17: "I have not come to destroy the law." Now the giving of thanks, because he gave thanks, so as to show that he has from another, namely from the Father, whatever he has: in which he shows us an example of doing likewise. He gave thanks especially, however, so as to give us an example that, when we begin a meal, we ought to give thanks to God; 1 Timothy 4:4: "Nothing is to be rejected which is received with the giving of thanks"; Psalm 21:27: "The poor shall eat, and shall be filled, and they shall praise the Lord." Likewise, that he might show that he was not praying for his own sake, but for the sake of the crowd, which was present, and it was necessary to persuade them that he had come from God. And therefore, when he performs a miracle before many, he prays, so as to show that he is not contrary to God, but works according to his will. It is said, however, in Mark, that Christ distributed the loaves to the crowds through the apostles. But here it is said that he himself distributed them, because he is seen to have done what he did through others. But both, according to the mystery, are true, because he alone refreshes inwardly, and others refresh outwardly and as ministers. Now the matter of the refreshment was bread and fish, concerning which enough has been said above. The satiety of the refreshment, however, was perfect, because they had "as much as they wanted." For Christ alone is he who feeds the empty soul, and fills the hungry soul with good things; Psalm 16:15: "I shall be satisfied when your glory shall appear." Others, however, as having grace by measure, perform miracles; but Christ, by absolute power, worked all things with great overabundance: hence it is said that "they were filled." Next, when he says, "But when they were filled, he said to his disciples," etc., the gathering of the fragments is dealt with, and first the Lord's command is set forth; second the disciples' execution of it, at the place, "They gathered therefore," etc. He says therefore, "But when they were filled, he said to his disciples: Gather up the fragments that remain." This indeed the Lord did not do for superfluous ostentation, but so as to show that the miracle performed was not illusory, through the fact that the remains, once gathered, were kept for a long time, and served as food for others. He also wished by this that that miracle should cling more firmly to the hearts of the disciples, whom he also commanded to carry the fragments; since he wished especially to instruct those who were to be the teachers of the whole world. But the disciples faithfully carry it out; hence it follows, "They gathered therefore," etc. Here it should be noted that the remains left over were not just any amount, nor by chance, but according to a fixed measure: because he made neither more nor less, but as much as he willed, to be superfluous. A sign of this is that each apostle's basket was full. Now a basket is a vessel assigned to rustic service. The twelve baskets, therefore, signify the twelve apostles and their imitators, who, although in the present they are held in contempt, are nevertheless inwardly filled with the riches of the spiritual sacraments: and they are said to be twelve, because the faith of the Holy Trinity was to be preached by them in the four parts of the world.”

“There is a lad here,.... Who either belonged to Christ and his disciples, and was employed to carry their provisions for them; which, if so, shows how meanly Christ and his disciples lived; or he belonged to some in the multitude; or rather he came here to sell what he had got: which hath five barley loaves. The land of Canaan was a land of barley, as well as wheat, Deu 8:8; this sort of grain grew there in plenty, and was in much use; the Jews had a barley harvest, Rut 1:22, which was at the time of the passover; for on the second day after the passover, the sheaf of the first fruits was waved before the Lord, which was of barley; hence the Targumist on the place just cited, paraphrases it thus; "they came to Bethlehem in the beginning of the passover, and on the day the children of Israel began to reap the sheaf of the wave offering, which was of barley.'' And it was now about the time of the passover, as appears from Joh 6:4, and had it been quite the time, and the barley sheaf had been waved, it might have been thought that these loaves were made of the new barley; but though barley was in use for bread among the Jews, as is evident, from the mention that is made of barley loaves and cakes, Kg2 4:42; yet it was bread of the coarsest sort, and what the meaner sort of people ate; see Eze 4:12. Yea, barley was used for food for horses and dromedaries, Kg1 4:28; and since therefore these loaves were, if not designed for the use of Christ and his twelve apostles, yet for some of his followers, and which they all ate of; it is an instance of the meanness and poverty of them: but however, they had better bread than this, even the bread of life, which is afterwards largely treated of in this chapter, which some of them at least ate of; and as our countryman Mr. Dod used to say, "brown bread and the Gospel are good fare:'' and it may be further observed, that the number of these loaves were but few; there were but "five" of them, for "five thousand" persons; and these do not seem to be very large ones, since one lad was able to carry them; and indeed, these loaves were no other than cakes, in which form they used to be made: and two small fishes; there were but "two", and these "small"; it is amazing, that five thousand persons should everyone have something of them, and enough: these fishes seem to be what the Jews (c) call and which the gloss interprets "small fishes": and by the word which is used of them, they seem to be salted, or pickled fishes, and such it is very probable these were; Nonnus calls them, , "fishes which were broiled", or perhaps dried in the sun; see Luk 24:42. But what are they among so many? everyone cannot possibly have a taste, much less any refreshment, still less a meal. (c) T. Bab. Cetubot, fol. 60. 2. & Sanhedrin, fol. 49. 1.”

“There is a lad here - Παιδαριον, a little boy, or servant, probably one who carried the apostles' provisions, or who came on purpose to sell his bread and fish. Five barley loaves - Barley scarcely bore one-third of the value of wheat in the east: see Rev 6:6. That it was a very mean fare appears from Eze 13:19, where the false prophetesses are said to pollute the name of God for handfuls of barley, i.e. for the meanest reward. And Plutarch, in Apoph. p. 174, speaking concerning the flight of Artaxerxes Mnemon, says he was reduced to such distress as to be obliged to eat barley bread. See Kypke. From this and other circumstances we may plainly perceive that the self-denying doctrine preached by Christ and his apostles was fully exemplified in their own manner of living. Two small fishes - Δυο οψαρια. The word of οψαριον signifies whatever is eaten with bread, to perfect the meal, or to make it easy of deglutition, or to help the digestion. There is no word in the English language for it, which is a great defect. The inhabitants of Scotland, and of the north and north-west of Ireland, use the word kytshen, by which they express what ever is eaten with bread or potatoes, as flesh, fish, butter, milk, eggs, etc., no satisfactory etymology of which word I am able to offer. In the parallel places in the other three evangelists, instead of οψαρια, ιχθυας is used; so that the word evidently means fish in the text of St. John: see on Joh 21:5 (note).”

“Having set forth the teaching on the spiritual life by which Christ gives life to those who have been regenerated, the Evangelist consequently deals with the spiritual nourishment by which Christ sustains those he has given life to; and first he sets forth the visible miracle which Christ performed by providing bodily nourishment; second he deals with spiritual nourishment, at the place, "Jesus answered them and said: Amen, amen, I say to you, you seek me, not because..." etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he sets forth the visible miracle of bodily nourishment; second he shows the effect of the miracle, at the place, "Those men therefore, when they had seen..." etc. Concerning the miracle he sets forth two things: namely its circumstances, and its performance, at the place, "And when Jesus had lifted up his eyes..." Concerning the first he does three things. First he describes the multitude which he fed; second he determines the place where he fed them, at the place, "Jesus therefore went up into the mountain"; third the time when he fed them, at the place, "Now the Passover was near," etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First he determines the place to which the multitude follows him; second, the crowd following; third he assigns the cause of their following. Now as to where the crowd followed the Lord, the Evangelist indicates this when he says, "After these things Jesus went away across the sea of Galilee"; that is, after the mystical words which the Lord had spoken concerning his power. Now this sea of Galilee is frequently named in Scripture, and in different places. But because this sea is not salty, but is a certain gathering of waters from the inflow of the Jordan, it is therefore called a lake by Luke, as is found in Luke 5:1; but because, according to the property of the Hebrew idiom, all gatherings of waters are called seas, according to that text of Genesis 1:10, "and the gatherings of waters he called seas," it is therefore called a sea. But it is surnamed Gennesareth from the nature of the place: for it is much agitated by the buffeting of winds, which are generated from the very evaporations of the water; hence Gennesareth in Greek is the same as "generating a breeze." It is also named "of Galilee" from the province of Galilee, in which it is. But "of Tiberias" from the city so called, which was on one side of this sea, having opposite it the city of Capernaum on the other side; which city was formerly called Zenereth, but was afterward restored by Herod the tetrarch in honor of Tiberius Caesar, and was called Tiberias. Now the literal reason why Jesus went away across the sea is assigned by Chrysostom: that Christ might yield to the fury and disturbance of the Jews, which they had conceived against Christ on account of the things he had said above concerning himself. Hence, as he himself says, just as missiles, when they strike against something hard, strike more heavily, but those which have nothing to meet them, once launched, are quickly spent and come to rest; so too, when we advance impetuously and by resisting against bold men, they rage the more; but if we yield to them, we easily soften their madness. For this reason Christ, by withdrawing across the sea, mitigated the fury of the Jews that had arisen from his foregoing words, giving us in this an example of doing likewise. Ecclesiasticus 8:14: "Do not stand against the face of an insolent man." Mystically, however, by the sea, the present turbulent world is signified; Psalm 103:25: "This sea, great and wide of hands." The Lord crossed this sea when he took on the sea of mortality and of penalty by being born, trod it underfoot by dying, and, crossing over by rising, arrived at the glory of the resurrection. Concerning this passing-over it is said below, John 13:1: "Jesus knowing that his hour had come, that he should pass from this world to the Father." As he passed over, great crowds followed him, by believing and by imitating, gathered from both peoples; Isaiah 60:5: "Then your heart shall wonder and be enlarged, when the multitude of the sea shall be turned to you"; Psalm 7:7: "Arise, O Lord, in the command which you have commanded, and the assembly of peoples shall surround you." The following crowd is described therefore as abundant, because "a great multitude followed him." Now the cause on account of which they followed was the working of miracles; hence he says, "because they saw the signs which he performed upon those who were sick." It should be known that some followed him on account of his teaching, namely those who were better disposed; but others, more imperfect, followed him out of admiration for the visible signs, being of a coarser mind. For signs, as is said in 1 Corinthians 14:22, "are not given to believers, but to unbelievers." Some also followed him out of devotion and faith, namely those whom he had healed in body: for they were healed by the Lord in body in such a way that they were also perfectly healed in soul; Deuteronomy 32:4: "The works of God are perfect." And this is clear, because to the paralytic (above, 8:11) he said pointedly: "Go, and sin no more"; and Matthew 9:2: "Son, your sins are forgiven you"; words which pertain more to the health of the soul than of the body. Now it should be noted that, whereas the Evangelist has made mention only of three miracles, namely of the wedding, of the ruler's son, and of the paralytic, here nevertheless he speaks indefinitely of "the signs which he was performing," so as to give one to understand that Christ performed many other signs, as is said below, at the end, of which he makes no mention in this book. For he intended especially to make known the teaching of Christ. Next he determines the place of the miracle, which is the mountain; hence he says, "He therefore went up into the mountain," that is, Jesus ascended privately, "and there he sat with his disciples." And indeed the mountain is a quite fitting place for a refreshment: for by the mountain is signified the perfection of justice, according to that text of Psalm 35:7: "Your justice is like the mountains of God." Since, therefore, these earthly things do not satisfy — indeed "whoever drinks of this water will thirst again," as is said above, II, 13 — but spiritual things do satisfy; therefore the Lord ascended to higher things with his disciples, to show that satiety is found in spiritual things, and the perfection of justice: concerning which mountain it is said in Psalm 67:16: "A mountain of God, a fat mountain." Hence there too he exercised the office of teacher, sitting with his disciples: for he it is who teaches every man knowledge. Next the time is described, when he says, "Now the Passover was near," which time indeed befits a refreshment. For Passover is interpreted as "passing-over": Exodus 12:11: "For it is the Phase, that is, the passing-over of the Lord," so as to give one to understand that whoever desires to be refreshed with the bread of the divine Word and the body and blood of the Lord must pass over from vices to virtues. 1 Corinthians 5:7: "Christ our Passover is sacrificed; therefore let us feast on the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth." Ecclesiasticus 24:26, divine Wisdom says: "Pass over to me, all you who desire me." Now this is the second Passover of which the Evangelist makes mention: to which, indeed, according to the precept of the law, which is found in Exodus 23:17, the Lord did not go up to Jerusalem. The reason for this is that Christ was God and man: and inasmuch as man he was indeed subject to the law; inasmuch as God he was above the law. Therefore, that he might show himself to be man, he sometimes kept the law; but that he might show himself to be God, he set the law aside. Hence also, by the fact that he did not go, he gave one to understand that the observances of the law would little by little, and shortly, cease. Next he deals with the performance of the miracle, when he says, "When Jesus therefore had lifted up his eyes, and had seen," etc.; and first the necessity of performing the miracle is shown; second the performance itself is added, at the place, "Jesus therefore says: Make the men sit down," etc. Now the necessity of the miracle's being performed is taken from the Lord's question and the disciples' answer; and therefore first the Lord's question is set forth; second the disciples' answer, at the place, "Philip answered him," etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First the occasion for questioning is set forth; second Christ's question is added; and third the intention of the one questioning is disclosed. Now the occasion for questioning was the sight of the multitude coming to Christ. And therefore he says, "When Jesus had lifted up his eyes," being on the mountain with his disciples as with those who were more perfect, "and had seen," etc. In which two things are to be considered concerning the Lord. One, that we may learn the maturity of Christ, who did not raise his eyes here and there, but sat modestly and attentively with his disciples: contrary to which it is said in Proverbs 30:13: "A generation whose eyes are lofty, and whose eyelids are lifted up on high"; and Ecclesiasticus 19:26: "A man is known by his look." The second, that we may learn that he did not sit idly with his disciples either; but, teaching them attentively, and turning their hearts to himself, he looked upon the disciples whom he was teaching; Luke 6:20: "And he, lifting up his eyes upon his disciples, said," etc. And therefore it is said, "When Jesus had lifted up his eyes," etc. Mystically, however, the eyes of the Lord are the spiritual gifts which, when he mercifully grants them to his elect, then he lifts up his eyes upon them, that is, he bestows a look of loving-kindness. This is what Psalm 85:16 asked, saying: "Look upon me, O Lord, and have mercy on me." Now the question concerns the feeding of the multitude; hence he said to Philip: "Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat?" He presupposes one thing, and asks about another. He presupposes indeed their want, because they did not have the means to provide food for so great a multitude; but he asks the manner of finding it, when he says, "Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat?" Here it should be noted that every teacher must spiritually feed the crowd that comes to him. And because no man has of himself the means to feed it, he must therefore buy it from elsewhere, by labor, by study, by assiduity in prayers; Isaiah 55:1: "You who have no money, make haste, buy, without any exchange, wine and milk." And again: "Why do you weigh out your money" — that is, your eloquence — "and not for bread" — that is, not for true wisdom, which refreshes (Ecclesiasticus 15:5: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding") — "and your labor not unto fullness," by learning things that do not satisfy, but rather empty out? Now the intention of the one questioning is disclosed when he says, "But this he said trying him," etc. Here the Evangelist, excluding one doubt, leads into another. For it could have been doubted that the Lord questioned Philip as though he were ignorant; but he excludes this, saying, "for he himself knew what he would do." But since to try someone seems also to belong to one who is ignorant, since it is the same as taking a trial of something, it seems that the Evangelist introduces another doubt when he says, "trying him." But it must be said that one person tries another in different ways, so as to take a trial of him: for a man tries in one way, in order to learn; the Devil in another way, in order to deceive; 1 Peter 5:8: "Your adversary the Devil, as a roaring lion, goes about seeking whom he may devour." But God, and Christ, indeed try not in order to learn, since he it is who searches hearts and minds; nor in order to deceive, since "he tries no one," as is said in James 1:13; but he tries in order to give to others a trial-proof of the one tried. Thus God tried Abraham; Genesis 22:1: "God tried Abraham," etc., and it follows: "Now I know that you fear the Lord" — that is, I have made it known that you fear the Lord. Thus from this he tries Philip in order that he might make known to others his answer, leading them thereby into the most certain knowledge of the sign to come. Next the disciples' answer is set forth, when he says, "Philip answered him," and first Philip's answer; second Andrew's answer, at the place, "One of his disciples says to him," etc. Now it should be known concerning the first, that Philip was, among the others, rather slow and untrained, and therefore among the others he questioned the Lord more frequently; below, John 14:8: "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us." But in the questioning of these two, as far as the letter is concerned, Andrew was better disposed than Philip, because Philip seems to have had no intention or disposition toward the miracle's being performed. And therefore he introduces that manner by which all those men could be fed, namely by money, saying, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them" — which we do not have, and therefore we cannot give them to eat. In which the poverty of Christ is suggested, who did not even have two hundred denarii. Andrew, however, seems to have regard to the miracle's being performed. For perhaps he had in memory the sign which Elisha had performed with barley loaves, when he fed a hundred men with twenty loaves, as is read in 4 Kings 4:42 and following, and therefore he says, "There is a boy here who has five barley loaves." But nevertheless he supposed that Christ would not perform a greater miracle than Elisha. For he reckoned that from fewer loaves fewer would be miraculously produced, and from more, more (although for him who does not need the underlying matter, it is equally easy to feed the crowds from more or from fewer), and therefore he adds, "But what are these among so many?" As if to say: even if they are multiplied as Elisha multiplied them, it is not sufficient. Mystically, spiritual refreshment is signified by wisdom. Now there is one wisdom, which Christ taught, who is true wisdom; 1 Corinthians 1:24: "Christ, the power of God and the wisdom of God." But before the coming of Christ there was a twofold teaching. One human, which the philosophers had; the other of the written law. Of the first, therefore, Philip makes mention, and therefore uses the term of buying, saying, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them." For human wisdom is possessed through acquisition. The number one hundred imports perfection. Hence two hundred suggests the twofold perfection necessary for this wisdom; for its perfection is arrived at by a twofold path: namely, by experience and by contemplation. He says therefore, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them," because whatever human reason can experience and think concerning truth is not sufficient for the perfect satiety of wisdom; Jeremiah 9:23: "Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, and let not the strong man glory in his strength, and let not the rich man glory in his riches; but let him who glories, glory in this, to know and understand me." For no philosopher's wisdom was so great that men could be recalled from error by it; rather they lead many into error. Of the second, however, Andrew makes mention; and therefore he did not wish that other loaves be bought, but that the crowd be fed from what was at hand, namely from those things which the law contained; hence he was better disposed than Philip; and therefore he says, "There is a boy here who has five barley loaves." This boy can be called Moses, on account of the imperfection of the state of the law: Hebrews 7:19: "The law brought no one to perfection"; or the people of the Jews, who served under the elements of the world, as is said in Galatians 4:3. This boy, therefore, has five loaves, that is, the teaching of the law: either because it is contained in the five books of Moses — above, John 1:17: "The law was given through Moses" — or because it was given to men occupied with sensible things, which are expressed by the five senses: and they are of barley, because the law itself was given so that in it the vital nourishment might be covered over by bodily sacraments — for the pith of barley is covered by a very clinging husk — or because the people of the Jews were not yet stripped of carnal desire, but clung to their hearts like husk: for in the Old Testament they experienced an outward hardness, on account of the ceremonial observances; Acts 15:10: "This is a burden which neither we, nor our fathers, were able to bear." And the Jews themselves, given over to bodily things, did not grasp the spiritual sense of the law; 2 Corinthians 3:15: "A veil is placed over their hearts." Now by the two fish, which gave a pleasant flavor to the bread, is understood the teaching of the Psalms and the prophets: and thus the Old Law had not only loaves, namely the five books of Moses, but also two fish, namely the prophets and the Psalms. Hence the Scripture of the Old Testament is divided into these three, Luke 24:44: "the things which are written in the Law and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning me." Or by the two fish, according to Augustine, two persons are signified: namely the royal and the priestly, by whom that people was ruled; which two persons, however, prefigured Christ, who was true king and priest. "But what are these among so many?" Because through these the human race could not be perfectly led to the knowledge of truth: for although God was known in Judea, the nations nevertheless did not know him. Next, when it says, "Jesus therefore said," the performance of the miracle is dealt with, and first the arrangement of the men is set forth; second their feeding, at the place, "Jesus therefore took the loaves," etc.; third the gathering of the fragments, at the place, "But when they were filled," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First the command concerning the arrangement of the crowds is set forth; second the opportuneness of the arrangement; and third the number of those arranged. Now the command was from the Lord to the disciples, that they should arrange the crowd for eating; hence Jesus says, "Make the men sit down," that is, sit down to eat. For, as was said above, II, in ancient times men used to dine reclining on couches, whence the custom grew up that those who sit down to eat are said to "recline." By which is mystically signified the rest which is necessary for the perfection of wisdom; Ecclesiasticus 38:25: "He who is diminished in activity will perfect wisdom." This arrangement is made through the disciples, because through them the knowledge of truth has been passed down to us; Psalm 71:3: "Let the mountains receive peace for the people." Now the opportuneness of the arrangement is drawn from the place: "now there was much grass in the place," which, according to the letter, is convenient for those reclining. Mystically, however, by the grass, flesh is signified, Isaiah 40:6: "All flesh is grass"; and according to this it can be referred to two things. It fits the teaching of the Old Testament, which was given to one resting in carnal things, and to a people wise in a carnal way; Isaiah 1:19: "If you be willing, and will hearken to me, you shall eat the good things of the land"; Deuteronomy 33:28: "The eye of Jacob upon a land of wheat, wine, and oil." Or it fits one who perceives true wisdom, to which one cannot come except by treading carnal things underfoot; Romans 12:2: "Do not be conformed to this age." Now the number was great; hence he says, "The men therefore sat down, in number about five thousand." The Evangelist numbers only the men, following the custom of the law, in which Moses numbered the people from twenty years old and upward, with no mention made of women, as is said in Numbers 1. This the Evangelist did for this reason, because these alone are capable of perfect teaching; 1 Corinthians 2:6: "We speak wisdom among the perfect"; Hebrews 5:14: "Solid food is for the perfect." Next, when he says, "Jesus therefore took the loaves," he deals with the feeding, and first the disposition of the one feeding is suggested; second the matter of the feeding; and third the perfect satiety. Now in the disposition of Jesus as he feeds them, first indeed his humility is noted; second, his giving of thanks. Humility indeed, because he took the loaves, and distributed them. And indeed Christ, about to perform the miracle, could have fed the crowds with loaves created out of nothing. But by dispensation he multiplied pre-existing loaves for the feeding of the crowds. First, indeed, that he might show that sensible things are not from the Devil, as the erring Manichees say. For if this were true, the Lord would not use sensible things for the work of divine praise, especially since he himself came "that he might destroy the works of the Devil," as is said in 1 John 3:8. Second, that he might show it to be false what they themselves say, namely that the teaching of the Old Testament is not from God, but from the Devil. Therefore, in order to show that the teaching of the New Testament is no other than that which was prefigured and contained in the teaching of the Old Testament, he multiplied the pre-existing loaves, indicating that it is he who perfects and fulfills the law; Matthew 5:17: "I have not come to destroy the law." Now the giving of thanks, because he gave thanks, so as to show that he has from another, namely from the Father, whatever he has: in which he shows us an example of doing likewise. He gave thanks especially, however, so as to give us an example that, when we begin a meal, we ought to give thanks to God; 1 Timothy 4:4: "Nothing is to be rejected which is received with the giving of thanks"; Psalm 21:27: "The poor shall eat, and shall be filled, and they shall praise the Lord." Likewise, that he might show that he was not praying for his own sake, but for the sake of the crowd, which was present, and it was necessary to persuade them that he had come from God. And therefore, when he performs a miracle before many, he prays, so as to show that he is not contrary to God, but works according to his will. It is said, however, in Mark, that Christ distributed the loaves to the crowds through the apostles. But here it is said that he himself distributed them, because he is seen to have done what he did through others. But both, according to the mystery, are true, because he alone refreshes inwardly, and others refresh outwardly and as ministers. Now the matter of the refreshment was bread and fish, concerning which enough has been said above. The satiety of the refreshment, however, was perfect, because they had "as much as they wanted." For Christ alone is he who feeds the empty soul, and fills the hungry soul with good things; Psalm 16:15: "I shall be satisfied when your glory shall appear." Others, however, as having grace by measure, perform miracles; but Christ, by absolute power, worked all things with great overabundance: hence it is said that "they were filled." Next, when he says, "But when they were filled, he said to his disciples," etc., the gathering of the fragments is dealt with, and first the Lord's command is set forth; second the disciples' execution of it, at the place, "They gathered therefore," etc. He says therefore, "But when they were filled, he said to his disciples: Gather up the fragments that remain." This indeed the Lord did not do for superfluous ostentation, but so as to show that the miracle performed was not illusory, through the fact that the remains, once gathered, were kept for a long time, and served as food for others. He also wished by this that that miracle should cling more firmly to the hearts of the disciples, whom he also commanded to carry the fragments; since he wished especially to instruct those who were to be the teachers of the whole world. But the disciples faithfully carry it out; hence it follows, "They gathered therefore," etc. Here it should be noted that the remains left over were not just any amount, nor by chance, but according to a fixed measure: because he made neither more nor less, but as much as he willed, to be superfluous. A sign of this is that each apostle's basket was full. Now a basket is a vessel assigned to rustic service. The twelve baskets, therefore, signify the twelve apostles and their imitators, who, although in the present they are held in contempt, are nevertheless inwardly filled with the riches of the spiritual sacraments: and they are said to be twelve, because the faith of the Holy Trinity was to be preached by them in the four parts of the world.”

“Having set forth the teaching on the spiritual life by which Christ gives life to those who have been regenerated, the Evangelist consequently deals with the spiritual nourishment by which Christ sustains those he has given life to; and first he sets forth the visible miracle which Christ performed by providing bodily nourishment; second he deals with spiritual nourishment, at the place, "Jesus answered them and said: Amen, amen, I say to you, you seek me, not because..." etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he sets forth the visible miracle of bodily nourishment; second he shows the effect of the miracle, at the place, "Those men therefore, when they had seen..." etc. Concerning the miracle he sets forth two things: namely its circumstances, and its performance, at the place, "And when Jesus had lifted up his eyes..." Concerning the first he does three things. First he describes the multitude which he fed; second he determines the place where he fed them, at the place, "Jesus therefore went up into the mountain"; third the time when he fed them, at the place, "Now the Passover was near," etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First he determines the place to which the multitude follows him; second, the crowd following; third he assigns the cause of their following. Now as to where the crowd followed the Lord, the Evangelist indicates this when he says, "After these things Jesus went away across the sea of Galilee"; that is, after the mystical words which the Lord had spoken concerning his power. Now this sea of Galilee is frequently named in Scripture, and in different places. But because this sea is not salty, but is a certain gathering of waters from the inflow of the Jordan, it is therefore called a lake by Luke, as is found in Luke 5:1; but because, according to the property of the Hebrew idiom, all gatherings of waters are called seas, according to that text of Genesis 1:10, "and the gatherings of waters he called seas," it is therefore called a sea. But it is surnamed Gennesareth from the nature of the place: for it is much agitated by the buffeting of winds, which are generated from the very evaporations of the water; hence Gennesareth in Greek is the same as "generating a breeze." It is also named "of Galilee" from the province of Galilee, in which it is. But "of Tiberias" from the city so called, which was on one side of this sea, having opposite it the city of Capernaum on the other side; which city was formerly called Zenereth, but was afterward restored by Herod the tetrarch in honor of Tiberius Caesar, and was called Tiberias. Now the literal reason why Jesus went away across the sea is assigned by Chrysostom: that Christ might yield to the fury and disturbance of the Jews, which they had conceived against Christ on account of the things he had said above concerning himself. Hence, as he himself says, just as missiles, when they strike against something hard, strike more heavily, but those which have nothing to meet them, once launched, are quickly spent and come to rest; so too, when we advance impetuously and by resisting against bold men, they rage the more; but if we yield to them, we easily soften their madness. For this reason Christ, by withdrawing across the sea, mitigated the fury of the Jews that had arisen from his foregoing words, giving us in this an example of doing likewise. Ecclesiasticus 8:14: "Do not stand against the face of an insolent man." Mystically, however, by the sea, the present turbulent world is signified; Psalm 103:25: "This sea, great and wide of hands." The Lord crossed this sea when he took on the sea of mortality and of penalty by being born, trod it underfoot by dying, and, crossing over by rising, arrived at the glory of the resurrection. Concerning this passing-over it is said below, John 13:1: "Jesus knowing that his hour had come, that he should pass from this world to the Father." As he passed over, great crowds followed him, by believing and by imitating, gathered from both peoples; Isaiah 60:5: "Then your heart shall wonder and be enlarged, when the multitude of the sea shall be turned to you"; Psalm 7:7: "Arise, O Lord, in the command which you have commanded, and the assembly of peoples shall surround you." The following crowd is described therefore as abundant, because "a great multitude followed him." Now the cause on account of which they followed was the working of miracles; hence he says, "because they saw the signs which he performed upon those who were sick." It should be known that some followed him on account of his teaching, namely those who were better disposed; but others, more imperfect, followed him out of admiration for the visible signs, being of a coarser mind. For signs, as is said in 1 Corinthians 14:22, "are not given to believers, but to unbelievers." Some also followed him out of devotion and faith, namely those whom he had healed in body: for they were healed by the Lord in body in such a way that they were also perfectly healed in soul; Deuteronomy 32:4: "The works of God are perfect." And this is clear, because to the paralytic (above, 8:11) he said pointedly: "Go, and sin no more"; and Matthew 9:2: "Son, your sins are forgiven you"; words which pertain more to the health of the soul than of the body. Now it should be noted that, whereas the Evangelist has made mention only of three miracles, namely of the wedding, of the ruler's son, and of the paralytic, here nevertheless he speaks indefinitely of "the signs which he was performing," so as to give one to understand that Christ performed many other signs, as is said below, at the end, of which he makes no mention in this book. For he intended especially to make known the teaching of Christ. Next he determines the place of the miracle, which is the mountain; hence he says, "He therefore went up into the mountain," that is, Jesus ascended privately, "and there he sat with his disciples." And indeed the mountain is a quite fitting place for a refreshment: for by the mountain is signified the perfection of justice, according to that text of Psalm 35:7: "Your justice is like the mountains of God." Since, therefore, these earthly things do not satisfy — indeed "whoever drinks of this water will thirst again," as is said above, II, 13 — but spiritual things do satisfy; therefore the Lord ascended to higher things with his disciples, to show that satiety is found in spiritual things, and the perfection of justice: concerning which mountain it is said in Psalm 67:16: "A mountain of God, a fat mountain." Hence there too he exercised the office of teacher, sitting with his disciples: for he it is who teaches every man knowledge. Next the time is described, when he says, "Now the Passover was near," which time indeed befits a refreshment. For Passover is interpreted as "passing-over": Exodus 12:11: "For it is the Phase, that is, the passing-over of the Lord," so as to give one to understand that whoever desires to be refreshed with the bread of the divine Word and the body and blood of the Lord must pass over from vices to virtues. 1 Corinthians 5:7: "Christ our Passover is sacrificed; therefore let us feast on the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth." Ecclesiasticus 24:26, divine Wisdom says: "Pass over to me, all you who desire me." Now this is the second Passover of which the Evangelist makes mention: to which, indeed, according to the precept of the law, which is found in Exodus 23:17, the Lord did not go up to Jerusalem. The reason for this is that Christ was God and man: and inasmuch as man he was indeed subject to the law; inasmuch as God he was above the law. Therefore, that he might show himself to be man, he sometimes kept the law; but that he might show himself to be God, he set the law aside. Hence also, by the fact that he did not go, he gave one to understand that the observances of the law would little by little, and shortly, cease. Next he deals with the performance of the miracle, when he says, "When Jesus therefore had lifted up his eyes, and had seen," etc.; and first the necessity of performing the miracle is shown; second the performance itself is added, at the place, "Jesus therefore says: Make the men sit down," etc. Now the necessity of the miracle's being performed is taken from the Lord's question and the disciples' answer; and therefore first the Lord's question is set forth; second the disciples' answer, at the place, "Philip answered him," etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First the occasion for questioning is set forth; second Christ's question is added; and third the intention of the one questioning is disclosed. Now the occasion for questioning was the sight of the multitude coming to Christ. And therefore he says, "When Jesus had lifted up his eyes," being on the mountain with his disciples as with those who were more perfect, "and had seen," etc. In which two things are to be considered concerning the Lord. One, that we may learn the maturity of Christ, who did not raise his eyes here and there, but sat modestly and attentively with his disciples: contrary to which it is said in Proverbs 30:13: "A generation whose eyes are lofty, and whose eyelids are lifted up on high"; and Ecclesiasticus 19:26: "A man is known by his look." The second, that we may learn that he did not sit idly with his disciples either; but, teaching them attentively, and turning their hearts to himself, he looked upon the disciples whom he was teaching; Luke 6:20: "And he, lifting up his eyes upon his disciples, said," etc. And therefore it is said, "When Jesus had lifted up his eyes," etc. Mystically, however, the eyes of the Lord are the spiritual gifts which, when he mercifully grants them to his elect, then he lifts up his eyes upon them, that is, he bestows a look of loving-kindness. This is what Psalm 85:16 asked, saying: "Look upon me, O Lord, and have mercy on me." Now the question concerns the feeding of the multitude; hence he said to Philip: "Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat?" He presupposes one thing, and asks about another. He presupposes indeed their want, because they did not have the means to provide food for so great a multitude; but he asks the manner of finding it, when he says, "Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat?" Here it should be noted that every teacher must spiritually feed the crowd that comes to him. And because no man has of himself the means to feed it, he must therefore buy it from elsewhere, by labor, by study, by assiduity in prayers; Isaiah 55:1: "You who have no money, make haste, buy, without any exchange, wine and milk." And again: "Why do you weigh out your money" — that is, your eloquence — "and not for bread" — that is, not for true wisdom, which refreshes (Ecclesiasticus 15:5: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding") — "and your labor not unto fullness," by learning things that do not satisfy, but rather empty out? Now the intention of the one questioning is disclosed when he says, "But this he said trying him," etc. Here the Evangelist, excluding one doubt, leads into another. For it could have been doubted that the Lord questioned Philip as though he were ignorant; but he excludes this, saying, "for he himself knew what he would do." But since to try someone seems also to belong to one who is ignorant, since it is the same as taking a trial of something, it seems that the Evangelist introduces another doubt when he says, "trying him." But it must be said that one person tries another in different ways, so as to take a trial of him: for a man tries in one way, in order to learn; the Devil in another way, in order to deceive; 1 Peter 5:8: "Your adversary the Devil, as a roaring lion, goes about seeking whom he may devour." But God, and Christ, indeed try not in order to learn, since he it is who searches hearts and minds; nor in order to deceive, since "he tries no one," as is said in James 1:13; but he tries in order to give to others a trial-proof of the one tried. Thus God tried Abraham; Genesis 22:1: "God tried Abraham," etc., and it follows: "Now I know that you fear the Lord" — that is, I have made it known that you fear the Lord. Thus from this he tries Philip in order that he might make known to others his answer, leading them thereby into the most certain knowledge of the sign to come. Next the disciples' answer is set forth, when he says, "Philip answered him," and first Philip's answer; second Andrew's answer, at the place, "One of his disciples says to him," etc. Now it should be known concerning the first, that Philip was, among the others, rather slow and untrained, and therefore among the others he questioned the Lord more frequently; below, John 14:8: "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us." But in the questioning of these two, as far as the letter is concerned, Andrew was better disposed than Philip, because Philip seems to have had no intention or disposition toward the miracle's being performed. And therefore he introduces that manner by which all those men could be fed, namely by money, saying, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them" — which we do not have, and therefore we cannot give them to eat. In which the poverty of Christ is suggested, who did not even have two hundred denarii. Andrew, however, seems to have regard to the miracle's being performed. For perhaps he had in memory the sign which Elisha had performed with barley loaves, when he fed a hundred men with twenty loaves, as is read in 4 Kings 4:42 and following, and therefore he says, "There is a boy here who has five barley loaves." But nevertheless he supposed that Christ would not perform a greater miracle than Elisha. For he reckoned that from fewer loaves fewer would be miraculously produced, and from more, more (although for him who does not need the underlying matter, it is equally easy to feed the crowds from more or from fewer), and therefore he adds, "But what are these among so many?" As if to say: even if they are multiplied as Elisha multiplied them, it is not sufficient. Mystically, spiritual refreshment is signified by wisdom. Now there is one wisdom, which Christ taught, who is true wisdom; 1 Corinthians 1:24: "Christ, the power of God and the wisdom of God." But before the coming of Christ there was a twofold teaching. One human, which the philosophers had; the other of the written law. Of the first, therefore, Philip makes mention, and therefore uses the term of buying, saying, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them." For human wisdom is possessed through acquisition. The number one hundred imports perfection. Hence two hundred suggests the twofold perfection necessary for this wisdom; for its perfection is arrived at by a twofold path: namely, by experience and by contemplation. He says therefore, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them," because whatever human reason can experience and think concerning truth is not sufficient for the perfect satiety of wisdom; Jeremiah 9:23: "Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, and let not the strong man glory in his strength, and let not the rich man glory in his riches; but let him who glories, glory in this, to know and understand me." For no philosopher's wisdom was so great that men could be recalled from error by it; rather they lead many into error. Of the second, however, Andrew makes mention; and therefore he did not wish that other loaves be bought, but that the crowd be fed from what was at hand, namely from those things which the law contained; hence he was better disposed than Philip; and therefore he says, "There is a boy here who has five barley loaves." This boy can be called Moses, on account of the imperfection of the state of the law: Hebrews 7:19: "The law brought no one to perfection"; or the people of the Jews, who served under the elements of the world, as is said in Galatians 4:3. This boy, therefore, has five loaves, that is, the teaching of the law: either because it is contained in the five books of Moses — above, John 1:17: "The law was given through Moses" — or because it was given to men occupied with sensible things, which are expressed by the five senses: and they are of barley, because the law itself was given so that in it the vital nourishment might be covered over by bodily sacraments — for the pith of barley is covered by a very clinging husk — or because the people of the Jews were not yet stripped of carnal desire, but clung to their hearts like husk: for in the Old Testament they experienced an outward hardness, on account of the ceremonial observances; Acts 15:10: "This is a burden which neither we, nor our fathers, were able to bear." And the Jews themselves, given over to bodily things, did not grasp the spiritual sense of the law; 2 Corinthians 3:15: "A veil is placed over their hearts." Now by the two fish, which gave a pleasant flavor to the bread, is understood the teaching of the Psalms and the prophets: and thus the Old Law had not only loaves, namely the five books of Moses, but also two fish, namely the prophets and the Psalms. Hence the Scripture of the Old Testament is divided into these three, Luke 24:44: "the things which are written in the Law and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning me." Or by the two fish, according to Augustine, two persons are signified: namely the royal and the priestly, by whom that people was ruled; which two persons, however, prefigured Christ, who was true king and priest. "But what are these among so many?" Because through these the human race could not be perfectly led to the knowledge of truth: for although God was known in Judea, the nations nevertheless did not know him. Next, when it says, "Jesus therefore said," the performance of the miracle is dealt with, and first the arrangement of the men is set forth; second their feeding, at the place, "Jesus therefore took the loaves," etc.; third the gathering of the fragments, at the place, "But when they were filled," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First the command concerning the arrangement of the crowds is set forth; second the opportuneness of the arrangement; and third the number of those arranged. Now the command was from the Lord to the disciples, that they should arrange the crowd for eating; hence Jesus says, "Make the men sit down," that is, sit down to eat. For, as was said above, II, in ancient times men used to dine reclining on couches, whence the custom grew up that those who sit down to eat are said to "recline." By which is mystically signified the rest which is necessary for the perfection of wisdom; Ecclesiasticus 38:25: "He who is diminished in activity will perfect wisdom." This arrangement is made through the disciples, because through them the knowledge of truth has been passed down to us; Psalm 71:3: "Let the mountains receive peace for the people." Now the opportuneness of the arrangement is drawn from the place: "now there was much grass in the place," which, according to the letter, is convenient for those reclining. Mystically, however, by the grass, flesh is signified, Isaiah 40:6: "All flesh is grass"; and according to this it can be referred to two things. It fits the teaching of the Old Testament, which was given to one resting in carnal things, and to a people wise in a carnal way; Isaiah 1:19: "If you be willing, and will hearken to me, you shall eat the good things of the land"; Deuteronomy 33:28: "The eye of Jacob upon a land of wheat, wine, and oil." Or it fits one who perceives true wisdom, to which one cannot come except by treading carnal things underfoot; Romans 12:2: "Do not be conformed to this age." Now the number was great; hence he says, "The men therefore sat down, in number about five thousand." The Evangelist numbers only the men, following the custom of the law, in which Moses numbered the people from twenty years old and upward, with no mention made of women, as is said in Numbers 1. This the Evangelist did for this reason, because these alone are capable of perfect teaching; 1 Corinthians 2:6: "We speak wisdom among the perfect"; Hebrews 5:14: "Solid food is for the perfect." Next, when he says, "Jesus therefore took the loaves," he deals with the feeding, and first the disposition of the one feeding is suggested; second the matter of the feeding; and third the perfect satiety. Now in the disposition of Jesus as he feeds them, first indeed his humility is noted; second, his giving of thanks. Humility indeed, because he took the loaves, and distributed them. And indeed Christ, about to perform the miracle, could have fed the crowds with loaves created out of nothing. But by dispensation he multiplied pre-existing loaves for the feeding of the crowds. First, indeed, that he might show that sensible things are not from the Devil, as the erring Manichees say. For if this were true, the Lord would not use sensible things for the work of divine praise, especially since he himself came "that he might destroy the works of the Devil," as is said in 1 John 3:8. Second, that he might show it to be false what they themselves say, namely that the teaching of the Old Testament is not from God, but from the Devil. Therefore, in order to show that the teaching of the New Testament is no other than that which was prefigured and contained in the teaching of the Old Testament, he multiplied the pre-existing loaves, indicating that it is he who perfects and fulfills the law; Matthew 5:17: "I have not come to destroy the law." Now the giving of thanks, because he gave thanks, so as to show that he has from another, namely from the Father, whatever he has: in which he shows us an example of doing likewise. He gave thanks especially, however, so as to give us an example that, when we begin a meal, we ought to give thanks to God; 1 Timothy 4:4: "Nothing is to be rejected which is received with the giving of thanks"; Psalm 21:27: "The poor shall eat, and shall be filled, and they shall praise the Lord." Likewise, that he might show that he was not praying for his own sake, but for the sake of the crowd, which was present, and it was necessary to persuade them that he had come from God. And therefore, when he performs a miracle before many, he prays, so as to show that he is not contrary to God, but works according to his will. It is said, however, in Mark, that Christ distributed the loaves to the crowds through the apostles. But here it is said that he himself distributed them, because he is seen to have done what he did through others. But both, according to the mystery, are true, because he alone refreshes inwardly, and others refresh outwardly and as ministers. Now the matter of the refreshment was bread and fish, concerning which enough has been said above. The satiety of the refreshment, however, was perfect, because they had "as much as they wanted." For Christ alone is he who feeds the empty soul, and fills the hungry soul with good things; Psalm 16:15: "I shall be satisfied when your glory shall appear." Others, however, as having grace by measure, perform miracles; but Christ, by absolute power, worked all things with great overabundance: hence it is said that "they were filled." Next, when he says, "But when they were filled, he said to his disciples," etc., the gathering of the fragments is dealt with, and first the Lord's command is set forth; second the disciples' execution of it, at the place, "They gathered therefore," etc. He says therefore, "But when they were filled, he said to his disciples: Gather up the fragments that remain." This indeed the Lord did not do for superfluous ostentation, but so as to show that the miracle performed was not illusory, through the fact that the remains, once gathered, were kept for a long time, and served as food for others. He also wished by this that that miracle should cling more firmly to the hearts of the disciples, whom he also commanded to carry the fragments; since he wished especially to instruct those who were to be the teachers of the whole world. But the disciples faithfully carry it out; hence it follows, "They gathered therefore," etc. Here it should be noted that the remains left over were not just any amount, nor by chance, but according to a fixed measure: because he made neither more nor less, but as much as he willed, to be superfluous. A sign of this is that each apostle's basket was full. Now a basket is a vessel assigned to rustic service. The twelve baskets, therefore, signify the twelve apostles and their imitators, who, although in the present they are held in contempt, are nevertheless inwardly filled with the riches of the spiritual sacraments: and they are said to be twelve, because the faith of the Holy Trinity was to be preached by them in the four parts of the world.”

“Having set forth the teaching on the spiritual life by which Christ gives life to those who have been regenerated, the Evangelist consequently deals with the spiritual nourishment by which Christ sustains those he has given life to; and first he sets forth the visible miracle which Christ performed by providing bodily nourishment; second he deals with spiritual nourishment, at the place, "Jesus answered them and said: Amen, amen, I say to you, you seek me, not because..." etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he sets forth the visible miracle of bodily nourishment; second he shows the effect of the miracle, at the place, "Those men therefore, when they had seen..." etc. Concerning the miracle he sets forth two things: namely its circumstances, and its performance, at the place, "And when Jesus had lifted up his eyes..." Concerning the first he does three things. First he describes the multitude which he fed; second he determines the place where he fed them, at the place, "Jesus therefore went up into the mountain"; third the time when he fed them, at the place, "Now the Passover was near," etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First he determines the place to which the multitude follows him; second, the crowd following; third he assigns the cause of their following. Now as to where the crowd followed the Lord, the Evangelist indicates this when he says, "After these things Jesus went away across the sea of Galilee"; that is, after the mystical words which the Lord had spoken concerning his power. Now this sea of Galilee is frequently named in Scripture, and in different places. But because this sea is not salty, but is a certain gathering of waters from the inflow of the Jordan, it is therefore called a lake by Luke, as is found in Luke 5:1; but because, according to the property of the Hebrew idiom, all gatherings of waters are called seas, according to that text of Genesis 1:10, "and the gatherings of waters he called seas," it is therefore called a sea. But it is surnamed Gennesareth from the nature of the place: for it is much agitated by the buffeting of winds, which are generated from the very evaporations of the water; hence Gennesareth in Greek is the same as "generating a breeze." It is also named "of Galilee" from the province of Galilee, in which it is. But "of Tiberias" from the city so called, which was on one side of this sea, having opposite it the city of Capernaum on the other side; which city was formerly called Zenereth, but was afterward restored by Herod the tetrarch in honor of Tiberius Caesar, and was called Tiberias. Now the literal reason why Jesus went away across the sea is assigned by Chrysostom: that Christ might yield to the fury and disturbance of the Jews, which they had conceived against Christ on account of the things he had said above concerning himself. Hence, as he himself says, just as missiles, when they strike against something hard, strike more heavily, but those which have nothing to meet them, once launched, are quickly spent and come to rest; so too, when we advance impetuously and by resisting against bold men, they rage the more; but if we yield to them, we easily soften their madness. For this reason Christ, by withdrawing across the sea, mitigated the fury of the Jews that had arisen from his foregoing words, giving us in this an example of doing likewise. Ecclesiasticus 8:14: "Do not stand against the face of an insolent man." Mystically, however, by the sea, the present turbulent world is signified; Psalm 103:25: "This sea, great and wide of hands." The Lord crossed this sea when he took on the sea of mortality and of penalty by being born, trod it underfoot by dying, and, crossing over by rising, arrived at the glory of the resurrection. Concerning this passing-over it is said below, John 13:1: "Jesus knowing that his hour had come, that he should pass from this world to the Father." As he passed over, great crowds followed him, by believing and by imitating, gathered from both peoples; Isaiah 60:5: "Then your heart shall wonder and be enlarged, when the multitude of the sea shall be turned to you"; Psalm 7:7: "Arise, O Lord, in the command which you have commanded, and the assembly of peoples shall surround you." The following crowd is described therefore as abundant, because "a great multitude followed him." Now the cause on account of which they followed was the working of miracles; hence he says, "because they saw the signs which he performed upon those who were sick." It should be known that some followed him on account of his teaching, namely those who were better disposed; but others, more imperfect, followed him out of admiration for the visible signs, being of a coarser mind. For signs, as is said in 1 Corinthians 14:22, "are not given to believers, but to unbelievers." Some also followed him out of devotion and faith, namely those whom he had healed in body: for they were healed by the Lord in body in such a way that they were also perfectly healed in soul; Deuteronomy 32:4: "The works of God are perfect." And this is clear, because to the paralytic (above, 8:11) he said pointedly: "Go, and sin no more"; and Matthew 9:2: "Son, your sins are forgiven you"; words which pertain more to the health of the soul than of the body. Now it should be noted that, whereas the Evangelist has made mention only of three miracles, namely of the wedding, of the ruler's son, and of the paralytic, here nevertheless he speaks indefinitely of "the signs which he was performing," so as to give one to understand that Christ performed many other signs, as is said below, at the end, of which he makes no mention in this book. For he intended especially to make known the teaching of Christ. Next he determines the place of the miracle, which is the mountain; hence he says, "He therefore went up into the mountain," that is, Jesus ascended privately, "and there he sat with his disciples." And indeed the mountain is a quite fitting place for a refreshment: for by the mountain is signified the perfection of justice, according to that text of Psalm 35:7: "Your justice is like the mountains of God." Since, therefore, these earthly things do not satisfy — indeed "whoever drinks of this water will thirst again," as is said above, II, 13 — but spiritual things do satisfy; therefore the Lord ascended to higher things with his disciples, to show that satiety is found in spiritual things, and the perfection of justice: concerning which mountain it is said in Psalm 67:16: "A mountain of God, a fat mountain." Hence there too he exercised the office of teacher, sitting with his disciples: for he it is who teaches every man knowledge. Next the time is described, when he says, "Now the Passover was near," which time indeed befits a refreshment. For Passover is interpreted as "passing-over": Exodus 12:11: "For it is the Phase, that is, the passing-over of the Lord," so as to give one to understand that whoever desires to be refreshed with the bread of the divine Word and the body and blood of the Lord must pass over from vices to virtues. 1 Corinthians 5:7: "Christ our Passover is sacrificed; therefore let us feast on the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth." Ecclesiasticus 24:26, divine Wisdom says: "Pass over to me, all you who desire me." Now this is the second Passover of which the Evangelist makes mention: to which, indeed, according to the precept of the law, which is found in Exodus 23:17, the Lord did not go up to Jerusalem. The reason for this is that Christ was God and man: and inasmuch as man he was indeed subject to the law; inasmuch as God he was above the law. Therefore, that he might show himself to be man, he sometimes kept the law; but that he might show himself to be God, he set the law aside. Hence also, by the fact that he did not go, he gave one to understand that the observances of the law would little by little, and shortly, cease. Next he deals with the performance of the miracle, when he says, "When Jesus therefore had lifted up his eyes, and had seen," etc.; and first the necessity of performing the miracle is shown; second the performance itself is added, at the place, "Jesus therefore says: Make the men sit down," etc. Now the necessity of the miracle's being performed is taken from the Lord's question and the disciples' answer; and therefore first the Lord's question is set forth; second the disciples' answer, at the place, "Philip answered him," etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First the occasion for questioning is set forth; second Christ's question is added; and third the intention of the one questioning is disclosed. Now the occasion for questioning was the sight of the multitude coming to Christ. And therefore he says, "When Jesus had lifted up his eyes," being on the mountain with his disciples as with those who were more perfect, "and had seen," etc. In which two things are to be considered concerning the Lord. One, that we may learn the maturity of Christ, who did not raise his eyes here and there, but sat modestly and attentively with his disciples: contrary to which it is said in Proverbs 30:13: "A generation whose eyes are lofty, and whose eyelids are lifted up on high"; and Ecclesiasticus 19:26: "A man is known by his look." The second, that we may learn that he did not sit idly with his disciples either; but, teaching them attentively, and turning their hearts to himself, he looked upon the disciples whom he was teaching; Luke 6:20: "And he, lifting up his eyes upon his disciples, said," etc. And therefore it is said, "When Jesus had lifted up his eyes," etc. Mystically, however, the eyes of the Lord are the spiritual gifts which, when he mercifully grants them to his elect, then he lifts up his eyes upon them, that is, he bestows a look of loving-kindness. This is what Psalm 85:16 asked, saying: "Look upon me, O Lord, and have mercy on me." Now the question concerns the feeding of the multitude; hence he said to Philip: "Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat?" He presupposes one thing, and asks about another. He presupposes indeed their want, because they did not have the means to provide food for so great a multitude; but he asks the manner of finding it, when he says, "Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat?" Here it should be noted that every teacher must spiritually feed the crowd that comes to him. And because no man has of himself the means to feed it, he must therefore buy it from elsewhere, by labor, by study, by assiduity in prayers; Isaiah 55:1: "You who have no money, make haste, buy, without any exchange, wine and milk." And again: "Why do you weigh out your money" — that is, your eloquence — "and not for bread" — that is, not for true wisdom, which refreshes (Ecclesiasticus 15:5: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding") — "and your labor not unto fullness," by learning things that do not satisfy, but rather empty out? Now the intention of the one questioning is disclosed when he says, "But this he said trying him," etc. Here the Evangelist, excluding one doubt, leads into another. For it could have been doubted that the Lord questioned Philip as though he were ignorant; but he excludes this, saying, "for he himself knew what he would do." But since to try someone seems also to belong to one who is ignorant, since it is the same as taking a trial of something, it seems that the Evangelist introduces another doubt when he says, "trying him." But it must be said that one person tries another in different ways, so as to take a trial of him: for a man tries in one way, in order to learn; the Devil in another way, in order to deceive; 1 Peter 5:8: "Your adversary the Devil, as a roaring lion, goes about seeking whom he may devour." But God, and Christ, indeed try not in order to learn, since he it is who searches hearts and minds; nor in order to deceive, since "he tries no one," as is said in James 1:13; but he tries in order to give to others a trial-proof of the one tried. Thus God tried Abraham; Genesis 22:1: "God tried Abraham," etc., and it follows: "Now I know that you fear the Lord" — that is, I have made it known that you fear the Lord. Thus from this he tries Philip in order that he might make known to others his answer, leading them thereby into the most certain knowledge of the sign to come. Next the disciples' answer is set forth, when he says, "Philip answered him," and first Philip's answer; second Andrew's answer, at the place, "One of his disciples says to him," etc. Now it should be known concerning the first, that Philip was, among the others, rather slow and untrained, and therefore among the others he questioned the Lord more frequently; below, John 14:8: "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us." But in the questioning of these two, as far as the letter is concerned, Andrew was better disposed than Philip, because Philip seems to have had no intention or disposition toward the miracle's being performed. And therefore he introduces that manner by which all those men could be fed, namely by money, saying, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them" — which we do not have, and therefore we cannot give them to eat. In which the poverty of Christ is suggested, who did not even have two hundred denarii. Andrew, however, seems to have regard to the miracle's being performed. For perhaps he had in memory the sign which Elisha had performed with barley loaves, when he fed a hundred men with twenty loaves, as is read in 4 Kings 4:42 and following, and therefore he says, "There is a boy here who has five barley loaves." But nevertheless he supposed that Christ would not perform a greater miracle than Elisha. For he reckoned that from fewer loaves fewer would be miraculously produced, and from more, more (although for him who does not need the underlying matter, it is equally easy to feed the crowds from more or from fewer), and therefore he adds, "But what are these among so many?" As if to say: even if they are multiplied as Elisha multiplied them, it is not sufficient. Mystically, spiritual refreshment is signified by wisdom. Now there is one wisdom, which Christ taught, who is true wisdom; 1 Corinthians 1:24: "Christ, the power of God and the wisdom of God." But before the coming of Christ there was a twofold teaching. One human, which the philosophers had; the other of the written law. Of the first, therefore, Philip makes mention, and therefore uses the term of buying, saying, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them." For human wisdom is possessed through acquisition. The number one hundred imports perfection. Hence two hundred suggests the twofold perfection necessary for this wisdom; for its perfection is arrived at by a twofold path: namely, by experience and by contemplation. He says therefore, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them," because whatever human reason can experience and think concerning truth is not sufficient for the perfect satiety of wisdom; Jeremiah 9:23: "Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, and let not the strong man glory in his strength, and let not the rich man glory in his riches; but let him who glories, glory in this, to know and understand me." For no philosopher's wisdom was so great that men could be recalled from error by it; rather they lead many into error. Of the second, however, Andrew makes mention; and therefore he did not wish that other loaves be bought, but that the crowd be fed from what was at hand, namely from those things which the law contained; hence he was better disposed than Philip; and therefore he says, "There is a boy here who has five barley loaves." This boy can be called Moses, on account of the imperfection of the state of the law: Hebrews 7:19: "The law brought no one to perfection"; or the people of the Jews, who served under the elements of the world, as is said in Galatians 4:3. This boy, therefore, has five loaves, that is, the teaching of the law: either because it is contained in the five books of Moses — above, John 1:17: "The law was given through Moses" — or because it was given to men occupied with sensible things, which are expressed by the five senses: and they are of barley, because the law itself was given so that in it the vital nourishment might be covered over by bodily sacraments — for the pith of barley is covered by a very clinging husk — or because the people of the Jews were not yet stripped of carnal desire, but clung to their hearts like husk: for in the Old Testament they experienced an outward hardness, on account of the ceremonial observances; Acts 15:10: "This is a burden which neither we, nor our fathers, were able to bear." And the Jews themselves, given over to bodily things, did not grasp the spiritual sense of the law; 2 Corinthians 3:15: "A veil is placed over their hearts." Now by the two fish, which gave a pleasant flavor to the bread, is understood the teaching of the Psalms and the prophets: and thus the Old Law had not only loaves, namely the five books of Moses, but also two fish, namely the prophets and the Psalms. Hence the Scripture of the Old Testament is divided into these three, Luke 24:44: "the things which are written in the Law and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning me." Or by the two fish, according to Augustine, two persons are signified: namely the royal and the priestly, by whom that people was ruled; which two persons, however, prefigured Christ, who was true king and priest. "But what are these among so many?" Because through these the human race could not be perfectly led to the knowledge of truth: for although God was known in Judea, the nations nevertheless did not know him. Next, when it says, "Jesus therefore said," the performance of the miracle is dealt with, and first the arrangement of the men is set forth; second their feeding, at the place, "Jesus therefore took the loaves," etc.; third the gathering of the fragments, at the place, "But when they were filled," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First the command concerning the arrangement of the crowds is set forth; second the opportuneness of the arrangement; and third the number of those arranged. Now the command was from the Lord to the disciples, that they should arrange the crowd for eating; hence Jesus says, "Make the men sit down," that is, sit down to eat. For, as was said above, II, in ancient times men used to dine reclining on couches, whence the custom grew up that those who sit down to eat are said to "recline." By which is mystically signified the rest which is necessary for the perfection of wisdom; Ecclesiasticus 38:25: "He who is diminished in activity will perfect wisdom." This arrangement is made through the disciples, because through them the knowledge of truth has been passed down to us; Psalm 71:3: "Let the mountains receive peace for the people." Now the opportuneness of the arrangement is drawn from the place: "now there was much grass in the place," which, according to the letter, is convenient for those reclining. Mystically, however, by the grass, flesh is signified, Isaiah 40:6: "All flesh is grass"; and according to this it can be referred to two things. It fits the teaching of the Old Testament, which was given to one resting in carnal things, and to a people wise in a carnal way; Isaiah 1:19: "If you be willing, and will hearken to me, you shall eat the good things of the land"; Deuteronomy 33:28: "The eye of Jacob upon a land of wheat, wine, and oil." Or it fits one who perceives true wisdom, to which one cannot come except by treading carnal things underfoot; Romans 12:2: "Do not be conformed to this age." Now the number was great; hence he says, "The men therefore sat down, in number about five thousand." The Evangelist numbers only the men, following the custom of the law, in which Moses numbered the people from twenty years old and upward, with no mention made of women, as is said in Numbers 1. This the Evangelist did for this reason, because these alone are capable of perfect teaching; 1 Corinthians 2:6: "We speak wisdom among the perfect"; Hebrews 5:14: "Solid food is for the perfect." Next, when he says, "Jesus therefore took the loaves," he deals with the feeding, and first the disposition of the one feeding is suggested; second the matter of the feeding; and third the perfect satiety. Now in the disposition of Jesus as he feeds them, first indeed his humility is noted; second, his giving of thanks. Humility indeed, because he took the loaves, and distributed them. And indeed Christ, about to perform the miracle, could have fed the crowds with loaves created out of nothing. But by dispensation he multiplied pre-existing loaves for the feeding of the crowds. First, indeed, that he might show that sensible things are not from the Devil, as the erring Manichees say. For if this were true, the Lord would not use sensible things for the work of divine praise, especially since he himself came "that he might destroy the works of the Devil," as is said in 1 John 3:8. Second, that he might show it to be false what they themselves say, namely that the teaching of the Old Testament is not from God, but from the Devil. Therefore, in order to show that the teaching of the New Testament is no other than that which was prefigured and contained in the teaching of the Old Testament, he multiplied the pre-existing loaves, indicating that it is he who perfects and fulfills the law; Matthew 5:17: "I have not come to destroy the law." Now the giving of thanks, because he gave thanks, so as to show that he has from another, namely from the Father, whatever he has: in which he shows us an example of doing likewise. He gave thanks especially, however, so as to give us an example that, when we begin a meal, we ought to give thanks to God; 1 Timothy 4:4: "Nothing is to be rejected which is received with the giving of thanks"; Psalm 21:27: "The poor shall eat, and shall be filled, and they shall praise the Lord." Likewise, that he might show that he was not praying for his own sake, but for the sake of the crowd, which was present, and it was necessary to persuade them that he had come from God. And therefore, when he performs a miracle before many, he prays, so as to show that he is not contrary to God, but works according to his will. It is said, however, in Mark, that Christ distributed the loaves to the crowds through the apostles. But here it is said that he himself distributed them, because he is seen to have done what he did through others. But both, according to the mystery, are true, because he alone refreshes inwardly, and others refresh outwardly and as ministers. Now the matter of the refreshment was bread and fish, concerning which enough has been said above. The satiety of the refreshment, however, was perfect, because they had "as much as they wanted." For Christ alone is he who feeds the empty soul, and fills the hungry soul with good things; Psalm 16:15: "I shall be satisfied when your glory shall appear." Others, however, as having grace by measure, perform miracles; but Christ, by absolute power, worked all things with great overabundance: hence it is said that "they were filled." Next, when he says, "But when they were filled, he said to his disciples," etc., the gathering of the fragments is dealt with, and first the Lord's command is set forth; second the disciples' execution of it, at the place, "They gathered therefore," etc. He says therefore, "But when they were filled, he said to his disciples: Gather up the fragments that remain." This indeed the Lord did not do for superfluous ostentation, but so as to show that the miracle performed was not illusory, through the fact that the remains, once gathered, were kept for a long time, and served as food for others. He also wished by this that that miracle should cling more firmly to the hearts of the disciples, whom he also commanded to carry the fragments; since he wished especially to instruct those who were to be the teachers of the whole world. But the disciples faithfully carry it out; hence it follows, "They gathered therefore," etc. Here it should be noted that the remains left over were not just any amount, nor by chance, but according to a fixed measure: because he made neither more nor less, but as much as he willed, to be superfluous. A sign of this is that each apostle's basket was full. Now a basket is a vessel assigned to rustic service. The twelve baskets, therefore, signify the twelve apostles and their imitators, who, although in the present they are held in contempt, are nevertheless inwardly filled with the riches of the spiritual sacraments: and they are said to be twelve, because the faith of the Holy Trinity was to be preached by them in the four parts of the world.”

“Having set forth the teaching on the spiritual life by which Christ gives life to those who have been regenerated, the Evangelist consequently deals with the spiritual nourishment by which Christ sustains those he has given life to; and first he sets forth the visible miracle which Christ performed by providing bodily nourishment; second he deals with spiritual nourishment, at the place, "Jesus answered them and said: Amen, amen, I say to you, you seek me, not because..." etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he sets forth the visible miracle of bodily nourishment; second he shows the effect of the miracle, at the place, "Those men therefore, when they had seen..." etc. Concerning the miracle he sets forth two things: namely its circumstances, and its performance, at the place, "And when Jesus had lifted up his eyes..." Concerning the first he does three things. First he describes the multitude which he fed; second he determines the place where he fed them, at the place, "Jesus therefore went up into the mountain"; third the time when he fed them, at the place, "Now the Passover was near," etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First he determines the place to which the multitude follows him; second, the crowd following; third he assigns the cause of their following. Now as to where the crowd followed the Lord, the Evangelist indicates this when he says, "After these things Jesus went away across the sea of Galilee"; that is, after the mystical words which the Lord had spoken concerning his power. Now this sea of Galilee is frequently named in Scripture, and in different places. But because this sea is not salty, but is a certain gathering of waters from the inflow of the Jordan, it is therefore called a lake by Luke, as is found in Luke 5:1; but because, according to the property of the Hebrew idiom, all gatherings of waters are called seas, according to that text of Genesis 1:10, "and the gatherings of waters he called seas," it is therefore called a sea. But it is surnamed Gennesareth from the nature of the place: for it is much agitated by the buffeting of winds, which are generated from the very evaporations of the water; hence Gennesareth in Greek is the same as "generating a breeze." It is also named "of Galilee" from the province of Galilee, in which it is. But "of Tiberias" from the city so called, which was on one side of this sea, having opposite it the city of Capernaum on the other side; which city was formerly called Zenereth, but was afterward restored by Herod the tetrarch in honor of Tiberius Caesar, and was called Tiberias. Now the literal reason why Jesus went away across the sea is assigned by Chrysostom: that Christ might yield to the fury and disturbance of the Jews, which they had conceived against Christ on account of the things he had said above concerning himself. Hence, as he himself says, just as missiles, when they strike against something hard, strike more heavily, but those which have nothing to meet them, once launched, are quickly spent and come to rest; so too, when we advance impetuously and by resisting against bold men, they rage the more; but if we yield to them, we easily soften their madness. For this reason Christ, by withdrawing across the sea, mitigated the fury of the Jews that had arisen from his foregoing words, giving us in this an example of doing likewise. Ecclesiasticus 8:14: "Do not stand against the face of an insolent man." Mystically, however, by the sea, the present turbulent world is signified; Psalm 103:25: "This sea, great and wide of hands." The Lord crossed this sea when he took on the sea of mortality and of penalty by being born, trod it underfoot by dying, and, crossing over by rising, arrived at the glory of the resurrection. Concerning this passing-over it is said below, John 13:1: "Jesus knowing that his hour had come, that he should pass from this world to the Father." As he passed over, great crowds followed him, by believing and by imitating, gathered from both peoples; Isaiah 60:5: "Then your heart shall wonder and be enlarged, when the multitude of the sea shall be turned to you"; Psalm 7:7: "Arise, O Lord, in the command which you have commanded, and the assembly of peoples shall surround you." The following crowd is described therefore as abundant, because "a great multitude followed him." Now the cause on account of which they followed was the working of miracles; hence he says, "because they saw the signs which he performed upon those who were sick." It should be known that some followed him on account of his teaching, namely those who were better disposed; but others, more imperfect, followed him out of admiration for the visible signs, being of a coarser mind. For signs, as is said in 1 Corinthians 14:22, "are not given to believers, but to unbelievers." Some also followed him out of devotion and faith, namely those whom he had healed in body: for they were healed by the Lord in body in such a way that they were also perfectly healed in soul; Deuteronomy 32:4: "The works of God are perfect." And this is clear, because to the paralytic (above, 8:11) he said pointedly: "Go, and sin no more"; and Matthew 9:2: "Son, your sins are forgiven you"; words which pertain more to the health of the soul than of the body. Now it should be noted that, whereas the Evangelist has made mention only of three miracles, namely of the wedding, of the ruler's son, and of the paralytic, here nevertheless he speaks indefinitely of "the signs which he was performing," so as to give one to understand that Christ performed many other signs, as is said below, at the end, of which he makes no mention in this book. For he intended especially to make known the teaching of Christ. Next he determines the place of the miracle, which is the mountain; hence he says, "He therefore went up into the mountain," that is, Jesus ascended privately, "and there he sat with his disciples." And indeed the mountain is a quite fitting place for a refreshment: for by the mountain is signified the perfection of justice, according to that text of Psalm 35:7: "Your justice is like the mountains of God." Since, therefore, these earthly things do not satisfy — indeed "whoever drinks of this water will thirst again," as is said above, II, 13 — but spiritual things do satisfy; therefore the Lord ascended to higher things with his disciples, to show that satiety is found in spiritual things, and the perfection of justice: concerning which mountain it is said in Psalm 67:16: "A mountain of God, a fat mountain." Hence there too he exercised the office of teacher, sitting with his disciples: for he it is who teaches every man knowledge. Next the time is described, when he says, "Now the Passover was near," which time indeed befits a refreshment. For Passover is interpreted as "passing-over": Exodus 12:11: "For it is the Phase, that is, the passing-over of the Lord," so as to give one to understand that whoever desires to be refreshed with the bread of the divine Word and the body and blood of the Lord must pass over from vices to virtues. 1 Corinthians 5:7: "Christ our Passover is sacrificed; therefore let us feast on the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth." Ecclesiasticus 24:26, divine Wisdom says: "Pass over to me, all you who desire me." Now this is the second Passover of which the Evangelist makes mention: to which, indeed, according to the precept of the law, which is found in Exodus 23:17, the Lord did not go up to Jerusalem. The reason for this is that Christ was God and man: and inasmuch as man he was indeed subject to the law; inasmuch as God he was above the law. Therefore, that he might show himself to be man, he sometimes kept the law; but that he might show himself to be God, he set the law aside. Hence also, by the fact that he did not go, he gave one to understand that the observances of the law would little by little, and shortly, cease. Next he deals with the performance of the miracle, when he says, "When Jesus therefore had lifted up his eyes, and had seen," etc.; and first the necessity of performing the miracle is shown; second the performance itself is added, at the place, "Jesus therefore says: Make the men sit down," etc. Now the necessity of the miracle's being performed is taken from the Lord's question and the disciples' answer; and therefore first the Lord's question is set forth; second the disciples' answer, at the place, "Philip answered him," etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First the occasion for questioning is set forth; second Christ's question is added; and third the intention of the one questioning is disclosed. Now the occasion for questioning was the sight of the multitude coming to Christ. And therefore he says, "When Jesus had lifted up his eyes," being on the mountain with his disciples as with those who were more perfect, "and had seen," etc. In which two things are to be considered concerning the Lord. One, that we may learn the maturity of Christ, who did not raise his eyes here and there, but sat modestly and attentively with his disciples: contrary to which it is said in Proverbs 30:13: "A generation whose eyes are lofty, and whose eyelids are lifted up on high"; and Ecclesiasticus 19:26: "A man is known by his look." The second, that we may learn that he did not sit idly with his disciples either; but, teaching them attentively, and turning their hearts to himself, he looked upon the disciples whom he was teaching; Luke 6:20: "And he, lifting up his eyes upon his disciples, said," etc. And therefore it is said, "When Jesus had lifted up his eyes," etc. Mystically, however, the eyes of the Lord are the spiritual gifts which, when he mercifully grants them to his elect, then he lifts up his eyes upon them, that is, he bestows a look of loving-kindness. This is what Psalm 85:16 asked, saying: "Look upon me, O Lord, and have mercy on me." Now the question concerns the feeding of the multitude; hence he said to Philip: "Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat?" He presupposes one thing, and asks about another. He presupposes indeed their want, because they did not have the means to provide food for so great a multitude; but he asks the manner of finding it, when he says, "Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat?" Here it should be noted that every teacher must spiritually feed the crowd that comes to him. And because no man has of himself the means to feed it, he must therefore buy it from elsewhere, by labor, by study, by assiduity in prayers; Isaiah 55:1: "You who have no money, make haste, buy, without any exchange, wine and milk." And again: "Why do you weigh out your money" — that is, your eloquence — "and not for bread" — that is, not for true wisdom, which refreshes (Ecclesiasticus 15:5: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding") — "and your labor not unto fullness," by learning things that do not satisfy, but rather empty out? Now the intention of the one questioning is disclosed when he says, "But this he said trying him," etc. Here the Evangelist, excluding one doubt, leads into another. For it could have been doubted that the Lord questioned Philip as though he were ignorant; but he excludes this, saying, "for he himself knew what he would do." But since to try someone seems also to belong to one who is ignorant, since it is the same as taking a trial of something, it seems that the Evangelist introduces another doubt when he says, "trying him." But it must be said that one person tries another in different ways, so as to take a trial of him: for a man tries in one way, in order to learn; the Devil in another way, in order to deceive; 1 Peter 5:8: "Your adversary the Devil, as a roaring lion, goes about seeking whom he may devour." But God, and Christ, indeed try not in order to learn, since he it is who searches hearts and minds; nor in order to deceive, since "he tries no one," as is said in James 1:13; but he tries in order to give to others a trial-proof of the one tried. Thus God tried Abraham; Genesis 22:1: "God tried Abraham," etc., and it follows: "Now I know that you fear the Lord" — that is, I have made it known that you fear the Lord. Thus from this he tries Philip in order that he might make known to others his answer, leading them thereby into the most certain knowledge of the sign to come. Next the disciples' answer is set forth, when he says, "Philip answered him," and first Philip's answer; second Andrew's answer, at the place, "One of his disciples says to him," etc. Now it should be known concerning the first, that Philip was, among the others, rather slow and untrained, and therefore among the others he questioned the Lord more frequently; below, John 14:8: "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us." But in the questioning of these two, as far as the letter is concerned, Andrew was better disposed than Philip, because Philip seems to have had no intention or disposition toward the miracle's being performed. And therefore he introduces that manner by which all those men could be fed, namely by money, saying, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them" — which we do not have, and therefore we cannot give them to eat. In which the poverty of Christ is suggested, who did not even have two hundred denarii. Andrew, however, seems to have regard to the miracle's being performed. For perhaps he had in memory the sign which Elisha had performed with barley loaves, when he fed a hundred men with twenty loaves, as is read in 4 Kings 4:42 and following, and therefore he says, "There is a boy here who has five barley loaves." But nevertheless he supposed that Christ would not perform a greater miracle than Elisha. For he reckoned that from fewer loaves fewer would be miraculously produced, and from more, more (although for him who does not need the underlying matter, it is equally easy to feed the crowds from more or from fewer), and therefore he adds, "But what are these among so many?" As if to say: even if they are multiplied as Elisha multiplied them, it is not sufficient. Mystically, spiritual refreshment is signified by wisdom. Now there is one wisdom, which Christ taught, who is true wisdom; 1 Corinthians 1:24: "Christ, the power of God and the wisdom of God." But before the coming of Christ there was a twofold teaching. One human, which the philosophers had; the other of the written law. Of the first, therefore, Philip makes mention, and therefore uses the term of buying, saying, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them." For human wisdom is possessed through acquisition. The number one hundred imports perfection. Hence two hundred suggests the twofold perfection necessary for this wisdom; for its perfection is arrived at by a twofold path: namely, by experience and by contemplation. He says therefore, "Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them," because whatever human reason can experience and think concerning truth is not sufficient for the perfect satiety of wisdom; Jeremiah 9:23: "Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, and let not the strong man glory in his strength, and let not the rich man glory in his riches; but let him who glories, glory in this, to know and understand me." For no philosopher's wisdom was so great that men could be recalled from error by it; rather they lead many into error. Of the second, however, Andrew makes mention; and therefore he did not wish that other loaves be bought, but that the crowd be fed from what was at hand, namely from those things which the law contained; hence he was better disposed than Philip; and therefore he says, "There is a boy here who has five barley loaves." This boy can be called Moses, on account of the imperfection of the state of the law: Hebrews 7:19: "The law brought no one to perfection"; or the people of the Jews, who served under the elements of the world, as is said in Galatians 4:3. This boy, therefore, has five loaves, that is, the teaching of the law: either because it is contained in the five books of Moses — above, John 1:17: "The law was given through Moses" — or because it was given to men occupied with sensible things, which are expressed by the five senses: and they are of barley, because the law itself was given so that in it the vital nourishment might be covered over by bodily sacraments — for the pith of barley is covered by a very clinging husk — or because the people of the Jews were not yet stripped of carnal desire, but clung to their hearts like husk: for in the Old Testament they experienced an outward hardness, on account of the ceremonial observances; Acts 15:10: "This is a burden which neither we, nor our fathers, were able to bear." And the Jews themselves, given over to bodily things, did not grasp the spiritual sense of the law; 2 Corinthians 3:15: "A veil is placed over their hearts." Now by the two fish, which gave a pleasant flavor to the bread, is understood the teaching of the Psalms and the prophets: and thus the Old Law had not only loaves, namely the five books of Moses, but also two fish, namely the prophets and the Psalms. Hence the Scripture of the Old Testament is divided into these three, Luke 24:44: "the things which are written in the Law and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning me." Or by the two fish, according to Augustine, two persons are signified: namely the royal and the priestly, by whom that people was ruled; which two persons, however, prefigured Christ, who was true king and priest. "But what are these among so many?" Because through these the human race could not be perfectly led to the knowledge of truth: for although God was known in Judea, the nations nevertheless did not know him. Next, when it says, "Jesus therefore said," the performance of the miracle is dealt with, and first the arrangement of the men is set forth; second their feeding, at the place, "Jesus therefore took the loaves," etc.; third the gathering of the fragments, at the place, "But when they were filled," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First the command concerning the arrangement of the crowds is set forth; second the opportuneness of the arrangement; and third the number of those arranged. Now the command was from the Lord to the disciples, that they should arrange the crowd for eating; hence Jesus says, "Make the men sit down," that is, sit down to eat. For, as was said above, II, in ancient times men used to dine reclining on couches, whence the custom grew up that those who sit down to eat are said to "recline." By which is mystically signified the rest which is necessary for the perfection of wisdom; Ecclesiasticus 38:25: "He who is diminished in activity will perfect wisdom." This arrangement is made through the disciples, because through them the knowledge of truth has been passed down to us; Psalm 71:3: "Let the mountains receive peace for the people." Now the opportuneness of the arrangement is drawn from the place: "now there was much grass in the place," which, according to the letter, is convenient for those reclining. Mystically, however, by the grass, flesh is signified, Isaiah 40:6: "All flesh is grass"; and according to this it can be referred to two things. It fits the teaching of the Old Testament, which was given to one resting in carnal things, and to a people wise in a carnal way; Isaiah 1:19: "If you be willing, and will hearken to me, you shall eat the good things of the land"; Deuteronomy 33:28: "The eye of Jacob upon a land of wheat, wine, and oil." Or it fits one who perceives true wisdom, to which one cannot come except by treading carnal things underfoot; Romans 12:2: "Do not be conformed to this age." Now the number was great; hence he says, "The men therefore sat down, in number about five thousand." The Evangelist numbers only the men, following the custom of the law, in which Moses numbered the people from twenty years old and upward, with no mention made of women, as is said in Numbers 1. This the Evangelist did for this reason, because these alone are capable of perfect teaching; 1 Corinthians 2:6: "We speak wisdom among the perfect"; Hebrews 5:14: "Solid food is for the perfect." Next, when he says, "Jesus therefore took the loaves," he deals with the feeding, and first the disposition of the one feeding is suggested; second the matter of the feeding; and third the perfect satiety. Now in the disposition of Jesus as he feeds them, first indeed his humility is noted; second, his giving of thanks. Humility indeed, because he took the loaves, and distributed them. And indeed Christ, about to perform the miracle, could have fed the crowds with loaves created out of nothing. But by dispensation he multiplied pre-existing loaves for the feeding of the crowds. First, indeed, that he might show that sensible things are not from the Devil, as the erring Manichees say. For if this were true, the Lord would not use sensible things for the work of divine praise, especially since he himself came "that he might destroy the works of the Devil," as is said in 1 John 3:8. Second, that he might show it to be false what they themselves say, namely that the teaching of the Old Testament is not from God, but from the Devil. Therefore, in order to show that the teaching of the New Testament is no other than that which was prefigured and contained in the teaching of the Old Testament, he multiplied the pre-existing loaves, indicating that it is he who perfects and fulfills the law; Matthew 5:17: "I have not come to destroy the law." Now the giving of thanks, because he gave thanks, so as to show that he has from another, namely from the Father, whatever he has: in which he shows us an example of doing likewise. He gave thanks especially, however, so as to give us an example that, when we begin a meal, we ought to give thanks to God; 1 Timothy 4:4: "Nothing is to be rejected which is received with the giving of thanks"; Psalm 21:27: "The poor shall eat, and shall be filled, and they shall praise the Lord." Likewise, that he might show that he was not praying for his own sake, but for the sake of the crowd, which was present, and it was necessary to persuade them that he had come from God. And therefore, when he performs a miracle before many, he prays, so as to show that he is not contrary to God, but works according to his will. It is said, however, in Mark, that Christ distributed the loaves to the crowds through the apostles. But here it is said that he himself distributed them, because he is seen to have done what he did through others. But both, according to the mystery, are true, because he alone refreshes inwardly, and others refresh outwardly and as ministers. Now the matter of the refreshment was bread and fish, concerning which enough has been said above. The satiety of the refreshment, however, was perfect, because they had "as much as they wanted." For Christ alone is he who feeds the empty soul, and fills the hungry soul with good things; Psalm 16:15: "I shall be satisfied when your glory shall appear." Others, however, as having grace by measure, perform miracles; but Christ, by absolute power, worked all things with great overabundance: hence it is said that "they were filled." Next, when he says, "But when they were filled, he said to his disciples," etc., the gathering of the fragments is dealt with, and first the Lord's command is set forth; second the disciples' execution of it, at the place, "They gathered therefore," etc. He says therefore, "But when they were filled, he said to his disciples: Gather up the fragments that remain." This indeed the Lord did not do for superfluous ostentation, but so as to show that the miracle performed was not illusory, through the fact that the remains, once gathered, were kept for a long time, and served as food for others. He also wished by this that that miracle should cling more firmly to the hearts of the disciples, whom he also commanded to carry the fragments; since he wished especially to instruct those who were to be the teachers of the whole world. But the disciples faithfully carry it out; hence it follows, "They gathered therefore," etc. Here it should be noted that the remains left over were not just any amount, nor by chance, but according to a fixed measure: because he made neither more nor less, but as much as he willed, to be superfluous. A sign of this is that each apostle's basket was full. Now a basket is a vessel assigned to rustic service. The twelve baskets, therefore, signify the twelve apostles and their imitators, who, although in the present they are held in contempt, are nevertheless inwardly filled with the riches of the spiritual sacraments: and they are said to be twelve, because the faith of the Holy Trinity was to be preached by them in the four parts of the world.”

“Having set forth the visible sign concerning bodily nourishment, here is set forth the effect of the sign upon the crowds, which is threefold: first, as to the confession of faith; second, as to the attempted rendering of honor, at the place, "Jesus therefore, when he knew," etc.; third, as to their diligent seeking, at the place, "And when evening was come," etc. It should be known, concerning the first, that it was said as it were out of the mouth of the Jews in Psalm 73:9: "Our signs we have not seen, there is now no prophet." Now it was formerly the custom that the prophets worked many signs, whence, signs being lacking, prophecy seemed to have ceased. But when they do see signs, they confess that prophecy has been restored to them. Hence they had already so far profited from the miracle they had seen that they called the Lord a prophet. It is said therefore that those men, who had been filled from the five loaves, when they had seen the sign that Jesus had done, said, "This is truly the prophet." Yet they had not come to perfect faith, because they believed him to be a prophet who is even the Lord of the prophets. Nor, however, are they altogether deceived, because the Lord himself also names himself a prophet. Now it should be known that a prophet is called one who sees. 1 Kings 9:9: "He that is now called a prophet, in time past was called a seer." Now sight pertains to the cognitive power. But in Christ there was a threefold knowledge. Namely, sensitive knowledge: and according to this he had some likeness with the prophets, inasmuch as in the imagination of Christ certain sensible species could be formed, by which future or hidden things might be presented, especially on account of the passibility that belonged to him by reason of his state as a wayfarer. Likewise intellective knowledge: and as to this he does not have a likeness with the prophets, but is even above the angels, since he was a comprehensor more excellently than any creature. Likewise divine knowledge: and as to this he was the inspirer of the prophets and of the angels, since all knowledge is caused through participation of the divine Word. Yet they seem to recognize in Christ the excellence of prophecy in this, that they say "truly the prophet." For although there were many prophets among the Jews, yet one was awaited, preeminent among them, according to Deuteronomy 18:15: "The Lord thy God will raise up to thee a prophet"; and it is of this that they speak; whence he says pointedly, "who is to come into the world." Then, when he says, "Jesus therefore, when he knew," etc., the second effect is set forth, as to the attempted rendering of honor, which nevertheless Christ shunned. And so first the endeavor of the people is set forth; second, the flight of Christ. The endeavor indeed, when it is said, "that they would take him by force, and make him king." For that is said to be seized which is taken apart from the will and the fitting occasion of him from whom it is taken. Now it was true that the disposition of God the Father had been, from eternity, to manifest the kingship of Christ, but this manifestation was not yet fitting according to the time; for he had come then, but not to reign, in the way in which he reigns in that we say in Matthew 6:10, "Thy kingdom come," where he will reign also according to that which he was made man. And therefore for this manifestation another time is appointed, namely, when the open glory of his saints shall be, after the judgment made by him. It was concerning this manifestation that the disciples asked, Acts 1:6: "Lord, wilt thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?" The crowds, therefore, believing that he had come to reign, wished to make him king. The reason for this is that men frequently want such a one for a lord as will feed them in temporal things. Whence, because Christ had fed them, they wished to make him king; Isaiah 3:6: "Thou hast a garment, be thou our prince." Whence Chrysostom says: "See how great is the power of gluttony. They no longer have any care for the transgression of the sabbath, nor are they any longer zealous for God, but all things are set aside, the belly being filled: but already a prophet was among them, and they wished to enthrone him as king." Now the flight of Christ is set forth, when he says, "he fled again into the mountain himself alone." Where it is given to be understood that the Lord, seeing the crowds, had come down from the mountain, and had fed the crowds in the lower places: for unless he had come down from the mountain, it would not be said that he "fled again into the mountain." But since he himself is truly king, why does he flee? To which a threefold reason is assigned. One, because it would have derogated from his dignity, if he had received a kingdom from man, he who was such a king that all kings were kings by participation in him; Proverbs 8:15: "By me kings reign." Another reason is that it would have prejudiced his teaching, if he had received glory or strength from men. For thus he worked and taught so that everything might be ascribed to divine power, and not to human favor; above, 5:41: "I receive not glory from men." The third reason is that he might teach us to despise worldly dignities; below, 13:15: "For I have given you an example, that as I have done to you, so you also should do"; Ecclesiasticus 7:4: "Seek not of man to be made a leader." Thus, therefore, he refused the glory of the world, so that yet he might of his own will undergo the penalty, according to that of Hebrews 12:2: "Who, having joy set before him, endured the cross, despising the shame." But contrary to this seems what is said in Matthew 14:23, namely, that "he went up alone into a mountain to pray." But, according to Augustine, these are not contrary, because the cause of fleeing is joined to the cause of praying. For then the Lord teaches us that there is a great cause for praying, when a cause for fleeing threatens. But mystically he ascends into the mountain then, when the crowds, having been refreshed, were prepared to submit themselves to him, because he ascends into heaven then, when the peoples are prepared to submit themselves to the truth of the faith, according to Psalm 7:8: "The congregation of the people shall surround thee; and for their sakes return thou on high"; that is, that the congregation of the peoples may surround thee, return thou on high. But it is said "he fled," so as to signify that his height could not be understood: for what we do not understand, we say flees from us. Here the third effect is treated, namely the diligent seeking, and first as to the disciples; second as to the crowds, at the place, "And the next day," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he sets forth the endeavor of the disciples; second he explains it, at the place, "and it was now dark," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he describes the descent of the disciples to the sea; second, the crossing of the sea, at the place, "and when they had gone up into a ship," etc. It should be known, therefore, concerning the first, that Christ went up the mountain without the disciples knowing, whence they waited until evening, thinking that he would come to them. But evening having come, they could bear no longer not to seek him: so great a love held them. And therefore he says, "And when it was now late, his disciples went down to the sea, seeking him." Now mystically, by "evening" is designated the Lord's Passion, or his Ascension: for as long as Christ was present in the body with the disciples, no disturbance weighed them down, no bitterness troubled them; Matthew 9:15: "The children of the bridegroom cannot mourn, as long as the bridegroom is with them." But with Christ withdrawing from them, they go down to the sea, that is, to the disturbances of the world; Psalm 103:25: "This sea great and wide." But because the love with which they were on fire did not allow them to be without the Lord's presence any longer, he therefore adds their crossing, when he says, "and when they had gone up into a ship, they came over the sea to Capharnaum." Then when he says, "and it was now dark," etc., he explains what he had set forth summarily, and first concerning the arrival at the sea; second concerning the crossing, at the place, "and the sea arose, a great wind blowing." As to the first he says, "it was now dark, and Jesus had not come to them": which the Evangelist expresses not without cause, so as to show through this their fervent love. For neither evening nor night held them back. Now mystically, "darkness" designates a defect of charity; for light is charity, according to 1 John 2:10: "He that loveth his brother abideth in the light." Darkness, therefore, is in us when Jesus, the true light, does not come to us, as is said above in chapter 1, in whose presence all darkness is driven away. Now Christ withdrew himself for so long from the disciples, first indeed that they might feel what his absence would be; which indeed they experienced in the storm of the sea. Jeremiah 2:19: "Know thou, and see that it is an evil and a bitter thing for thee to have left the Lord." Second, that they might seek more diligently; Song of Songs 5:17: "Whither is thy beloved gone, O thou most beautiful among women? … And we will seek him with thee." As to the crossing he says, "and the sea arose, a great wind blowing." And first the storm of the sea is set forth; second, the appearance of Christ and the time of the appearance, at the place, "and when they had rowed," etc.; third, the effect of the appearance, at the place, "and they were afraid," etc. Now the storm on the sea was caused by the blowing of the wind that had arisen; and therefore he says, "and the sea arose, a great wind blowing," on high. By that wind is figured the temptation and persecution which is to come upon the Church on account of a defect of charity. For, as Augustine says, whence charity grows cold, thence the waves increase, and the ship is troubled. Yet those winds and the storm and the waves and the darkness did not so act that either the ship should not move forward, or, having come loose, should be broken, because "he that shall persevere unto the end, he shall be saved," Matthew 24:13; and in the same, chapter 7:27: "the winds blew, and the streams beat against that house, and it fell not." Now the appearance of Christ was not immediately from the beginning of the storm, but after some space; and therefore he says, "when they had rowed, therefore, about five and twenty or thirty furlongs, they see Jesus." And this so that it might be given to be understood, that the Lord permits us to be troubled for a time, so that our virtue may be tested; yet in the end he does not abandon us in necessity, but becomes near to us; 1 Corinthians 10:13: "God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that which you are able; but will make also with temptation issue, that you may be able to bear it." According to Augustine, the twenty-five furlongs which they row are the five books of Moses. For a number of this sort is a square number, arising from this number five multiplied into itself: for five times five is twenty-five; now a number multiplied retains the meaning of its root: whence just as by five the old law is signified, so by twenty-five is signified the perfection of the New Testament. Now by thirty is signified the perfection of the New Testament, which was lacking to the law: for if the same five be multiplied by six, which is a perfect number, the number thirty arises. To those, therefore, who row twenty-five or thirty furlongs, that is, who fulfill the law, or the perfection of the Gospel, Jesus comes, treading down all the swellings of the world, the heights of the present age. Psalm 88:10: "Thou rulest the power of the sea: and appeasest the motion of the waves thereof." And then we shall see Christ near to the ship, because divine help draws near. Psalm 144:18: "The Lord is nigh unto all them that call upon him." It appears, therefore, that those who rightly seek Christ have him present. Now these men most fervently desired Christ: which is clear from the darkness of the time, from the storm of the sea, and from the distance of the harbor, notwithstanding which they were endeavoring to go to him. And therefore Christ was present to them. Now the effect of the appearance is set forth when he says, "and they were afraid. But he saith to them: it is I, be not afraid," and first the interior effect is set forth; second, the exterior, at the place, "and immediately the ship was at the land." Now the interior effect was fear; and therefore is set forth the fear of the disciples conceived from the sudden appearance of Christ, when he says, "and they were afraid," with a good fear, because caused by humility; Romans 11:20: "Be not high-minded, but fear." Or with a bad fear, because, as is said in Matthew 14:26, "they thought it was an apparition." Psalm 13:5: "There have they trembled for fear, where there was no fear." Since fear especially belongs to carnal men, who are terrified at spiritual things. Second is set forth Christ's comforting against a twofold danger. Namely, against the danger to faith in the intellect, and as to this he says, "it is I," as it were repelling all doubt; Luke, last chapter, 39: "See my hands and feet, that it is I myself." Second, against the danger of fear in the affections; and as to this he says, "be not afraid"; Jeremiah 1:8: "Be not afraid at their presence"; Psalm 26:1: "The Lord is my light and my salvation, whom shall I fear?" Third is set forth the disciples' acceptance, because "they willingly took him into the ship": by which it is signified that when servile fear is excluded from our hearts, then we receive Christ, by loving and contemplating him. Apocalypse 3:20: "Behold, I stand at the gate, and knock: if any man shall hear my voice, and open to me the door, I will come in to him." Now the exterior effect was as to two things. First, that the storm was calmed; second, that immediately the ship was at the land, when it was far distant from it: for he furnished them not a deceptive, but a tranquil navigation; and wishing to work a greater miracle, he did not go up into the ship. Thus, therefore, a threefold miracle here concurs: namely, the walking upon the sea, the sudden cessation of the storm, and the bringing of the distant ship to the harbor: that we may learn that the faithful, in whom Christ is, press down the swelling of the world, tread upon the waves of tribulations, and swiftly pass over to the land of the living, according to Psalm 142:10: "Thy good spirit shall lead me into the right land." But here there is a manifold question. One is concerning the letter, in which Matthew seems to say the contrary: for, Matthew 14:22, it is said that the disciples came to the sea at the Lord's command; here, however, that they went down seeking him. Another question is that Matthew in the same place says that the disciples, crossing the sea, came into the land of Genesareth; here, however, it is said that they came to Capharnaum. The third question is that Matthew says that Christ entered the ship; here, however, that he did not. But concerning these three, Chrysostom, dispatching the matter briefly, says that this was not the same miracle as that of Matthew. For, as he himself says, Christ frequently worked a miracle of this kind, walking upon the sea, yet not before the crowds, but before his disciples, lest the crowds should believe that he did not have a true body. According to Augustine, however, it is said, and more truly, that it was the same miracle which John narrates here, and Matthew there. And therefore, answering the first question, he says that it does not matter that Matthew says that they went down to the sea at Christ's command. For it could be that the Lord had commanded them this, and they went down believing that Christ would sail with them: whence they waited for him until night. And because Christ did not come, then they themselves crossed the sea. To the second question there is a twofold response. One is, that Capharnaum and Genesareth are on the same shore, and neighboring. And perhaps the disciples arrived across the sea at the boundary of both, and so Matthew names the one, and John the other. Or it can be said that Matthew does not say that they came immediately into Genesareth, and so perhaps they first came to Capharnaum, and afterward into Genesareth, etc.”

“Having set forth the visible sign concerning bodily nourishment, here is set forth the effect of the sign upon the crowds, which is threefold: first, as to the confession of faith; second, as to the attempted rendering of honor, at the place, "Jesus therefore, when he knew," etc.; third, as to their diligent seeking, at the place, "And when evening was come," etc. It should be known, concerning the first, that it was said as it were out of the mouth of the Jews in Psalm 73:9: "Our signs we have not seen, there is now no prophet." Now it was formerly the custom that the prophets worked many signs, whence, signs being lacking, prophecy seemed to have ceased. But when they do see signs, they confess that prophecy has been restored to them. Hence they had already so far profited from the miracle they had seen that they called the Lord a prophet. It is said therefore that those men, who had been filled from the five loaves, when they had seen the sign that Jesus had done, said, "This is truly the prophet." Yet they had not come to perfect faith, because they believed him to be a prophet who is even the Lord of the prophets. Nor, however, are they altogether deceived, because the Lord himself also names himself a prophet. Now it should be known that a prophet is called one who sees. 1 Kings 9:9: "He that is now called a prophet, in time past was called a seer." Now sight pertains to the cognitive power. But in Christ there was a threefold knowledge. Namely, sensitive knowledge: and according to this he had some likeness with the prophets, inasmuch as in the imagination of Christ certain sensible species could be formed, by which future or hidden things might be presented, especially on account of the passibility that belonged to him by reason of his state as a wayfarer. Likewise intellective knowledge: and as to this he does not have a likeness with the prophets, but is even above the angels, since he was a comprehensor more excellently than any creature. Likewise divine knowledge: and as to this he was the inspirer of the prophets and of the angels, since all knowledge is caused through participation of the divine Word. Yet they seem to recognize in Christ the excellence of prophecy in this, that they say "truly the prophet." For although there were many prophets among the Jews, yet one was awaited, preeminent among them, according to Deuteronomy 18:15: "The Lord thy God will raise up to thee a prophet"; and it is of this that they speak; whence he says pointedly, "who is to come into the world." Then, when he says, "Jesus therefore, when he knew," etc., the second effect is set forth, as to the attempted rendering of honor, which nevertheless Christ shunned. And so first the endeavor of the people is set forth; second, the flight of Christ. The endeavor indeed, when it is said, "that they would take him by force, and make him king." For that is said to be seized which is taken apart from the will and the fitting occasion of him from whom it is taken. Now it was true that the disposition of God the Father had been, from eternity, to manifest the kingship of Christ, but this manifestation was not yet fitting according to the time; for he had come then, but not to reign, in the way in which he reigns in that we say in Matthew 6:10, "Thy kingdom come," where he will reign also according to that which he was made man. And therefore for this manifestation another time is appointed, namely, when the open glory of his saints shall be, after the judgment made by him. It was concerning this manifestation that the disciples asked, Acts 1:6: "Lord, wilt thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?" The crowds, therefore, believing that he had come to reign, wished to make him king. The reason for this is that men frequently want such a one for a lord as will feed them in temporal things. Whence, because Christ had fed them, they wished to make him king; Isaiah 3:6: "Thou hast a garment, be thou our prince." Whence Chrysostom says: "See how great is the power of gluttony. They no longer have any care for the transgression of the sabbath, nor are they any longer zealous for God, but all things are set aside, the belly being filled: but already a prophet was among them, and they wished to enthrone him as king." Now the flight of Christ is set forth, when he says, "he fled again into the mountain himself alone." Where it is given to be understood that the Lord, seeing the crowds, had come down from the mountain, and had fed the crowds in the lower places: for unless he had come down from the mountain, it would not be said that he "fled again into the mountain." But since he himself is truly king, why does he flee? To which a threefold reason is assigned. One, because it would have derogated from his dignity, if he had received a kingdom from man, he who was such a king that all kings were kings by participation in him; Proverbs 8:15: "By me kings reign." Another reason is that it would have prejudiced his teaching, if he had received glory or strength from men. For thus he worked and taught so that everything might be ascribed to divine power, and not to human favor; above, 5:41: "I receive not glory from men." The third reason is that he might teach us to despise worldly dignities; below, 13:15: "For I have given you an example, that as I have done to you, so you also should do"; Ecclesiasticus 7:4: "Seek not of man to be made a leader." Thus, therefore, he refused the glory of the world, so that yet he might of his own will undergo the penalty, according to that of Hebrews 12:2: "Who, having joy set before him, endured the cross, despising the shame." But contrary to this seems what is said in Matthew 14:23, namely, that "he went up alone into a mountain to pray." But, according to Augustine, these are not contrary, because the cause of fleeing is joined to the cause of praying. For then the Lord teaches us that there is a great cause for praying, when a cause for fleeing threatens. But mystically he ascends into the mountain then, when the crowds, having been refreshed, were prepared to submit themselves to him, because he ascends into heaven then, when the peoples are prepared to submit themselves to the truth of the faith, according to Psalm 7:8: "The congregation of the people shall surround thee; and for their sakes return thou on high"; that is, that the congregation of the peoples may surround thee, return thou on high. But it is said "he fled," so as to signify that his height could not be understood: for what we do not understand, we say flees from us. Here the third effect is treated, namely the diligent seeking, and first as to the disciples; second as to the crowds, at the place, "And the next day," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he sets forth the endeavor of the disciples; second he explains it, at the place, "and it was now dark," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he describes the descent of the disciples to the sea; second, the crossing of the sea, at the place, "and when they had gone up into a ship," etc. It should be known, therefore, concerning the first, that Christ went up the mountain without the disciples knowing, whence they waited until evening, thinking that he would come to them. But evening having come, they could bear no longer not to seek him: so great a love held them. And therefore he says, "And when it was now late, his disciples went down to the sea, seeking him." Now mystically, by "evening" is designated the Lord's Passion, or his Ascension: for as long as Christ was present in the body with the disciples, no disturbance weighed them down, no bitterness troubled them; Matthew 9:15: "The children of the bridegroom cannot mourn, as long as the bridegroom is with them." But with Christ withdrawing from them, they go down to the sea, that is, to the disturbances of the world; Psalm 103:25: "This sea great and wide." But because the love with which they were on fire did not allow them to be without the Lord's presence any longer, he therefore adds their crossing, when he says, "and when they had gone up into a ship, they came over the sea to Capharnaum." Then when he says, "and it was now dark," etc., he explains what he had set forth summarily, and first concerning the arrival at the sea; second concerning the crossing, at the place, "and the sea arose, a great wind blowing." As to the first he says, "it was now dark, and Jesus had not come to them": which the Evangelist expresses not without cause, so as to show through this their fervent love. For neither evening nor night held them back. Now mystically, "darkness" designates a defect of charity; for light is charity, according to 1 John 2:10: "He that loveth his brother abideth in the light." Darkness, therefore, is in us when Jesus, the true light, does not come to us, as is said above in chapter 1, in whose presence all darkness is driven away. Now Christ withdrew himself for so long from the disciples, first indeed that they might feel what his absence would be; which indeed they experienced in the storm of the sea. Jeremiah 2:19: "Know thou, and see that it is an evil and a bitter thing for thee to have left the Lord." Second, that they might seek more diligently; Song of Songs 5:17: "Whither is thy beloved gone, O thou most beautiful among women? … And we will seek him with thee." As to the crossing he says, "and the sea arose, a great wind blowing." And first the storm of the sea is set forth; second, the appearance of Christ and the time of the appearance, at the place, "and when they had rowed," etc.; third, the effect of the appearance, at the place, "and they were afraid," etc. Now the storm on the sea was caused by the blowing of the wind that had arisen; and therefore he says, "and the sea arose, a great wind blowing," on high. By that wind is figured the temptation and persecution which is to come upon the Church on account of a defect of charity. For, as Augustine says, whence charity grows cold, thence the waves increase, and the ship is troubled. Yet those winds and the storm and the waves and the darkness did not so act that either the ship should not move forward, or, having come loose, should be broken, because "he that shall persevere unto the end, he shall be saved," Matthew 24:13; and in the same, chapter 7:27: "the winds blew, and the streams beat against that house, and it fell not." Now the appearance of Christ was not immediately from the beginning of the storm, but after some space; and therefore he says, "when they had rowed, therefore, about five and twenty or thirty furlongs, they see Jesus." And this so that it might be given to be understood, that the Lord permits us to be troubled for a time, so that our virtue may be tested; yet in the end he does not abandon us in necessity, but becomes near to us; 1 Corinthians 10:13: "God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that which you are able; but will make also with temptation issue, that you may be able to bear it." According to Augustine, the twenty-five furlongs which they row are the five books of Moses. For a number of this sort is a square number, arising from this number five multiplied into itself: for five times five is twenty-five; now a number multiplied retains the meaning of its root: whence just as by five the old law is signified, so by twenty-five is signified the perfection of the New Testament. Now by thirty is signified the perfection of the New Testament, which was lacking to the law: for if the same five be multiplied by six, which is a perfect number, the number thirty arises. To those, therefore, who row twenty-five or thirty furlongs, that is, who fulfill the law, or the perfection of the Gospel, Jesus comes, treading down all the swellings of the world, the heights of the present age. Psalm 88:10: "Thou rulest the power of the sea: and appeasest the motion of the waves thereof." And then we shall see Christ near to the ship, because divine help draws near. Psalm 144:18: "The Lord is nigh unto all them that call upon him." It appears, therefore, that those who rightly seek Christ have him present. Now these men most fervently desired Christ: which is clear from the darkness of the time, from the storm of the sea, and from the distance of the harbor, notwithstanding which they were endeavoring to go to him. And therefore Christ was present to them. Now the effect of the appearance is set forth when he says, "and they were afraid. But he saith to them: it is I, be not afraid," and first the interior effect is set forth; second, the exterior, at the place, "and immediately the ship was at the land." Now the interior effect was fear; and therefore is set forth the fear of the disciples conceived from the sudden appearance of Christ, when he says, "and they were afraid," with a good fear, because caused by humility; Romans 11:20: "Be not high-minded, but fear." Or with a bad fear, because, as is said in Matthew 14:26, "they thought it was an apparition." Psalm 13:5: "There have they trembled for fear, where there was no fear." Since fear especially belongs to carnal men, who are terrified at spiritual things. Second is set forth Christ's comforting against a twofold danger. Namely, against the danger to faith in the intellect, and as to this he says, "it is I," as it were repelling all doubt; Luke, last chapter, 39: "See my hands and feet, that it is I myself." Second, against the danger of fear in the affections; and as to this he says, "be not afraid"; Jeremiah 1:8: "Be not afraid at their presence"; Psalm 26:1: "The Lord is my light and my salvation, whom shall I fear?" Third is set forth the disciples' acceptance, because "they willingly took him into the ship": by which it is signified that when servile fear is excluded from our hearts, then we receive Christ, by loving and contemplating him. Apocalypse 3:20: "Behold, I stand at the gate, and knock: if any man shall hear my voice, and open to me the door, I will come in to him." Now the exterior effect was as to two things. First, that the storm was calmed; second, that immediately the ship was at the land, when it was far distant from it: for he furnished them not a deceptive, but a tranquil navigation; and wishing to work a greater miracle, he did not go up into the ship. Thus, therefore, a threefold miracle here concurs: namely, the walking upon the sea, the sudden cessation of the storm, and the bringing of the distant ship to the harbor: that we may learn that the faithful, in whom Christ is, press down the swelling of the world, tread upon the waves of tribulations, and swiftly pass over to the land of the living, according to Psalm 142:10: "Thy good spirit shall lead me into the right land." But here there is a manifold question. One is concerning the letter, in which Matthew seems to say the contrary: for, Matthew 14:22, it is said that the disciples came to the sea at the Lord's command; here, however, that they went down seeking him. Another question is that Matthew in the same place says that the disciples, crossing the sea, came into the land of Genesareth; here, however, it is said that they came to Capharnaum. The third question is that Matthew says that Christ entered the ship; here, however, that he did not. But concerning these three, Chrysostom, dispatching the matter briefly, says that this was not the same miracle as that of Matthew. For, as he himself says, Christ frequently worked a miracle of this kind, walking upon the sea, yet not before the crowds, but before his disciples, lest the crowds should believe that he did not have a true body. According to Augustine, however, it is said, and more truly, that it was the same miracle which John narrates here, and Matthew there. And therefore, answering the first question, he says that it does not matter that Matthew says that they went down to the sea at Christ's command. For it could be that the Lord had commanded them this, and they went down believing that Christ would sail with them: whence they waited for him until night. And because Christ did not come, then they themselves crossed the sea. To the second question there is a twofold response. One is, that Capharnaum and Genesareth are on the same shore, and neighboring. And perhaps the disciples arrived across the sea at the boundary of both, and so Matthew names the one, and John the other. Or it can be said that Matthew does not say that they came immediately into Genesareth, and so perhaps they first came to Capharnaum, and afterward into Genesareth, etc.”

“Here is, I. Christ's retirement from the multitude. 1. Observe what induced him to retire; because he perceived that those who acknowledged him to be that prophet that should come into the world would come, and take him by force, to make him a king, Joh 6:15. Now here we have an instance, (1.) Of the irregular zeal of some of Christ's followers; nothing would serve but they would make him a king. Now, [1.] This was an act of zeal for the honour of Christ, and against the contempt which the ruling part of the Jewish church put upon him. They were concerned to see so great a benefactor to the world so little esteemed in it; and therefore, since royal titles are counted the most illustrious, they would make him a king, knowing that the Messiah was to be a king; and if a prophet, like Moses, then a sovereign prince and lawgiver, like him; and, if they cannot set him up upon the holy hill of Zion, a mountain in Galilee shall serve for the present. Those whom Christ has feasted with the royal dainties of heaven should, in return for his favour, make him their king, and set him upon the throne in their souls: let him that has fed us rule us. But, [2.] It was an irregular zeal; for First, It was grounded upon a mistake concerning the nature of Christ's kingdom, as if it were to be of this world, and he must appear with outward pomp, a crown on his head, and an army at his foot; such a king as this they would make him, which was as great a disparagement to his glory as it would be to lacquer gold or paint a ruby. Right notions of Christ's kingdom would keep us to right methods for advancing it. Secondly, It was excited by the love of the flesh; they would make him their king who could feed them so plentifully without their toil, and save them from the curse of eating their bread in the sweat of their face. Thirdly, It was intended to carry on a secular design; they hoped this might be a fair opportunity of shaking off the Roman yoke, of which they were weary. If they had one to head them who could victual an army cheaper than another could provide for a family, they were sure of the sinews of the war, and could not fail of success, and the recovery of their ancient liberties. Thus is religion often prostituted to a secular interest, and Christ is served only to serve a turn, Rom 16:18. Vix quaritur Jesus properter Jesusm, sed propter aliud - Jesus is usually sought after for something else, not for his own sake. - Augustine. Nay, Fourthly, It was a tumultuous, seditious attempt, and a disturbance of the public peace; it would make the country a seat of war, and expose it to the resentments of the Roman power. Fifthly, It was contrary to the mind of our Lord Jesus himself; for they would take him by force, whether he would or no. Note, Those who force honours upon Christ which he has not required at their hands displease him, and do him the greatest dishonour. Those that say I am of Christ, in opposition to those that are of Apollos and Cephas (so making Christ the head of a party), take him by force, to make him a king, contrary to his own mind. (2.) Here is an instance of the humility and self-denial of the Lord Jesus, that, when they would have made him a king, he departed; so far was he from countenancing the design that he effectually quashed it. Herein he has left a testimony, [1.] Against ambition and affectation of worldly honour, to which he was perfectly mortified, and has taught us to be so. Had they come to take him by force and make him a prisoner, he could not have been more industrious to abscond than he was when they would make him a king. Let us not then covet to be the idols of the crowd, nor be desirous of vainglory. [2.] Against faction and sedition, treason and rebellion, and whatever tends to disturb the peace of kings and provinces. By this it appears that he was no enemy to Caesar, nor would have his followers be so, but the quiet in the land; that he would have his ministers decline every thing that looks like sedition, or looks towards it, and improve their interest only for their work's sake. 2. Observe whither he retired: He departed again into a mountain, eis to oros - into the mountain, the mountain where he had preached (Joh 6:3), whence he came down into the plain, to feed the people, and then returned to it alone, to be private. Christ, though so useful in the places of concourse, yet chose sometimes to be alone, to teach us to sequester ourselves from the world now and then, for the more free converse with God and our own souls; and never less alone, says the serious Christian, than when alone. Public services must not jostle out private devotions. II. Here is the disciples' distress at sea. They that go down to the sea in ships, these see the works of the Lord, for he raiseth the stormy wind, Psa 107:23, Psa 107:24. Apply this to these disciples. 1. Here is their going down to the sea in a ship (Joh 6:16, Joh 6:17): When even was come, and they had done their day's work, it was time to look homeward, and therefore they went aboard, and set sail for Capernaum. This they did by particular direction from their Master, with design (as it should seem) to get them out of the way of the temptation of countenancing those that would have made him a king. 2. Here is the stormy wind arising and fulfilling the word of God. They were Christ's disciples, and were now in the way of their duty, and Christ was now in the mount praying for them; and yet they were in this distress. The perils and afflictions of this present time may very well consist with our interest in Christ and his intercession. They had lately been feasted at Christ's table; but after the sun-shine of comfort expect a storm. (1.) It was now dark; this made the storm the more dangerous and uncomfortable. Sometimes the people of God are in trouble, and cannot see their way out; in the dark concerning the cause of their trouble, concerning the design and tendency of it, and what the issue will be. (2.) Jesus was not come to them. When they were in that storm (Mat 8:23, etc.) Jesus was with them; but now their beloved had withdrawn himself, and was gone. The absence of Christ is the great aggravation of the troubles of Christians. (3.) The sea arose by reason of a great wind. It was calm and fair when they put to sea (they were not so presumptuous as to launch out in a storm), but it arose when they were at sea. In times of tranquillity we must prepare for trouble, for it may arise when we little think of it. Let it comfort good people, when they happen to be in storms at sea, that the disciples of Christ were so; and let the promises of a gracious God balance the threats of an angry sea. Though in a storm, and in the dark, they are no worse off than Christ's disciples were. Clouds and darkness sometimes surround the children of the light, and of the day. 3. Here is Christ's seasonable approach to them when they were in this peril, Joh 6:19. They had rowed (being forced by the contrary winds to betake themselves to their oars) about twenty-five or thirty furlongs. The Holy Spirit that indicted this could have ascertained the number of furlongs precisely, but this, being only circumstantial, is left to be expressed according to the conjecture of the penman. And, when they were got off a good way at sea, they see Jesus walking on the sea. See here, (1.) The power Christ has over the laws and customs of nature, to control and dispense with them at his pleasure. It is natural for heavy bodies to sink in water, but Christ walked upon the water as upon dry land, which was more than Moses's dividing the water and walking through the water. (2.) The concern Christ has for his disciples in distress: He drew nigh to the ship; for therefore he walked upon the water, as he rides upon the heavens, for the help of his people, Deu 33:26. He will not leave them comfortless when they seem to be tossed with tempests and not comforted. When they are banished (as John) into remote places, or shut up (as Paul and Silas) in close places, he will find access to them, and will be nigh them. (3.) The relief Christ gives to his disciples in their fears. They were afraid, more afraid of an apparition (for so they supposed him to be) than of the winds and waves. It is more terrible to wrestle with the rulers of the darkness of this world than with a tempestuous sea. When they thought a demon haunted them, and perhaps was instrumental to raise the storm, they were more terrified than they had been while they saw nothing in it but what was natural. Note, [1.] Our real distresses are often much increased by our imaginary ones, the creatures of our own fancy. [2.] Even the approaches of comfort and deliverance are often so misconstrued as to become the occasions of fear and perplexity. We are often not only worse frightened than hurt, but then most frightened when we are ready to be helped. But, when they were in this fright, how affectionately did Christ silence their fears with that compassionate word (Joh 6:20), It is I, be not afraid! Nothing is more powerful to convince sinners than that word, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest; nothing more powerful to comfort saints than this, "I am Jesus whom thou lovest; it is I that love thee, and seek thy good; be not afraid of me, nor of the storm." When trouble is nigh Christ is nigh. 4. Here is their speedy arrival at the port they were bound for, Joh 6:17. (1.) They welcomed Christ into the ship; they willingly received him. Note, Christ's absenting himself for a time is but so much the more to endear himself, at his return, to his disciples, who value his presence above any thing; see Sol 3:4. (2.) Christ brought them safely to the shore: Immediately the ship was at the land whither they went. Note, [1.] The ship of the church, in which the disciples of Christ have embarked themselves and their all, may be much shattered and distressed, yet it shall come safe to the harbour at last; tossed at sea, but not lost; cast down, but not destroyed; the bush burning, but not consumed. [2.] The power and presence of the church's King shall expedite and facilitate her deliverance, and conquer the difficulties which have baffled the skill and industry of all her other friends. The disciples had rowed hard, but could not make their point till they had got Christ in the ship, and then the work was done suddenly. If we have received Christ Jesus the Lord, have received him willingly, though the night be dark and the wind high, yet we may comfort ourselves with this, that we shall be at shore shortly, and are nearer to it than we think we are. Many a doubting soul is fetched to heaven by a pleasing surprise, or ever it is aware.”

“When Jesus therefore perceived,.... As being the omniscient God, who knew their hearts, and the secret thoughts and purposes of them; or, as man, understood by their words and gestures: that they would come and take him by force, and make him a king; that they had "determined", as the Arabic version renders it; or "had it in their mind", as the Persic; to gather about him as one man, and seize him in a violent manner, whether he would or not; and proclaim him the King Messiah; place him at the head of them, to deliver the nation from the Roman yoke, and set up a temporal kingdom, in which they might hope for great secular advantages: and they might the rather be induced to take such a step, since, by this miracle, they could not doubt of his being able to support such an army of men, and to succeed in the enterprise; for he that could do this, what was it he could not do? but, he departed again into a mountain, himself alone; he left the company directly, upon this resolution of theirs, and even took not his disciples with him, who were in the same way of thinking about a temporal kingdom, as the people, and might encourage them in this undertaking: the mountain Christ went into, very probably was the same he went up to before; the reasons of his departure, were to prevent the attempt; to show that his kingdom was not of this world; to teach his followers to forsake the honours and riches of this world, for his sake; and to let them know, that those who sought only for a temporal redeemer, were unworthy of his presence: and also he went away alone, for the sake of secret retirement, and private prayer; and it may be chiefly, that he prayed that God would open the minds of these men, and particularly the disciples; that they might be convinced of their mistaken notions of him as a temporal prince: some copies add, "and he prayed there"; the Syriac, Ethiopic, and Persic versions leave out the word "again"; and the latter, contrary to all others, renders it, "Christ departed from the mountain alone".”

“Take him by force, to make him a king - The Jews had often suffered by famine in those times in which their enemies were permitted to prevail over them; but, finding that Jesus had such power as to multiply a few loaves to feed thousands, they took it for granted that while he was at their head no evil could possibly happen to them, and therefore were determined immediately to proclaim him king, and rid themselves at once of Herod and the Romans. Our Lord perceiving this, either by some words which they had dropped, or by his penetration of their hearts, retired before the project had been fully formed, or could be put into execution. It was not till a considerable time afterwards that even the disciples fully understood that his kingdom was not of this world. Into a mountain - That on which he was with his disciples previously to his working this miracle: see Joh 6:3. St. Matthew, Mat 14:22, Mat 14:23, and Mark, Mar 6:45, Mar 6:46, say that, before this, Jesus constrained his disciples to embark in the vessel, and go along the sea coast towards Capernaum, or Bethsaida - see here Joh 6:17, and the note on Mar 6:45 (note); and that, after they were gone, he dismissed the multitudes, having, no doubt, given them such advices as the nature of the case required; after which he went into the mountain to pray. Worldly wisdom would have said, "Declare thyself king: yield to the desires of the people: this will be the readiest way of converting the Jews." No. Jesus must die for the sin of the world. - No man's heart can be turned to God by outward pomp or splendor - no saving change can be brought about by any might or any power, but by the Spirit of the Lord of hosts. Zac 4:6.”

“Having set forth the visible sign concerning bodily nourishment, here is set forth the effect of the sign upon the crowds, which is threefold: first, as to the confession of faith; second, as to the attempted rendering of honor, at the place, "Jesus therefore, when he knew," etc.; third, as to their diligent seeking, at the place, "And when evening was come," etc. It should be known, concerning the first, that it was said as it were out of the mouth of the Jews in Psalm 73:9: "Our signs we have not seen, there is now no prophet." Now it was formerly the custom that the prophets worked many signs, whence, signs being lacking, prophecy seemed to have ceased. But when they do see signs, they confess that prophecy has been restored to them. Hence they had already so far profited from the miracle they had seen that they called the Lord a prophet. It is said therefore that those men, who had been filled from the five loaves, when they had seen the sign that Jesus had done, said, "This is truly the prophet." Yet they had not come to perfect faith, because they believed him to be a prophet who is even the Lord of the prophets. Nor, however, are they altogether deceived, because the Lord himself also names himself a prophet. Now it should be known that a prophet is called one who sees. 1 Kings 9:9: "He that is now called a prophet, in time past was called a seer." Now sight pertains to the cognitive power. But in Christ there was a threefold knowledge. Namely, sensitive knowledge: and according to this he had some likeness with the prophets, inasmuch as in the imagination of Christ certain sensible species could be formed, by which future or hidden things might be presented, especially on account of the passibility that belonged to him by reason of his state as a wayfarer. Likewise intellective knowledge: and as to this he does not have a likeness with the prophets, but is even above the angels, since he was a comprehensor more excellently than any creature. Likewise divine knowledge: and as to this he was the inspirer of the prophets and of the angels, since all knowledge is caused through participation of the divine Word. Yet they seem to recognize in Christ the excellence of prophecy in this, that they say "truly the prophet." For although there were many prophets among the Jews, yet one was awaited, preeminent among them, according to Deuteronomy 18:15: "The Lord thy God will raise up to thee a prophet"; and it is of this that they speak; whence he says pointedly, "who is to come into the world." Then, when he says, "Jesus therefore, when he knew," etc., the second effect is set forth, as to the attempted rendering of honor, which nevertheless Christ shunned. And so first the endeavor of the people is set forth; second, the flight of Christ. The endeavor indeed, when it is said, "that they would take him by force, and make him king." For that is said to be seized which is taken apart from the will and the fitting occasion of him from whom it is taken. Now it was true that the disposition of God the Father had been, from eternity, to manifest the kingship of Christ, but this manifestation was not yet fitting according to the time; for he had come then, but not to reign, in the way in which he reigns in that we say in Matthew 6:10, "Thy kingdom come," where he will reign also according to that which he was made man. And therefore for this manifestation another time is appointed, namely, when the open glory of his saints shall be, after the judgment made by him. It was concerning this manifestation that the disciples asked, Acts 1:6: "Lord, wilt thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?" The crowds, therefore, believing that he had come to reign, wished to make him king. The reason for this is that men frequently want such a one for a lord as will feed them in temporal things. Whence, because Christ had fed them, they wished to make him king; Isaiah 3:6: "Thou hast a garment, be thou our prince." Whence Chrysostom says: "See how great is the power of gluttony. They no longer have any care for the transgression of the sabbath, nor are they any longer zealous for God, but all things are set aside, the belly being filled: but already a prophet was among them, and they wished to enthrone him as king." Now the flight of Christ is set forth, when he says, "he fled again into the mountain himself alone." Where it is given to be understood that the Lord, seeing the crowds, had come down from the mountain, and had fed the crowds in the lower places: for unless he had come down from the mountain, it would not be said that he "fled again into the mountain." But since he himself is truly king, why does he flee? To which a threefold reason is assigned. One, because it would have derogated from his dignity, if he had received a kingdom from man, he who was such a king that all kings were kings by participation in him; Proverbs 8:15: "By me kings reign." Another reason is that it would have prejudiced his teaching, if he had received glory or strength from men. For thus he worked and taught so that everything might be ascribed to divine power, and not to human favor; above, 5:41: "I receive not glory from men." The third reason is that he might teach us to despise worldly dignities; below, 13:15: "For I have given you an example, that as I have done to you, so you also should do"; Ecclesiasticus 7:4: "Seek not of man to be made a leader." Thus, therefore, he refused the glory of the world, so that yet he might of his own will undergo the penalty, according to that of Hebrews 12:2: "Who, having joy set before him, endured the cross, despising the shame." But contrary to this seems what is said in Matthew 14:23, namely, that "he went up alone into a mountain to pray." But, according to Augustine, these are not contrary, because the cause of fleeing is joined to the cause of praying. For then the Lord teaches us that there is a great cause for praying, when a cause for fleeing threatens. But mystically he ascends into the mountain then, when the crowds, having been refreshed, were prepared to submit themselves to him, because he ascends into heaven then, when the peoples are prepared to submit themselves to the truth of the faith, according to Psalm 7:8: "The congregation of the people shall surround thee; and for their sakes return thou on high"; that is, that the congregation of the peoples may surround thee, return thou on high. But it is said "he fled," so as to signify that his height could not be understood: for what we do not understand, we say flees from us. Here the third effect is treated, namely the diligent seeking, and first as to the disciples; second as to the crowds, at the place, "And the next day," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he sets forth the endeavor of the disciples; second he explains it, at the place, "and it was now dark," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he describes the descent of the disciples to the sea; second, the crossing of the sea, at the place, "and when they had gone up into a ship," etc. It should be known, therefore, concerning the first, that Christ went up the mountain without the disciples knowing, whence they waited until evening, thinking that he would come to them. But evening having come, they could bear no longer not to seek him: so great a love held them. And therefore he says, "And when it was now late, his disciples went down to the sea, seeking him." Now mystically, by "evening" is designated the Lord's Passion, or his Ascension: for as long as Christ was present in the body with the disciples, no disturbance weighed them down, no bitterness troubled them; Matthew 9:15: "The children of the bridegroom cannot mourn, as long as the bridegroom is with them." But with Christ withdrawing from them, they go down to the sea, that is, to the disturbances of the world; Psalm 103:25: "This sea great and wide." But because the love with which they were on fire did not allow them to be without the Lord's presence any longer, he therefore adds their crossing, when he says, "and when they had gone up into a ship, they came over the sea to Capharnaum." Then when he says, "and it was now dark," etc., he explains what he had set forth summarily, and first concerning the arrival at the sea; second concerning the crossing, at the place, "and the sea arose, a great wind blowing." As to the first he says, "it was now dark, and Jesus had not come to them": which the Evangelist expresses not without cause, so as to show through this their fervent love. For neither evening nor night held them back. Now mystically, "darkness" designates a defect of charity; for light is charity, according to 1 John 2:10: "He that loveth his brother abideth in the light." Darkness, therefore, is in us when Jesus, the true light, does not come to us, as is said above in chapter 1, in whose presence all darkness is driven away. Now Christ withdrew himself for so long from the disciples, first indeed that they might feel what his absence would be; which indeed they experienced in the storm of the sea. Jeremiah 2:19: "Know thou, and see that it is an evil and a bitter thing for thee to have left the Lord." Second, that they might seek more diligently; Song of Songs 5:17: "Whither is thy beloved gone, O thou most beautiful among women? … And we will seek him with thee." As to the crossing he says, "and the sea arose, a great wind blowing." And first the storm of the sea is set forth; second, the appearance of Christ and the time of the appearance, at the place, "and when they had rowed," etc.; third, the effect of the appearance, at the place, "and they were afraid," etc. Now the storm on the sea was caused by the blowing of the wind that had arisen; and therefore he says, "and the sea arose, a great wind blowing," on high. By that wind is figured the temptation and persecution which is to come upon the Church on account of a defect of charity. For, as Augustine says, whence charity grows cold, thence the waves increase, and the ship is troubled. Yet those winds and the storm and the waves and the darkness did not so act that either the ship should not move forward, or, having come loose, should be broken, because "he that shall persevere unto the end, he shall be saved," Matthew 24:13; and in the same, chapter 7:27: "the winds blew, and the streams beat against that house, and it fell not." Now the appearance of Christ was not immediately from the beginning of the storm, but after some space; and therefore he says, "when they had rowed, therefore, about five and twenty or thirty furlongs, they see Jesus." And this so that it might be given to be understood, that the Lord permits us to be troubled for a time, so that our virtue may be tested; yet in the end he does not abandon us in necessity, but becomes near to us; 1 Corinthians 10:13: "God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that which you are able; but will make also with temptation issue, that you may be able to bear it." According to Augustine, the twenty-five furlongs which they row are the five books of Moses. For a number of this sort is a square number, arising from this number five multiplied into itself: for five times five is twenty-five; now a number multiplied retains the meaning of its root: whence just as by five the old law is signified, so by twenty-five is signified the perfection of the New Testament. Now by thirty is signified the perfection of the New Testament, which was lacking to the law: for if the same five be multiplied by six, which is a perfect number, the number thirty arises. To those, therefore, who row twenty-five or thirty furlongs, that is, who fulfill the law, or the perfection of the Gospel, Jesus comes, treading down all the swellings of the world, the heights of the present age. Psalm 88:10: "Thou rulest the power of the sea: and appeasest the motion of the waves thereof." And then we shall see Christ near to the ship, because divine help draws near. Psalm 144:18: "The Lord is nigh unto all them that call upon him." It appears, therefore, that those who rightly seek Christ have him present. Now these men most fervently desired Christ: which is clear from the darkness of the time, from the storm of the sea, and from the distance of the harbor, notwithstanding which they were endeavoring to go to him. And therefore Christ was present to them. Now the effect of the appearance is set forth when he says, "and they were afraid. But he saith to them: it is I, be not afraid," and first the interior effect is set forth; second, the exterior, at the place, "and immediately the ship was at the land." Now the interior effect was fear; and therefore is set forth the fear of the disciples conceived from the sudden appearance of Christ, when he says, "and they were afraid," with a good fear, because caused by humility; Romans 11:20: "Be not high-minded, but fear." Or with a bad fear, because, as is said in Matthew 14:26, "they thought it was an apparition." Psalm 13:5: "There have they trembled for fear, where there was no fear." Since fear especially belongs to carnal men, who are terrified at spiritual things. Second is set forth Christ's comforting against a twofold danger. Namely, against the danger to faith in the intellect, and as to this he says, "it is I," as it were repelling all doubt; Luke, last chapter, 39: "See my hands and feet, that it is I myself." Second, against the danger of fear in the affections; and as to this he says, "be not afraid"; Jeremiah 1:8: "Be not afraid at their presence"; Psalm 26:1: "The Lord is my light and my salvation, whom shall I fear?" Third is set forth the disciples' acceptance, because "they willingly took him into the ship": by which it is signified that when servile fear is excluded from our hearts, then we receive Christ, by loving and contemplating him. Apocalypse 3:20: "Behold, I stand at the gate, and knock: if any man shall hear my voice, and open to me the door, I will come in to him." Now the exterior effect was as to two things. First, that the storm was calmed; second, that immediately the ship was at the land, when it was far distant from it: for he furnished them not a deceptive, but a tranquil navigation; and wishing to work a greater miracle, he did not go up into the ship. Thus, therefore, a threefold miracle here concurs: namely, the walking upon the sea, the sudden cessation of the storm, and the bringing of the distant ship to the harbor: that we may learn that the faithful, in whom Christ is, press down the swelling of the world, tread upon the waves of tribulations, and swiftly pass over to the land of the living, according to Psalm 142:10: "Thy good spirit shall lead me into the right land." But here there is a manifold question. One is concerning the letter, in which Matthew seems to say the contrary: for, Matthew 14:22, it is said that the disciples came to the sea at the Lord's command; here, however, that they went down seeking him. Another question is that Matthew in the same place says that the disciples, crossing the sea, came into the land of Genesareth; here, however, it is said that they came to Capharnaum. The third question is that Matthew says that Christ entered the ship; here, however, that he did not. But concerning these three, Chrysostom, dispatching the matter briefly, says that this was not the same miracle as that of Matthew. For, as he himself says, Christ frequently worked a miracle of this kind, walking upon the sea, yet not before the crowds, but before his disciples, lest the crowds should believe that he did not have a true body. According to Augustine, however, it is said, and more truly, that it was the same miracle which John narrates here, and Matthew there. And therefore, answering the first question, he says that it does not matter that Matthew says that they went down to the sea at Christ's command. For it could be that the Lord had commanded them this, and they went down believing that Christ would sail with them: whence they waited for him until night. And because Christ did not come, then they themselves crossed the sea. To the second question there is a twofold response. One is, that Capharnaum and Genesareth are on the same shore, and neighboring. And perhaps the disciples arrived across the sea at the boundary of both, and so Matthew names the one, and John the other. Or it can be said that Matthew does not say that they came immediately into Genesareth, and so perhaps they first came to Capharnaum, and afterward into Genesareth, etc.”

“Having set forth the visible sign concerning bodily nourishment, here is set forth the effect of the sign upon the crowds, which is threefold: first, as to the confession of faith; second, as to the attempted rendering of honor, at the place, "Jesus therefore, when he knew," etc.; third, as to their diligent seeking, at the place, "And when evening was come," etc. It should be known, concerning the first, that it was said as it were out of the mouth of the Jews in Psalm 73:9: "Our signs we have not seen, there is now no prophet." Now it was formerly the custom that the prophets worked many signs, whence, signs being lacking, prophecy seemed to have ceased. But when they do see signs, they confess that prophecy has been restored to them. Hence they had already so far profited from the miracle they had seen that they called the Lord a prophet. It is said therefore that those men, who had been filled from the five loaves, when they had seen the sign that Jesus had done, said, "This is truly the prophet." Yet they had not come to perfect faith, because they believed him to be a prophet who is even the Lord of the prophets. Nor, however, are they altogether deceived, because the Lord himself also names himself a prophet. Now it should be known that a prophet is called one who sees. 1 Kings 9:9: "He that is now called a prophet, in time past was called a seer." Now sight pertains to the cognitive power. But in Christ there was a threefold knowledge. Namely, sensitive knowledge: and according to this he had some likeness with the prophets, inasmuch as in the imagination of Christ certain sensible species could be formed, by which future or hidden things might be presented, especially on account of the passibility that belonged to him by reason of his state as a wayfarer. Likewise intellective knowledge: and as to this he does not have a likeness with the prophets, but is even above the angels, since he was a comprehensor more excellently than any creature. Likewise divine knowledge: and as to this he was the inspirer of the prophets and of the angels, since all knowledge is caused through participation of the divine Word. Yet they seem to recognize in Christ the excellence of prophecy in this, that they say "truly the prophet." For although there were many prophets among the Jews, yet one was awaited, preeminent among them, according to Deuteronomy 18:15: "The Lord thy God will raise up to thee a prophet"; and it is of this that they speak; whence he says pointedly, "who is to come into the world." Then, when he says, "Jesus therefore, when he knew," etc., the second effect is set forth, as to the attempted rendering of honor, which nevertheless Christ shunned. And so first the endeavor of the people is set forth; second, the flight of Christ. The endeavor indeed, when it is said, "that they would take him by force, and make him king." For that is said to be seized which is taken apart from the will and the fitting occasion of him from whom it is taken. Now it was true that the disposition of God the Father had been, from eternity, to manifest the kingship of Christ, but this manifestation was not yet fitting according to the time; for he had come then, but not to reign, in the way in which he reigns in that we say in Matthew 6:10, "Thy kingdom come," where he will reign also according to that which he was made man. And therefore for this manifestation another time is appointed, namely, when the open glory of his saints shall be, after the judgment made by him. It was concerning this manifestation that the disciples asked, Acts 1:6: "Lord, wilt thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?" The crowds, therefore, believing that he had come to reign, wished to make him king. The reason for this is that men frequently want such a one for a lord as will feed them in temporal things. Whence, because Christ had fed them, they wished to make him king; Isaiah 3:6: "Thou hast a garment, be thou our prince." Whence Chrysostom says: "See how great is the power of gluttony. They no longer have any care for the transgression of the sabbath, nor are they any longer zealous for God, but all things are set aside, the belly being filled: but already a prophet was among them, and they wished to enthrone him as king." Now the flight of Christ is set forth, when he says, "he fled again into the mountain himself alone." Where it is given to be understood that the Lord, seeing the crowds, had come down from the mountain, and had fed the crowds in the lower places: for unless he had come down from the mountain, it would not be said that he "fled again into the mountain." But since he himself is truly king, why does he flee? To which a threefold reason is assigned. One, because it would have derogated from his dignity, if he had received a kingdom from man, he who was such a king that all kings were kings by participation in him; Proverbs 8:15: "By me kings reign." Another reason is that it would have prejudiced his teaching, if he had received glory or strength from men. For thus he worked and taught so that everything might be ascribed to divine power, and not to human favor; above, 5:41: "I receive not glory from men." The third reason is that he might teach us to despise worldly dignities; below, 13:15: "For I have given you an example, that as I have done to you, so you also should do"; Ecclesiasticus 7:4: "Seek not of man to be made a leader." Thus, therefore, he refused the glory of the world, so that yet he might of his own will undergo the penalty, according to that of Hebrews 12:2: "Who, having joy set before him, endured the cross, despising the shame." But contrary to this seems what is said in Matthew 14:23, namely, that "he went up alone into a mountain to pray." But, according to Augustine, these are not contrary, because the cause of fleeing is joined to the cause of praying. For then the Lord teaches us that there is a great cause for praying, when a cause for fleeing threatens. But mystically he ascends into the mountain then, when the crowds, having been refreshed, were prepared to submit themselves to him, because he ascends into heaven then, when the peoples are prepared to submit themselves to the truth of the faith, according to Psalm 7:8: "The congregation of the people shall surround thee; and for their sakes return thou on high"; that is, that the congregation of the peoples may surround thee, return thou on high. But it is said "he fled," so as to signify that his height could not be understood: for what we do not understand, we say flees from us. Here the third effect is treated, namely the diligent seeking, and first as to the disciples; second as to the crowds, at the place, "And the next day," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he sets forth the endeavor of the disciples; second he explains it, at the place, "and it was now dark," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he describes the descent of the disciples to the sea; second, the crossing of the sea, at the place, "and when they had gone up into a ship," etc. It should be known, therefore, concerning the first, that Christ went up the mountain without the disciples knowing, whence they waited until evening, thinking that he would come to them. But evening having come, they could bear no longer not to seek him: so great a love held them. And therefore he says, "And when it was now late, his disciples went down to the sea, seeking him." Now mystically, by "evening" is designated the Lord's Passion, or his Ascension: for as long as Christ was present in the body with the disciples, no disturbance weighed them down, no bitterness troubled them; Matthew 9:15: "The children of the bridegroom cannot mourn, as long as the bridegroom is with them." But with Christ withdrawing from them, they go down to the sea, that is, to the disturbances of the world; Psalm 103:25: "This sea great and wide." But because the love with which they were on fire did not allow them to be without the Lord's presence any longer, he therefore adds their crossing, when he says, "and when they had gone up into a ship, they came over the sea to Capharnaum." Then when he says, "and it was now dark," etc., he explains what he had set forth summarily, and first concerning the arrival at the sea; second concerning the crossing, at the place, "and the sea arose, a great wind blowing." As to the first he says, "it was now dark, and Jesus had not come to them": which the Evangelist expresses not without cause, so as to show through this their fervent love. For neither evening nor night held them back. Now mystically, "darkness" designates a defect of charity; for light is charity, according to 1 John 2:10: "He that loveth his brother abideth in the light." Darkness, therefore, is in us when Jesus, the true light, does not come to us, as is said above in chapter 1, in whose presence all darkness is driven away. Now Christ withdrew himself for so long from the disciples, first indeed that they might feel what his absence would be; which indeed they experienced in the storm of the sea. Jeremiah 2:19: "Know thou, and see that it is an evil and a bitter thing for thee to have left the Lord." Second, that they might seek more diligently; Song of Songs 5:17: "Whither is thy beloved gone, O thou most beautiful among women? … And we will seek him with thee." As to the crossing he says, "and the sea arose, a great wind blowing." And first the storm of the sea is set forth; second, the appearance of Christ and the time of the appearance, at the place, "and when they had rowed," etc.; third, the effect of the appearance, at the place, "and they were afraid," etc. Now the storm on the sea was caused by the blowing of the wind that had arisen; and therefore he says, "and the sea arose, a great wind blowing," on high. By that wind is figured the temptation and persecution which is to come upon the Church on account of a defect of charity. For, as Augustine says, whence charity grows cold, thence the waves increase, and the ship is troubled. Yet those winds and the storm and the waves and the darkness did not so act that either the ship should not move forward, or, having come loose, should be broken, because "he that shall persevere unto the end, he shall be saved," Matthew 24:13; and in the same, chapter 7:27: "the winds blew, and the streams beat against that house, and it fell not." Now the appearance of Christ was not immediately from the beginning of the storm, but after some space; and therefore he says, "when they had rowed, therefore, about five and twenty or thirty furlongs, they see Jesus." And this so that it might be given to be understood, that the Lord permits us to be troubled for a time, so that our virtue may be tested; yet in the end he does not abandon us in necessity, but becomes near to us; 1 Corinthians 10:13: "God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that which you are able; but will make also with temptation issue, that you may be able to bear it." According to Augustine, the twenty-five furlongs which they row are the five books of Moses. For a number of this sort is a square number, arising from this number five multiplied into itself: for five times five is twenty-five; now a number multiplied retains the meaning of its root: whence just as by five the old law is signified, so by twenty-five is signified the perfection of the New Testament. Now by thirty is signified the perfection of the New Testament, which was lacking to the law: for if the same five be multiplied by six, which is a perfect number, the number thirty arises. To those, therefore, who row twenty-five or thirty furlongs, that is, who fulfill the law, or the perfection of the Gospel, Jesus comes, treading down all the swellings of the world, the heights of the present age. Psalm 88:10: "Thou rulest the power of the sea: and appeasest the motion of the waves thereof." And then we shall see Christ near to the ship, because divine help draws near. Psalm 144:18: "The Lord is nigh unto all them that call upon him." It appears, therefore, that those who rightly seek Christ have him present. Now these men most fervently desired Christ: which is clear from the darkness of the time, from the storm of the sea, and from the distance of the harbor, notwithstanding which they were endeavoring to go to him. And therefore Christ was present to them. Now the effect of the appearance is set forth when he says, "and they were afraid. But he saith to them: it is I, be not afraid," and first the interior effect is set forth; second, the exterior, at the place, "and immediately the ship was at the land." Now the interior effect was fear; and therefore is set forth the fear of the disciples conceived from the sudden appearance of Christ, when he says, "and they were afraid," with a good fear, because caused by humility; Romans 11:20: "Be not high-minded, but fear." Or with a bad fear, because, as is said in Matthew 14:26, "they thought it was an apparition." Psalm 13:5: "There have they trembled for fear, where there was no fear." Since fear especially belongs to carnal men, who are terrified at spiritual things. Second is set forth Christ's comforting against a twofold danger. Namely, against the danger to faith in the intellect, and as to this he says, "it is I," as it were repelling all doubt; Luke, last chapter, 39: "See my hands and feet, that it is I myself." Second, against the danger of fear in the affections; and as to this he says, "be not afraid"; Jeremiah 1:8: "Be not afraid at their presence"; Psalm 26:1: "The Lord is my light and my salvation, whom shall I fear?" Third is set forth the disciples' acceptance, because "they willingly took him into the ship": by which it is signified that when servile fear is excluded from our hearts, then we receive Christ, by loving and contemplating him. Apocalypse 3:20: "Behold, I stand at the gate, and knock: if any man shall hear my voice, and open to me the door, I will come in to him." Now the exterior effect was as to two things. First, that the storm was calmed; second, that immediately the ship was at the land, when it was far distant from it: for he furnished them not a deceptive, but a tranquil navigation; and wishing to work a greater miracle, he did not go up into the ship. Thus, therefore, a threefold miracle here concurs: namely, the walking upon the sea, the sudden cessation of the storm, and the bringing of the distant ship to the harbor: that we may learn that the faithful, in whom Christ is, press down the swelling of the world, tread upon the waves of tribulations, and swiftly pass over to the land of the living, according to Psalm 142:10: "Thy good spirit shall lead me into the right land." But here there is a manifold question. One is concerning the letter, in which Matthew seems to say the contrary: for, Matthew 14:22, it is said that the disciples came to the sea at the Lord's command; here, however, that they went down seeking him. Another question is that Matthew in the same place says that the disciples, crossing the sea, came into the land of Genesareth; here, however, it is said that they came to Capharnaum. The third question is that Matthew says that Christ entered the ship; here, however, that he did not. But concerning these three, Chrysostom, dispatching the matter briefly, says that this was not the same miracle as that of Matthew. For, as he himself says, Christ frequently worked a miracle of this kind, walking upon the sea, yet not before the crowds, but before his disciples, lest the crowds should believe that he did not have a true body. According to Augustine, however, it is said, and more truly, that it was the same miracle which John narrates here, and Matthew there. And therefore, answering the first question, he says that it does not matter that Matthew says that they went down to the sea at Christ's command. For it could be that the Lord had commanded them this, and they went down believing that Christ would sail with them: whence they waited for him until night. And because Christ did not come, then they themselves crossed the sea. To the second question there is a twofold response. One is, that Capharnaum and Genesareth are on the same shore, and neighboring. And perhaps the disciples arrived across the sea at the boundary of both, and so Matthew names the one, and John the other. Or it can be said that Matthew does not say that they came immediately into Genesareth, and so perhaps they first came to Capharnaum, and afterward into Genesareth, etc.”

“Having set forth the visible sign concerning bodily nourishment, here is set forth the effect of the sign upon the crowds, which is threefold: first, as to the confession of faith; second, as to the attempted rendering of honor, at the place, "Jesus therefore, when he knew," etc.; third, as to their diligent seeking, at the place, "And when evening was come," etc. It should be known, concerning the first, that it was said as it were out of the mouth of the Jews in Psalm 73:9: "Our signs we have not seen, there is now no prophet." Now it was formerly the custom that the prophets worked many signs, whence, signs being lacking, prophecy seemed to have ceased. But when they do see signs, they confess that prophecy has been restored to them. Hence they had already so far profited from the miracle they had seen that they called the Lord a prophet. It is said therefore that those men, who had been filled from the five loaves, when they had seen the sign that Jesus had done, said, "This is truly the prophet." Yet they had not come to perfect faith, because they believed him to be a prophet who is even the Lord of the prophets. Nor, however, are they altogether deceived, because the Lord himself also names himself a prophet. Now it should be known that a prophet is called one who sees. 1 Kings 9:9: "He that is now called a prophet, in time past was called a seer." Now sight pertains to the cognitive power. But in Christ there was a threefold knowledge. Namely, sensitive knowledge: and according to this he had some likeness with the prophets, inasmuch as in the imagination of Christ certain sensible species could be formed, by which future or hidden things might be presented, especially on account of the passibility that belonged to him by reason of his state as a wayfarer. Likewise intellective knowledge: and as to this he does not have a likeness with the prophets, but is even above the angels, since he was a comprehensor more excellently than any creature. Likewise divine knowledge: and as to this he was the inspirer of the prophets and of the angels, since all knowledge is caused through participation of the divine Word. Yet they seem to recognize in Christ the excellence of prophecy in this, that they say "truly the prophet." For although there were many prophets among the Jews, yet one was awaited, preeminent among them, according to Deuteronomy 18:15: "The Lord thy God will raise up to thee a prophet"; and it is of this that they speak; whence he says pointedly, "who is to come into the world." Then, when he says, "Jesus therefore, when he knew," etc., the second effect is set forth, as to the attempted rendering of honor, which nevertheless Christ shunned. And so first the endeavor of the people is set forth; second, the flight of Christ. The endeavor indeed, when it is said, "that they would take him by force, and make him king." For that is said to be seized which is taken apart from the will and the fitting occasion of him from whom it is taken. Now it was true that the disposition of God the Father had been, from eternity, to manifest the kingship of Christ, but this manifestation was not yet fitting according to the time; for he had come then, but not to reign, in the way in which he reigns in that we say in Matthew 6:10, "Thy kingdom come," where he will reign also according to that which he was made man. And therefore for this manifestation another time is appointed, namely, when the open glory of his saints shall be, after the judgment made by him. It was concerning this manifestation that the disciples asked, Acts 1:6: "Lord, wilt thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?" The crowds, therefore, believing that he had come to reign, wished to make him king. The reason for this is that men frequently want such a one for a lord as will feed them in temporal things. Whence, because Christ had fed them, they wished to make him king; Isaiah 3:6: "Thou hast a garment, be thou our prince." Whence Chrysostom says: "See how great is the power of gluttony. They no longer have any care for the transgression of the sabbath, nor are they any longer zealous for God, but all things are set aside, the belly being filled: but already a prophet was among them, and they wished to enthrone him as king." Now the flight of Christ is set forth, when he says, "he fled again into the mountain himself alone." Where it is given to be understood that the Lord, seeing the crowds, had come down from the mountain, and had fed the crowds in the lower places: for unless he had come down from the mountain, it would not be said that he "fled again into the mountain." But since he himself is truly king, why does he flee? To which a threefold reason is assigned. One, because it would have derogated from his dignity, if he had received a kingdom from man, he who was such a king that all kings were kings by participation in him; Proverbs 8:15: "By me kings reign." Another reason is that it would have prejudiced his teaching, if he had received glory or strength from men. For thus he worked and taught so that everything might be ascribed to divine power, and not to human favor; above, 5:41: "I receive not glory from men." The third reason is that he might teach us to despise worldly dignities; below, 13:15: "For I have given you an example, that as I have done to you, so you also should do"; Ecclesiasticus 7:4: "Seek not of man to be made a leader." Thus, therefore, he refused the glory of the world, so that yet he might of his own will undergo the penalty, according to that of Hebrews 12:2: "Who, having joy set before him, endured the cross, despising the shame." But contrary to this seems what is said in Matthew 14:23, namely, that "he went up alone into a mountain to pray." But, according to Augustine, these are not contrary, because the cause of fleeing is joined to the cause of praying. For then the Lord teaches us that there is a great cause for praying, when a cause for fleeing threatens. But mystically he ascends into the mountain then, when the crowds, having been refreshed, were prepared to submit themselves to him, because he ascends into heaven then, when the peoples are prepared to submit themselves to the truth of the faith, according to Psalm 7:8: "The congregation of the people shall surround thee; and for their sakes return thou on high"; that is, that the congregation of the peoples may surround thee, return thou on high. But it is said "he fled," so as to signify that his height could not be understood: for what we do not understand, we say flees from us. Here the third effect is treated, namely the diligent seeking, and first as to the disciples; second as to the crowds, at the place, "And the next day," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he sets forth the endeavor of the disciples; second he explains it, at the place, "and it was now dark," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he describes the descent of the disciples to the sea; second, the crossing of the sea, at the place, "and when they had gone up into a ship," etc. It should be known, therefore, concerning the first, that Christ went up the mountain without the disciples knowing, whence they waited until evening, thinking that he would come to them. But evening having come, they could bear no longer not to seek him: so great a love held them. And therefore he says, "And when it was now late, his disciples went down to the sea, seeking him." Now mystically, by "evening" is designated the Lord's Passion, or his Ascension: for as long as Christ was present in the body with the disciples, no disturbance weighed them down, no bitterness troubled them; Matthew 9:15: "The children of the bridegroom cannot mourn, as long as the bridegroom is with them." But with Christ withdrawing from them, they go down to the sea, that is, to the disturbances of the world; Psalm 103:25: "This sea great and wide." But because the love with which they were on fire did not allow them to be without the Lord's presence any longer, he therefore adds their crossing, when he says, "and when they had gone up into a ship, they came over the sea to Capharnaum." Then when he says, "and it was now dark," etc., he explains what he had set forth summarily, and first concerning the arrival at the sea; second concerning the crossing, at the place, "and the sea arose, a great wind blowing." As to the first he says, "it was now dark, and Jesus had not come to them": which the Evangelist expresses not without cause, so as to show through this their fervent love. For neither evening nor night held them back. Now mystically, "darkness" designates a defect of charity; for light is charity, according to 1 John 2:10: "He that loveth his brother abideth in the light." Darkness, therefore, is in us when Jesus, the true light, does not come to us, as is said above in chapter 1, in whose presence all darkness is driven away. Now Christ withdrew himself for so long from the disciples, first indeed that they might feel what his absence would be; which indeed they experienced in the storm of the sea. Jeremiah 2:19: "Know thou, and see that it is an evil and a bitter thing for thee to have left the Lord." Second, that they might seek more diligently; Song of Songs 5:17: "Whither is thy beloved gone, O thou most beautiful among women? … And we will seek him with thee." As to the crossing he says, "and the sea arose, a great wind blowing." And first the storm of the sea is set forth; second, the appearance of Christ and the time of the appearance, at the place, "and when they had rowed," etc.; third, the effect of the appearance, at the place, "and they were afraid," etc. Now the storm on the sea was caused by the blowing of the wind that had arisen; and therefore he says, "and the sea arose, a great wind blowing," on high. By that wind is figured the temptation and persecution which is to come upon the Church on account of a defect of charity. For, as Augustine says, whence charity grows cold, thence the waves increase, and the ship is troubled. Yet those winds and the storm and the waves and the darkness did not so act that either the ship should not move forward, or, having come loose, should be broken, because "he that shall persevere unto the end, he shall be saved," Matthew 24:13; and in the same, chapter 7:27: "the winds blew, and the streams beat against that house, and it fell not." Now the appearance of Christ was not immediately from the beginning of the storm, but after some space; and therefore he says, "when they had rowed, therefore, about five and twenty or thirty furlongs, they see Jesus." And this so that it might be given to be understood, that the Lord permits us to be troubled for a time, so that our virtue may be tested; yet in the end he does not abandon us in necessity, but becomes near to us; 1 Corinthians 10:13: "God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that which you are able; but will make also with temptation issue, that you may be able to bear it." According to Augustine, the twenty-five furlongs which they row are the five books of Moses. For a number of this sort is a square number, arising from this number five multiplied into itself: for five times five is twenty-five; now a number multiplied retains the meaning of its root: whence just as by five the old law is signified, so by twenty-five is signified the perfection of the New Testament. Now by thirty is signified the perfection of the New Testament, which was lacking to the law: for if the same five be multiplied by six, which is a perfect number, the number thirty arises. To those, therefore, who row twenty-five or thirty furlongs, that is, who fulfill the law, or the perfection of the Gospel, Jesus comes, treading down all the swellings of the world, the heights of the present age. Psalm 88:10: "Thou rulest the power of the sea: and appeasest the motion of the waves thereof." And then we shall see Christ near to the ship, because divine help draws near. Psalm 144:18: "The Lord is nigh unto all them that call upon him." It appears, therefore, that those who rightly seek Christ have him present. Now these men most fervently desired Christ: which is clear from the darkness of the time, from the storm of the sea, and from the distance of the harbor, notwithstanding which they were endeavoring to go to him. And therefore Christ was present to them. Now the effect of the appearance is set forth when he says, "and they were afraid. But he saith to them: it is I, be not afraid," and first the interior effect is set forth; second, the exterior, at the place, "and immediately the ship was at the land." Now the interior effect was fear; and therefore is set forth the fear of the disciples conceived from the sudden appearance of Christ, when he says, "and they were afraid," with a good fear, because caused by humility; Romans 11:20: "Be not high-minded, but fear." Or with a bad fear, because, as is said in Matthew 14:26, "they thought it was an apparition." Psalm 13:5: "There have they trembled for fear, where there was no fear." Since fear especially belongs to carnal men, who are terrified at spiritual things. Second is set forth Christ's comforting against a twofold danger. Namely, against the danger to faith in the intellect, and as to this he says, "it is I," as it were repelling all doubt; Luke, last chapter, 39: "See my hands and feet, that it is I myself." Second, against the danger of fear in the affections; and as to this he says, "be not afraid"; Jeremiah 1:8: "Be not afraid at their presence"; Psalm 26:1: "The Lord is my light and my salvation, whom shall I fear?" Third is set forth the disciples' acceptance, because "they willingly took him into the ship": by which it is signified that when servile fear is excluded from our hearts, then we receive Christ, by loving and contemplating him. Apocalypse 3:20: "Behold, I stand at the gate, and knock: if any man shall hear my voice, and open to me the door, I will come in to him." Now the exterior effect was as to two things. First, that the storm was calmed; second, that immediately the ship was at the land, when it was far distant from it: for he furnished them not a deceptive, but a tranquil navigation; and wishing to work a greater miracle, he did not go up into the ship. Thus, therefore, a threefold miracle here concurs: namely, the walking upon the sea, the sudden cessation of the storm, and the bringing of the distant ship to the harbor: that we may learn that the faithful, in whom Christ is, press down the swelling of the world, tread upon the waves of tribulations, and swiftly pass over to the land of the living, according to Psalm 142:10: "Thy good spirit shall lead me into the right land." But here there is a manifold question. One is concerning the letter, in which Matthew seems to say the contrary: for, Matthew 14:22, it is said that the disciples came to the sea at the Lord's command; here, however, that they went down seeking him. Another question is that Matthew in the same place says that the disciples, crossing the sea, came into the land of Genesareth; here, however, it is said that they came to Capharnaum. The third question is that Matthew says that Christ entered the ship; here, however, that he did not. But concerning these three, Chrysostom, dispatching the matter briefly, says that this was not the same miracle as that of Matthew. For, as he himself says, Christ frequently worked a miracle of this kind, walking upon the sea, yet not before the crowds, but before his disciples, lest the crowds should believe that he did not have a true body. According to Augustine, however, it is said, and more truly, that it was the same miracle which John narrates here, and Matthew there. And therefore, answering the first question, he says that it does not matter that Matthew says that they went down to the sea at Christ's command. For it could be that the Lord had commanded them this, and they went down believing that Christ would sail with them: whence they waited for him until night. And because Christ did not come, then they themselves crossed the sea. To the second question there is a twofold response. One is, that Capharnaum and Genesareth are on the same shore, and neighboring. And perhaps the disciples arrived across the sea at the boundary of both, and so Matthew names the one, and John the other. Or it can be said that Matthew does not say that they came immediately into Genesareth, and so perhaps they first came to Capharnaum, and afterward into Genesareth, etc.”

“Having set forth the visible sign concerning bodily nourishment, here is set forth the effect of the sign upon the crowds, which is threefold: first, as to the confession of faith; second, as to the attempted rendering of honor, at the place, "Jesus therefore, when he knew," etc.; third, as to their diligent seeking, at the place, "And when evening was come," etc. It should be known, concerning the first, that it was said as it were out of the mouth of the Jews in Psalm 73:9: "Our signs we have not seen, there is now no prophet." Now it was formerly the custom that the prophets worked many signs, whence, signs being lacking, prophecy seemed to have ceased. But when they do see signs, they confess that prophecy has been restored to them. Hence they had already so far profited from the miracle they had seen that they called the Lord a prophet. It is said therefore that those men, who had been filled from the five loaves, when they had seen the sign that Jesus had done, said, "This is truly the prophet." Yet they had not come to perfect faith, because they believed him to be a prophet who is even the Lord of the prophets. Nor, however, are they altogether deceived, because the Lord himself also names himself a prophet. Now it should be known that a prophet is called one who sees. 1 Kings 9:9: "He that is now called a prophet, in time past was called a seer." Now sight pertains to the cognitive power. But in Christ there was a threefold knowledge. Namely, sensitive knowledge: and according to this he had some likeness with the prophets, inasmuch as in the imagination of Christ certain sensible species could be formed, by which future or hidden things might be presented, especially on account of the passibility that belonged to him by reason of his state as a wayfarer. Likewise intellective knowledge: and as to this he does not have a likeness with the prophets, but is even above the angels, since he was a comprehensor more excellently than any creature. Likewise divine knowledge: and as to this he was the inspirer of the prophets and of the angels, since all knowledge is caused through participation of the divine Word. Yet they seem to recognize in Christ the excellence of prophecy in this, that they say "truly the prophet." For although there were many prophets among the Jews, yet one was awaited, preeminent among them, according to Deuteronomy 18:15: "The Lord thy God will raise up to thee a prophet"; and it is of this that they speak; whence he says pointedly, "who is to come into the world." Then, when he says, "Jesus therefore, when he knew," etc., the second effect is set forth, as to the attempted rendering of honor, which nevertheless Christ shunned. And so first the endeavor of the people is set forth; second, the flight of Christ. The endeavor indeed, when it is said, "that they would take him by force, and make him king." For that is said to be seized which is taken apart from the will and the fitting occasion of him from whom it is taken. Now it was true that the disposition of God the Father had been, from eternity, to manifest the kingship of Christ, but this manifestation was not yet fitting according to the time; for he had come then, but not to reign, in the way in which he reigns in that we say in Matthew 6:10, "Thy kingdom come," where he will reign also according to that which he was made man. And therefore for this manifestation another time is appointed, namely, when the open glory of his saints shall be, after the judgment made by him. It was concerning this manifestation that the disciples asked, Acts 1:6: "Lord, wilt thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?" The crowds, therefore, believing that he had come to reign, wished to make him king. The reason for this is that men frequently want such a one for a lord as will feed them in temporal things. Whence, because Christ had fed them, they wished to make him king; Isaiah 3:6: "Thou hast a garment, be thou our prince." Whence Chrysostom says: "See how great is the power of gluttony. They no longer have any care for the transgression of the sabbath, nor are they any longer zealous for God, but all things are set aside, the belly being filled: but already a prophet was among them, and they wished to enthrone him as king." Now the flight of Christ is set forth, when he says, "he fled again into the mountain himself alone." Where it is given to be understood that the Lord, seeing the crowds, had come down from the mountain, and had fed the crowds in the lower places: for unless he had come down from the mountain, it would not be said that he "fled again into the mountain." But since he himself is truly king, why does he flee? To which a threefold reason is assigned. One, because it would have derogated from his dignity, if he had received a kingdom from man, he who was such a king that all kings were kings by participation in him; Proverbs 8:15: "By me kings reign." Another reason is that it would have prejudiced his teaching, if he had received glory or strength from men. For thus he worked and taught so that everything might be ascribed to divine power, and not to human favor; above, 5:41: "I receive not glory from men." The third reason is that he might teach us to despise worldly dignities; below, 13:15: "For I have given you an example, that as I have done to you, so you also should do"; Ecclesiasticus 7:4: "Seek not of man to be made a leader." Thus, therefore, he refused the glory of the world, so that yet he might of his own will undergo the penalty, according to that of Hebrews 12:2: "Who, having joy set before him, endured the cross, despising the shame." But contrary to this seems what is said in Matthew 14:23, namely, that "he went up alone into a mountain to pray." But, according to Augustine, these are not contrary, because the cause of fleeing is joined to the cause of praying. For then the Lord teaches us that there is a great cause for praying, when a cause for fleeing threatens. But mystically he ascends into the mountain then, when the crowds, having been refreshed, were prepared to submit themselves to him, because he ascends into heaven then, when the peoples are prepared to submit themselves to the truth of the faith, according to Psalm 7:8: "The congregation of the people shall surround thee; and for their sakes return thou on high"; that is, that the congregation of the peoples may surround thee, return thou on high. But it is said "he fled," so as to signify that his height could not be understood: for what we do not understand, we say flees from us. Here the third effect is treated, namely the diligent seeking, and first as to the disciples; second as to the crowds, at the place, "And the next day," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he sets forth the endeavor of the disciples; second he explains it, at the place, "and it was now dark," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he describes the descent of the disciples to the sea; second, the crossing of the sea, at the place, "and when they had gone up into a ship," etc. It should be known, therefore, concerning the first, that Christ went up the mountain without the disciples knowing, whence they waited until evening, thinking that he would come to them. But evening having come, they could bear no longer not to seek him: so great a love held them. And therefore he says, "And when it was now late, his disciples went down to the sea, seeking him." Now mystically, by "evening" is designated the Lord's Passion, or his Ascension: for as long as Christ was present in the body with the disciples, no disturbance weighed them down, no bitterness troubled them; Matthew 9:15: "The children of the bridegroom cannot mourn, as long as the bridegroom is with them." But with Christ withdrawing from them, they go down to the sea, that is, to the disturbances of the world; Psalm 103:25: "This sea great and wide." But because the love with which they were on fire did not allow them to be without the Lord's presence any longer, he therefore adds their crossing, when he says, "and when they had gone up into a ship, they came over the sea to Capharnaum." Then when he says, "and it was now dark," etc., he explains what he had set forth summarily, and first concerning the arrival at the sea; second concerning the crossing, at the place, "and the sea arose, a great wind blowing." As to the first he says, "it was now dark, and Jesus had not come to them": which the Evangelist expresses not without cause, so as to show through this their fervent love. For neither evening nor night held them back. Now mystically, "darkness" designates a defect of charity; for light is charity, according to 1 John 2:10: "He that loveth his brother abideth in the light." Darkness, therefore, is in us when Jesus, the true light, does not come to us, as is said above in chapter 1, in whose presence all darkness is driven away. Now Christ withdrew himself for so long from the disciples, first indeed that they might feel what his absence would be; which indeed they experienced in the storm of the sea. Jeremiah 2:19: "Know thou, and see that it is an evil and a bitter thing for thee to have left the Lord." Second, that they might seek more diligently; Song of Songs 5:17: "Whither is thy beloved gone, O thou most beautiful among women? … And we will seek him with thee." As to the crossing he says, "and the sea arose, a great wind blowing." And first the storm of the sea is set forth; second, the appearance of Christ and the time of the appearance, at the place, "and when they had rowed," etc.; third, the effect of the appearance, at the place, "and they were afraid," etc. Now the storm on the sea was caused by the blowing of the wind that had arisen; and therefore he says, "and the sea arose, a great wind blowing," on high. By that wind is figured the temptation and persecution which is to come upon the Church on account of a defect of charity. For, as Augustine says, whence charity grows cold, thence the waves increase, and the ship is troubled. Yet those winds and the storm and the waves and the darkness did not so act that either the ship should not move forward, or, having come loose, should be broken, because "he that shall persevere unto the end, he shall be saved," Matthew 24:13; and in the same, chapter 7:27: "the winds blew, and the streams beat against that house, and it fell not." Now the appearance of Christ was not immediately from the beginning of the storm, but after some space; and therefore he says, "when they had rowed, therefore, about five and twenty or thirty furlongs, they see Jesus." And this so that it might be given to be understood, that the Lord permits us to be troubled for a time, so that our virtue may be tested; yet in the end he does not abandon us in necessity, but becomes near to us; 1 Corinthians 10:13: "God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that which you are able; but will make also with temptation issue, that you may be able to bear it." According to Augustine, the twenty-five furlongs which they row are the five books of Moses. For a number of this sort is a square number, arising from this number five multiplied into itself: for five times five is twenty-five; now a number multiplied retains the meaning of its root: whence just as by five the old law is signified, so by twenty-five is signified the perfection of the New Testament. Now by thirty is signified the perfection of the New Testament, which was lacking to the law: for if the same five be multiplied by six, which is a perfect number, the number thirty arises. To those, therefore, who row twenty-five or thirty furlongs, that is, who fulfill the law, or the perfection of the Gospel, Jesus comes, treading down all the swellings of the world, the heights of the present age. Psalm 88:10: "Thou rulest the power of the sea: and appeasest the motion of the waves thereof." And then we shall see Christ near to the ship, because divine help draws near. Psalm 144:18: "The Lord is nigh unto all them that call upon him." It appears, therefore, that those who rightly seek Christ have him present. Now these men most fervently desired Christ: which is clear from the darkness of the time, from the storm of the sea, and from the distance of the harbor, notwithstanding which they were endeavoring to go to him. And therefore Christ was present to them. Now the effect of the appearance is set forth when he says, "and they were afraid. But he saith to them: it is I, be not afraid," and first the interior effect is set forth; second, the exterior, at the place, "and immediately the ship was at the land." Now the interior effect was fear; and therefore is set forth the fear of the disciples conceived from the sudden appearance of Christ, when he says, "and they were afraid," with a good fear, because caused by humility; Romans 11:20: "Be not high-minded, but fear." Or with a bad fear, because, as is said in Matthew 14:26, "they thought it was an apparition." Psalm 13:5: "There have they trembled for fear, where there was no fear." Since fear especially belongs to carnal men, who are terrified at spiritual things. Second is set forth Christ's comforting against a twofold danger. Namely, against the danger to faith in the intellect, and as to this he says, "it is I," as it were repelling all doubt; Luke, last chapter, 39: "See my hands and feet, that it is I myself." Second, against the danger of fear in the affections; and as to this he says, "be not afraid"; Jeremiah 1:8: "Be not afraid at their presence"; Psalm 26:1: "The Lord is my light and my salvation, whom shall I fear?" Third is set forth the disciples' acceptance, because "they willingly took him into the ship": by which it is signified that when servile fear is excluded from our hearts, then we receive Christ, by loving and contemplating him. Apocalypse 3:20: "Behold, I stand at the gate, and knock: if any man shall hear my voice, and open to me the door, I will come in to him." Now the exterior effect was as to two things. First, that the storm was calmed; second, that immediately the ship was at the land, when it was far distant from it: for he furnished them not a deceptive, but a tranquil navigation; and wishing to work a greater miracle, he did not go up into the ship. Thus, therefore, a threefold miracle here concurs: namely, the walking upon the sea, the sudden cessation of the storm, and the bringing of the distant ship to the harbor: that we may learn that the faithful, in whom Christ is, press down the swelling of the world, tread upon the waves of tribulations, and swiftly pass over to the land of the living, according to Psalm 142:10: "Thy good spirit shall lead me into the right land." But here there is a manifold question. One is concerning the letter, in which Matthew seems to say the contrary: for, Matthew 14:22, it is said that the disciples came to the sea at the Lord's command; here, however, that they went down seeking him. Another question is that Matthew in the same place says that the disciples, crossing the sea, came into the land of Genesareth; here, however, it is said that they came to Capharnaum. The third question is that Matthew says that Christ entered the ship; here, however, that he did not. But concerning these three, Chrysostom, dispatching the matter briefly, says that this was not the same miracle as that of Matthew. For, as he himself says, Christ frequently worked a miracle of this kind, walking upon the sea, yet not before the crowds, but before his disciples, lest the crowds should believe that he did not have a true body. According to Augustine, however, it is said, and more truly, that it was the same miracle which John narrates here, and Matthew there. And therefore, answering the first question, he says that it does not matter that Matthew says that they went down to the sea at Christ's command. For it could be that the Lord had commanded them this, and they went down believing that Christ would sail with them: whence they waited for him until night. And because Christ did not come, then they themselves crossed the sea. To the second question there is a twofold response. One is, that Capharnaum and Genesareth are on the same shore, and neighboring. And perhaps the disciples arrived across the sea at the boundary of both, and so Matthew names the one, and John the other. Or it can be said that Matthew does not say that they came immediately into Genesareth, and so perhaps they first came to Capharnaum, and afterward into Genesareth, etc.”

“Having set forth the visible sign concerning bodily nourishment, here is set forth the effect of the sign upon the crowds, which is threefold: first, as to the confession of faith; second, as to the attempted rendering of honor, at the place, "Jesus therefore, when he knew," etc.; third, as to their diligent seeking, at the place, "And when evening was come," etc. It should be known, concerning the first, that it was said as it were out of the mouth of the Jews in Psalm 73:9: "Our signs we have not seen, there is now no prophet." Now it was formerly the custom that the prophets worked many signs, whence, signs being lacking, prophecy seemed to have ceased. But when they do see signs, they confess that prophecy has been restored to them. Hence they had already so far profited from the miracle they had seen that they called the Lord a prophet. It is said therefore that those men, who had been filled from the five loaves, when they had seen the sign that Jesus had done, said, "This is truly the prophet." Yet they had not come to perfect faith, because they believed him to be a prophet who is even the Lord of the prophets. Nor, however, are they altogether deceived, because the Lord himself also names himself a prophet. Now it should be known that a prophet is called one who sees. 1 Kings 9:9: "He that is now called a prophet, in time past was called a seer." Now sight pertains to the cognitive power. But in Christ there was a threefold knowledge. Namely, sensitive knowledge: and according to this he had some likeness with the prophets, inasmuch as in the imagination of Christ certain sensible species could be formed, by which future or hidden things might be presented, especially on account of the passibility that belonged to him by reason of his state as a wayfarer. Likewise intellective knowledge: and as to this he does not have a likeness with the prophets, but is even above the angels, since he was a comprehensor more excellently than any creature. Likewise divine knowledge: and as to this he was the inspirer of the prophets and of the angels, since all knowledge is caused through participation of the divine Word. Yet they seem to recognize in Christ the excellence of prophecy in this, that they say "truly the prophet." For although there were many prophets among the Jews, yet one was awaited, preeminent among them, according to Deuteronomy 18:15: "The Lord thy God will raise up to thee a prophet"; and it is of this that they speak; whence he says pointedly, "who is to come into the world." Then, when he says, "Jesus therefore, when he knew," etc., the second effect is set forth, as to the attempted rendering of honor, which nevertheless Christ shunned. And so first the endeavor of the people is set forth; second, the flight of Christ. The endeavor indeed, when it is said, "that they would take him by force, and make him king." For that is said to be seized which is taken apart from the will and the fitting occasion of him from whom it is taken. Now it was true that the disposition of God the Father had been, from eternity, to manifest the kingship of Christ, but this manifestation was not yet fitting according to the time; for he had come then, but not to reign, in the way in which he reigns in that we say in Matthew 6:10, "Thy kingdom come," where he will reign also according to that which he was made man. And therefore for this manifestation another time is appointed, namely, when the open glory of his saints shall be, after the judgment made by him. It was concerning this manifestation that the disciples asked, Acts 1:6: "Lord, wilt thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?" The crowds, therefore, believing that he had come to reign, wished to make him king. The reason for this is that men frequently want such a one for a lord as will feed them in temporal things. Whence, because Christ had fed them, they wished to make him king; Isaiah 3:6: "Thou hast a garment, be thou our prince." Whence Chrysostom says: "See how great is the power of gluttony. They no longer have any care for the transgression of the sabbath, nor are they any longer zealous for God, but all things are set aside, the belly being filled: but already a prophet was among them, and they wished to enthrone him as king." Now the flight of Christ is set forth, when he says, "he fled again into the mountain himself alone." Where it is given to be understood that the Lord, seeing the crowds, had come down from the mountain, and had fed the crowds in the lower places: for unless he had come down from the mountain, it would not be said that he "fled again into the mountain." But since he himself is truly king, why does he flee? To which a threefold reason is assigned. One, because it would have derogated from his dignity, if he had received a kingdom from man, he who was such a king that all kings were kings by participation in him; Proverbs 8:15: "By me kings reign." Another reason is that it would have prejudiced his teaching, if he had received glory or strength from men. For thus he worked and taught so that everything might be ascribed to divine power, and not to human favor; above, 5:41: "I receive not glory from men." The third reason is that he might teach us to despise worldly dignities; below, 13:15: "For I have given you an example, that as I have done to you, so you also should do"; Ecclesiasticus 7:4: "Seek not of man to be made a leader." Thus, therefore, he refused the glory of the world, so that yet he might of his own will undergo the penalty, according to that of Hebrews 12:2: "Who, having joy set before him, endured the cross, despising the shame." But contrary to this seems what is said in Matthew 14:23, namely, that "he went up alone into a mountain to pray." But, according to Augustine, these are not contrary, because the cause of fleeing is joined to the cause of praying. For then the Lord teaches us that there is a great cause for praying, when a cause for fleeing threatens. But mystically he ascends into the mountain then, when the crowds, having been refreshed, were prepared to submit themselves to him, because he ascends into heaven then, when the peoples are prepared to submit themselves to the truth of the faith, according to Psalm 7:8: "The congregation of the people shall surround thee; and for their sakes return thou on high"; that is, that the congregation of the peoples may surround thee, return thou on high. But it is said "he fled," so as to signify that his height could not be understood: for what we do not understand, we say flees from us. Here the third effect is treated, namely the diligent seeking, and first as to the disciples; second as to the crowds, at the place, "And the next day," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he sets forth the endeavor of the disciples; second he explains it, at the place, "and it was now dark," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he describes the descent of the disciples to the sea; second, the crossing of the sea, at the place, "and when they had gone up into a ship," etc. It should be known, therefore, concerning the first, that Christ went up the mountain without the disciples knowing, whence they waited until evening, thinking that he would come to them. But evening having come, they could bear no longer not to seek him: so great a love held them. And therefore he says, "And when it was now late, his disciples went down to the sea, seeking him." Now mystically, by "evening" is designated the Lord's Passion, or his Ascension: for as long as Christ was present in the body with the disciples, no disturbance weighed them down, no bitterness troubled them; Matthew 9:15: "The children of the bridegroom cannot mourn, as long as the bridegroom is with them." But with Christ withdrawing from them, they go down to the sea, that is, to the disturbances of the world; Psalm 103:25: "This sea great and wide." But because the love with which they were on fire did not allow them to be without the Lord's presence any longer, he therefore adds their crossing, when he says, "and when they had gone up into a ship, they came over the sea to Capharnaum." Then when he says, "and it was now dark," etc., he explains what he had set forth summarily, and first concerning the arrival at the sea; second concerning the crossing, at the place, "and the sea arose, a great wind blowing." As to the first he says, "it was now dark, and Jesus had not come to them": which the Evangelist expresses not without cause, so as to show through this their fervent love. For neither evening nor night held them back. Now mystically, "darkness" designates a defect of charity; for light is charity, according to 1 John 2:10: "He that loveth his brother abideth in the light." Darkness, therefore, is in us when Jesus, the true light, does not come to us, as is said above in chapter 1, in whose presence all darkness is driven away. Now Christ withdrew himself for so long from the disciples, first indeed that they might feel what his absence would be; which indeed they experienced in the storm of the sea. Jeremiah 2:19: "Know thou, and see that it is an evil and a bitter thing for thee to have left the Lord." Second, that they might seek more diligently; Song of Songs 5:17: "Whither is thy beloved gone, O thou most beautiful among women? … And we will seek him with thee." As to the crossing he says, "and the sea arose, a great wind blowing." And first the storm of the sea is set forth; second, the appearance of Christ and the time of the appearance, at the place, "and when they had rowed," etc.; third, the effect of the appearance, at the place, "and they were afraid," etc. Now the storm on the sea was caused by the blowing of the wind that had arisen; and therefore he says, "and the sea arose, a great wind blowing," on high. By that wind is figured the temptation and persecution which is to come upon the Church on account of a defect of charity. For, as Augustine says, whence charity grows cold, thence the waves increase, and the ship is troubled. Yet those winds and the storm and the waves and the darkness did not so act that either the ship should not move forward, or, having come loose, should be broken, because "he that shall persevere unto the end, he shall be saved," Matthew 24:13; and in the same, chapter 7:27: "the winds blew, and the streams beat against that house, and it fell not." Now the appearance of Christ was not immediately from the beginning of the storm, but after some space; and therefore he says, "when they had rowed, therefore, about five and twenty or thirty furlongs, they see Jesus." And this so that it might be given to be understood, that the Lord permits us to be troubled for a time, so that our virtue may be tested; yet in the end he does not abandon us in necessity, but becomes near to us; 1 Corinthians 10:13: "God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that which you are able; but will make also with temptation issue, that you may be able to bear it." According to Augustine, the twenty-five furlongs which they row are the five books of Moses. For a number of this sort is a square number, arising from this number five multiplied into itself: for five times five is twenty-five; now a number multiplied retains the meaning of its root: whence just as by five the old law is signified, so by twenty-five is signified the perfection of the New Testament. Now by thirty is signified the perfection of the New Testament, which was lacking to the law: for if the same five be multiplied by six, which is a perfect number, the number thirty arises. To those, therefore, who row twenty-five or thirty furlongs, that is, who fulfill the law, or the perfection of the Gospel, Jesus comes, treading down all the swellings of the world, the heights of the present age. Psalm 88:10: "Thou rulest the power of the sea: and appeasest the motion of the waves thereof." And then we shall see Christ near to the ship, because divine help draws near. Psalm 144:18: "The Lord is nigh unto all them that call upon him." It appears, therefore, that those who rightly seek Christ have him present. Now these men most fervently desired Christ: which is clear from the darkness of the time, from the storm of the sea, and from the distance of the harbor, notwithstanding which they were endeavoring to go to him. And therefore Christ was present to them. Now the effect of the appearance is set forth when he says, "and they were afraid. But he saith to them: it is I, be not afraid," and first the interior effect is set forth; second, the exterior, at the place, "and immediately the ship was at the land." Now the interior effect was fear; and therefore is set forth the fear of the disciples conceived from the sudden appearance of Christ, when he says, "and they were afraid," with a good fear, because caused by humility; Romans 11:20: "Be not high-minded, but fear." Or with a bad fear, because, as is said in Matthew 14:26, "they thought it was an apparition." Psalm 13:5: "There have they trembled for fear, where there was no fear." Since fear especially belongs to carnal men, who are terrified at spiritual things. Second is set forth Christ's comforting against a twofold danger. Namely, against the danger to faith in the intellect, and as to this he says, "it is I," as it were repelling all doubt; Luke, last chapter, 39: "See my hands and feet, that it is I myself." Second, against the danger of fear in the affections; and as to this he says, "be not afraid"; Jeremiah 1:8: "Be not afraid at their presence"; Psalm 26:1: "The Lord is my light and my salvation, whom shall I fear?" Third is set forth the disciples' acceptance, because "they willingly took him into the ship": by which it is signified that when servile fear is excluded from our hearts, then we receive Christ, by loving and contemplating him. Apocalypse 3:20: "Behold, I stand at the gate, and knock: if any man shall hear my voice, and open to me the door, I will come in to him." Now the exterior effect was as to two things. First, that the storm was calmed; second, that immediately the ship was at the land, when it was far distant from it: for he furnished them not a deceptive, but a tranquil navigation; and wishing to work a greater miracle, he did not go up into the ship. Thus, therefore, a threefold miracle here concurs: namely, the walking upon the sea, the sudden cessation of the storm, and the bringing of the distant ship to the harbor: that we may learn that the faithful, in whom Christ is, press down the swelling of the world, tread upon the waves of tribulations, and swiftly pass over to the land of the living, according to Psalm 142:10: "Thy good spirit shall lead me into the right land." But here there is a manifold question. One is concerning the letter, in which Matthew seems to say the contrary: for, Matthew 14:22, it is said that the disciples came to the sea at the Lord's command; here, however, that they went down seeking him. Another question is that Matthew in the same place says that the disciples, crossing the sea, came into the land of Genesareth; here, however, it is said that they came to Capharnaum. The third question is that Matthew says that Christ entered the ship; here, however, that he did not. But concerning these three, Chrysostom, dispatching the matter briefly, says that this was not the same miracle as that of Matthew. For, as he himself says, Christ frequently worked a miracle of this kind, walking upon the sea, yet not before the crowds, but before his disciples, lest the crowds should believe that he did not have a true body. According to Augustine, however, it is said, and more truly, that it was the same miracle which John narrates here, and Matthew there. And therefore, answering the first question, he says that it does not matter that Matthew says that they went down to the sea at Christ's command. For it could be that the Lord had commanded them this, and they went down believing that Christ would sail with them: whence they waited for him until night. And because Christ did not come, then they themselves crossed the sea. To the second question there is a twofold response. One is, that Capharnaum and Genesareth are on the same shore, and neighboring. And perhaps the disciples arrived across the sea at the boundary of both, and so Matthew names the one, and John the other. Or it can be said that Matthew does not say that they came immediately into Genesareth, and so perhaps they first came to Capharnaum, and afterward into Genesareth, etc.”

“Having set forth the visible sign concerning bodily nourishment, here is set forth the effect of the sign upon the crowds, which is threefold: first, as to the confession of faith; second, as to the attempted rendering of honor, at the place, "Jesus therefore, when he knew," etc.; third, as to their diligent seeking, at the place, "And when evening was come," etc. It should be known, concerning the first, that it was said as it were out of the mouth of the Jews in Psalm 73:9: "Our signs we have not seen, there is now no prophet." Now it was formerly the custom that the prophets worked many signs, whence, signs being lacking, prophecy seemed to have ceased. But when they do see signs, they confess that prophecy has been restored to them. Hence they had already so far profited from the miracle they had seen that they called the Lord a prophet. It is said therefore that those men, who had been filled from the five loaves, when they had seen the sign that Jesus had done, said, "This is truly the prophet." Yet they had not come to perfect faith, because they believed him to be a prophet who is even the Lord of the prophets. Nor, however, are they altogether deceived, because the Lord himself also names himself a prophet. Now it should be known that a prophet is called one who sees. 1 Kings 9:9: "He that is now called a prophet, in time past was called a seer." Now sight pertains to the cognitive power. But in Christ there was a threefold knowledge. Namely, sensitive knowledge: and according to this he had some likeness with the prophets, inasmuch as in the imagination of Christ certain sensible species could be formed, by which future or hidden things might be presented, especially on account of the passibility that belonged to him by reason of his state as a wayfarer. Likewise intellective knowledge: and as to this he does not have a likeness with the prophets, but is even above the angels, since he was a comprehensor more excellently than any creature. Likewise divine knowledge: and as to this he was the inspirer of the prophets and of the angels, since all knowledge is caused through participation of the divine Word. Yet they seem to recognize in Christ the excellence of prophecy in this, that they say "truly the prophet." For although there were many prophets among the Jews, yet one was awaited, preeminent among them, according to Deuteronomy 18:15: "The Lord thy God will raise up to thee a prophet"; and it is of this that they speak; whence he says pointedly, "who is to come into the world." Then, when he says, "Jesus therefore, when he knew," etc., the second effect is set forth, as to the attempted rendering of honor, which nevertheless Christ shunned. And so first the endeavor of the people is set forth; second, the flight of Christ. The endeavor indeed, when it is said, "that they would take him by force, and make him king." For that is said to be seized which is taken apart from the will and the fitting occasion of him from whom it is taken. Now it was true that the disposition of God the Father had been, from eternity, to manifest the kingship of Christ, but this manifestation was not yet fitting according to the time; for he had come then, but not to reign, in the way in which he reigns in that we say in Matthew 6:10, "Thy kingdom come," where he will reign also according to that which he was made man. And therefore for this manifestation another time is appointed, namely, when the open glory of his saints shall be, after the judgment made by him. It was concerning this manifestation that the disciples asked, Acts 1:6: "Lord, wilt thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?" The crowds, therefore, believing that he had come to reign, wished to make him king. The reason for this is that men frequently want such a one for a lord as will feed them in temporal things. Whence, because Christ had fed them, they wished to make him king; Isaiah 3:6: "Thou hast a garment, be thou our prince." Whence Chrysostom says: "See how great is the power of gluttony. They no longer have any care for the transgression of the sabbath, nor are they any longer zealous for God, but all things are set aside, the belly being filled: but already a prophet was among them, and they wished to enthrone him as king." Now the flight of Christ is set forth, when he says, "he fled again into the mountain himself alone." Where it is given to be understood that the Lord, seeing the crowds, had come down from the mountain, and had fed the crowds in the lower places: for unless he had come down from the mountain, it would not be said that he "fled again into the mountain." But since he himself is truly king, why does he flee? To which a threefold reason is assigned. One, because it would have derogated from his dignity, if he had received a kingdom from man, he who was such a king that all kings were kings by participation in him; Proverbs 8:15: "By me kings reign." Another reason is that it would have prejudiced his teaching, if he had received glory or strength from men. For thus he worked and taught so that everything might be ascribed to divine power, and not to human favor; above, 5:41: "I receive not glory from men." The third reason is that he might teach us to despise worldly dignities; below, 13:15: "For I have given you an example, that as I have done to you, so you also should do"; Ecclesiasticus 7:4: "Seek not of man to be made a leader." Thus, therefore, he refused the glory of the world, so that yet he might of his own will undergo the penalty, according to that of Hebrews 12:2: "Who, having joy set before him, endured the cross, despising the shame." But contrary to this seems what is said in Matthew 14:23, namely, that "he went up alone into a mountain to pray." But, according to Augustine, these are not contrary, because the cause of fleeing is joined to the cause of praying. For then the Lord teaches us that there is a great cause for praying, when a cause for fleeing threatens. But mystically he ascends into the mountain then, when the crowds, having been refreshed, were prepared to submit themselves to him, because he ascends into heaven then, when the peoples are prepared to submit themselves to the truth of the faith, according to Psalm 7:8: "The congregation of the people shall surround thee; and for their sakes return thou on high"; that is, that the congregation of the peoples may surround thee, return thou on high. But it is said "he fled," so as to signify that his height could not be understood: for what we do not understand, we say flees from us. Here the third effect is treated, namely the diligent seeking, and first as to the disciples; second as to the crowds, at the place, "And the next day," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he sets forth the endeavor of the disciples; second he explains it, at the place, "and it was now dark," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he describes the descent of the disciples to the sea; second, the crossing of the sea, at the place, "and when they had gone up into a ship," etc. It should be known, therefore, concerning the first, that Christ went up the mountain without the disciples knowing, whence they waited until evening, thinking that he would come to them. But evening having come, they could bear no longer not to seek him: so great a love held them. And therefore he says, "And when it was now late, his disciples went down to the sea, seeking him." Now mystically, by "evening" is designated the Lord's Passion, or his Ascension: for as long as Christ was present in the body with the disciples, no disturbance weighed them down, no bitterness troubled them; Matthew 9:15: "The children of the bridegroom cannot mourn, as long as the bridegroom is with them." But with Christ withdrawing from them, they go down to the sea, that is, to the disturbances of the world; Psalm 103:25: "This sea great and wide." But because the love with which they were on fire did not allow them to be without the Lord's presence any longer, he therefore adds their crossing, when he says, "and when they had gone up into a ship, they came over the sea to Capharnaum." Then when he says, "and it was now dark," etc., he explains what he had set forth summarily, and first concerning the arrival at the sea; second concerning the crossing, at the place, "and the sea arose, a great wind blowing." As to the first he says, "it was now dark, and Jesus had not come to them": which the Evangelist expresses not without cause, so as to show through this their fervent love. For neither evening nor night held them back. Now mystically, "darkness" designates a defect of charity; for light is charity, according to 1 John 2:10: "He that loveth his brother abideth in the light." Darkness, therefore, is in us when Jesus, the true light, does not come to us, as is said above in chapter 1, in whose presence all darkness is driven away. Now Christ withdrew himself for so long from the disciples, first indeed that they might feel what his absence would be; which indeed they experienced in the storm of the sea. Jeremiah 2:19: "Know thou, and see that it is an evil and a bitter thing for thee to have left the Lord." Second, that they might seek more diligently; Song of Songs 5:17: "Whither is thy beloved gone, O thou most beautiful among women? … And we will seek him with thee." As to the crossing he says, "and the sea arose, a great wind blowing." And first the storm of the sea is set forth; second, the appearance of Christ and the time of the appearance, at the place, "and when they had rowed," etc.; third, the effect of the appearance, at the place, "and they were afraid," etc. Now the storm on the sea was caused by the blowing of the wind that had arisen; and therefore he says, "and the sea arose, a great wind blowing," on high. By that wind is figured the temptation and persecution which is to come upon the Church on account of a defect of charity. For, as Augustine says, whence charity grows cold, thence the waves increase, and the ship is troubled. Yet those winds and the storm and the waves and the darkness did not so act that either the ship should not move forward, or, having come loose, should be broken, because "he that shall persevere unto the end, he shall be saved," Matthew 24:13; and in the same, chapter 7:27: "the winds blew, and the streams beat against that house, and it fell not." Now the appearance of Christ was not immediately from the beginning of the storm, but after some space; and therefore he says, "when they had rowed, therefore, about five and twenty or thirty furlongs, they see Jesus." And this so that it might be given to be understood, that the Lord permits us to be troubled for a time, so that our virtue may be tested; yet in the end he does not abandon us in necessity, but becomes near to us; 1 Corinthians 10:13: "God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that which you are able; but will make also with temptation issue, that you may be able to bear it." According to Augustine, the twenty-five furlongs which they row are the five books of Moses. For a number of this sort is a square number, arising from this number five multiplied into itself: for five times five is twenty-five; now a number multiplied retains the meaning of its root: whence just as by five the old law is signified, so by twenty-five is signified the perfection of the New Testament. Now by thirty is signified the perfection of the New Testament, which was lacking to the law: for if the same five be multiplied by six, which is a perfect number, the number thirty arises. To those, therefore, who row twenty-five or thirty furlongs, that is, who fulfill the law, or the perfection of the Gospel, Jesus comes, treading down all the swellings of the world, the heights of the present age. Psalm 88:10: "Thou rulest the power of the sea: and appeasest the motion of the waves thereof." And then we shall see Christ near to the ship, because divine help draws near. Psalm 144:18: "The Lord is nigh unto all them that call upon him." It appears, therefore, that those who rightly seek Christ have him present. Now these men most fervently desired Christ: which is clear from the darkness of the time, from the storm of the sea, and from the distance of the harbor, notwithstanding which they were endeavoring to go to him. And therefore Christ was present to them. Now the effect of the appearance is set forth when he says, "and they were afraid. But he saith to them: it is I, be not afraid," and first the interior effect is set forth; second, the exterior, at the place, "and immediately the ship was at the land." Now the interior effect was fear; and therefore is set forth the fear of the disciples conceived from the sudden appearance of Christ, when he says, "and they were afraid," with a good fear, because caused by humility; Romans 11:20: "Be not high-minded, but fear." Or with a bad fear, because, as is said in Matthew 14:26, "they thought it was an apparition." Psalm 13:5: "There have they trembled for fear, where there was no fear." Since fear especially belongs to carnal men, who are terrified at spiritual things. Second is set forth Christ's comforting against a twofold danger. Namely, against the danger to faith in the intellect, and as to this he says, "it is I," as it were repelling all doubt; Luke, last chapter, 39: "See my hands and feet, that it is I myself." Second, against the danger of fear in the affections; and as to this he says, "be not afraid"; Jeremiah 1:8: "Be not afraid at their presence"; Psalm 26:1: "The Lord is my light and my salvation, whom shall I fear?" Third is set forth the disciples' acceptance, because "they willingly took him into the ship": by which it is signified that when servile fear is excluded from our hearts, then we receive Christ, by loving and contemplating him. Apocalypse 3:20: "Behold, I stand at the gate, and knock: if any man shall hear my voice, and open to me the door, I will come in to him." Now the exterior effect was as to two things. First, that the storm was calmed; second, that immediately the ship was at the land, when it was far distant from it: for he furnished them not a deceptive, but a tranquil navigation; and wishing to work a greater miracle, he did not go up into the ship. Thus, therefore, a threefold miracle here concurs: namely, the walking upon the sea, the sudden cessation of the storm, and the bringing of the distant ship to the harbor: that we may learn that the faithful, in whom Christ is, press down the swelling of the world, tread upon the waves of tribulations, and swiftly pass over to the land of the living, according to Psalm 142:10: "Thy good spirit shall lead me into the right land." But here there is a manifold question. One is concerning the letter, in which Matthew seems to say the contrary: for, Matthew 14:22, it is said that the disciples came to the sea at the Lord's command; here, however, that they went down seeking him. Another question is that Matthew in the same place says that the disciples, crossing the sea, came into the land of Genesareth; here, however, it is said that they came to Capharnaum. The third question is that Matthew says that Christ entered the ship; here, however, that he did not. But concerning these three, Chrysostom, dispatching the matter briefly, says that this was not the same miracle as that of Matthew. For, as he himself says, Christ frequently worked a miracle of this kind, walking upon the sea, yet not before the crowds, but before his disciples, lest the crowds should believe that he did not have a true body. According to Augustine, however, it is said, and more truly, that it was the same miracle which John narrates here, and Matthew there. And therefore, answering the first question, he says that it does not matter that Matthew says that they went down to the sea at Christ's command. For it could be that the Lord had commanded them this, and they went down believing that Christ would sail with them: whence they waited for him until night. And because Christ did not come, then they themselves crossed the sea. To the second question there is a twofold response. One is, that Capharnaum and Genesareth are on the same shore, and neighboring. And perhaps the disciples arrived across the sea at the boundary of both, and so Matthew names the one, and John the other. Or it can be said that Matthew does not say that they came immediately into Genesareth, and so perhaps they first came to Capharnaum, and afterward into Genesareth, etc.”

“The day following,.... The day after that, in which the miracle of feeding live thousand men with five loaves and two fishes was done: the morning after the disciples had had such a bad voyage: when the people which stood on the other side of the sea; from that in which the disciples now were, being landed at Capernaum; that is, they stood on that side, or shore, where they took shipping, near Bethsaida and Tiberias: here, after they were dismissed by Christ, they stood all night, waiting for boats to carry them over; or rather, knowing that Christ was not gone with his disciples, they continued, hoping to meet with him in the morning, and enjoy some more advantage by him: for they saw that there was none other boat there, save that one whereinto his disciples were entered, and that Jesus went not with his disciples into the boat, but that his disciples were gone away alone; from whence they concluded, that since there was only that boat, and Jesus did not go into it, but that the disciples went off without him, that he must be therefore somewhere on shore, and not far off, and they hoped to find him in the morning; wherefore it was very surprising to them, when they found him at Capernaum, when, and how he got there.”

“After the Evangelist has set down how the disciples sought Christ, he here consequently treats of the crowds seeking him, and first the motive for seeking is set down; second, the opportunity for seeking, at the words "but other boats came," etc.; third, the seeking itself is set down, at the words "when therefore the crowd had seen," etc. Now what moved the crowds to seek Christ was the preceding miracle, namely that he had crossed the sea without a vehicle. This indeed became known to them, because in the evening he was not on the shore that was near the place where he had worked the miracle of the loaves, where there was only one boat, and that boat had crossed with the disciples to the other side without Christ. Hence, when in the morning they had not found Christ on the same side where he had been on the previous day, but he was already on the other side, and he had had no other boat in which to cross, they suspected that he had crossed by walking upon the sea. And this is what he says: on the next day — that is, the day after that on which he had worked the miracle of the loaves — the crowd that was standing across the sea, where he had worked the miracle, saw that there was no other boat there but one, because on the previous day there had been only that one, and saw that Jesus had not entered the boat with his disciples, etc. By this one boat is signified the Church, which is one, by the unity of faith and of the sacraments; Ephesians 4:5: "one faith, one Baptism." But by the fact that Jesus is not with the disciples is signified the bodily separation of Christ from them at the ascension; Mark, last chapter, 19: "the Lord Jesus indeed, after he had spoken to them, was taken up into heaven." The opportunity for seeking is given by the arrival of other boats from the other side of the sea, with which they were able to cross over to seek Christ; and therefore he says, "but other boats came" from the other side, namely from Tiberias, near the place where they had eaten the loaves, etc. By these other boats that came are signified the conventicles of heretics and of those who seek the things that are their own, and not the things of Jesus Christ — below: "you seek me because you ate of my loaves" — and which are separated either in faith, as regards heretics, or lacking charity, as regards the carnal, who are not properly in the Church, but are nevertheless alongside it, insofar as they put forward a feigned faith and have the appearance of holiness; according to that saying, 2 Timothy 3:5: "having indeed a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof." And 2 Corinthians 11:14: "it is no wonder if the ministers of Satan transform themselves." But the seeking was earnest; hence he says "when therefore the crowd had seen," etc., and first he shows how the crowd seeks Christ; second, how, once he is found, they question him. He says therefore first, that when the crowd had seen that Jesus was not there, nor his disciples, they got into the boats that had come from Tiberias, seeking him — which is praiseworthy; Isaiah 55:6: "seek the Lord while he may be found"; and Psalm 68:33: "seek the Lord, and your soul shall live." But once he is found they question him; hence he said, and when the crowds had found him, namely Christ, across the sea, they said to him: Rabbi, when did you come here? But this question can be understood in two ways. In one way, that they ask only about the time; and then, according to Chrysostom, their crudeness is to be reproached, because after so great a miracle they do not ask about the manner of crossing, namely how he had crossed without a boat, but only about the time of the crossing. Or it can be said that by saying "when," they ask not only about the time, but also about the other circumstances that concurred in the miraculous crossing. But note that above, after the meal, they wanted to make him king; but now, though they have him present, they do not want to make him king. The reason for this is that they wanted to make him king, stirred up by the passion of joy caused by the meal. Now passions of this kind quickly pass away, and therefore the things that are disposed according to these very passions are transitory; but the things that are disposed by reason endure more; Ecclesiasticus 27:12: "a wise man continues in wisdom as the sun; but a fool is changed as the moon"; Proverbs 11:18: "the wicked man makes unstable work." Next, when he says "Jesus answered them," etc., the Lord treats of spiritual food; and first he sets forth the truth concerning the spiritual; second, he excludes a contradiction, at the words "the Jews therefore murmured about him." Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets forth the truth of the spiritual food; second he intimates its origin, at the words "they said therefore to him: what sign then do you work?" etc.; third he teaches the manner of receiving this food itself, at the words "they said therefore to him: Lord, always give us this bread." Concerning the first he does two things. First he shows the spiritual food, and its power; second he makes manifest what it is, at the words "they said therefore to him: what shall we do that we may work the works of God?" Concerning the first he does two things. First he argues against their perverse desire; second he exhorts them to the truth, at the words "labor," etc. He says therefore: amen, amen I say to you, although you show yourselves as it were devout, yet you seek me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate of the loaves, and were filled; as if he were to say: you seek me on account of the flesh, not on account of the spirit, namely so that you may be fed again. And, as Augustine says, the place of these is held by those who seek Jesus, not for his own sake, but so that they may obtain certain worldly advantages; such as those who, having business dealings, approach prelates and clerics, not on account of Christ, but so that by their intercession they may be advanced with the great; such as those who take refuge in churches, not on account of Jesus, but because they are oppressed by those more powerful; such also as those who, drawing near to the Lord through holy orders, seek not the merits of the virtues, but the aids of the present life, namely riches and honors, as Gregory says in Moralia 23. And this is clear: for to work signs belongs to divine power; but to eat multiplied bread is something temporal. Since, therefore, they do not come to Christ on account of the power which they see in him, but on account of the fact that they eat of the loaves, they do not serve Christ but their own belly, as is said in Philippians 3, and Psalm 48:19: "he will confess to you when you have done well to him." He leads them back to the truth by setting before them the spiritual food, saying labor not for the food that perishes, but for that which endures unto eternal life, and first he sets forth its power; second its authority, at the words "which the Son of man has given you." The power of that food is considered in the fact that it does not perish. Hence it must be known concerning this, that bodily things are certain likenesses of spiritual things, inasmuch as they are caused and derived from them, and therefore they imitate the spiritual things themselves in some way. Hence, just as the body is sustained by food, so that by which the spirit is sustained is called its food, whatever that may be. But that by which the body is sustained, since it passes over into the nature of the body, is corruptible; but the food by which the spirit is sustained is incorruptible, because it is not changed into the spirit itself, but rather, conversely, the spirit is changed into the food. Hence it is the saying of Augustine: "I am the food of the full-grown: grow, and you shall eat me. Nor shall you change me into yourself, as the food of your flesh, but you shall be changed into me," as is said in the Book of Confessions. And therefore the Lord says "labor"; that is, seek by laboring, or merit by works, not the food that perishes, namely the bodily food; 1 Corinthians 6:13: "food for the belly, and the belly for food, but God will destroy both this and that" — because the use of foods will not always exist; but labor for that food, namely the spiritual, which endures unto eternal life; which food indeed is God himself, insofar as he is truth to be contemplated, and goodness to be loved, by which the spirit is refreshed; Proverbs 9:5: "eat my bread"; Ecclesiasticus 15:3: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding." Likewise, obedience itself to the divine commandments; above, 4:34: "my food is to do the will of him who sent me." Likewise, also Christ himself. Below, in the same chapter: "I am the bread of life"; likewise: "my flesh is truly food, and my blood is truly drink." And this insofar as it is joined to the Word of God, which is the food by which the Angels live. Now he assigned a similar difference above in chapter 4:13, concerning bodily drink and spiritual drink, when he said: "whoever drinks of this water shall thirst again; but whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him shall not thirst forever" — the same difference which he here assigns between bodily and spiritual food. The reason for this is that bodily things are corruptible, but spiritual things, and especially God, are eternal. But it must be known, according to Augustine in the book On the Work of Monks, that from this saying, namely "labor not for the food that perishes," certain monks took occasion for error, saying that spiritual men ought not to work anything bodily. But this understanding is false, because Paul, who was most spiritual, labored with his own hands, as is found in Ephesians 4:28, where he himself says: "he who stole, let him now steal no more; but rather let him labor with his hands." Therefore the true understanding is that we should direct our work — that is, our principal study and intention — toward seeking the food that leads to eternal life, namely the spiritual goods. But we ought not to attend principally to temporal things, but only accessorily, that is, to procure them only by reason of the corruptible body, which must be sustained as long as we live in this life. Hence, against this, the Apostle pointedly says, 2 Thessalonians 3:10: "he who does not work, let him not eat"; as if he were to say: those who say that nothing bodily is to be done — since eating is something bodily — such men ought not to eat. Next, when he says "which the Son of man will give you," he sets down the giver of the spiritual food: and first he sets down the author of this food; second he makes manifest whence he has the authority to feed. Now the author and giver of the spiritual food is Christ; and therefore he says which — namely, the food that does not perish — the Son of man will give you. If he had said "the Son of God," it would not have seemed remarkable; but the fact that the Son of man gives it more raises attention. Yet in a spiritual sense the Son of man gives it for this reason: because human nature, weakened by sin, loathed spiritual food, and could not take it in its own spirituality; hence it was necessary that the Son of God take on flesh, and through it refresh us; Psalm 22:5: "you have prepared a table before me." But whence he has the authority of giving, he adds when he says "for this one the Father, God, has sealed"; as if he were to say: that the Son of man will give this, he has this only insofar as, by the singularity and eminence of the fullness of grace, he excels all the sons of men; hence he says this one — namely the Son of man — the Father has sealed: that is, has markedly distinguished him from the rest; Psalm 44:8: "God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness above your fellows." Or, according to Hilary, "has sealed," that is, has stamped with a seal. Now when a seal is impressed in wax, the wax retains the whole figure of the seal, just as the Son also received the whole figure of the Father. Now there is a twofold reception which the Son received from the Father. One is eternal; and it is not of this that what is here said, "has sealed," is to be understood, because in sealing, the nature receiving is one thing, and the nature impressing is another. But this is understood of the mystery of the Incarnation, because upon human nature God the Father impressed the Word, who is "the splendor and the figure of his substance," as is said in Hebrews 1:3. Or according to Chrysostom, "has sealed," that is, God the Father specially instructed him for this, that he should give eternal life to the world; below, 10:10: "I came that they may have life," etc. For thus, when someone is chosen to carry out some great office, he is said to be sealed for that office; Luke 10:1: "after these things the Lord appointed also seventy others as disciples," etc. Or "has sealed," that is, has made manifest by the voice at the Baptism, and by works, as was said above, chapter 5. Next, when he says "they said therefore to him: what shall we do that we may work the works of God?", he makes manifest what the spiritual food is, and first the question of the Jews is set down; second the response of Jesus Christ is added, at the words "Jesus answered," etc. Concerning the first it must be known that the Jews, instructed from the law, believed that nothing was eternal except God. Hence, when he had said that the spiritual food endures unto eternal life, they understood that food to be something divine. And therefore, seeking, they make mention not of food, but of the work of God, when they say "what shall we do that we may work the works of God?" In which they were not far from the truth, since the spiritual food is nothing other than to work the works of God; Luke 18:18: "what shall I do to possess eternal life?" The Lord's response is set down when he says "this is the work of God, that you believe in him," etc. Here it must be considered that the Apostle, in Romans 4, distinguishes faith from works, saying that Abraham was not justified by works, but by faith. What then is it that the Lord here says, that faith itself, or believing, is the work of God? But to this there is a twofold response. One, that the Apostle does not distinguish faith from works absolutely, but from exterior works. For there are certain exterior works, which are carried out with the bodily members, and which, because they are better known, are called works according to common usage; but others are interior, which are carried out in the soul itself, which are known only to the wise, and which turn to the heart. In another way it is said that believing itself can be reckoned among exterior works, not because faith is itself the works, but because it is their principle; hence he also pointedly says "that you believe in him." For it makes a difference whether one says "to believe God" — for thus I designate the object — or "to believe God" (as a witness) — for thus I designate a witness — or "to believe in God" — for thus I designate an end: so that in this way God can be held as the object of faith, as witness, and as end, but in different respects. For the object of faith can be a creature — for I believe that heaven was created; likewise a creature also can be a witness of faith, for I believe Paul, or any of the saints; but the end of faith cannot be anything but God, for our mind is borne only toward God as toward an end. But since the end has the character of the good, it is the object of love; and therefore to believe in God as in an end is proper to faith formed by charity; and this faith, thus formed, is the principle of all good works; and to this extent believing itself is called the work of God. But if faith is the work of God, how do men do the works of God? But this is resolved by Isaiah 26:12, when it says: "all our works he has wrought in us." For this very thing that we believe, and whatever good we work, is in us from God; Philippians 2:13: "it is he who works in us both to will and to accomplish." And therefore he pointedly says that believing is the work of God, in order to show that faith is a gift of God, as is said in Ephesians 2:8. Next, when he says "they said therefore to him: what sign then do you work?", the origin of the food is treated, and first the question of the Jews is set down; second the response of Christ, at the words "amen, amen I say to you, Moses did not give you bread from heaven." Concerning the first they do three things. First they ask for a sign; second they specify it; third they adduce the testimony of Scripture. Now they ask for a sign by proposing the question; hence they said: what sign do you work, that we may see, and believe you? Now this question is explained differently by Augustine, and differently by Chrysostom. For Chrysostom says that the Lord had invited them to faith. Now the arguments leading to faith are miracles; 1 Corinthians 14:22: "signs are given to unbelievers." And therefore for this they seek a sign by which they may believe; for it is the custom of the Jews to ask for signs; 1 Corinthians 1:22: "for the Jews seek signs." Hence he says "what sign then do you work?" But this seems ridiculous, that they should ask for some miracles for this purpose, since he had just performed some, by multiplying the loaves, and by walking upon the sea, which had occurred in their very presence, and which they could believe. But they say this for this reason: to provoke the Lord, and to induce him always to feed them. This is clear, because they make no mention of any other sign except that which was done for their fathers through Moses for forty years, as if by this they were asking that he should always feed them; hence they say "our fathers ate manna in the desert." Nor do they say: God fed our fathers with manna, lest they should seem to want to make him equal to God. Likewise they do not say, Moses fed them, lest they should seem to prefer Moses to Christ — as if wanting by this to entice him, so that he might continually feed them. Concerning that food it is spoken of in Exodus 16, and in Psalm 77:25: "man ate the bread of Angels." But Augustine says that the Lord said that he would give them food that endures unto eternal life; hence he seems, as it were, to prefer himself to Moses. But the Jews reckoned Moses greater than Christ; hence they said, below, chapter 9:29: "we know that God spoke to Moses; but as for this man, we do not know where he is from." Hence they required that Christ should do certain things greater than Moses had done; and therefore they bring back to memory the things that Moses did, saying: our fathers ate manna in the desert; as if he were to say: what you say about yourself is greater than what Moses did, because you promise food that does not perish; but the manna that Moses gave, if it was kept for another day, swarmed with worms. If therefore you wish us to believe you, you should do something greater than Moses; for what you did is not greater, because you satisfied five thousand men, but with five barley loaves, and only once; whereas he satisfied the whole people with manna from heaven for forty years, and this in the desert, just as it is written in Psalm 77:24: "he gave them bread from heaven to eat."”

“In these verses we have, I. The careful enquiry which the people made after Christ, Joh 6:23, Joh 6:24. They saw the disciples go to sea; they saw Christ retire to the mountain, probably with an intimation that he desired to be private for some time; but, their hearts being set upon making him a king, they way-laid his return, and the day following, the hot fit of their zeal still continuing, 1. They were much at a loss for him. He was gone, and they knew not what was become of him. They saw there was no boat there but that in which the disciples went off, Providence so ordering it for the confirming of the miracle of his walking on the sea, for there was no boat for him to go in. They observed also that Jesus did not go with his disciples, but that they went off alone, and left him among them on their side of the water. Note, Those that would find Christ must diligently observe all his motions, and learn to understand the tokens of his presence and absence, that they may steer accordingly. 2. They were very industrious in seeking him. They searched the places thereabouts, and when they saw that Jesus was not there, nor his disciples (neither he nor any one that could give tidings of him), they resolved to search elsewhere. Note, Those that would find Christ must accomplish a diligent search, must seek till they find, must go from sea to sea, to seek the word of God, rather than live without it; and those whom Christ has feasted with the bread of life should have their souls carried out in earnest desires towards him. Much would have more, in communion with Christ. Now, (1.) They resolved to go to Capernaum in quest of him. There were his head-quarters, where he usually resided. Thither his disciples were gone; and they knew he would not be long absent from them. Those that would find Christ must go forth by the footsteps of the flock. (2.) Providence favoured them with an opportunity of going thither by sea, which was the speediest way; for there came other boats from Tiberias, which lay further off upon the same shore, nigh, though not so nigh to the place where they did eat bread, in which they might soon make a trip to Capernaum, and probably the boats were bound for that port. Note, Those that in sincerity seek Christ, and seek opportunities of converse with him, are commonly owned and assisted by Providence in those pursuits. The evangelist, having occasion to mention their eating the multiplied bread, adds, After that the Lord had given thanks, Joh 6:11. So much were the disciples affected with their Master's giving thanks that they could never forget the impressions made upon them by it, but took a pleasure in remembering the gracious words that then proceeded out of his mouth. This was the grace and beauty of that meal, and made it remarkable; their hearts burned within them. 3. They laid hold of the opportunity that offered itself, and they also took shipping, and came to Capernaum, seeking for Jesus. They did not defer, in hopes to see him again on this side the water; but their convictions being strong, and their desires warm, they followed him presently. Good motions are often crushed, and come to nothing, for want of being prosecuted in time. They came to Capernaum, and, for aught that appears, these unsound hypocritical followers of Christ had a calm and pleasant passage, while his sincere disciples had a rough and stormy one. It is not strange if it fare worst with the best men in this evil world. They came, seeking Jesus. Note, Those that would find Christ, and find comfort in him, must be willing to take pains, and, as here, to compass sea and land to seek and serve him who came from heaven to earth to seek and save us. II. The success of this enquiry: They found him on the other side of the sea, Joh 6:25. Note, Christ will be found of those that seek him, first or last; and it is worth while to cross a sea, nay, to go from sea to sea, and from the river to the ends of the earth, to seek Christ, if we may but find him at last. These people appeared afterwards to be unsound, and not actuated by any good principle, and yet were thus zealous. Note, Hypocrites may be very forward in their attendance on God's ordinances. If men have no more to show for their love to Christ than their running after sermons and prayers, and their pangs of affection to good preaching, they have reason to suspect themselves no better than this eager crowd. But though these people were no better principled, and Christ knew it, yet he was willing to be found of them, and admitted them into fellowship with him. If we could know the hearts of hypocrites, yet, while their profession is plausible, we must not exclude them from our communion, much less when we do not know their hearts. III. The question they put to him when they found him: Rabbi, when camest thou hither? It should seem by Joh 6:59 that they found him in the synagogue. They knew this was the likeliest place to seek Christ in, for it was his custom to attend public assemblies for religious worship, Luk 4:16. Note, Christ must be sought, and will be found, in the congregations of his people and in the administration of his ordinances; public worship is what Christ chooses to own and grace with his presence and the manifestations of himself. There they found him, and all they had to say to him was, Rabbi, when camest thou hither? They saw he would not be made a king, and therefore say no more of this, but call him Rabbi, their teacher. Their enquiry refers not only to the time, but to the manner, of his conveying himself thither; not only When, but, "How, camest thou thither?" for there was no boat for him to come in. They were curious in asking concerning Christ's motions, but not solicitous to observe their own. IV. The answer Christ gave them, not direct to their question (what was it to them when and how he came thither?) but such an answer as their case required. 1. He discovers the corrupt principle they acted from in following him (Joh 6:26): "Verily, verily, I say unto you, I that search the heart, and know what is in man, I the Amen, the faithful witness, Rev 3:14, Rev 3:15. You seek me; that is well, but it is not from a good principle." Christ knows not only what we do, but why we do it. These followed Christ, (1.) Not for his doctrine's sake: Not because you saw the miracles. The miracles were the great confirmation of his doctrine; Nicodemus sought for him for the sake of them (Joh 3:2), and argued from the power of his works to the truth of his word; but these were so stupid and mindless that they never considered this. But, (2.) It was for their own bellies' sake: Because you did eat of the loaves, and were filled; not because he taught them, but because he fed them. He had given them, [1.] A full meal's meat: They did eat, and were filled; and some of them perhaps were so poor that they had not known of a long time before now what it was to have enough, to eat and leave. [2.] A dainty meal's meat; it is probable that, as the miraculous wine was the best wine, so was the miraculous food more than usually pleasant. [3.] A cheap meal's meat, that cost them nothing; no reckoning was brought in. Note, Many follow Christ for loaves, and not for love. Thus those do who aim at secular advantage in their profession of religion, and follow it because by this craft they get their preferments. Quantis profuit nobis haec fabula de Christo - This fable respecting Christ, what a gainful concern we have made of it! said one of the popes. These people complimented Christ with Rabbi, and showed him great respect, yet he told them thus faithfully of their hypocrisy; his ministers must hence learn not to flatter those that flatter them, nor to be bribed by fair words to cry peace to all that cry rabbi to them, but to give faithful reproofs where there is cause for them. 2. He directs them to better principles (Joh 6:27): Labour for that meat which endures to everlasting life. With the woman of Samaria he had discoursed of spiritual things under the similitude of water; here he speaks of them under the similitude of meat, taking occasion from the loaves they had eaten. His design is, (1.) To moderate our worldly pursuits: Labour not for the meat that perishes. This does not forbid honest labour for food convenient, Th2 3:12. But we must not make the things of this world our chief care and concern. Note, [1.] The things of the world are meat that perishes. Worldly wealth, honour, and pleasure, are meat; they feed the fancy (and many times this is all) and fill the belly. These are things which mean hunger after as meat, and glut themselves with, and which a carnal heart, as long as they last, may make a shift to live upon; but they perish, are of a perishing nature, wither of themselves, and are exposed to a thousand accidents; those that have the largest share of them are not sure to have them while they live, but are sure to leave them and lose them when they die. [2.] It is therefore folly for us inordinately to labour after them. First, We must not labour in religion, nor work the works thereof, for this perishing meat, with an eye to this; we must not make our religion subservient to a worldly interest, nor aim at secular advantages in sacred exercises. Secondly, We must not at all labour for this meat; that is, we must not make these perishing things our chief good, nor make our care and pains about them our chief business; not seek those things first and most, Pro 23:4, Pro 23:5. (2.) To quicken and excite our gracious pursuits: "Bestow your pains to better purpose, and labour for that meat which belongs to the soul," of which he shows, [1.] That it is unspeakably desirable: It is meat which endures to everlasting life; it is a happiness which will last as long as we must, which not only itself endures eternally, but will nourish us up to everlasting life. The blessings of the new covenant are our preparative for eternal life, our preservative to it, and the pledge and earnest of it. [2.] It is undoubtedly attainable. Shall all the treasures of the world be ransacked, and all the fruits of the earth gathered together, to furnish us with provisions that will last to eternity? No, The sea saith, It is not in me, among all the treasures hidden in the sand. It cannot be gotten for gold; but it is that which the Son of man shall give; hēn dōsei, either which meat, or which life, the Son of man shall give. Observe here, First, Who gives this meat: the Son of man, the great householder and master of the stores, who is entrusted with the administration of the kingdom of God among men, and the dispensation of the gifts, graces, and comforts of that kingdom, and has power to give eternal life, with all the means of it and preparatives for it. We are told to labour for it, as if it were to be got by our own industry, and sold upon that valuable consideration, as the heathen said, Dii laboribus omnia vendunt - The gods sell all advantages to the industrious. But when we have laboured ever so much for it, we have not merited it as our hire, but the Son of man gives it. And what more free than gift? It is an encouragement that he who has the giving of it is the Son of man, for then we may hope the sons of men that seek it, and labour for it, shall not fail to have it. Secondly, What authority he has to give it; for him has God the Father sealed, touton gar ho Patēr esphragisen̂ ho Theos - for him the Father has sealed (proved and evidenced) to be God; so some read it; he has declared him to be the Son of God with power. He has sealed him, that is, has given him full authority to deal between God and man, as God's ambassador to man and man's intercessor with God, and has proved his commission by miracles. Having given him authority, he has given us assurance of it; having entrusted him with unlimited powers, he has satisfied us with undoubted proofs of them; so that as he might go on with confidence in his undertaking for us, so may we in our resignations to him. God the Father scaled him with the Spirit that rested on him, by the voice from heaven, by the testimony he bore to him in signs and wonders. Divine revelation is perfected in him, in him the vision and prophecy is sealed up (Dan 9:24), to him all believers seal that he is true (Joh 3:33), and in him they are all sealed, Co2 1:22.”

“Howbeit there came other boats from Tiberias,.... A city by the sea side, built by Herod, and called so in honour of Tiberius Caesar; though the Jews give a different etymology of it; they say, it is the same with Rakkath, Jos 19:35, and that it was a fortified place from the days of Joshua, and that on one side, , "the sea was its wall" (d): and so Jonathan the Targumist on Deu 3:17 says, that Tiberias was near the sea of salt: this place became famous for many of the wise men that lived here; here was a famous university, and here the Misna and Jerusalem Talmud were written; and here the sanhedrim sat, after it removed from Jerusalem: nigh unto the place where they did eat bread; where the day before they had been fed in so miraculous a manner: the meaning is, either that Tiberias was near to the place where the miracle was wrought, or the boats from Tiberias came near that place, and both were true: so that these men that were waiting by the sea side, had an opportunity of going over in these boats in quest of Christ, to whom they were now become greatly attached, by feeding them in so wonderful a manner: after that the Lord had given thanks; which clause is added to show, that the multiplication of the bread, and the refreshment the men had by it, were owing to the power of Christ, and his blessing it; though this is wanting in Beza's most ancient copy, and in some others. (d) T. Bab. Megilla, fol. 5. 2. & Hieros. Megilla, fol. 70. 1.”

“After the Evangelist has set down how the disciples sought Christ, he here consequently treats of the crowds seeking him, and first the motive for seeking is set down; second, the opportunity for seeking, at the words "but other boats came," etc.; third, the seeking itself is set down, at the words "when therefore the crowd had seen," etc. Now what moved the crowds to seek Christ was the preceding miracle, namely that he had crossed the sea without a vehicle. This indeed became known to them, because in the evening he was not on the shore that was near the place where he had worked the miracle of the loaves, where there was only one boat, and that boat had crossed with the disciples to the other side without Christ. Hence, when in the morning they had not found Christ on the same side where he had been on the previous day, but he was already on the other side, and he had had no other boat in which to cross, they suspected that he had crossed by walking upon the sea. And this is what he says: on the next day — that is, the day after that on which he had worked the miracle of the loaves — the crowd that was standing across the sea, where he had worked the miracle, saw that there was no other boat there but one, because on the previous day there had been only that one, and saw that Jesus had not entered the boat with his disciples, etc. By this one boat is signified the Church, which is one, by the unity of faith and of the sacraments; Ephesians 4:5: "one faith, one Baptism." But by the fact that Jesus is not with the disciples is signified the bodily separation of Christ from them at the ascension; Mark, last chapter, 19: "the Lord Jesus indeed, after he had spoken to them, was taken up into heaven." The opportunity for seeking is given by the arrival of other boats from the other side of the sea, with which they were able to cross over to seek Christ; and therefore he says, "but other boats came" from the other side, namely from Tiberias, near the place where they had eaten the loaves, etc. By these other boats that came are signified the conventicles of heretics and of those who seek the things that are their own, and not the things of Jesus Christ — below: "you seek me because you ate of my loaves" — and which are separated either in faith, as regards heretics, or lacking charity, as regards the carnal, who are not properly in the Church, but are nevertheless alongside it, insofar as they put forward a feigned faith and have the appearance of holiness; according to that saying, 2 Timothy 3:5: "having indeed a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof." And 2 Corinthians 11:14: "it is no wonder if the ministers of Satan transform themselves." But the seeking was earnest; hence he says "when therefore the crowd had seen," etc., and first he shows how the crowd seeks Christ; second, how, once he is found, they question him. He says therefore first, that when the crowd had seen that Jesus was not there, nor his disciples, they got into the boats that had come from Tiberias, seeking him — which is praiseworthy; Isaiah 55:6: "seek the Lord while he may be found"; and Psalm 68:33: "seek the Lord, and your soul shall live." But once he is found they question him; hence he said, and when the crowds had found him, namely Christ, across the sea, they said to him: Rabbi, when did you come here? But this question can be understood in two ways. In one way, that they ask only about the time; and then, according to Chrysostom, their crudeness is to be reproached, because after so great a miracle they do not ask about the manner of crossing, namely how he had crossed without a boat, but only about the time of the crossing. Or it can be said that by saying "when," they ask not only about the time, but also about the other circumstances that concurred in the miraculous crossing. But note that above, after the meal, they wanted to make him king; but now, though they have him present, they do not want to make him king. The reason for this is that they wanted to make him king, stirred up by the passion of joy caused by the meal. Now passions of this kind quickly pass away, and therefore the things that are disposed according to these very passions are transitory; but the things that are disposed by reason endure more; Ecclesiasticus 27:12: "a wise man continues in wisdom as the sun; but a fool is changed as the moon"; Proverbs 11:18: "the wicked man makes unstable work." Next, when he says "Jesus answered them," etc., the Lord treats of spiritual food; and first he sets forth the truth concerning the spiritual; second, he excludes a contradiction, at the words "the Jews therefore murmured about him." Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets forth the truth of the spiritual food; second he intimates its origin, at the words "they said therefore to him: what sign then do you work?" etc.; third he teaches the manner of receiving this food itself, at the words "they said therefore to him: Lord, always give us this bread." Concerning the first he does two things. First he shows the spiritual food, and its power; second he makes manifest what it is, at the words "they said therefore to him: what shall we do that we may work the works of God?" Concerning the first he does two things. First he argues against their perverse desire; second he exhorts them to the truth, at the words "labor," etc. He says therefore: amen, amen I say to you, although you show yourselves as it were devout, yet you seek me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate of the loaves, and were filled; as if he were to say: you seek me on account of the flesh, not on account of the spirit, namely so that you may be fed again. And, as Augustine says, the place of these is held by those who seek Jesus, not for his own sake, but so that they may obtain certain worldly advantages; such as those who, having business dealings, approach prelates and clerics, not on account of Christ, but so that by their intercession they may be advanced with the great; such as those who take refuge in churches, not on account of Jesus, but because they are oppressed by those more powerful; such also as those who, drawing near to the Lord through holy orders, seek not the merits of the virtues, but the aids of the present life, namely riches and honors, as Gregory says in Moralia 23. And this is clear: for to work signs belongs to divine power; but to eat multiplied bread is something temporal. Since, therefore, they do not come to Christ on account of the power which they see in him, but on account of the fact that they eat of the loaves, they do not serve Christ but their own belly, as is said in Philippians 3, and Psalm 48:19: "he will confess to you when you have done well to him." He leads them back to the truth by setting before them the spiritual food, saying labor not for the food that perishes, but for that which endures unto eternal life, and first he sets forth its power; second its authority, at the words "which the Son of man has given you." The power of that food is considered in the fact that it does not perish. Hence it must be known concerning this, that bodily things are certain likenesses of spiritual things, inasmuch as they are caused and derived from them, and therefore they imitate the spiritual things themselves in some way. Hence, just as the body is sustained by food, so that by which the spirit is sustained is called its food, whatever that may be. But that by which the body is sustained, since it passes over into the nature of the body, is corruptible; but the food by which the spirit is sustained is incorruptible, because it is not changed into the spirit itself, but rather, conversely, the spirit is changed into the food. Hence it is the saying of Augustine: "I am the food of the full-grown: grow, and you shall eat me. Nor shall you change me into yourself, as the food of your flesh, but you shall be changed into me," as is said in the Book of Confessions. And therefore the Lord says "labor"; that is, seek by laboring, or merit by works, not the food that perishes, namely the bodily food; 1 Corinthians 6:13: "food for the belly, and the belly for food, but God will destroy both this and that" — because the use of foods will not always exist; but labor for that food, namely the spiritual, which endures unto eternal life; which food indeed is God himself, insofar as he is truth to be contemplated, and goodness to be loved, by which the spirit is refreshed; Proverbs 9:5: "eat my bread"; Ecclesiasticus 15:3: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding." Likewise, obedience itself to the divine commandments; above, 4:34: "my food is to do the will of him who sent me." Likewise, also Christ himself. Below, in the same chapter: "I am the bread of life"; likewise: "my flesh is truly food, and my blood is truly drink." And this insofar as it is joined to the Word of God, which is the food by which the Angels live. Now he assigned a similar difference above in chapter 4:13, concerning bodily drink and spiritual drink, when he said: "whoever drinks of this water shall thirst again; but whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him shall not thirst forever" — the same difference which he here assigns between bodily and spiritual food. The reason for this is that bodily things are corruptible, but spiritual things, and especially God, are eternal. But it must be known, according to Augustine in the book On the Work of Monks, that from this saying, namely "labor not for the food that perishes," certain monks took occasion for error, saying that spiritual men ought not to work anything bodily. But this understanding is false, because Paul, who was most spiritual, labored with his own hands, as is found in Ephesians 4:28, where he himself says: "he who stole, let him now steal no more; but rather let him labor with his hands." Therefore the true understanding is that we should direct our work — that is, our principal study and intention — toward seeking the food that leads to eternal life, namely the spiritual goods. But we ought not to attend principally to temporal things, but only accessorily, that is, to procure them only by reason of the corruptible body, which must be sustained as long as we live in this life. Hence, against this, the Apostle pointedly says, 2 Thessalonians 3:10: "he who does not work, let him not eat"; as if he were to say: those who say that nothing bodily is to be done — since eating is something bodily — such men ought not to eat. Next, when he says "which the Son of man will give you," he sets down the giver of the spiritual food: and first he sets down the author of this food; second he makes manifest whence he has the authority to feed. Now the author and giver of the spiritual food is Christ; and therefore he says which — namely, the food that does not perish — the Son of man will give you. If he had said "the Son of God," it would not have seemed remarkable; but the fact that the Son of man gives it more raises attention. Yet in a spiritual sense the Son of man gives it for this reason: because human nature, weakened by sin, loathed spiritual food, and could not take it in its own spirituality; hence it was necessary that the Son of God take on flesh, and through it refresh us; Psalm 22:5: "you have prepared a table before me." But whence he has the authority of giving, he adds when he says "for this one the Father, God, has sealed"; as if he were to say: that the Son of man will give this, he has this only insofar as, by the singularity and eminence of the fullness of grace, he excels all the sons of men; hence he says this one — namely the Son of man — the Father has sealed: that is, has markedly distinguished him from the rest; Psalm 44:8: "God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness above your fellows." Or, according to Hilary, "has sealed," that is, has stamped with a seal. Now when a seal is impressed in wax, the wax retains the whole figure of the seal, just as the Son also received the whole figure of the Father. Now there is a twofold reception which the Son received from the Father. One is eternal; and it is not of this that what is here said, "has sealed," is to be understood, because in sealing, the nature receiving is one thing, and the nature impressing is another. But this is understood of the mystery of the Incarnation, because upon human nature God the Father impressed the Word, who is "the splendor and the figure of his substance," as is said in Hebrews 1:3. Or according to Chrysostom, "has sealed," that is, God the Father specially instructed him for this, that he should give eternal life to the world; below, 10:10: "I came that they may have life," etc. For thus, when someone is chosen to carry out some great office, he is said to be sealed for that office; Luke 10:1: "after these things the Lord appointed also seventy others as disciples," etc. Or "has sealed," that is, has made manifest by the voice at the Baptism, and by works, as was said above, chapter 5. Next, when he says "they said therefore to him: what shall we do that we may work the works of God?", he makes manifest what the spiritual food is, and first the question of the Jews is set down; second the response of Jesus Christ is added, at the words "Jesus answered," etc. Concerning the first it must be known that the Jews, instructed from the law, believed that nothing was eternal except God. Hence, when he had said that the spiritual food endures unto eternal life, they understood that food to be something divine. And therefore, seeking, they make mention not of food, but of the work of God, when they say "what shall we do that we may work the works of God?" In which they were not far from the truth, since the spiritual food is nothing other than to work the works of God; Luke 18:18: "what shall I do to possess eternal life?" The Lord's response is set down when he says "this is the work of God, that you believe in him," etc. Here it must be considered that the Apostle, in Romans 4, distinguishes faith from works, saying that Abraham was not justified by works, but by faith. What then is it that the Lord here says, that faith itself, or believing, is the work of God? But to this there is a twofold response. One, that the Apostle does not distinguish faith from works absolutely, but from exterior works. For there are certain exterior works, which are carried out with the bodily members, and which, because they are better known, are called works according to common usage; but others are interior, which are carried out in the soul itself, which are known only to the wise, and which turn to the heart. In another way it is said that believing itself can be reckoned among exterior works, not because faith is itself the works, but because it is their principle; hence he also pointedly says "that you believe in him." For it makes a difference whether one says "to believe God" — for thus I designate the object — or "to believe God" (as a witness) — for thus I designate a witness — or "to believe in God" — for thus I designate an end: so that in this way God can be held as the object of faith, as witness, and as end, but in different respects. For the object of faith can be a creature — for I believe that heaven was created; likewise a creature also can be a witness of faith, for I believe Paul, or any of the saints; but the end of faith cannot be anything but God, for our mind is borne only toward God as toward an end. But since the end has the character of the good, it is the object of love; and therefore to believe in God as in an end is proper to faith formed by charity; and this faith, thus formed, is the principle of all good works; and to this extent believing itself is called the work of God. But if faith is the work of God, how do men do the works of God? But this is resolved by Isaiah 26:12, when it says: "all our works he has wrought in us." For this very thing that we believe, and whatever good we work, is in us from God; Philippians 2:13: "it is he who works in us both to will and to accomplish." And therefore he pointedly says that believing is the work of God, in order to show that faith is a gift of God, as is said in Ephesians 2:8. Next, when he says "they said therefore to him: what sign then do you work?", the origin of the food is treated, and first the question of the Jews is set down; second the response of Christ, at the words "amen, amen I say to you, Moses did not give you bread from heaven." Concerning the first they do three things. First they ask for a sign; second they specify it; third they adduce the testimony of Scripture. Now they ask for a sign by proposing the question; hence they said: what sign do you work, that we may see, and believe you? Now this question is explained differently by Augustine, and differently by Chrysostom. For Chrysostom says that the Lord had invited them to faith. Now the arguments leading to faith are miracles; 1 Corinthians 14:22: "signs are given to unbelievers." And therefore for this they seek a sign by which they may believe; for it is the custom of the Jews to ask for signs; 1 Corinthians 1:22: "for the Jews seek signs." Hence he says "what sign then do you work?" But this seems ridiculous, that they should ask for some miracles for this purpose, since he had just performed some, by multiplying the loaves, and by walking upon the sea, which had occurred in their very presence, and which they could believe. But they say this for this reason: to provoke the Lord, and to induce him always to feed them. This is clear, because they make no mention of any other sign except that which was done for their fathers through Moses for forty years, as if by this they were asking that he should always feed them; hence they say "our fathers ate manna in the desert." Nor do they say: God fed our fathers with manna, lest they should seem to want to make him equal to God. Likewise they do not say, Moses fed them, lest they should seem to prefer Moses to Christ — as if wanting by this to entice him, so that he might continually feed them. Concerning that food it is spoken of in Exodus 16, and in Psalm 77:25: "man ate the bread of Angels." But Augustine says that the Lord said that he would give them food that endures unto eternal life; hence he seems, as it were, to prefer himself to Moses. But the Jews reckoned Moses greater than Christ; hence they said, below, chapter 9:29: "we know that God spoke to Moses; but as for this man, we do not know where he is from." Hence they required that Christ should do certain things greater than Moses had done; and therefore they bring back to memory the things that Moses did, saying: our fathers ate manna in the desert; as if he were to say: what you say about yourself is greater than what Moses did, because you promise food that does not perish; but the manna that Moses gave, if it was kept for another day, swarmed with worms. If therefore you wish us to believe you, you should do something greater than Moses; for what you did is not greater, because you satisfied five thousand men, but with five barley loaves, and only once; whereas he satisfied the whole people with manna from heaven for forty years, and this in the desert, just as it is written in Psalm 77:24: "he gave them bread from heaven to eat."”

“After the Evangelist has set down how the disciples sought Christ, he here consequently treats of the crowds seeking him, and first the motive for seeking is set down; second, the opportunity for seeking, at the words "but other boats came," etc.; third, the seeking itself is set down, at the words "when therefore the crowd had seen," etc. Now what moved the crowds to seek Christ was the preceding miracle, namely that he had crossed the sea without a vehicle. This indeed became known to them, because in the evening he was not on the shore that was near the place where he had worked the miracle of the loaves, where there was only one boat, and that boat had crossed with the disciples to the other side without Christ. Hence, when in the morning they had not found Christ on the same side where he had been on the previous day, but he was already on the other side, and he had had no other boat in which to cross, they suspected that he had crossed by walking upon the sea. And this is what he says: on the next day — that is, the day after that on which he had worked the miracle of the loaves — the crowd that was standing across the sea, where he had worked the miracle, saw that there was no other boat there but one, because on the previous day there had been only that one, and saw that Jesus had not entered the boat with his disciples, etc. By this one boat is signified the Church, which is one, by the unity of faith and of the sacraments; Ephesians 4:5: "one faith, one Baptism." But by the fact that Jesus is not with the disciples is signified the bodily separation of Christ from them at the ascension; Mark, last chapter, 19: "the Lord Jesus indeed, after he had spoken to them, was taken up into heaven." The opportunity for seeking is given by the arrival of other boats from the other side of the sea, with which they were able to cross over to seek Christ; and therefore he says, "but other boats came" from the other side, namely from Tiberias, near the place where they had eaten the loaves, etc. By these other boats that came are signified the conventicles of heretics and of those who seek the things that are their own, and not the things of Jesus Christ — below: "you seek me because you ate of my loaves" — and which are separated either in faith, as regards heretics, or lacking charity, as regards the carnal, who are not properly in the Church, but are nevertheless alongside it, insofar as they put forward a feigned faith and have the appearance of holiness; according to that saying, 2 Timothy 3:5: "having indeed a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof." And 2 Corinthians 11:14: "it is no wonder if the ministers of Satan transform themselves." But the seeking was earnest; hence he says "when therefore the crowd had seen," etc., and first he shows how the crowd seeks Christ; second, how, once he is found, they question him. He says therefore first, that when the crowd had seen that Jesus was not there, nor his disciples, they got into the boats that had come from Tiberias, seeking him — which is praiseworthy; Isaiah 55:6: "seek the Lord while he may be found"; and Psalm 68:33: "seek the Lord, and your soul shall live." But once he is found they question him; hence he said, and when the crowds had found him, namely Christ, across the sea, they said to him: Rabbi, when did you come here? But this question can be understood in two ways. In one way, that they ask only about the time; and then, according to Chrysostom, their crudeness is to be reproached, because after so great a miracle they do not ask about the manner of crossing, namely how he had crossed without a boat, but only about the time of the crossing. Or it can be said that by saying "when," they ask not only about the time, but also about the other circumstances that concurred in the miraculous crossing. But note that above, after the meal, they wanted to make him king; but now, though they have him present, they do not want to make him king. The reason for this is that they wanted to make him king, stirred up by the passion of joy caused by the meal. Now passions of this kind quickly pass away, and therefore the things that are disposed according to these very passions are transitory; but the things that are disposed by reason endure more; Ecclesiasticus 27:12: "a wise man continues in wisdom as the sun; but a fool is changed as the moon"; Proverbs 11:18: "the wicked man makes unstable work." Next, when he says "Jesus answered them," etc., the Lord treats of spiritual food; and first he sets forth the truth concerning the spiritual; second, he excludes a contradiction, at the words "the Jews therefore murmured about him." Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets forth the truth of the spiritual food; second he intimates its origin, at the words "they said therefore to him: what sign then do you work?" etc.; third he teaches the manner of receiving this food itself, at the words "they said therefore to him: Lord, always give us this bread." Concerning the first he does two things. First he shows the spiritual food, and its power; second he makes manifest what it is, at the words "they said therefore to him: what shall we do that we may work the works of God?" Concerning the first he does two things. First he argues against their perverse desire; second he exhorts them to the truth, at the words "labor," etc. He says therefore: amen, amen I say to you, although you show yourselves as it were devout, yet you seek me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate of the loaves, and were filled; as if he were to say: you seek me on account of the flesh, not on account of the spirit, namely so that you may be fed again. And, as Augustine says, the place of these is held by those who seek Jesus, not for his own sake, but so that they may obtain certain worldly advantages; such as those who, having business dealings, approach prelates and clerics, not on account of Christ, but so that by their intercession they may be advanced with the great; such as those who take refuge in churches, not on account of Jesus, but because they are oppressed by those more powerful; such also as those who, drawing near to the Lord through holy orders, seek not the merits of the virtues, but the aids of the present life, namely riches and honors, as Gregory says in Moralia 23. And this is clear: for to work signs belongs to divine power; but to eat multiplied bread is something temporal. Since, therefore, they do not come to Christ on account of the power which they see in him, but on account of the fact that they eat of the loaves, they do not serve Christ but their own belly, as is said in Philippians 3, and Psalm 48:19: "he will confess to you when you have done well to him." He leads them back to the truth by setting before them the spiritual food, saying labor not for the food that perishes, but for that which endures unto eternal life, and first he sets forth its power; second its authority, at the words "which the Son of man has given you." The power of that food is considered in the fact that it does not perish. Hence it must be known concerning this, that bodily things are certain likenesses of spiritual things, inasmuch as they are caused and derived from them, and therefore they imitate the spiritual things themselves in some way. Hence, just as the body is sustained by food, so that by which the spirit is sustained is called its food, whatever that may be. But that by which the body is sustained, since it passes over into the nature of the body, is corruptible; but the food by which the spirit is sustained is incorruptible, because it is not changed into the spirit itself, but rather, conversely, the spirit is changed into the food. Hence it is the saying of Augustine: "I am the food of the full-grown: grow, and you shall eat me. Nor shall you change me into yourself, as the food of your flesh, but you shall be changed into me," as is said in the Book of Confessions. And therefore the Lord says "labor"; that is, seek by laboring, or merit by works, not the food that perishes, namely the bodily food; 1 Corinthians 6:13: "food for the belly, and the belly for food, but God will destroy both this and that" — because the use of foods will not always exist; but labor for that food, namely the spiritual, which endures unto eternal life; which food indeed is God himself, insofar as he is truth to be contemplated, and goodness to be loved, by which the spirit is refreshed; Proverbs 9:5: "eat my bread"; Ecclesiasticus 15:3: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding." Likewise, obedience itself to the divine commandments; above, 4:34: "my food is to do the will of him who sent me." Likewise, also Christ himself. Below, in the same chapter: "I am the bread of life"; likewise: "my flesh is truly food, and my blood is truly drink." And this insofar as it is joined to the Word of God, which is the food by which the Angels live. Now he assigned a similar difference above in chapter 4:13, concerning bodily drink and spiritual drink, when he said: "whoever drinks of this water shall thirst again; but whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him shall not thirst forever" — the same difference which he here assigns between bodily and spiritual food. The reason for this is that bodily things are corruptible, but spiritual things, and especially God, are eternal. But it must be known, according to Augustine in the book On the Work of Monks, that from this saying, namely "labor not for the food that perishes," certain monks took occasion for error, saying that spiritual men ought not to work anything bodily. But this understanding is false, because Paul, who was most spiritual, labored with his own hands, as is found in Ephesians 4:28, where he himself says: "he who stole, let him now steal no more; but rather let him labor with his hands." Therefore the true understanding is that we should direct our work — that is, our principal study and intention — toward seeking the food that leads to eternal life, namely the spiritual goods. But we ought not to attend principally to temporal things, but only accessorily, that is, to procure them only by reason of the corruptible body, which must be sustained as long as we live in this life. Hence, against this, the Apostle pointedly says, 2 Thessalonians 3:10: "he who does not work, let him not eat"; as if he were to say: those who say that nothing bodily is to be done — since eating is something bodily — such men ought not to eat. Next, when he says "which the Son of man will give you," he sets down the giver of the spiritual food: and first he sets down the author of this food; second he makes manifest whence he has the authority to feed. Now the author and giver of the spiritual food is Christ; and therefore he says which — namely, the food that does not perish — the Son of man will give you. If he had said "the Son of God," it would not have seemed remarkable; but the fact that the Son of man gives it more raises attention. Yet in a spiritual sense the Son of man gives it for this reason: because human nature, weakened by sin, loathed spiritual food, and could not take it in its own spirituality; hence it was necessary that the Son of God take on flesh, and through it refresh us; Psalm 22:5: "you have prepared a table before me." But whence he has the authority of giving, he adds when he says "for this one the Father, God, has sealed"; as if he were to say: that the Son of man will give this, he has this only insofar as, by the singularity and eminence of the fullness of grace, he excels all the sons of men; hence he says this one — namely the Son of man — the Father has sealed: that is, has markedly distinguished him from the rest; Psalm 44:8: "God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness above your fellows." Or, according to Hilary, "has sealed," that is, has stamped with a seal. Now when a seal is impressed in wax, the wax retains the whole figure of the seal, just as the Son also received the whole figure of the Father. Now there is a twofold reception which the Son received from the Father. One is eternal; and it is not of this that what is here said, "has sealed," is to be understood, because in sealing, the nature receiving is one thing, and the nature impressing is another. But this is understood of the mystery of the Incarnation, because upon human nature God the Father impressed the Word, who is "the splendor and the figure of his substance," as is said in Hebrews 1:3. Or according to Chrysostom, "has sealed," that is, God the Father specially instructed him for this, that he should give eternal life to the world; below, 10:10: "I came that they may have life," etc. For thus, when someone is chosen to carry out some great office, he is said to be sealed for that office; Luke 10:1: "after these things the Lord appointed also seventy others as disciples," etc. Or "has sealed," that is, has made manifest by the voice at the Baptism, and by works, as was said above, chapter 5. Next, when he says "they said therefore to him: what shall we do that we may work the works of God?", he makes manifest what the spiritual food is, and first the question of the Jews is set down; second the response of Jesus Christ is added, at the words "Jesus answered," etc. Concerning the first it must be known that the Jews, instructed from the law, believed that nothing was eternal except God. Hence, when he had said that the spiritual food endures unto eternal life, they understood that food to be something divine. And therefore, seeking, they make mention not of food, but of the work of God, when they say "what shall we do that we may work the works of God?" In which they were not far from the truth, since the spiritual food is nothing other than to work the works of God; Luke 18:18: "what shall I do to possess eternal life?" The Lord's response is set down when he says "this is the work of God, that you believe in him," etc. Here it must be considered that the Apostle, in Romans 4, distinguishes faith from works, saying that Abraham was not justified by works, but by faith. What then is it that the Lord here says, that faith itself, or believing, is the work of God? But to this there is a twofold response. One, that the Apostle does not distinguish faith from works absolutely, but from exterior works. For there are certain exterior works, which are carried out with the bodily members, and which, because they are better known, are called works according to common usage; but others are interior, which are carried out in the soul itself, which are known only to the wise, and which turn to the heart. In another way it is said that believing itself can be reckoned among exterior works, not because faith is itself the works, but because it is their principle; hence he also pointedly says "that you believe in him." For it makes a difference whether one says "to believe God" — for thus I designate the object — or "to believe God" (as a witness) — for thus I designate a witness — or "to believe in God" — for thus I designate an end: so that in this way God can be held as the object of faith, as witness, and as end, but in different respects. For the object of faith can be a creature — for I believe that heaven was created; likewise a creature also can be a witness of faith, for I believe Paul, or any of the saints; but the end of faith cannot be anything but God, for our mind is borne only toward God as toward an end. But since the end has the character of the good, it is the object of love; and therefore to believe in God as in an end is proper to faith formed by charity; and this faith, thus formed, is the principle of all good works; and to this extent believing itself is called the work of God. But if faith is the work of God, how do men do the works of God? But this is resolved by Isaiah 26:12, when it says: "all our works he has wrought in us." For this very thing that we believe, and whatever good we work, is in us from God; Philippians 2:13: "it is he who works in us both to will and to accomplish." And therefore he pointedly says that believing is the work of God, in order to show that faith is a gift of God, as is said in Ephesians 2:8. Next, when he says "they said therefore to him: what sign then do you work?", the origin of the food is treated, and first the question of the Jews is set down; second the response of Christ, at the words "amen, amen I say to you, Moses did not give you bread from heaven." Concerning the first they do three things. First they ask for a sign; second they specify it; third they adduce the testimony of Scripture. Now they ask for a sign by proposing the question; hence they said: what sign do you work, that we may see, and believe you? Now this question is explained differently by Augustine, and differently by Chrysostom. For Chrysostom says that the Lord had invited them to faith. Now the arguments leading to faith are miracles; 1 Corinthians 14:22: "signs are given to unbelievers." And therefore for this they seek a sign by which they may believe; for it is the custom of the Jews to ask for signs; 1 Corinthians 1:22: "for the Jews seek signs." Hence he says "what sign then do you work?" But this seems ridiculous, that they should ask for some miracles for this purpose, since he had just performed some, by multiplying the loaves, and by walking upon the sea, which had occurred in their very presence, and which they could believe. But they say this for this reason: to provoke the Lord, and to induce him always to feed them. This is clear, because they make no mention of any other sign except that which was done for their fathers through Moses for forty years, as if by this they were asking that he should always feed them; hence they say "our fathers ate manna in the desert." Nor do they say: God fed our fathers with manna, lest they should seem to want to make him equal to God. Likewise they do not say, Moses fed them, lest they should seem to prefer Moses to Christ — as if wanting by this to entice him, so that he might continually feed them. Concerning that food it is spoken of in Exodus 16, and in Psalm 77:25: "man ate the bread of Angels." But Augustine says that the Lord said that he would give them food that endures unto eternal life; hence he seems, as it were, to prefer himself to Moses. But the Jews reckoned Moses greater than Christ; hence they said, below, chapter 9:29: "we know that God spoke to Moses; but as for this man, we do not know where he is from." Hence they required that Christ should do certain things greater than Moses had done; and therefore they bring back to memory the things that Moses did, saying: our fathers ate manna in the desert; as if he were to say: what you say about yourself is greater than what Moses did, because you promise food that does not perish; but the manna that Moses gave, if it was kept for another day, swarmed with worms. If therefore you wish us to believe you, you should do something greater than Moses; for what you did is not greater, because you satisfied five thousand men, but with five barley loaves, and only once; whereas he satisfied the whole people with manna from heaven for forty years, and this in the desert, just as it is written in Psalm 77:24: "he gave them bread from heaven to eat."”

“After the Evangelist has set down how the disciples sought Christ, he here consequently treats of the crowds seeking him, and first the motive for seeking is set down; second, the opportunity for seeking, at the words "but other boats came," etc.; third, the seeking itself is set down, at the words "when therefore the crowd had seen," etc. Now what moved the crowds to seek Christ was the preceding miracle, namely that he had crossed the sea without a vehicle. This indeed became known to them, because in the evening he was not on the shore that was near the place where he had worked the miracle of the loaves, where there was only one boat, and that boat had crossed with the disciples to the other side without Christ. Hence, when in the morning they had not found Christ on the same side where he had been on the previous day, but he was already on the other side, and he had had no other boat in which to cross, they suspected that he had crossed by walking upon the sea. And this is what he says: on the next day — that is, the day after that on which he had worked the miracle of the loaves — the crowd that was standing across the sea, where he had worked the miracle, saw that there was no other boat there but one, because on the previous day there had been only that one, and saw that Jesus had not entered the boat with his disciples, etc. By this one boat is signified the Church, which is one, by the unity of faith and of the sacraments; Ephesians 4:5: "one faith, one Baptism." But by the fact that Jesus is not with the disciples is signified the bodily separation of Christ from them at the ascension; Mark, last chapter, 19: "the Lord Jesus indeed, after he had spoken to them, was taken up into heaven." The opportunity for seeking is given by the arrival of other boats from the other side of the sea, with which they were able to cross over to seek Christ; and therefore he says, "but other boats came" from the other side, namely from Tiberias, near the place where they had eaten the loaves, etc. By these other boats that came are signified the conventicles of heretics and of those who seek the things that are their own, and not the things of Jesus Christ — below: "you seek me because you ate of my loaves" — and which are separated either in faith, as regards heretics, or lacking charity, as regards the carnal, who are not properly in the Church, but are nevertheless alongside it, insofar as they put forward a feigned faith and have the appearance of holiness; according to that saying, 2 Timothy 3:5: "having indeed a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof." And 2 Corinthians 11:14: "it is no wonder if the ministers of Satan transform themselves." But the seeking was earnest; hence he says "when therefore the crowd had seen," etc., and first he shows how the crowd seeks Christ; second, how, once he is found, they question him. He says therefore first, that when the crowd had seen that Jesus was not there, nor his disciples, they got into the boats that had come from Tiberias, seeking him — which is praiseworthy; Isaiah 55:6: "seek the Lord while he may be found"; and Psalm 68:33: "seek the Lord, and your soul shall live." But once he is found they question him; hence he said, and when the crowds had found him, namely Christ, across the sea, they said to him: Rabbi, when did you come here? But this question can be understood in two ways. In one way, that they ask only about the time; and then, according to Chrysostom, their crudeness is to be reproached, because after so great a miracle they do not ask about the manner of crossing, namely how he had crossed without a boat, but only about the time of the crossing. Or it can be said that by saying "when," they ask not only about the time, but also about the other circumstances that concurred in the miraculous crossing. But note that above, after the meal, they wanted to make him king; but now, though they have him present, they do not want to make him king. The reason for this is that they wanted to make him king, stirred up by the passion of joy caused by the meal. Now passions of this kind quickly pass away, and therefore the things that are disposed according to these very passions are transitory; but the things that are disposed by reason endure more; Ecclesiasticus 27:12: "a wise man continues in wisdom as the sun; but a fool is changed as the moon"; Proverbs 11:18: "the wicked man makes unstable work." Next, when he says "Jesus answered them," etc., the Lord treats of spiritual food; and first he sets forth the truth concerning the spiritual; second, he excludes a contradiction, at the words "the Jews therefore murmured about him." Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets forth the truth of the spiritual food; second he intimates its origin, at the words "they said therefore to him: what sign then do you work?" etc.; third he teaches the manner of receiving this food itself, at the words "they said therefore to him: Lord, always give us this bread." Concerning the first he does two things. First he shows the spiritual food, and its power; second he makes manifest what it is, at the words "they said therefore to him: what shall we do that we may work the works of God?" Concerning the first he does two things. First he argues against their perverse desire; second he exhorts them to the truth, at the words "labor," etc. He says therefore: amen, amen I say to you, although you show yourselves as it were devout, yet you seek me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate of the loaves, and were filled; as if he were to say: you seek me on account of the flesh, not on account of the spirit, namely so that you may be fed again. And, as Augustine says, the place of these is held by those who seek Jesus, not for his own sake, but so that they may obtain certain worldly advantages; such as those who, having business dealings, approach prelates and clerics, not on account of Christ, but so that by their intercession they may be advanced with the great; such as those who take refuge in churches, not on account of Jesus, but because they are oppressed by those more powerful; such also as those who, drawing near to the Lord through holy orders, seek not the merits of the virtues, but the aids of the present life, namely riches and honors, as Gregory says in Moralia 23. And this is clear: for to work signs belongs to divine power; but to eat multiplied bread is something temporal. Since, therefore, they do not come to Christ on account of the power which they see in him, but on account of the fact that they eat of the loaves, they do not serve Christ but their own belly, as is said in Philippians 3, and Psalm 48:19: "he will confess to you when you have done well to him." He leads them back to the truth by setting before them the spiritual food, saying labor not for the food that perishes, but for that which endures unto eternal life, and first he sets forth its power; second its authority, at the words "which the Son of man has given you." The power of that food is considered in the fact that it does not perish. Hence it must be known concerning this, that bodily things are certain likenesses of spiritual things, inasmuch as they are caused and derived from them, and therefore they imitate the spiritual things themselves in some way. Hence, just as the body is sustained by food, so that by which the spirit is sustained is called its food, whatever that may be. But that by which the body is sustained, since it passes over into the nature of the body, is corruptible; but the food by which the spirit is sustained is incorruptible, because it is not changed into the spirit itself, but rather, conversely, the spirit is changed into the food. Hence it is the saying of Augustine: "I am the food of the full-grown: grow, and you shall eat me. Nor shall you change me into yourself, as the food of your flesh, but you shall be changed into me," as is said in the Book of Confessions. And therefore the Lord says "labor"; that is, seek by laboring, or merit by works, not the food that perishes, namely the bodily food; 1 Corinthians 6:13: "food for the belly, and the belly for food, but God will destroy both this and that" — because the use of foods will not always exist; but labor for that food, namely the spiritual, which endures unto eternal life; which food indeed is God himself, insofar as he is truth to be contemplated, and goodness to be loved, by which the spirit is refreshed; Proverbs 9:5: "eat my bread"; Ecclesiasticus 15:3: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding." Likewise, obedience itself to the divine commandments; above, 4:34: "my food is to do the will of him who sent me." Likewise, also Christ himself. Below, in the same chapter: "I am the bread of life"; likewise: "my flesh is truly food, and my blood is truly drink." And this insofar as it is joined to the Word of God, which is the food by which the Angels live. Now he assigned a similar difference above in chapter 4:13, concerning bodily drink and spiritual drink, when he said: "whoever drinks of this water shall thirst again; but whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him shall not thirst forever" — the same difference which he here assigns between bodily and spiritual food. The reason for this is that bodily things are corruptible, but spiritual things, and especially God, are eternal. But it must be known, according to Augustine in the book On the Work of Monks, that from this saying, namely "labor not for the food that perishes," certain monks took occasion for error, saying that spiritual men ought not to work anything bodily. But this understanding is false, because Paul, who was most spiritual, labored with his own hands, as is found in Ephesians 4:28, where he himself says: "he who stole, let him now steal no more; but rather let him labor with his hands." Therefore the true understanding is that we should direct our work — that is, our principal study and intention — toward seeking the food that leads to eternal life, namely the spiritual goods. But we ought not to attend principally to temporal things, but only accessorily, that is, to procure them only by reason of the corruptible body, which must be sustained as long as we live in this life. Hence, against this, the Apostle pointedly says, 2 Thessalonians 3:10: "he who does not work, let him not eat"; as if he were to say: those who say that nothing bodily is to be done — since eating is something bodily — such men ought not to eat. Next, when he says "which the Son of man will give you," he sets down the giver of the spiritual food: and first he sets down the author of this food; second he makes manifest whence he has the authority to feed. Now the author and giver of the spiritual food is Christ; and therefore he says which — namely, the food that does not perish — the Son of man will give you. If he had said "the Son of God," it would not have seemed remarkable; but the fact that the Son of man gives it more raises attention. Yet in a spiritual sense the Son of man gives it for this reason: because human nature, weakened by sin, loathed spiritual food, and could not take it in its own spirituality; hence it was necessary that the Son of God take on flesh, and through it refresh us; Psalm 22:5: "you have prepared a table before me." But whence he has the authority of giving, he adds when he says "for this one the Father, God, has sealed"; as if he were to say: that the Son of man will give this, he has this only insofar as, by the singularity and eminence of the fullness of grace, he excels all the sons of men; hence he says this one — namely the Son of man — the Father has sealed: that is, has markedly distinguished him from the rest; Psalm 44:8: "God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness above your fellows." Or, according to Hilary, "has sealed," that is, has stamped with a seal. Now when a seal is impressed in wax, the wax retains the whole figure of the seal, just as the Son also received the whole figure of the Father. Now there is a twofold reception which the Son received from the Father. One is eternal; and it is not of this that what is here said, "has sealed," is to be understood, because in sealing, the nature receiving is one thing, and the nature impressing is another. But this is understood of the mystery of the Incarnation, because upon human nature God the Father impressed the Word, who is "the splendor and the figure of his substance," as is said in Hebrews 1:3. Or according to Chrysostom, "has sealed," that is, God the Father specially instructed him for this, that he should give eternal life to the world; below, 10:10: "I came that they may have life," etc. For thus, when someone is chosen to carry out some great office, he is said to be sealed for that office; Luke 10:1: "after these things the Lord appointed also seventy others as disciples," etc. Or "has sealed," that is, has made manifest by the voice at the Baptism, and by works, as was said above, chapter 5. Next, when he says "they said therefore to him: what shall we do that we may work the works of God?", he makes manifest what the spiritual food is, and first the question of the Jews is set down; second the response of Jesus Christ is added, at the words "Jesus answered," etc. Concerning the first it must be known that the Jews, instructed from the law, believed that nothing was eternal except God. Hence, when he had said that the spiritual food endures unto eternal life, they understood that food to be something divine. And therefore, seeking, they make mention not of food, but of the work of God, when they say "what shall we do that we may work the works of God?" In which they were not far from the truth, since the spiritual food is nothing other than to work the works of God; Luke 18:18: "what shall I do to possess eternal life?" The Lord's response is set down when he says "this is the work of God, that you believe in him," etc. Here it must be considered that the Apostle, in Romans 4, distinguishes faith from works, saying that Abraham was not justified by works, but by faith. What then is it that the Lord here says, that faith itself, or believing, is the work of God? But to this there is a twofold response. One, that the Apostle does not distinguish faith from works absolutely, but from exterior works. For there are certain exterior works, which are carried out with the bodily members, and which, because they are better known, are called works according to common usage; but others are interior, which are carried out in the soul itself, which are known only to the wise, and which turn to the heart. In another way it is said that believing itself can be reckoned among exterior works, not because faith is itself the works, but because it is their principle; hence he also pointedly says "that you believe in him." For it makes a difference whether one says "to believe God" — for thus I designate the object — or "to believe God" (as a witness) — for thus I designate a witness — or "to believe in God" — for thus I designate an end: so that in this way God can be held as the object of faith, as witness, and as end, but in different respects. For the object of faith can be a creature — for I believe that heaven was created; likewise a creature also can be a witness of faith, for I believe Paul, or any of the saints; but the end of faith cannot be anything but God, for our mind is borne only toward God as toward an end. But since the end has the character of the good, it is the object of love; and therefore to believe in God as in an end is proper to faith formed by charity; and this faith, thus formed, is the principle of all good works; and to this extent believing itself is called the work of God. But if faith is the work of God, how do men do the works of God? But this is resolved by Isaiah 26:12, when it says: "all our works he has wrought in us." For this very thing that we believe, and whatever good we work, is in us from God; Philippians 2:13: "it is he who works in us both to will and to accomplish." And therefore he pointedly says that believing is the work of God, in order to show that faith is a gift of God, as is said in Ephesians 2:8. Next, when he says "they said therefore to him: what sign then do you work?", the origin of the food is treated, and first the question of the Jews is set down; second the response of Christ, at the words "amen, amen I say to you, Moses did not give you bread from heaven." Concerning the first they do three things. First they ask for a sign; second they specify it; third they adduce the testimony of Scripture. Now they ask for a sign by proposing the question; hence they said: what sign do you work, that we may see, and believe you? Now this question is explained differently by Augustine, and differently by Chrysostom. For Chrysostom says that the Lord had invited them to faith. Now the arguments leading to faith are miracles; 1 Corinthians 14:22: "signs are given to unbelievers." And therefore for this they seek a sign by which they may believe; for it is the custom of the Jews to ask for signs; 1 Corinthians 1:22: "for the Jews seek signs." Hence he says "what sign then do you work?" But this seems ridiculous, that they should ask for some miracles for this purpose, since he had just performed some, by multiplying the loaves, and by walking upon the sea, which had occurred in their very presence, and which they could believe. But they say this for this reason: to provoke the Lord, and to induce him always to feed them. This is clear, because they make no mention of any other sign except that which was done for their fathers through Moses for forty years, as if by this they were asking that he should always feed them; hence they say "our fathers ate manna in the desert." Nor do they say: God fed our fathers with manna, lest they should seem to want to make him equal to God. Likewise they do not say, Moses fed them, lest they should seem to prefer Moses to Christ — as if wanting by this to entice him, so that he might continually feed them. Concerning that food it is spoken of in Exodus 16, and in Psalm 77:25: "man ate the bread of Angels." But Augustine says that the Lord said that he would give them food that endures unto eternal life; hence he seems, as it were, to prefer himself to Moses. But the Jews reckoned Moses greater than Christ; hence they said, below, chapter 9:29: "we know that God spoke to Moses; but as for this man, we do not know where he is from." Hence they required that Christ should do certain things greater than Moses had done; and therefore they bring back to memory the things that Moses did, saying: our fathers ate manna in the desert; as if he were to say: what you say about yourself is greater than what Moses did, because you promise food that does not perish; but the manna that Moses gave, if it was kept for another day, swarmed with worms. If therefore you wish us to believe you, you should do something greater than Moses; for what you did is not greater, because you satisfied five thousand men, but with five barley loaves, and only once; whereas he satisfied the whole people with manna from heaven for forty years, and this in the desert, just as it is written in Psalm 77:24: "he gave them bread from heaven to eat."”

“Jesus answered them and said,.... Not by replying to their question, or giving a direct answer to that, which he could have done, by telling them that he walked upon the water, and found his disciples in great distress, and delivered them, and came early that morning with them to the land of Gennesaret, and so to Capernaum: but not willing to gratify their curiosity; and knowing from what principles, and with what views they sought after him, and followed him; and willing to let them know that he knew them, being the searcher of hearts, and to reprove them for them, thus addressed them: verily, verily, I say unto you; this is a certain truth, and was full well known to Christ, and what their own consciences must attest: ye seek me not because ye saw the miracles; of feeding so large a number with so small a quantity of food, and of healing them that needed it, Luk 9:11. Not but that they did regard the miracles of Christ, and concluded from thence he must be that prophet that was to come, and were for taking him by force, and proclaiming him king; but then they had a greater respect to their own worldly interest, and their carnal appetites, than to these, as follows: but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were filled; they regarded their own bellies more than the honour and glory of Christ, and even than the good of their immortal souls, and the spiritual and eternal salvation of them: and it is to be feared that this is the case of too many who make a profession of religion; their view being their own worldly advantages, and not the spiritual and everlasting good of their souls, and the real interest of a Redeemer: hence the following advice.”

“After the Evangelist has set down how the disciples sought Christ, he here consequently treats of the crowds seeking him, and first the motive for seeking is set down; second, the opportunity for seeking, at the words "but other boats came," etc.; third, the seeking itself is set down, at the words "when therefore the crowd had seen," etc. Now what moved the crowds to seek Christ was the preceding miracle, namely that he had crossed the sea without a vehicle. This indeed became known to them, because in the evening he was not on the shore that was near the place where he had worked the miracle of the loaves, where there was only one boat, and that boat had crossed with the disciples to the other side without Christ. Hence, when in the morning they had not found Christ on the same side where he had been on the previous day, but he was already on the other side, and he had had no other boat in which to cross, they suspected that he had crossed by walking upon the sea. And this is what he says: on the next day — that is, the day after that on which he had worked the miracle of the loaves — the crowd that was standing across the sea, where he had worked the miracle, saw that there was no other boat there but one, because on the previous day there had been only that one, and saw that Jesus had not entered the boat with his disciples, etc. By this one boat is signified the Church, which is one, by the unity of faith and of the sacraments; Ephesians 4:5: "one faith, one Baptism." But by the fact that Jesus is not with the disciples is signified the bodily separation of Christ from them at the ascension; Mark, last chapter, 19: "the Lord Jesus indeed, after he had spoken to them, was taken up into heaven." The opportunity for seeking is given by the arrival of other boats from the other side of the sea, with which they were able to cross over to seek Christ; and therefore he says, "but other boats came" from the other side, namely from Tiberias, near the place where they had eaten the loaves, etc. By these other boats that came are signified the conventicles of heretics and of those who seek the things that are their own, and not the things of Jesus Christ — below: "you seek me because you ate of my loaves" — and which are separated either in faith, as regards heretics, or lacking charity, as regards the carnal, who are not properly in the Church, but are nevertheless alongside it, insofar as they put forward a feigned faith and have the appearance of holiness; according to that saying, 2 Timothy 3:5: "having indeed a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof." And 2 Corinthians 11:14: "it is no wonder if the ministers of Satan transform themselves." But the seeking was earnest; hence he says "when therefore the crowd had seen," etc., and first he shows how the crowd seeks Christ; second, how, once he is found, they question him. He says therefore first, that when the crowd had seen that Jesus was not there, nor his disciples, they got into the boats that had come from Tiberias, seeking him — which is praiseworthy; Isaiah 55:6: "seek the Lord while he may be found"; and Psalm 68:33: "seek the Lord, and your soul shall live." But once he is found they question him; hence he said, and when the crowds had found him, namely Christ, across the sea, they said to him: Rabbi, when did you come here? But this question can be understood in two ways. In one way, that they ask only about the time; and then, according to Chrysostom, their crudeness is to be reproached, because after so great a miracle they do not ask about the manner of crossing, namely how he had crossed without a boat, but only about the time of the crossing. Or it can be said that by saying "when," they ask not only about the time, but also about the other circumstances that concurred in the miraculous crossing. But note that above, after the meal, they wanted to make him king; but now, though they have him present, they do not want to make him king. The reason for this is that they wanted to make him king, stirred up by the passion of joy caused by the meal. Now passions of this kind quickly pass away, and therefore the things that are disposed according to these very passions are transitory; but the things that are disposed by reason endure more; Ecclesiasticus 27:12: "a wise man continues in wisdom as the sun; but a fool is changed as the moon"; Proverbs 11:18: "the wicked man makes unstable work." Next, when he says "Jesus answered them," etc., the Lord treats of spiritual food; and first he sets forth the truth concerning the spiritual; second, he excludes a contradiction, at the words "the Jews therefore murmured about him." Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets forth the truth of the spiritual food; second he intimates its origin, at the words "they said therefore to him: what sign then do you work?" etc.; third he teaches the manner of receiving this food itself, at the words "they said therefore to him: Lord, always give us this bread." Concerning the first he does two things. First he shows the spiritual food, and its power; second he makes manifest what it is, at the words "they said therefore to him: what shall we do that we may work the works of God?" Concerning the first he does two things. First he argues against their perverse desire; second he exhorts them to the truth, at the words "labor," etc. He says therefore: amen, amen I say to you, although you show yourselves as it were devout, yet you seek me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate of the loaves, and were filled; as if he were to say: you seek me on account of the flesh, not on account of the spirit, namely so that you may be fed again. And, as Augustine says, the place of these is held by those who seek Jesus, not for his own sake, but so that they may obtain certain worldly advantages; such as those who, having business dealings, approach prelates and clerics, not on account of Christ, but so that by their intercession they may be advanced with the great; such as those who take refuge in churches, not on account of Jesus, but because they are oppressed by those more powerful; such also as those who, drawing near to the Lord through holy orders, seek not the merits of the virtues, but the aids of the present life, namely riches and honors, as Gregory says in Moralia 23. And this is clear: for to work signs belongs to divine power; but to eat multiplied bread is something temporal. Since, therefore, they do not come to Christ on account of the power which they see in him, but on account of the fact that they eat of the loaves, they do not serve Christ but their own belly, as is said in Philippians 3, and Psalm 48:19: "he will confess to you when you have done well to him." He leads them back to the truth by setting before them the spiritual food, saying labor not for the food that perishes, but for that which endures unto eternal life, and first he sets forth its power; second its authority, at the words "which the Son of man has given you." The power of that food is considered in the fact that it does not perish. Hence it must be known concerning this, that bodily things are certain likenesses of spiritual things, inasmuch as they are caused and derived from them, and therefore they imitate the spiritual things themselves in some way. Hence, just as the body is sustained by food, so that by which the spirit is sustained is called its food, whatever that may be. But that by which the body is sustained, since it passes over into the nature of the body, is corruptible; but the food by which the spirit is sustained is incorruptible, because it is not changed into the spirit itself, but rather, conversely, the spirit is changed into the food. Hence it is the saying of Augustine: "I am the food of the full-grown: grow, and you shall eat me. Nor shall you change me into yourself, as the food of your flesh, but you shall be changed into me," as is said in the Book of Confessions. And therefore the Lord says "labor"; that is, seek by laboring, or merit by works, not the food that perishes, namely the bodily food; 1 Corinthians 6:13: "food for the belly, and the belly for food, but God will destroy both this and that" — because the use of foods will not always exist; but labor for that food, namely the spiritual, which endures unto eternal life; which food indeed is God himself, insofar as he is truth to be contemplated, and goodness to be loved, by which the spirit is refreshed; Proverbs 9:5: "eat my bread"; Ecclesiasticus 15:3: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding." Likewise, obedience itself to the divine commandments; above, 4:34: "my food is to do the will of him who sent me." Likewise, also Christ himself. Below, in the same chapter: "I am the bread of life"; likewise: "my flesh is truly food, and my blood is truly drink." And this insofar as it is joined to the Word of God, which is the food by which the Angels live. Now he assigned a similar difference above in chapter 4:13, concerning bodily drink and spiritual drink, when he said: "whoever drinks of this water shall thirst again; but whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him shall not thirst forever" — the same difference which he here assigns between bodily and spiritual food. The reason for this is that bodily things are corruptible, but spiritual things, and especially God, are eternal. But it must be known, according to Augustine in the book On the Work of Monks, that from this saying, namely "labor not for the food that perishes," certain monks took occasion for error, saying that spiritual men ought not to work anything bodily. But this understanding is false, because Paul, who was most spiritual, labored with his own hands, as is found in Ephesians 4:28, where he himself says: "he who stole, let him now steal no more; but rather let him labor with his hands." Therefore the true understanding is that we should direct our work — that is, our principal study and intention — toward seeking the food that leads to eternal life, namely the spiritual goods. But we ought not to attend principally to temporal things, but only accessorily, that is, to procure them only by reason of the corruptible body, which must be sustained as long as we live in this life. Hence, against this, the Apostle pointedly says, 2 Thessalonians 3:10: "he who does not work, let him not eat"; as if he were to say: those who say that nothing bodily is to be done — since eating is something bodily — such men ought not to eat. Next, when he says "which the Son of man will give you," he sets down the giver of the spiritual food: and first he sets down the author of this food; second he makes manifest whence he has the authority to feed. Now the author and giver of the spiritual food is Christ; and therefore he says which — namely, the food that does not perish — the Son of man will give you. If he had said "the Son of God," it would not have seemed remarkable; but the fact that the Son of man gives it more raises attention. Yet in a spiritual sense the Son of man gives it for this reason: because human nature, weakened by sin, loathed spiritual food, and could not take it in its own spirituality; hence it was necessary that the Son of God take on flesh, and through it refresh us; Psalm 22:5: "you have prepared a table before me." But whence he has the authority of giving, he adds when he says "for this one the Father, God, has sealed"; as if he were to say: that the Son of man will give this, he has this only insofar as, by the singularity and eminence of the fullness of grace, he excels all the sons of men; hence he says this one — namely the Son of man — the Father has sealed: that is, has markedly distinguished him from the rest; Psalm 44:8: "God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness above your fellows." Or, according to Hilary, "has sealed," that is, has stamped with a seal. Now when a seal is impressed in wax, the wax retains the whole figure of the seal, just as the Son also received the whole figure of the Father. Now there is a twofold reception which the Son received from the Father. One is eternal; and it is not of this that what is here said, "has sealed," is to be understood, because in sealing, the nature receiving is one thing, and the nature impressing is another. But this is understood of the mystery of the Incarnation, because upon human nature God the Father impressed the Word, who is "the splendor and the figure of his substance," as is said in Hebrews 1:3. Or according to Chrysostom, "has sealed," that is, God the Father specially instructed him for this, that he should give eternal life to the world; below, 10:10: "I came that they may have life," etc. For thus, when someone is chosen to carry out some great office, he is said to be sealed for that office; Luke 10:1: "after these things the Lord appointed also seventy others as disciples," etc. Or "has sealed," that is, has made manifest by the voice at the Baptism, and by works, as was said above, chapter 5. Next, when he says "they said therefore to him: what shall we do that we may work the works of God?", he makes manifest what the spiritual food is, and first the question of the Jews is set down; second the response of Jesus Christ is added, at the words "Jesus answered," etc. Concerning the first it must be known that the Jews, instructed from the law, believed that nothing was eternal except God. Hence, when he had said that the spiritual food endures unto eternal life, they understood that food to be something divine. And therefore, seeking, they make mention not of food, but of the work of God, when they say "what shall we do that we may work the works of God?" In which they were not far from the truth, since the spiritual food is nothing other than to work the works of God; Luke 18:18: "what shall I do to possess eternal life?" The Lord's response is set down when he says "this is the work of God, that you believe in him," etc. Here it must be considered that the Apostle, in Romans 4, distinguishes faith from works, saying that Abraham was not justified by works, but by faith. What then is it that the Lord here says, that faith itself, or believing, is the work of God? But to this there is a twofold response. One, that the Apostle does not distinguish faith from works absolutely, but from exterior works. For there are certain exterior works, which are carried out with the bodily members, and which, because they are better known, are called works according to common usage; but others are interior, which are carried out in the soul itself, which are known only to the wise, and which turn to the heart. In another way it is said that believing itself can be reckoned among exterior works, not because faith is itself the works, but because it is their principle; hence he also pointedly says "that you believe in him." For it makes a difference whether one says "to believe God" — for thus I designate the object — or "to believe God" (as a witness) — for thus I designate a witness — or "to believe in God" — for thus I designate an end: so that in this way God can be held as the object of faith, as witness, and as end, but in different respects. For the object of faith can be a creature — for I believe that heaven was created; likewise a creature also can be a witness of faith, for I believe Paul, or any of the saints; but the end of faith cannot be anything but God, for our mind is borne only toward God as toward an end. But since the end has the character of the good, it is the object of love; and therefore to believe in God as in an end is proper to faith formed by charity; and this faith, thus formed, is the principle of all good works; and to this extent believing itself is called the work of God. But if faith is the work of God, how do men do the works of God? But this is resolved by Isaiah 26:12, when it says: "all our works he has wrought in us." For this very thing that we believe, and whatever good we work, is in us from God; Philippians 2:13: "it is he who works in us both to will and to accomplish." And therefore he pointedly says that believing is the work of God, in order to show that faith is a gift of God, as is said in Ephesians 2:8. Next, when he says "they said therefore to him: what sign then do you work?", the origin of the food is treated, and first the question of the Jews is set down; second the response of Christ, at the words "amen, amen I say to you, Moses did not give you bread from heaven." Concerning the first they do three things. First they ask for a sign; second they specify it; third they adduce the testimony of Scripture. Now they ask for a sign by proposing the question; hence they said: what sign do you work, that we may see, and believe you? Now this question is explained differently by Augustine, and differently by Chrysostom. For Chrysostom says that the Lord had invited them to faith. Now the arguments leading to faith are miracles; 1 Corinthians 14:22: "signs are given to unbelievers." And therefore for this they seek a sign by which they may believe; for it is the custom of the Jews to ask for signs; 1 Corinthians 1:22: "for the Jews seek signs." Hence he says "what sign then do you work?" But this seems ridiculous, that they should ask for some miracles for this purpose, since he had just performed some, by multiplying the loaves, and by walking upon the sea, which had occurred in their very presence, and which they could believe. But they say this for this reason: to provoke the Lord, and to induce him always to feed them. This is clear, because they make no mention of any other sign except that which was done for their fathers through Moses for forty years, as if by this they were asking that he should always feed them; hence they say "our fathers ate manna in the desert." Nor do they say: God fed our fathers with manna, lest they should seem to want to make him equal to God. Likewise they do not say, Moses fed them, lest they should seem to prefer Moses to Christ — as if wanting by this to entice him, so that he might continually feed them. Concerning that food it is spoken of in Exodus 16, and in Psalm 77:25: "man ate the bread of Angels." But Augustine says that the Lord said that he would give them food that endures unto eternal life; hence he seems, as it were, to prefer himself to Moses. But the Jews reckoned Moses greater than Christ; hence they said, below, chapter 9:29: "we know that God spoke to Moses; but as for this man, we do not know where he is from." Hence they required that Christ should do certain things greater than Moses had done; and therefore they bring back to memory the things that Moses did, saying: our fathers ate manna in the desert; as if he were to say: what you say about yourself is greater than what Moses did, because you promise food that does not perish; but the manna that Moses gave, if it was kept for another day, swarmed with worms. If therefore you wish us to believe you, you should do something greater than Moses; for what you did is not greater, because you satisfied five thousand men, but with five barley loaves, and only once; whereas he satisfied the whole people with manna from heaven for forty years, and this in the desert, just as it is written in Psalm 77:24: "he gave them bread from heaven to eat."”

“Labour not for the meat which perisheth,.... Meaning either food for the body, which is perishing; its virtue is perishing; man cannot live by it alone, nor does it last long; its substance is perishing; it is received into the stomach, and there digested; it goes into the belly, and is cast out into the draught; and that which it supports, for a while, is perishing; and both the one, and the other, shall be destroyed; even meats for the belly, and the belly for meats: now, though it becomes men to work for their bread, to provide it for themselves and families; yet they should not be anxiously solicitous about it, or labour only for that, and prefer it to spiritual food: or else food for the mind is meant, and that either in a sensual way, as sinful lust and pleasures, the honours of this world, and the riches of it; which are sweet morsels, though bread of deceit, to carnal minds, and which they labour hard for: or, in a religious way, as superstition, will worship, external works of righteousness, in order to please God, and obtain eternal life and salvation; which to labour for in such a way, is to spend money for that which is not bread, and labour for that which profiteth not; and in each of these ways were these Jews labouring for perishing food, from which Christ dissuades them: but for that which endureth unto everlasting life; either the grace of Christ, which, as meat, is quickening and refreshing, strengthening and supporting, and which causes nourishment and growth, and by virtue of which work is done; and this springs up unto everlasting life, and is inseparably connected with it; and particularly the blessings of grace, such as sanctification, adoption, pardon, and justification: or the Gospel, and the ordinances of it, which are refreshing, and strengthening, and by which the saints are nourished up unto everlasting life; or rather the flesh of Christ eaten, in a spiritual sense, by faith, of which Christ so largely discourses in the following part of the chapter: which the son of man shall give unto you; meaning either everlasting life, which is in Christ's gift, and is a free grace gift of his; or else the meat which endures unto it: for though it is to be laboured for, not so as to prepare it, or to purchase it, but by asking for it in prayer, and by attending on ordinances, and exercising faith on Christ; yet it is his gift, and he gives it freely; grace, and the blessings of it, are freely given by him, and so are the Gospel and its ordinances; and also his own flesh, which is first given by him, by way of sacrifice, in the room and stead of his people, and for the life of them, Joh 6:51; and then it is given unto them to feed upon spiritually by faith, and which is here designed: for him hath God the Father sealed; designated and appointed to be the Saviour, and Redeemer of his people, and has sent, authorized, and commissioned him as such; and has made him known, and approved of him, by the descent of the Spirit on him, and by a voice from heaven, declaring him his beloved Son; and has confirmed him to be the Messiah by the miraculous works he gave him to finish; for all which several uses seals are, as to distinguish one thing from another, to render anything authentic, to point it out, or to confirm it.”

“After the Evangelist has set down how the disciples sought Christ, he here consequently treats of the crowds seeking him, and first the motive for seeking is set down; second, the opportunity for seeking, at the words "but other boats came," etc.; third, the seeking itself is set down, at the words "when therefore the crowd had seen," etc. Now what moved the crowds to seek Christ was the preceding miracle, namely that he had crossed the sea without a vehicle. This indeed became known to them, because in the evening he was not on the shore that was near the place where he had worked the miracle of the loaves, where there was only one boat, and that boat had crossed with the disciples to the other side without Christ. Hence, when in the morning they had not found Christ on the same side where he had been on the previous day, but he was already on the other side, and he had had no other boat in which to cross, they suspected that he had crossed by walking upon the sea. And this is what he says: on the next day — that is, the day after that on which he had worked the miracle of the loaves — the crowd that was standing across the sea, where he had worked the miracle, saw that there was no other boat there but one, because on the previous day there had been only that one, and saw that Jesus had not entered the boat with his disciples, etc. By this one boat is signified the Church, which is one, by the unity of faith and of the sacraments; Ephesians 4:5: "one faith, one Baptism." But by the fact that Jesus is not with the disciples is signified the bodily separation of Christ from them at the ascension; Mark, last chapter, 19: "the Lord Jesus indeed, after he had spoken to them, was taken up into heaven." The opportunity for seeking is given by the arrival of other boats from the other side of the sea, with which they were able to cross over to seek Christ; and therefore he says, "but other boats came" from the other side, namely from Tiberias, near the place where they had eaten the loaves, etc. By these other boats that came are signified the conventicles of heretics and of those who seek the things that are their own, and not the things of Jesus Christ — below: "you seek me because you ate of my loaves" — and which are separated either in faith, as regards heretics, or lacking charity, as regards the carnal, who are not properly in the Church, but are nevertheless alongside it, insofar as they put forward a feigned faith and have the appearance of holiness; according to that saying, 2 Timothy 3:5: "having indeed a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof." And 2 Corinthians 11:14: "it is no wonder if the ministers of Satan transform themselves." But the seeking was earnest; hence he says "when therefore the crowd had seen," etc., and first he shows how the crowd seeks Christ; second, how, once he is found, they question him. He says therefore first, that when the crowd had seen that Jesus was not there, nor his disciples, they got into the boats that had come from Tiberias, seeking him — which is praiseworthy; Isaiah 55:6: "seek the Lord while he may be found"; and Psalm 68:33: "seek the Lord, and your soul shall live." But once he is found they question him; hence he said, and when the crowds had found him, namely Christ, across the sea, they said to him: Rabbi, when did you come here? But this question can be understood in two ways. In one way, that they ask only about the time; and then, according to Chrysostom, their crudeness is to be reproached, because after so great a miracle they do not ask about the manner of crossing, namely how he had crossed without a boat, but only about the time of the crossing. Or it can be said that by saying "when," they ask not only about the time, but also about the other circumstances that concurred in the miraculous crossing. But note that above, after the meal, they wanted to make him king; but now, though they have him present, they do not want to make him king. The reason for this is that they wanted to make him king, stirred up by the passion of joy caused by the meal. Now passions of this kind quickly pass away, and therefore the things that are disposed according to these very passions are transitory; but the things that are disposed by reason endure more; Ecclesiasticus 27:12: "a wise man continues in wisdom as the sun; but a fool is changed as the moon"; Proverbs 11:18: "the wicked man makes unstable work." Next, when he says "Jesus answered them," etc., the Lord treats of spiritual food; and first he sets forth the truth concerning the spiritual; second, he excludes a contradiction, at the words "the Jews therefore murmured about him." Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets forth the truth of the spiritual food; second he intimates its origin, at the words "they said therefore to him: what sign then do you work?" etc.; third he teaches the manner of receiving this food itself, at the words "they said therefore to him: Lord, always give us this bread." Concerning the first he does two things. First he shows the spiritual food, and its power; second he makes manifest what it is, at the words "they said therefore to him: what shall we do that we may work the works of God?" Concerning the first he does two things. First he argues against their perverse desire; second he exhorts them to the truth, at the words "labor," etc. He says therefore: amen, amen I say to you, although you show yourselves as it were devout, yet you seek me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate of the loaves, and were filled; as if he were to say: you seek me on account of the flesh, not on account of the spirit, namely so that you may be fed again. And, as Augustine says, the place of these is held by those who seek Jesus, not for his own sake, but so that they may obtain certain worldly advantages; such as those who, having business dealings, approach prelates and clerics, not on account of Christ, but so that by their intercession they may be advanced with the great; such as those who take refuge in churches, not on account of Jesus, but because they are oppressed by those more powerful; such also as those who, drawing near to the Lord through holy orders, seek not the merits of the virtues, but the aids of the present life, namely riches and honors, as Gregory says in Moralia 23. And this is clear: for to work signs belongs to divine power; but to eat multiplied bread is something temporal. Since, therefore, they do not come to Christ on account of the power which they see in him, but on account of the fact that they eat of the loaves, they do not serve Christ but their own belly, as is said in Philippians 3, and Psalm 48:19: "he will confess to you when you have done well to him." He leads them back to the truth by setting before them the spiritual food, saying labor not for the food that perishes, but for that which endures unto eternal life, and first he sets forth its power; second its authority, at the words "which the Son of man has given you." The power of that food is considered in the fact that it does not perish. Hence it must be known concerning this, that bodily things are certain likenesses of spiritual things, inasmuch as they are caused and derived from them, and therefore they imitate the spiritual things themselves in some way. Hence, just as the body is sustained by food, so that by which the spirit is sustained is called its food, whatever that may be. But that by which the body is sustained, since it passes over into the nature of the body, is corruptible; but the food by which the spirit is sustained is incorruptible, because it is not changed into the spirit itself, but rather, conversely, the spirit is changed into the food. Hence it is the saying of Augustine: "I am the food of the full-grown: grow, and you shall eat me. Nor shall you change me into yourself, as the food of your flesh, but you shall be changed into me," as is said in the Book of Confessions. And therefore the Lord says "labor"; that is, seek by laboring, or merit by works, not the food that perishes, namely the bodily food; 1 Corinthians 6:13: "food for the belly, and the belly for food, but God will destroy both this and that" — because the use of foods will not always exist; but labor for that food, namely the spiritual, which endures unto eternal life; which food indeed is God himself, insofar as he is truth to be contemplated, and goodness to be loved, by which the spirit is refreshed; Proverbs 9:5: "eat my bread"; Ecclesiasticus 15:3: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding." Likewise, obedience itself to the divine commandments; above, 4:34: "my food is to do the will of him who sent me." Likewise, also Christ himself. Below, in the same chapter: "I am the bread of life"; likewise: "my flesh is truly food, and my blood is truly drink." And this insofar as it is joined to the Word of God, which is the food by which the Angels live. Now he assigned a similar difference above in chapter 4:13, concerning bodily drink and spiritual drink, when he said: "whoever drinks of this water shall thirst again; but whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him shall not thirst forever" — the same difference which he here assigns between bodily and spiritual food. The reason for this is that bodily things are corruptible, but spiritual things, and especially God, are eternal. But it must be known, according to Augustine in the book On the Work of Monks, that from this saying, namely "labor not for the food that perishes," certain monks took occasion for error, saying that spiritual men ought not to work anything bodily. But this understanding is false, because Paul, who was most spiritual, labored with his own hands, as is found in Ephesians 4:28, where he himself says: "he who stole, let him now steal no more; but rather let him labor with his hands." Therefore the true understanding is that we should direct our work — that is, our principal study and intention — toward seeking the food that leads to eternal life, namely the spiritual goods. But we ought not to attend principally to temporal things, but only accessorily, that is, to procure them only by reason of the corruptible body, which must be sustained as long as we live in this life. Hence, against this, the Apostle pointedly says, 2 Thessalonians 3:10: "he who does not work, let him not eat"; as if he were to say: those who say that nothing bodily is to be done — since eating is something bodily — such men ought not to eat. Next, when he says "which the Son of man will give you," he sets down the giver of the spiritual food: and first he sets down the author of this food; second he makes manifest whence he has the authority to feed. Now the author and giver of the spiritual food is Christ; and therefore he says which — namely, the food that does not perish — the Son of man will give you. If he had said "the Son of God," it would not have seemed remarkable; but the fact that the Son of man gives it more raises attention. Yet in a spiritual sense the Son of man gives it for this reason: because human nature, weakened by sin, loathed spiritual food, and could not take it in its own spirituality; hence it was necessary that the Son of God take on flesh, and through it refresh us; Psalm 22:5: "you have prepared a table before me." But whence he has the authority of giving, he adds when he says "for this one the Father, God, has sealed"; as if he were to say: that the Son of man will give this, he has this only insofar as, by the singularity and eminence of the fullness of grace, he excels all the sons of men; hence he says this one — namely the Son of man — the Father has sealed: that is, has markedly distinguished him from the rest; Psalm 44:8: "God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness above your fellows." Or, according to Hilary, "has sealed," that is, has stamped with a seal. Now when a seal is impressed in wax, the wax retains the whole figure of the seal, just as the Son also received the whole figure of the Father. Now there is a twofold reception which the Son received from the Father. One is eternal; and it is not of this that what is here said, "has sealed," is to be understood, because in sealing, the nature receiving is one thing, and the nature impressing is another. But this is understood of the mystery of the Incarnation, because upon human nature God the Father impressed the Word, who is "the splendor and the figure of his substance," as is said in Hebrews 1:3. Or according to Chrysostom, "has sealed," that is, God the Father specially instructed him for this, that he should give eternal life to the world; below, 10:10: "I came that they may have life," etc. For thus, when someone is chosen to carry out some great office, he is said to be sealed for that office; Luke 10:1: "after these things the Lord appointed also seventy others as disciples," etc. Or "has sealed," that is, has made manifest by the voice at the Baptism, and by works, as was said above, chapter 5. Next, when he says "they said therefore to him: what shall we do that we may work the works of God?", he makes manifest what the spiritual food is, and first the question of the Jews is set down; second the response of Jesus Christ is added, at the words "Jesus answered," etc. Concerning the first it must be known that the Jews, instructed from the law, believed that nothing was eternal except God. Hence, when he had said that the spiritual food endures unto eternal life, they understood that food to be something divine. And therefore, seeking, they make mention not of food, but of the work of God, when they say "what shall we do that we may work the works of God?" In which they were not far from the truth, since the spiritual food is nothing other than to work the works of God; Luke 18:18: "what shall I do to possess eternal life?" The Lord's response is set down when he says "this is the work of God, that you believe in him," etc. Here it must be considered that the Apostle, in Romans 4, distinguishes faith from works, saying that Abraham was not justified by works, but by faith. What then is it that the Lord here says, that faith itself, or believing, is the work of God? But to this there is a twofold response. One, that the Apostle does not distinguish faith from works absolutely, but from exterior works. For there are certain exterior works, which are carried out with the bodily members, and which, because they are better known, are called works according to common usage; but others are interior, which are carried out in the soul itself, which are known only to the wise, and which turn to the heart. In another way it is said that believing itself can be reckoned among exterior works, not because faith is itself the works, but because it is their principle; hence he also pointedly says "that you believe in him." For it makes a difference whether one says "to believe God" — for thus I designate the object — or "to believe God" (as a witness) — for thus I designate a witness — or "to believe in God" — for thus I designate an end: so that in this way God can be held as the object of faith, as witness, and as end, but in different respects. For the object of faith can be a creature — for I believe that heaven was created; likewise a creature also can be a witness of faith, for I believe Paul, or any of the saints; but the end of faith cannot be anything but God, for our mind is borne only toward God as toward an end. But since the end has the character of the good, it is the object of love; and therefore to believe in God as in an end is proper to faith formed by charity; and this faith, thus formed, is the principle of all good works; and to this extent believing itself is called the work of God. But if faith is the work of God, how do men do the works of God? But this is resolved by Isaiah 26:12, when it says: "all our works he has wrought in us." For this very thing that we believe, and whatever good we work, is in us from God; Philippians 2:13: "it is he who works in us both to will and to accomplish." And therefore he pointedly says that believing is the work of God, in order to show that faith is a gift of God, as is said in Ephesians 2:8. Next, when he says "they said therefore to him: what sign then do you work?", the origin of the food is treated, and first the question of the Jews is set down; second the response of Christ, at the words "amen, amen I say to you, Moses did not give you bread from heaven." Concerning the first they do three things. First they ask for a sign; second they specify it; third they adduce the testimony of Scripture. Now they ask for a sign by proposing the question; hence they said: what sign do you work, that we may see, and believe you? Now this question is explained differently by Augustine, and differently by Chrysostom. For Chrysostom says that the Lord had invited them to faith. Now the arguments leading to faith are miracles; 1 Corinthians 14:22: "signs are given to unbelievers." And therefore for this they seek a sign by which they may believe; for it is the custom of the Jews to ask for signs; 1 Corinthians 1:22: "for the Jews seek signs." Hence he says "what sign then do you work?" But this seems ridiculous, that they should ask for some miracles for this purpose, since he had just performed some, by multiplying the loaves, and by walking upon the sea, which had occurred in their very presence, and which they could believe. But they say this for this reason: to provoke the Lord, and to induce him always to feed them. This is clear, because they make no mention of any other sign except that which was done for their fathers through Moses for forty years, as if by this they were asking that he should always feed them; hence they say "our fathers ate manna in the desert." Nor do they say: God fed our fathers with manna, lest they should seem to want to make him equal to God. Likewise they do not say, Moses fed them, lest they should seem to prefer Moses to Christ — as if wanting by this to entice him, so that he might continually feed them. Concerning that food it is spoken of in Exodus 16, and in Psalm 77:25: "man ate the bread of Angels." But Augustine says that the Lord said that he would give them food that endures unto eternal life; hence he seems, as it were, to prefer himself to Moses. But the Jews reckoned Moses greater than Christ; hence they said, below, chapter 9:29: "we know that God spoke to Moses; but as for this man, we do not know where he is from." Hence they required that Christ should do certain things greater than Moses had done; and therefore they bring back to memory the things that Moses did, saying: our fathers ate manna in the desert; as if he were to say: what you say about yourself is greater than what Moses did, because you promise food that does not perish; but the manna that Moses gave, if it was kept for another day, swarmed with worms. If therefore you wish us to believe you, you should do something greater than Moses; for what you did is not greater, because you satisfied five thousand men, but with five barley loaves, and only once; whereas he satisfied the whole people with manna from heaven for forty years, and this in the desert, just as it is written in Psalm 77:24: "he gave them bread from heaven to eat."”

“Labor not for the meat - That is, for that only, but also for the bread, etc. Our Lord wills every man to be active and diligent in that employment in which providence has placed him; but it is his will also that that employment, and all the concerns of life, should be subservient to the interest of his soul. But for that meat, etc. - He who labors not, in the work of his salvation, is never likely to enter into the kingdom of God. Though our labor cannot purchase it, either in whole or in part, yet it is the way in which God chooses to give salvation; and he that will have heaven must strive for it. Every thing that can be possessed, except the salvation of God, is a perishing thing: this is its essential character: it can last to us no longer than the body lasts. But, when the earth and its produce are burnt up, this bread of Christ, his grace and salvation, will be found remaining unto eternal life. This is the portion after which an immortal spirit should seek. Him hath God the Father sealed - By this expression, our Lord points out the commission which, as the Messiah, he received from the Father, to be prophet and priest to an ignorant, sinful world. As a person who wishes to communicate his mind to another who is at a distance writes a letter, seals it with his own seal, and sends it directed to the person for whom it was written, so Christ, who lay in the bosom of the Father, came to interpret the Divine will to man, bearing the image, superscription, and seal of God, in the immaculate holiness of his nature, unsullied truth of his doctrine, and in the astonishing evidence of his miracles. But he came also as a priest, to make an atonement for sin; and the bread which nourishes unto eternal life, he tells us, Joh 6:51, is his body, which he gives for the life of the world; and to this sacrifice of himself, the words, him hath God the Father sealed, seem especially to relate. It certainly was a custom, among nations contiguous to Judea, to set a seal upon the victim which was deemed proper for sacrifice. The following account of the method of providing white bulls among the Egyptians, for sacrifices to their god Apis, taken from Herodotus, Euterpe, b. ii. p. 117, casts much light upon this place. "They sacrifice white bulls to Apis; and for that reason make the following trial. If they find one black hair upon him, they consider him as unclean: that they may know this with certainty, the priest appointed for this purpose views every part of the animal, both standing and lying on the ground. After this, he draws out his tongue, to see if he be clean by certain signs: in the last place, he looks upon the hairs of his tail, that he may be sure they are as by nature they should be. If, after this search, the bull is found unblemished, he signifies it by tying a label to his horns; then, having applied wax, he seals it with his ring, and they lead him away: for it is death to sacrifice one of these animals, unless he have been marked with such a seal. The Jews could not be unacquainted with the rites and ceremonies of the Egyptian worship; and it is possible that such precautions as these were in use among themselves, especially as they were so strictly enjoined to have their sacrifices without Spot, and without blemish. Infinite justice found Jesus Christ to be without spot or blemish, and therefore sealed, pointed out and accepted him, as a proper sacrifice and atonement for the sin of the whole world. Collate with this passage, Heb 7:26-28; Eph 5:27; Pe2 3:14; and especially Heb 9:13, Heb 9:14 : For if the blood of Bulls and of goats, and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth - how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself Without Spot to God, purge your consciences from dead works! The rabbins talk much of the seal of God, which they suppose to be אמת emeth, or truth; and that this is a representation of the unoriginated and endless perfections of God. This doctrine is just; but their method of proving it is not so satisfactory. Aleph א, say they, is the first letter of the alphabet; mem מ the middle; and tau ת the last: these three letters make אמת emeth, Truth, because God is the first - there was none before him; he is the middle - none mingles with him; and he is the last - there can be none after him. Hieros. Sanhed. fol. 18. See also Pe1 1:18, Pe1 1:19.”

“After the Evangelist has set down how the disciples sought Christ, he here consequently treats of the crowds seeking him, and first the motive for seeking is set down; second, the opportunity for seeking, at the words "but other boats came," etc.; third, the seeking itself is set down, at the words "when therefore the crowd had seen," etc. Now what moved the crowds to seek Christ was the preceding miracle, namely that he had crossed the sea without a vehicle. This indeed became known to them, because in the evening he was not on the shore that was near the place where he had worked the miracle of the loaves, where there was only one boat, and that boat had crossed with the disciples to the other side without Christ. Hence, when in the morning they had not found Christ on the same side where he had been on the previous day, but he was already on the other side, and he had had no other boat in which to cross, they suspected that he had crossed by walking upon the sea. And this is what he says: on the next day — that is, the day after that on which he had worked the miracle of the loaves — the crowd that was standing across the sea, where he had worked the miracle, saw that there was no other boat there but one, because on the previous day there had been only that one, and saw that Jesus had not entered the boat with his disciples, etc. By this one boat is signified the Church, which is one, by the unity of faith and of the sacraments; Ephesians 4:5: "one faith, one Baptism." But by the fact that Jesus is not with the disciples is signified the bodily separation of Christ from them at the ascension; Mark, last chapter, 19: "the Lord Jesus indeed, after he had spoken to them, was taken up into heaven." The opportunity for seeking is given by the arrival of other boats from the other side of the sea, with which they were able to cross over to seek Christ; and therefore he says, "but other boats came" from the other side, namely from Tiberias, near the place where they had eaten the loaves, etc. By these other boats that came are signified the conventicles of heretics and of those who seek the things that are their own, and not the things of Jesus Christ — below: "you seek me because you ate of my loaves" — and which are separated either in faith, as regards heretics, or lacking charity, as regards the carnal, who are not properly in the Church, but are nevertheless alongside it, insofar as they put forward a feigned faith and have the appearance of holiness; according to that saying, 2 Timothy 3:5: "having indeed a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof." And 2 Corinthians 11:14: "it is no wonder if the ministers of Satan transform themselves." But the seeking was earnest; hence he says "when therefore the crowd had seen," etc., and first he shows how the crowd seeks Christ; second, how, once he is found, they question him. He says therefore first, that when the crowd had seen that Jesus was not there, nor his disciples, they got into the boats that had come from Tiberias, seeking him — which is praiseworthy; Isaiah 55:6: "seek the Lord while he may be found"; and Psalm 68:33: "seek the Lord, and your soul shall live." But once he is found they question him; hence he said, and when the crowds had found him, namely Christ, across the sea, they said to him: Rabbi, when did you come here? But this question can be understood in two ways. In one way, that they ask only about the time; and then, according to Chrysostom, their crudeness is to be reproached, because after so great a miracle they do not ask about the manner of crossing, namely how he had crossed without a boat, but only about the time of the crossing. Or it can be said that by saying "when," they ask not only about the time, but also about the other circumstances that concurred in the miraculous crossing. But note that above, after the meal, they wanted to make him king; but now, though they have him present, they do not want to make him king. The reason for this is that they wanted to make him king, stirred up by the passion of joy caused by the meal. Now passions of this kind quickly pass away, and therefore the things that are disposed according to these very passions are transitory; but the things that are disposed by reason endure more; Ecclesiasticus 27:12: "a wise man continues in wisdom as the sun; but a fool is changed as the moon"; Proverbs 11:18: "the wicked man makes unstable work." Next, when he says "Jesus answered them," etc., the Lord treats of spiritual food; and first he sets forth the truth concerning the spiritual; second, he excludes a contradiction, at the words "the Jews therefore murmured about him." Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets forth the truth of the spiritual food; second he intimates its origin, at the words "they said therefore to him: what sign then do you work?" etc.; third he teaches the manner of receiving this food itself, at the words "they said therefore to him: Lord, always give us this bread." Concerning the first he does two things. First he shows the spiritual food, and its power; second he makes manifest what it is, at the words "they said therefore to him: what shall we do that we may work the works of God?" Concerning the first he does two things. First he argues against their perverse desire; second he exhorts them to the truth, at the words "labor," etc. He says therefore: amen, amen I say to you, although you show yourselves as it were devout, yet you seek me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate of the loaves, and were filled; as if he were to say: you seek me on account of the flesh, not on account of the spirit, namely so that you may be fed again. And, as Augustine says, the place of these is held by those who seek Jesus, not for his own sake, but so that they may obtain certain worldly advantages; such as those who, having business dealings, approach prelates and clerics, not on account of Christ, but so that by their intercession they may be advanced with the great; such as those who take refuge in churches, not on account of Jesus, but because they are oppressed by those more powerful; such also as those who, drawing near to the Lord through holy orders, seek not the merits of the virtues, but the aids of the present life, namely riches and honors, as Gregory says in Moralia 23. And this is clear: for to work signs belongs to divine power; but to eat multiplied bread is something temporal. Since, therefore, they do not come to Christ on account of the power which they see in him, but on account of the fact that they eat of the loaves, they do not serve Christ but their own belly, as is said in Philippians 3, and Psalm 48:19: "he will confess to you when you have done well to him." He leads them back to the truth by setting before them the spiritual food, saying labor not for the food that perishes, but for that which endures unto eternal life, and first he sets forth its power; second its authority, at the words "which the Son of man has given you." The power of that food is considered in the fact that it does not perish. Hence it must be known concerning this, that bodily things are certain likenesses of spiritual things, inasmuch as they are caused and derived from them, and therefore they imitate the spiritual things themselves in some way. Hence, just as the body is sustained by food, so that by which the spirit is sustained is called its food, whatever that may be. But that by which the body is sustained, since it passes over into the nature of the body, is corruptible; but the food by which the spirit is sustained is incorruptible, because it is not changed into the spirit itself, but rather, conversely, the spirit is changed into the food. Hence it is the saying of Augustine: "I am the food of the full-grown: grow, and you shall eat me. Nor shall you change me into yourself, as the food of your flesh, but you shall be changed into me," as is said in the Book of Confessions. And therefore the Lord says "labor"; that is, seek by laboring, or merit by works, not the food that perishes, namely the bodily food; 1 Corinthians 6:13: "food for the belly, and the belly for food, but God will destroy both this and that" — because the use of foods will not always exist; but labor for that food, namely the spiritual, which endures unto eternal life; which food indeed is God himself, insofar as he is truth to be contemplated, and goodness to be loved, by which the spirit is refreshed; Proverbs 9:5: "eat my bread"; Ecclesiasticus 15:3: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding." Likewise, obedience itself to the divine commandments; above, 4:34: "my food is to do the will of him who sent me." Likewise, also Christ himself. Below, in the same chapter: "I am the bread of life"; likewise: "my flesh is truly food, and my blood is truly drink." And this insofar as it is joined to the Word of God, which is the food by which the Angels live. Now he assigned a similar difference above in chapter 4:13, concerning bodily drink and spiritual drink, when he said: "whoever drinks of this water shall thirst again; but whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him shall not thirst forever" — the same difference which he here assigns between bodily and spiritual food. The reason for this is that bodily things are corruptible, but spiritual things, and especially God, are eternal. But it must be known, according to Augustine in the book On the Work of Monks, that from this saying, namely "labor not for the food that perishes," certain monks took occasion for error, saying that spiritual men ought not to work anything bodily. But this understanding is false, because Paul, who was most spiritual, labored with his own hands, as is found in Ephesians 4:28, where he himself says: "he who stole, let him now steal no more; but rather let him labor with his hands." Therefore the true understanding is that we should direct our work — that is, our principal study and intention — toward seeking the food that leads to eternal life, namely the spiritual goods. But we ought not to attend principally to temporal things, but only accessorily, that is, to procure them only by reason of the corruptible body, which must be sustained as long as we live in this life. Hence, against this, the Apostle pointedly says, 2 Thessalonians 3:10: "he who does not work, let him not eat"; as if he were to say: those who say that nothing bodily is to be done — since eating is something bodily — such men ought not to eat. Next, when he says "which the Son of man will give you," he sets down the giver of the spiritual food: and first he sets down the author of this food; second he makes manifest whence he has the authority to feed. Now the author and giver of the spiritual food is Christ; and therefore he says which — namely, the food that does not perish — the Son of man will give you. If he had said "the Son of God," it would not have seemed remarkable; but the fact that the Son of man gives it more raises attention. Yet in a spiritual sense the Son of man gives it for this reason: because human nature, weakened by sin, loathed spiritual food, and could not take it in its own spirituality; hence it was necessary that the Son of God take on flesh, and through it refresh us; Psalm 22:5: "you have prepared a table before me." But whence he has the authority of giving, he adds when he says "for this one the Father, God, has sealed"; as if he were to say: that the Son of man will give this, he has this only insofar as, by the singularity and eminence of the fullness of grace, he excels all the sons of men; hence he says this one — namely the Son of man — the Father has sealed: that is, has markedly distinguished him from the rest; Psalm 44:8: "God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness above your fellows." Or, according to Hilary, "has sealed," that is, has stamped with a seal. Now when a seal is impressed in wax, the wax retains the whole figure of the seal, just as the Son also received the whole figure of the Father. Now there is a twofold reception which the Son received from the Father. One is eternal; and it is not of this that what is here said, "has sealed," is to be understood, because in sealing, the nature receiving is one thing, and the nature impressing is another. But this is understood of the mystery of the Incarnation, because upon human nature God the Father impressed the Word, who is "the splendor and the figure of his substance," as is said in Hebrews 1:3. Or according to Chrysostom, "has sealed," that is, God the Father specially instructed him for this, that he should give eternal life to the world; below, 10:10: "I came that they may have life," etc. For thus, when someone is chosen to carry out some great office, he is said to be sealed for that office; Luke 10:1: "after these things the Lord appointed also seventy others as disciples," etc. Or "has sealed," that is, has made manifest by the voice at the Baptism, and by works, as was said above, chapter 5. Next, when he says "they said therefore to him: what shall we do that we may work the works of God?", he makes manifest what the spiritual food is, and first the question of the Jews is set down; second the response of Jesus Christ is added, at the words "Jesus answered," etc. Concerning the first it must be known that the Jews, instructed from the law, believed that nothing was eternal except God. Hence, when he had said that the spiritual food endures unto eternal life, they understood that food to be something divine. And therefore, seeking, they make mention not of food, but of the work of God, when they say "what shall we do that we may work the works of God?" In which they were not far from the truth, since the spiritual food is nothing other than to work the works of God; Luke 18:18: "what shall I do to possess eternal life?" The Lord's response is set down when he says "this is the work of God, that you believe in him," etc. Here it must be considered that the Apostle, in Romans 4, distinguishes faith from works, saying that Abraham was not justified by works, but by faith. What then is it that the Lord here says, that faith itself, or believing, is the work of God? But to this there is a twofold response. One, that the Apostle does not distinguish faith from works absolutely, but from exterior works. For there are certain exterior works, which are carried out with the bodily members, and which, because they are better known, are called works according to common usage; but others are interior, which are carried out in the soul itself, which are known only to the wise, and which turn to the heart. In another way it is said that believing itself can be reckoned among exterior works, not because faith is itself the works, but because it is their principle; hence he also pointedly says "that you believe in him." For it makes a difference whether one says "to believe God" — for thus I designate the object — or "to believe God" (as a witness) — for thus I designate a witness — or "to believe in God" — for thus I designate an end: so that in this way God can be held as the object of faith, as witness, and as end, but in different respects. For the object of faith can be a creature — for I believe that heaven was created; likewise a creature also can be a witness of faith, for I believe Paul, or any of the saints; but the end of faith cannot be anything but God, for our mind is borne only toward God as toward an end. But since the end has the character of the good, it is the object of love; and therefore to believe in God as in an end is proper to faith formed by charity; and this faith, thus formed, is the principle of all good works; and to this extent believing itself is called the work of God. But if faith is the work of God, how do men do the works of God? But this is resolved by Isaiah 26:12, when it says: "all our works he has wrought in us." For this very thing that we believe, and whatever good we work, is in us from God; Philippians 2:13: "it is he who works in us both to will and to accomplish." And therefore he pointedly says that believing is the work of God, in order to show that faith is a gift of God, as is said in Ephesians 2:8. Next, when he says "they said therefore to him: what sign then do you work?", the origin of the food is treated, and first the question of the Jews is set down; second the response of Christ, at the words "amen, amen I say to you, Moses did not give you bread from heaven." Concerning the first they do three things. First they ask for a sign; second they specify it; third they adduce the testimony of Scripture. Now they ask for a sign by proposing the question; hence they said: what sign do you work, that we may see, and believe you? Now this question is explained differently by Augustine, and differently by Chrysostom. For Chrysostom says that the Lord had invited them to faith. Now the arguments leading to faith are miracles; 1 Corinthians 14:22: "signs are given to unbelievers." And therefore for this they seek a sign by which they may believe; for it is the custom of the Jews to ask for signs; 1 Corinthians 1:22: "for the Jews seek signs." Hence he says "what sign then do you work?" But this seems ridiculous, that they should ask for some miracles for this purpose, since he had just performed some, by multiplying the loaves, and by walking upon the sea, which had occurred in their very presence, and which they could believe. But they say this for this reason: to provoke the Lord, and to induce him always to feed them. This is clear, because they make no mention of any other sign except that which was done for their fathers through Moses for forty years, as if by this they were asking that he should always feed them; hence they say "our fathers ate manna in the desert." Nor do they say: God fed our fathers with manna, lest they should seem to want to make him equal to God. Likewise they do not say, Moses fed them, lest they should seem to prefer Moses to Christ — as if wanting by this to entice him, so that he might continually feed them. Concerning that food it is spoken of in Exodus 16, and in Psalm 77:25: "man ate the bread of Angels." But Augustine says that the Lord said that he would give them food that endures unto eternal life; hence he seems, as it were, to prefer himself to Moses. But the Jews reckoned Moses greater than Christ; hence they said, below, chapter 9:29: "we know that God spoke to Moses; but as for this man, we do not know where he is from." Hence they required that Christ should do certain things greater than Moses had done; and therefore they bring back to memory the things that Moses did, saying: our fathers ate manna in the desert; as if he were to say: what you say about yourself is greater than what Moses did, because you promise food that does not perish; but the manna that Moses gave, if it was kept for another day, swarmed with worms. If therefore you wish us to believe you, you should do something greater than Moses; for what you did is not greater, because you satisfied five thousand men, but with five barley loaves, and only once; whereas he satisfied the whole people with manna from heaven for forty years, and this in the desert, just as it is written in Psalm 77:24: "he gave them bread from heaven to eat."”

“Whether this conference was with the Capernaites, in whose synagogue Christ now was, or with those who came from the other side of the sea, is not certain nor material; however, it is an instance of Christ's condescension that he gave them leave to ask him questions, and did not resent the interruption as an affront, no, not from his common hearers, though not his immediate followers. Those that would be apt to teach must be swift to hear, and study to answer. It is the wisdom of teachers, when they are asked even impertinent unprofitable questions, thence to take occasion to answer in that which is profitable, that the question may be rejected, but not the request. Now, I. Christ having told them that they must work for the meat he spoke of, must labour for it, they enquire what work they must do, and he answers them, Joh 6:28, Joh 6:29. 1. Their enquiry was pertinent enough (Joh 6:28): What shall we do, that we may work the works of God? Some understand it as a pert question: "What works of God can we do more and better than those we do in obedience to the law of Moses?" But I rather take it as a humble serious question, showing them to be, at least for the present, in a good mind, and willing to know and do their duty; and I imagine that those who asked this question, How and What (Joh 6:30), and made the request (Joh 6:34), were not the same persons with those that murmured (Joh 6:41, Joh 6:42), and strove (Joh 6:52), for those are expressly called the Jews, who came out of Judea (for those were strictly called Jews) to cavil, whereas these were of Galilee, and came to be taught. This question here intimates that they were convinced that those who would obtain this everlasting meat, (1.) Must aim to do something great. Those who look high in their expectations, and hope to enjoy the glory of God, must aim high in those endeavours, and study to do the works of God, works which he requires and will accept, works of God, distinguished from the works of worldly men in their worldly pursuits. It is not enough to speak the words of God, but we must do the works of God. (2.) Must be willing to do any thing: What shall we do? Lord, I am ready to do whatever thou shalt appoint, though ever so displeasing to flesh and blood, Act 9:6. 2. Christ's answer was plain enough (Joh 6:29): This is the work of God that ye believe. Note, (1.) The work of faith is the work of God. They enquire after the works of God (in the plural number), being careful about many things; but Christ directs them to one work, which includes all, the one thing needful: that you believe, which supersedes all the works of the ceremonial law; the work which is necessary to the acceptance of all the other works, and which produces them, for without faith you cannot please God. It is God's work, for it is of his working in us, it subjects the soul to his working on us, and quickens the soul in working for him, (2.) That faith is the work of God which closes with Christ, and relies upon him. It is to believe on him as one whom God hath sent, as God's commissioner in the great affair of peace between God and man, and as such to rest upon him, and resign ourselves to him. See Joh 14:1. II. Christ having told them that the Son of man would give them this meat, they enquire concerning him, and he answers their enquiry. 1. Their enquiry is after a sign (Joh 6:30): What sign showest thou? Thus far they were right, that, since he required them to give him credit, he should produce his credentials, and make it out by miracle that he was sent of God. Moses having confirmed his mission by signs, it was requisite that Christ, who came to set aside the ceremonial law, should in like manner confirm his: "What dost thou work? What doest thou drive at? What lasting characters of a divine power does thou design to leave upon thy doctrine?" But herein they missed it, (1.) That they overlooked the many miracles which they had seen wrought by him, and which amounted to an abundant proof of his divine mission. Is this a time of day to ask, "What sign showest thou?" especially at Capernaum, the staple of miracles, where he had done so many mighty works, signs so significant of his office and undertaking? Were not these very persons but the other day miraculously fed by him? None so blind as they that will not see; for they may be so blind as to question whether it be day or no, when the sun shines in their faces. (2.) That they preferred the miraculous feeding of Israel in the wilderness before all the miracles Christ wrought (Joh 6:31): Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; and, to strengthen the objection, they quote a scripture for it: He gave them bread from heaven (taken from Psa 78:24), he gave them of the corn of heaven. What a good use might be made of this story to which they here refer! It was a memorable instance of God's power and goodness, often mentioned to the glory of God (Neh 9:20, Neh 9:21), yet see how these people perverted it, and made an ill use of it. [1.] Christ reproved them for their fondness of the miraculous bread, and bade them not set their hearts upon meat which perisheth; "Why," say they, "meat for the belly was the great good thing that God gave to our fathers in the desert; and why should not we then labour for that meat? If God made much of them, why should not we be for those that will make much of us?" [2.] Christ had fed five thousand men with five loaves, and had given them that as one sign to prove him sent of God; but, under colour of magnifying the miracles of Moses, they tacitly undervalue this miracle of Christ, and evade the evidence of it. "Christ fed his thousands; but Moses his hundreds of thousands; Christ fed them but once, and then reproved those who followed him in hope to be still fed, and put them off with a discourse of spiritual food; but Moses fed his followers forty years, and miracles were not their rarities, but their daily bread: Christ fed them with bread out of the earth, barley-bread, and fishes out of the sea; but Moses fed Israel with bread from heaven, angel's food." Thus big did these Jews talk of the manna which their fathers did eat; but their fathers had slighted it as much as they did now the barley-loaves, and called light bread, Num 21:5. Thus apt are we to slight and overlook the appearances of God's power and grace in our own times, while we pretend to admire the wonders of which our fathers told us. Suppose this miracle of Christ was outdone by that of Moses, yet there were other instances in which Christ's miracles outshone his; and, besides, all true miracles prove a divine doctrine, though not equally illustrious in the circumstances, which were ever diversified according as the occasion did require. As much as the manna excelled the barley-loaves, so much, and much more, did the doctrine of Christ excel the law of Moses, and his heavenly institutions the carnal ordinances of that dispensation. 2. Here is Christ's reply to this enquiry, wherein, (1.) He rectifies their mistake concerning the typical manna. It was true that their fathers did eat manna in the desert. But, [1.] It was not Moses that gave it to them, nor were they obliged to him for it; he was but the instrument, and therefore they must look beyond him to God. We do not find that Moses did so much as pray to God for the manna; and he spoke unadvisedly when he said, Must we fetch water out of the rock? Moses gave them not either that bread or that water. [2.] It was not given them, as they imagined, from heaven, from the highest heavens, but only from the clouds, and therefore not so much superior to that which had its rise from the earth as they thought. Because the scripture saith, He gave them bread from heaven, it does not follow that it was heavenly bread, or was intended to be the nourishment of souls. Misunderstanding scripture language occasions many mistakes in the things of God. (2.) He informs them concerning the true manna, of which that was a type: But my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven; that which is truly and properly the bread from heaven, of which the manna was but a shadow and figure, is now given, not to your fathers, who are dead and gone, but to you of this present age, for whom the better things were reserved: he is now giving you that bread from heaven, which is truly so called. As much as the throne of God's glory is above the clouds of the air, so much does the spiritual bread of the everlasting gospel excel the manna. In calling God his Father, he proclaims himself greater than Moses; for Moses was faithful but as a servant, Christ as a Son, Heb 3:5, Heb 3:6. III. Christ, having replied to their enquiries, takes further occasion from their objection concerning the manna to discourse of himself under the similitude of bread, and of believing under the similitude of eating and drinking; to which, together with his putting both together in the eating of his flesh and drinking of his blood, and with the remarks made upon it by the hearers, the rest of this conference may be reduced. 1. Christ having spoken of himself as the great gift of God, and the true bread (Joh 6:32), largely explains and confirms this, that we may rightly know him. (1.) He here shows that he is the true bread; this he repeats again and again, Joh 6:33, Joh 6:35, Joh 6:48-51. Observe, [1.] That Christ is bread is that to the soul which bread is to the body, nourishes and supports the spiritual life (is the staff of it) as bread does the bodily life; it is the staff of life. The doctrines of the gospel concerning Christ - that he is the mediator between God and man, that he is our peace, our righteousness, our Redeemer; by these things do men live. Our bodies could better live without food than our souls without Christ. Bread-corn is bruised (Isa 28:28), so was Christ; he was born at Bethlehem, the house of bread, and typified by the show-bread. [2.] That he is the bread of God (Joh 6:33), divine bread; it is he that is of God (Joh 6:46), bread which my Father gives (Joh 6:32), which he has made to be the food of our souls; the bread of God's family, his children's bread. The Levitical sacrifices are called the bread of God (Lev 21:21, Lev 21:22), and Christ is the great sacrifice; Christ, in his word and ordinances, the feast upon the sacrifice. [3.] That he is the bread of life (Joh 6:35, and again, Joh 6:48), that bread of life, alluding to the tree of life in the midst of the garden of Eden, which was to Adam the seal of that part of the covenant, Do this and live, of which he might eat and live. Christ is the bread of life, for he is the fruit of the tree of life. First, He is the living bread (so he explains himself, Joh 6:51): I am the living bread. Bread is itself a dead thing, and nourishes not but by the help of the faculties of a living body; but Christ is himself living bread, and nourishes by his own power. Manna was a dead thing; if kept but one night, it putrefied and bred worms; but Christ is ever living, everlasting bread, that never moulds, nor waxes old. The doctrine of Christ crucified is now as strengthening and comforting to a believer as ever it was, and his mediation still of as much value and efficacy as ever. Secondly, He gives life unto the world (Joh 6:33), spiritual and eternal life; the life of the soul in union and communion with God here, and in the vision and fruition of him hereafter; a life that includes in it all happiness. The manna did only reserve and support life, did not preserve and perpetuate life, much less restore it; but Christ gives life to those that were dead in sin. The manna was ordained only for the life of the Israelites, but Christ is given for the life of the world; none are excluded from the benefit of this bread, but such as exclude themselves. Christ came to put life into the minds of men, principles productive of acceptable performances. [4.] That he is the bread which came down from heaven; this is often repeated here, Joh 6:33, Joh 6:50, Joh 6:51, Joh 6:58. This denotes, First, The divinity of Christ's person. As God, he had a being in heaven, whence he came to take our nature upon him: I came down from heaven, whence we may infer his antiquity, he was in the beginning with God; his ability, for heaven is the firmament of power; and his authority, he came with a divine commission. Secondly, The divine original of all that good which flows to us through him. He comes, not only katabas - that came down (Joh 6:51), but katabainōi - that comes down; he is descending, denoting a constant communication of light, life, and love, from God to believers through Christ, as the manna descended daily; see Eph 1:3. Omnia desuper - All things from above. [5.] That he is that bread of which the manna was a type and figure (Joh 6:58), that bread, the true bread, Joh 6:32. As the rock that they drank of was Christ, so was the manna they ate of spiritual bread, Co1 10:3, Co1 10:4. Manna was given to Israel; so Christ to the spiritual Israel. There was manna enough for them all; so in Christ a fulness of grace for all believers; he that gathers much of this manna will have none to spare when he comes to use it; and he that gathers little, when his grace comes to be perfected in glory, shall find that he has no lack. Manna was to be gathered in the morning; and those that would find Christ must seek him early. Manna was sweet, and, as the author of the Wisdom of Solomon tells us (Wisd. 16:20), was agreeable to every palate; and to those that believe Christ is precious. Israel lived upon manna till they came to Canaan; and Christ is our life. There was a memorial of the manna preserved in the ark; so of Christ in the Lord's supper, as the food of souls. (2.) He here shows what his undertaking was, and what his errand into the world. Laying aside the metaphor, he speaks plainly, and speaks no proverb, giving us an account of his business among men, Joh 6:38-40. [1.] He assures us, in general, that he came from heaven upon his Father's business (Joh 6:38), not do his own will, but the will of him that sent him. He came from heaven, which bespeaks him an intelligent active being, who voluntarily descended to this lower world, a long journey, and a great step downward, considering the glories of the world he came from and the calamities of the world he came to; we may well ask with wonder, "What moved him to such an expedition?" Here he tells that he came to do, not his own will, but the will of his Father; not that he had any will that stood in competition with the will of his Father, but those to whom he spoke suspected he might. "No," saith he, "my own will is not the spring I act fRom. nor the rule I go by, but I am come to do the will of him that sent me." That is, First, Christ did not come into the world as a private person, that acts for himself only, but under a public character, to act for others as an ambassador, or plenipotentiary, authorized by a public commission; he came into the world as God's great agent and the world's great physician. It was not any private business that brought him hither, but he came to settle affairs between parties no less considerable than the great Creator and the whole creation. Secondly, Christ, when he was in the world, did not carry on any private design, nor had any separate interest at all, distinct from theirs for whom he acted. The scope of his whole life was to glorify God and do good to men. He therefore never consulted his own ease, safety, or quiet; but, when he was to lay down his life, though he had a human nature which startled at it, he set aside the consideration of that, and resolved his will as man into the will of God: Not as I will, but as thou wilt. [2.] He acquaints us, in particular, with that will of the Father which he came to do; he here declares the decree, the instructions he was to pursue. First, The private instructions given to Christ, that he should be sure to save all the chosen remnant; and this is the covenant of redemption between the Father and the Son (Joh 6:38): "This is the Father's will, who hath sent me; this is the charge I am entrusted with, that of all whom he hath given me I should lose none." Note, 1. There is a certain number of the children of men given by the Father to Jesus Christ, to be his care, and so to be to him for a name and a praise; given him for an inheritance, for a possession. Let him do all that for them which their case requires; teach them, and heal them, pay their debt, and plead their cause, prepare them for, and preserve them to, eternal life, and then let him make his best of them. The Father might dispose of them as he pleased: as creatures, their lives and beings were derived from him; as sinners, their lives and beings were forfeited to him. He might have sold them for the satisfaction of his justice, and delivered them to the tormentors; but he pitched upon them to be the monuments of his mercy, and delivered them to the Saviour. Those whom God chose to be the objects of his special love he lodged as a trust in the hands of Christ. 2. Jesus Christ has undertaken that he will lose none of those that were thus given him of the Father. The many sons whom he was to bring to glory shall all be forth-coming, and none of them missing, Mat 18:14. None of them shall be lost, for want of a sufficient grace to sanctify them. If I bring him not unto thee, and set him before thee, then let me bear the blame for ever, Gen 43:9. 3. Christ's undertaking for those that are given him extends to the resurrection of their bodies. I will raise it up again at the last day, which supposes all that goes before, but this is to crown and complete the undertaking. The body is a part of the man, and therefore a part of Christ's purchase and charge; it pertains to the promises, and therefore it shall not be lost. The undertaking is not only that he shall lose none, no person, but that he shall lose nothing, no part of the person, and therefore not the body. Christ's undertaking will never be accomplished till the resurrection, when the souls and bodies of the saints shall be re-united and gathered to Christ, that he may present them to the Father: Behold I, and the children that thou has given me, Heb 2:13; Ti2 1:12. 4. The spring and original of all this is the sovereign will of God, the counsels of his will, according to which he works all this. This was the commandment he gave to his Son, when he sent him into the world, and to which the Son always had an eye. Secondly, The public instructions which were to be given to the children of men, in what way, and upon what terms, they might obtain salvation by Christ; and this is the covenant of grace between God and man. Who the particular persons were that were given to Christ is a secret: The Lord knows them that are his, we do not, nor is it fit we should; but, though their names are concealed, their characters are published. An offer is made of life and happiness upon gospel terms, that by it those that were given to Christ might be brought to him, and others left inexcusable (Joh 6:40): "This is the will, the revealed will, of him that sent me, the method agreed upon, upon which to proceed with the children of men, that every one, Jew or Gentile, that sees the Son, and believes on him, may have everlasting life, and I will raise him up." This is gospel indeed, good news. Is it now reviving to hear this? 1. That eternal life may be had, if it be not our own fault; that whereas, upon the sin of the first Adam, the way of the tree of life was blocked up, by the grace of the second Adam it is laid upon again. The crown of glory is set before us as the prize of our high calling, which we may run for and obtain. 2. Every one may have it. This gospel is to be preached, this offer made, to all, and none can say, "It belongs not to me," Rev 22:17. 3. This everlasting life is sure to all those who believe in Christ, and to them only. He that sees the Son, and believes on him, shall be saved. Some understand this seeing as a limitation of this condition of salvation to those only that have the revelation of Christ and his grace made to them. Every one that has the opportunity of being acquainted with Christ, and improves this so well as to believe in him, shall have everlasting life, so that none shall be condemned for unbelief (however they maybe for other sins) but those who have had the gospel preached to them, who, like these Jews here (Joh 6:36), have seen, and yet have not believed; have known Christ, and yet not trusted in him. But I rather understand seeing here to mean the same thing with believing, for it is theōrōn, which signifies not so much the sight of the eye (as Joh 6:36, heōrakate me - ye have seen me) as the contemplation of the mind. Every one that sees the Son, that is, believes on him, sees him with an eye of faith, by which we come to be duly acquainted and affected with the doctrine of the gospel concerning him. It is to look upon him, as the stung Israelites upon the brazen serpent. It is not a blind faith that Christ requires, that we should be willing to have our eyes put out, and then follow him, but that we should see him, and see what ground we go upon in our faith. It is then right when it is not taken up upon hearsay (believing as the church believes), but is the result of a due consideration of, and insight into, the motives of credibility: Now mine eye sees thee. We have heard him ourselves. 4. Those who believe in Jesus Christ, in order to their having everlasting life, shall be raised up by his power at the last day. He had it in charge as his Father's will (Joh 6:39), and here he solemnly makes it his own undertaking: I will raise him up, which signifies not only the return of the body to life, but the putting of the whole man into a full possession of the eternal life promised. 2. Now Christ discoursing thus concerning himself, as the bread of life that came down from heaven, let us see what remarks his hearers made upon it. (1.) When they heard of such a thing as the bread of God, which gives life, they heartily prayed for it (Joh 6:34): Lord, evermore give us this bread. I cannot think that this is spoken scoffingly, and in a way of derision, as most interpreters understand it: "Give us such bread as this, if thou canst; let us be fed with it, not for one meal, as with the five loaves, but evermore;" as if this were no better a prayer than that of the impenitent thief: If thou be the Christ, save thyself and us. But I take this request to be made, though ignorantly, yet honestly, and to be well meant; for they call him Lord, and desire a share in what he gives, whatever he means by it. General and confused notions of divine things produce in carnal hearts some kind of desires towards them, and wishes of them; like Balaam's wish, to die the death of the righteous. Those who have an indistinct knowledge of the things of God, who see men as trees walking, make, as I may call them, inarticulate prayers for spiritual blessings. They think the favour of God a good thing, and heaven a fine place, and cannot but wish them their own, while they have no value nor desire at all for that holiness which is necessary both to the one and to the other. Let this be the desire of our souls; have we tasted that the Lord is gracious, been feasted with the word of God, and Christ in the word? Let us say, "Lord, evermore give us this bread; let the bread of life be our daily bread, the heavenly manna our continual feast, and let us never know the want of it." (2.) But, when they understood that by this bread of life Jesus meant himself, then they despised it. Whether they were the same persons that had prayed for it (Joh 6:34), or some others of the company, does not appear; it seems to be some others, for they are called Jews. Now it is said (Joh 6:41), They murmured at him. This comes in immediately after that solemn declaration which Christ had made of God's will and his own undertaking concerning man's salvation (Joh 6:39, Joh 6:40), which certainly were some of the most weighty and gracious words that ever proceeded out of the mouth of our Lord Jesus, the most faithful, and best worthy of all acceptation. One would think that, like Israel in Egypt, when they heard that God had thus visited them, they should have bowed their heads and worshipped; but on the contrary, instead of closing with the offer made them, they murmured, quarrelled with what Christ said, and, though they did not openly oppose and contradict it, yet they privately whispered among themselves in contempt of it, and instilled into one another's minds prejudices against it. Many that will not professedly contradict the doctrine of Christ (their cavils are so weak and groundless that they are either ashamed to own them or afraid to have them silenced), yet say in their hearts that they do not like it. Now, [1.] That which offended them was Christ's asserting his origin to be from heaven, Joh 6:41, Joh 6:42. How is it that he saith, I came down from heaven? They had heard of angels coming down from heaven, but never of a man, overlooking the proofs he had given them of his being more than a man. [2.] That which they thought justified them herein was that they knew his extraction on earth: Is not this Jesus the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? They took it amiss that he should say that he came down from heaven, when he was one of them. They speak slightly of his blessed name, Jesus: Is not this Jesus. They take it for granted that Joseph was really his father, though he was only reputed to be so. Note, Mistakes concerning the person of Christ, as if he were a mere man, conceived and born by ordinary generation, occasion the offence that is taken at his doctrine and offices. Those who set him on a level with the other sons of men, whose father and mother we know, no wonder if they derogate from the honour of his satisfaction and the mysteries of his undertaking, and, like the Jews here, murmur at his promise to raise us up at the last day. 3. Christ, having spoken of faith as the great work of God (Joh 6:29), discourses largely concerning this work, instructing and encouraging us in it. (1.) He shows what it is to believe in Christ. [1.] To believe in Christ is to come to Christ. He that comes to me is the same with him that believes in me (Joh 6:35), and again (Joh 6:37): He that comes unto me; so Joh 6:44, Joh 6:45. Repentance towards God is coming to him (Jer 3:22) as our chief good and highest end; and so faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ is coming to him as our prince and Saviour, and our way to the Father. It denotes the out-goings of our affection towards him, for these are the motions of the soul, and actions agreeable; it is to come off from all those things that stand in opposition to him or competition with him, and to come up to those terms upon which life and salvation are offered to us through him. When he was here on earth it was more that barely coming where he was; so it is now more than coming to his word and ordinances. [2.] It is to feed upon Christ (Joh 6:51): If any man eat of this bread. The former denotes applying ourselves to Christ; this denotes applying Christ to ourselves, with appetite and delight, that we may receive life, and strength, and comfort from him. To feed on him as the Israelites on the manna, having quitted the fleshpots of Egypt, and not depending on the labour of their hands (to eat of that), but living purely on the bread given them from heaven. (2.) He shows what is to be got by believing in Christ. What will he give us if we come to him? What shall we be the better of we feed upon him? Want and death are the chief things we dread; may we but be assured of the comforts of our being, and the continuance of it in the midst of these comforts, we have enough; now these two are here secured to true believers. [1.] They shall never want, never hunger, never thirst, Joh 6:35. Desires they have, earnest desires, but these so suitably, so seasonably, so abundantly satisfied, that they cannot be called hunger and thirst, which are uneasy and painful. Those that did eat manna, and drink of the rock, hungered and thirsted afterwards. Manna surfeited them; water out of the rock failed them. But there is such an over-flowing fulness in Christ as can never be exhausted, and there are such ever-flowing communications from him as can never be interrupted. [2.] They shall never die, not die eternally; for, First, He that believes on Christ has everlasting life (Joh 6:47); he has the assurance of it, the grant of it, the earnest of it; he has it in the promise and first-fruits. Union with Christ and communion with God in Christ are everlasting life begun. Secondly, Whereas they that did eat manna died, Christ is such bread as a man may eat of and never die, Joh 6:49, Joh 6:50. Observe here, 1. The insufficiency of the typical manna: Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead. There may be much good use made of the death of our fathers; their graves speak to us, and their monuments are our memorials, particularly of this, that the greatest plenty of the most dainty food will neither prolong the thread of life nor avert the stroke of death. Those that did eat manna, angel's food, died like other men. There could be nothing amiss in their diet, to shorten their days, nor could their deaths be hastened by the toils and fatigues of life (for they neither sowed nor reaped), and yet they died. (1.) Many of them died by the immediate strokes of God's vengeance for their unbelief and murmurings; for, though they did eat that spiritual meat, yet with many of them God was not well-pleased, but they were overthrown in the wilderness, Co1 10:3-5. Their eating manna was no security to them from the wrath of God, as believing in Christ is to us. (2.) The rest of them died in a course of nature, and their carcases fell, under a divine sentence, in that wilderness where they did eat manna. In that very age when miracles were daily bread was the life of man reduced to the stint it now stands at, as appears, Psa 90:10. Let them not then boast so much of manna. 2. The all-sufficiency of the true manna, of which the other was a type: This is the bread that cometh down from heaven, that truly divine and heavenly food, that a man may eat thereof and not die; that is, not fall under the wrath of God, which is killing to the soul; not die the second death; no, nor the first death finally and irrecoverably. Not die, that is, not perish, not come short of the heavenly Canaan, as the Israelites did of the earthly, for want of faith, though they had manna. This is further explained by that promise in the next words: If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever, Joh 6:51. This is the meaning of this never dying: though he go down to death, he shall pass through it to that world where there shall be no more death. To live for ever is not to be for ever (the damned in hell shall be for ever, the soul of man was made for an endless state), but to be happy for ever. And because the body must needs die, and be as water spilt upon the ground, Christ here undertakes for the gathering of that up too (as before, Joh 6:44, I will raise him up at the last day); and even that shall live for ever. (3.) He shows what encouragements we have to believe in Christ. Christ here speaks of some who had seen him and yet believed not, Joh 6:36. They saw his person and miracles, and heard him preach, and yet were not wrought upon to believe in him. Faith is not always the effect of sight; the soldiers were eye-witnesses of his resurrection, and yet, instead of believing in him, they belied him; so that it is a difficult thing to bring people to believe in Christ: and, by the operation of the Spirit of grace, those that have not seen have yet believed. Two things we are here assured of, to encourage our faith: - [1.] That the Son will bid all those welcome that come to him (Joh 6:37): Him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. How welcome should this word be to our souls which bids us welcome to Christ! Him that cometh; it is in the singular number, denoting favour, not only to the body of believers in general, but to every particular soul that applies itself to Christ. Here, First, The duty required is a pure gospel duty: to come to Christ, that we may come to God by him. His beauty and love, those great attractives, must draw us to him; sense of need and fear of danger must drive us to him; any thing to bring us to Christ. Secondly, The promise is a pure gospel promise: I will in no wise cast out - ou mē ekbagō exō. There are two negatives: I”

“After the Evangelist has set down how the disciples sought Christ, he here consequently treats of the crowds seeking him, and first the motive for seeking is set down; second, the opportunity for seeking, at the words "but other boats came," etc.; third, the seeking itself is set down, at the words "when therefore the crowd had seen," etc. Now what moved the crowds to seek Christ was the preceding miracle, namely that he had crossed the sea without a vehicle. This indeed became known to them, because in the evening he was not on the shore that was near the place where he had worked the miracle of the loaves, where there was only one boat, and that boat had crossed with the disciples to the other side without Christ. Hence, when in the morning they had not found Christ on the same side where he had been on the previous day, but he was already on the other side, and he had had no other boat in which to cross, they suspected that he had crossed by walking upon the sea. And this is what he says: on the next day — that is, the day after that on which he had worked the miracle of the loaves — the crowd that was standing across the sea, where he had worked the miracle, saw that there was no other boat there but one, because on the previous day there had been only that one, and saw that Jesus had not entered the boat with his disciples, etc. By this one boat is signified the Church, which is one, by the unity of faith and of the sacraments; Ephesians 4:5: "one faith, one Baptism." But by the fact that Jesus is not with the disciples is signified the bodily separation of Christ from them at the ascension; Mark, last chapter, 19: "the Lord Jesus indeed, after he had spoken to them, was taken up into heaven." The opportunity for seeking is given by the arrival of other boats from the other side of the sea, with which they were able to cross over to seek Christ; and therefore he says, "but other boats came" from the other side, namely from Tiberias, near the place where they had eaten the loaves, etc. By these other boats that came are signified the conventicles of heretics and of those who seek the things that are their own, and not the things of Jesus Christ — below: "you seek me because you ate of my loaves" — and which are separated either in faith, as regards heretics, or lacking charity, as regards the carnal, who are not properly in the Church, but are nevertheless alongside it, insofar as they put forward a feigned faith and have the appearance of holiness; according to that saying, 2 Timothy 3:5: "having indeed a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof." And 2 Corinthians 11:14: "it is no wonder if the ministers of Satan transform themselves." But the seeking was earnest; hence he says "when therefore the crowd had seen," etc., and first he shows how the crowd seeks Christ; second, how, once he is found, they question him. He says therefore first, that when the crowd had seen that Jesus was not there, nor his disciples, they got into the boats that had come from Tiberias, seeking him — which is praiseworthy; Isaiah 55:6: "seek the Lord while he may be found"; and Psalm 68:33: "seek the Lord, and your soul shall live." But once he is found they question him; hence he said, and when the crowds had found him, namely Christ, across the sea, they said to him: Rabbi, when did you come here? But this question can be understood in two ways. In one way, that they ask only about the time; and then, according to Chrysostom, their crudeness is to be reproached, because after so great a miracle they do not ask about the manner of crossing, namely how he had crossed without a boat, but only about the time of the crossing. Or it can be said that by saying "when," they ask not only about the time, but also about the other circumstances that concurred in the miraculous crossing. But note that above, after the meal, they wanted to make him king; but now, though they have him present, they do not want to make him king. The reason for this is that they wanted to make him king, stirred up by the passion of joy caused by the meal. Now passions of this kind quickly pass away, and therefore the things that are disposed according to these very passions are transitory; but the things that are disposed by reason endure more; Ecclesiasticus 27:12: "a wise man continues in wisdom as the sun; but a fool is changed as the moon"; Proverbs 11:18: "the wicked man makes unstable work." Next, when he says "Jesus answered them," etc., the Lord treats of spiritual food; and first he sets forth the truth concerning the spiritual; second, he excludes a contradiction, at the words "the Jews therefore murmured about him." Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets forth the truth of the spiritual food; second he intimates its origin, at the words "they said therefore to him: what sign then do you work?" etc.; third he teaches the manner of receiving this food itself, at the words "they said therefore to him: Lord, always give us this bread." Concerning the first he does two things. First he shows the spiritual food, and its power; second he makes manifest what it is, at the words "they said therefore to him: what shall we do that we may work the works of God?" Concerning the first he does two things. First he argues against their perverse desire; second he exhorts them to the truth, at the words "labor," etc. He says therefore: amen, amen I say to you, although you show yourselves as it were devout, yet you seek me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate of the loaves, and were filled; as if he were to say: you seek me on account of the flesh, not on account of the spirit, namely so that you may be fed again. And, as Augustine says, the place of these is held by those who seek Jesus, not for his own sake, but so that they may obtain certain worldly advantages; such as those who, having business dealings, approach prelates and clerics, not on account of Christ, but so that by their intercession they may be advanced with the great; such as those who take refuge in churches, not on account of Jesus, but because they are oppressed by those more powerful; such also as those who, drawing near to the Lord through holy orders, seek not the merits of the virtues, but the aids of the present life, namely riches and honors, as Gregory says in Moralia 23. And this is clear: for to work signs belongs to divine power; but to eat multiplied bread is something temporal. Since, therefore, they do not come to Christ on account of the power which they see in him, but on account of the fact that they eat of the loaves, they do not serve Christ but their own belly, as is said in Philippians 3, and Psalm 48:19: "he will confess to you when you have done well to him." He leads them back to the truth by setting before them the spiritual food, saying labor not for the food that perishes, but for that which endures unto eternal life, and first he sets forth its power; second its authority, at the words "which the Son of man has given you." The power of that food is considered in the fact that it does not perish. Hence it must be known concerning this, that bodily things are certain likenesses of spiritual things, inasmuch as they are caused and derived from them, and therefore they imitate the spiritual things themselves in some way. Hence, just as the body is sustained by food, so that by which the spirit is sustained is called its food, whatever that may be. But that by which the body is sustained, since it passes over into the nature of the body, is corruptible; but the food by which the spirit is sustained is incorruptible, because it is not changed into the spirit itself, but rather, conversely, the spirit is changed into the food. Hence it is the saying of Augustine: "I am the food of the full-grown: grow, and you shall eat me. Nor shall you change me into yourself, as the food of your flesh, but you shall be changed into me," as is said in the Book of Confessions. And therefore the Lord says "labor"; that is, seek by laboring, or merit by works, not the food that perishes, namely the bodily food; 1 Corinthians 6:13: "food for the belly, and the belly for food, but God will destroy both this and that" — because the use of foods will not always exist; but labor for that food, namely the spiritual, which endures unto eternal life; which food indeed is God himself, insofar as he is truth to be contemplated, and goodness to be loved, by which the spirit is refreshed; Proverbs 9:5: "eat my bread"; Ecclesiasticus 15:3: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding." Likewise, obedience itself to the divine commandments; above, 4:34: "my food is to do the will of him who sent me." Likewise, also Christ himself. Below, in the same chapter: "I am the bread of life"; likewise: "my flesh is truly food, and my blood is truly drink." And this insofar as it is joined to the Word of God, which is the food by which the Angels live. Now he assigned a similar difference above in chapter 4:13, concerning bodily drink and spiritual drink, when he said: "whoever drinks of this water shall thirst again; but whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him shall not thirst forever" — the same difference which he here assigns between bodily and spiritual food. The reason for this is that bodily things are corruptible, but spiritual things, and especially God, are eternal. But it must be known, according to Augustine in the book On the Work of Monks, that from this saying, namely "labor not for the food that perishes," certain monks took occasion for error, saying that spiritual men ought not to work anything bodily. But this understanding is false, because Paul, who was most spiritual, labored with his own hands, as is found in Ephesians 4:28, where he himself says: "he who stole, let him now steal no more; but rather let him labor with his hands." Therefore the true understanding is that we should direct our work — that is, our principal study and intention — toward seeking the food that leads to eternal life, namely the spiritual goods. But we ought not to attend principally to temporal things, but only accessorily, that is, to procure them only by reason of the corruptible body, which must be sustained as long as we live in this life. Hence, against this, the Apostle pointedly says, 2 Thessalonians 3:10: "he who does not work, let him not eat"; as if he were to say: those who say that nothing bodily is to be done — since eating is something bodily — such men ought not to eat. Next, when he says "which the Son of man will give you," he sets down the giver of the spiritual food: and first he sets down the author of this food; second he makes manifest whence he has the authority to feed. Now the author and giver of the spiritual food is Christ; and therefore he says which — namely, the food that does not perish — the Son of man will give you. If he had said "the Son of God," it would not have seemed remarkable; but the fact that the Son of man gives it more raises attention. Yet in a spiritual sense the Son of man gives it for this reason: because human nature, weakened by sin, loathed spiritual food, and could not take it in its own spirituality; hence it was necessary that the Son of God take on flesh, and through it refresh us; Psalm 22:5: "you have prepared a table before me." But whence he has the authority of giving, he adds when he says "for this one the Father, God, has sealed"; as if he were to say: that the Son of man will give this, he has this only insofar as, by the singularity and eminence of the fullness of grace, he excels all the sons of men; hence he says this one — namely the Son of man — the Father has sealed: that is, has markedly distinguished him from the rest; Psalm 44:8: "God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness above your fellows." Or, according to Hilary, "has sealed," that is, has stamped with a seal. Now when a seal is impressed in wax, the wax retains the whole figure of the seal, just as the Son also received the whole figure of the Father. Now there is a twofold reception which the Son received from the Father. One is eternal; and it is not of this that what is here said, "has sealed," is to be understood, because in sealing, the nature receiving is one thing, and the nature impressing is another. But this is understood of the mystery of the Incarnation, because upon human nature God the Father impressed the Word, who is "the splendor and the figure of his substance," as is said in Hebrews 1:3. Or according to Chrysostom, "has sealed," that is, God the Father specially instructed him for this, that he should give eternal life to the world; below, 10:10: "I came that they may have life," etc. For thus, when someone is chosen to carry out some great office, he is said to be sealed for that office; Luke 10:1: "after these things the Lord appointed also seventy others as disciples," etc. Or "has sealed," that is, has made manifest by the voice at the Baptism, and by works, as was said above, chapter 5. Next, when he says "they said therefore to him: what shall we do that we may work the works of God?", he makes manifest what the spiritual food is, and first the question of the Jews is set down; second the response of Jesus Christ is added, at the words "Jesus answered," etc. Concerning the first it must be known that the Jews, instructed from the law, believed that nothing was eternal except God. Hence, when he had said that the spiritual food endures unto eternal life, they understood that food to be something divine. And therefore, seeking, they make mention not of food, but of the work of God, when they say "what shall we do that we may work the works of God?" In which they were not far from the truth, since the spiritual food is nothing other than to work the works of God; Luke 18:18: "what shall I do to possess eternal life?" The Lord's response is set down when he says "this is the work of God, that you believe in him," etc. Here it must be considered that the Apostle, in Romans 4, distinguishes faith from works, saying that Abraham was not justified by works, but by faith. What then is it that the Lord here says, that faith itself, or believing, is the work of God? But to this there is a twofold response. One, that the Apostle does not distinguish faith from works absolutely, but from exterior works. For there are certain exterior works, which are carried out with the bodily members, and which, because they are better known, are called works according to common usage; but others are interior, which are carried out in the soul itself, which are known only to the wise, and which turn to the heart. In another way it is said that believing itself can be reckoned among exterior works, not because faith is itself the works, but because it is their principle; hence he also pointedly says "that you believe in him." For it makes a difference whether one says "to believe God" — for thus I designate the object — or "to believe God" (as a witness) — for thus I designate a witness — or "to believe in God" — for thus I designate an end: so that in this way God can be held as the object of faith, as witness, and as end, but in different respects. For the object of faith can be a creature — for I believe that heaven was created; likewise a creature also can be a witness of faith, for I believe Paul, or any of the saints; but the end of faith cannot be anything but God, for our mind is borne only toward God as toward an end. But since the end has the character of the good, it is the object of love; and therefore to believe in God as in an end is proper to faith formed by charity; and this faith, thus formed, is the principle of all good works; and to this extent believing itself is called the work of God. But if faith is the work of God, how do men do the works of God? But this is resolved by Isaiah 26:12, when it says: "all our works he has wrought in us." For this very thing that we believe, and whatever good we work, is in us from God; Philippians 2:13: "it is he who works in us both to will and to accomplish." And therefore he pointedly says that believing is the work of God, in order to show that faith is a gift of God, as is said in Ephesians 2:8. Next, when he says "they said therefore to him: what sign then do you work?", the origin of the food is treated, and first the question of the Jews is set down; second the response of Christ, at the words "amen, amen I say to you, Moses did not give you bread from heaven." Concerning the first they do three things. First they ask for a sign; second they specify it; third they adduce the testimony of Scripture. Now they ask for a sign by proposing the question; hence they said: what sign do you work, that we may see, and believe you? Now this question is explained differently by Augustine, and differently by Chrysostom. For Chrysostom says that the Lord had invited them to faith. Now the arguments leading to faith are miracles; 1 Corinthians 14:22: "signs are given to unbelievers." And therefore for this they seek a sign by which they may believe; for it is the custom of the Jews to ask for signs; 1 Corinthians 1:22: "for the Jews seek signs." Hence he says "what sign then do you work?" But this seems ridiculous, that they should ask for some miracles for this purpose, since he had just performed some, by multiplying the loaves, and by walking upon the sea, which had occurred in their very presence, and which they could believe. But they say this for this reason: to provoke the Lord, and to induce him always to feed them. This is clear, because they make no mention of any other sign except that which was done for their fathers through Moses for forty years, as if by this they were asking that he should always feed them; hence they say "our fathers ate manna in the desert." Nor do they say: God fed our fathers with manna, lest they should seem to want to make him equal to God. Likewise they do not say, Moses fed them, lest they should seem to prefer Moses to Christ — as if wanting by this to entice him, so that he might continually feed them. Concerning that food it is spoken of in Exodus 16, and in Psalm 77:25: "man ate the bread of Angels." But Augustine says that the Lord said that he would give them food that endures unto eternal life; hence he seems, as it were, to prefer himself to Moses. But the Jews reckoned Moses greater than Christ; hence they said, below, chapter 9:29: "we know that God spoke to Moses; but as for this man, we do not know where he is from." Hence they required that Christ should do certain things greater than Moses had done; and therefore they bring back to memory the things that Moses did, saying: our fathers ate manna in the desert; as if he were to say: what you say about yourself is greater than what Moses did, because you promise food that does not perish; but the manna that Moses gave, if it was kept for another day, swarmed with worms. If therefore you wish us to believe you, you should do something greater than Moses; for what you did is not greater, because you satisfied five thousand men, but with five barley loaves, and only once; whereas he satisfied the whole people with manna from heaven for forty years, and this in the desert, just as it is written in Psalm 77:24: "he gave them bread from heaven to eat."”

“They said therefore unto him,.... Seeing he proposed believing in him as the grand work of God to be done, and what is most acceptable in his sight: what sign showest thou then, that we may see and believe thee? The people of the Jews were always requiring signs and wonders, and when they had one and another shown them, they still sought for more, and were never satisfied; see Mat 12:39. These men had lately seen various signs and miracles of Christ, as healing the sick, and feeding live thousand of them, and more, with five loaves, and two fishes; and though, for the time present, these had some influence upon them, and they were ready to believe he was that prophet; yet now, at least some of them, begin to retract, and signify, that unless some other, and greater signs were shown, they should not believe in him as the Messiah: what dost thou work? more than others, or Moses. They seem to make light of the miracle of the loaves, or at least require some greater sign and miracle, to engage their belief in him as the Messiah; and as they were lovers of their bellies, and expected dainties in the times of the Messiah, they seem to move for, and desire miracles of that kind to be wrought; and which sense the following words confirm.”

“After the Evangelist has set down how the disciples sought Christ, he here consequently treats of the crowds seeking him, and first the motive for seeking is set down; second, the opportunity for seeking, at the words "but other boats came," etc.; third, the seeking itself is set down, at the words "when therefore the crowd had seen," etc. Now what moved the crowds to seek Christ was the preceding miracle, namely that he had crossed the sea without a vehicle. This indeed became known to them, because in the evening he was not on the shore that was near the place where he had worked the miracle of the loaves, where there was only one boat, and that boat had crossed with the disciples to the other side without Christ. Hence, when in the morning they had not found Christ on the same side where he had been on the previous day, but he was already on the other side, and he had had no other boat in which to cross, they suspected that he had crossed by walking upon the sea. And this is what he says: on the next day — that is, the day after that on which he had worked the miracle of the loaves — the crowd that was standing across the sea, where he had worked the miracle, saw that there was no other boat there but one, because on the previous day there had been only that one, and saw that Jesus had not entered the boat with his disciples, etc. By this one boat is signified the Church, which is one, by the unity of faith and of the sacraments; Ephesians 4:5: "one faith, one Baptism." But by the fact that Jesus is not with the disciples is signified the bodily separation of Christ from them at the ascension; Mark, last chapter, 19: "the Lord Jesus indeed, after he had spoken to them, was taken up into heaven." The opportunity for seeking is given by the arrival of other boats from the other side of the sea, with which they were able to cross over to seek Christ; and therefore he says, "but other boats came" from the other side, namely from Tiberias, near the place where they had eaten the loaves, etc. By these other boats that came are signified the conventicles of heretics and of those who seek the things that are their own, and not the things of Jesus Christ — below: "you seek me because you ate of my loaves" — and which are separated either in faith, as regards heretics, or lacking charity, as regards the carnal, who are not properly in the Church, but are nevertheless alongside it, insofar as they put forward a feigned faith and have the appearance of holiness; according to that saying, 2 Timothy 3:5: "having indeed a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof." And 2 Corinthians 11:14: "it is no wonder if the ministers of Satan transform themselves." But the seeking was earnest; hence he says "when therefore the crowd had seen," etc., and first he shows how the crowd seeks Christ; second, how, once he is found, they question him. He says therefore first, that when the crowd had seen that Jesus was not there, nor his disciples, they got into the boats that had come from Tiberias, seeking him — which is praiseworthy; Isaiah 55:6: "seek the Lord while he may be found"; and Psalm 68:33: "seek the Lord, and your soul shall live." But once he is found they question him; hence he said, and when the crowds had found him, namely Christ, across the sea, they said to him: Rabbi, when did you come here? But this question can be understood in two ways. In one way, that they ask only about the time; and then, according to Chrysostom, their crudeness is to be reproached, because after so great a miracle they do not ask about the manner of crossing, namely how he had crossed without a boat, but only about the time of the crossing. Or it can be said that by saying "when," they ask not only about the time, but also about the other circumstances that concurred in the miraculous crossing. But note that above, after the meal, they wanted to make him king; but now, though they have him present, they do not want to make him king. The reason for this is that they wanted to make him king, stirred up by the passion of joy caused by the meal. Now passions of this kind quickly pass away, and therefore the things that are disposed according to these very passions are transitory; but the things that are disposed by reason endure more; Ecclesiasticus 27:12: "a wise man continues in wisdom as the sun; but a fool is changed as the moon"; Proverbs 11:18: "the wicked man makes unstable work." Next, when he says "Jesus answered them," etc., the Lord treats of spiritual food; and first he sets forth the truth concerning the spiritual; second, he excludes a contradiction, at the words "the Jews therefore murmured about him." Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets forth the truth of the spiritual food; second he intimates its origin, at the words "they said therefore to him: what sign then do you work?" etc.; third he teaches the manner of receiving this food itself, at the words "they said therefore to him: Lord, always give us this bread." Concerning the first he does two things. First he shows the spiritual food, and its power; second he makes manifest what it is, at the words "they said therefore to him: what shall we do that we may work the works of God?" Concerning the first he does two things. First he argues against their perverse desire; second he exhorts them to the truth, at the words "labor," etc. He says therefore: amen, amen I say to you, although you show yourselves as it were devout, yet you seek me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate of the loaves, and were filled; as if he were to say: you seek me on account of the flesh, not on account of the spirit, namely so that you may be fed again. And, as Augustine says, the place of these is held by those who seek Jesus, not for his own sake, but so that they may obtain certain worldly advantages; such as those who, having business dealings, approach prelates and clerics, not on account of Christ, but so that by their intercession they may be advanced with the great; such as those who take refuge in churches, not on account of Jesus, but because they are oppressed by those more powerful; such also as those who, drawing near to the Lord through holy orders, seek not the merits of the virtues, but the aids of the present life, namely riches and honors, as Gregory says in Moralia 23. And this is clear: for to work signs belongs to divine power; but to eat multiplied bread is something temporal. Since, therefore, they do not come to Christ on account of the power which they see in him, but on account of the fact that they eat of the loaves, they do not serve Christ but their own belly, as is said in Philippians 3, and Psalm 48:19: "he will confess to you when you have done well to him." He leads them back to the truth by setting before them the spiritual food, saying labor not for the food that perishes, but for that which endures unto eternal life, and first he sets forth its power; second its authority, at the words "which the Son of man has given you." The power of that food is considered in the fact that it does not perish. Hence it must be known concerning this, that bodily things are certain likenesses of spiritual things, inasmuch as they are caused and derived from them, and therefore they imitate the spiritual things themselves in some way. Hence, just as the body is sustained by food, so that by which the spirit is sustained is called its food, whatever that may be. But that by which the body is sustained, since it passes over into the nature of the body, is corruptible; but the food by which the spirit is sustained is incorruptible, because it is not changed into the spirit itself, but rather, conversely, the spirit is changed into the food. Hence it is the saying of Augustine: "I am the food of the full-grown: grow, and you shall eat me. Nor shall you change me into yourself, as the food of your flesh, but you shall be changed into me," as is said in the Book of Confessions. And therefore the Lord says "labor"; that is, seek by laboring, or merit by works, not the food that perishes, namely the bodily food; 1 Corinthians 6:13: "food for the belly, and the belly for food, but God will destroy both this and that" — because the use of foods will not always exist; but labor for that food, namely the spiritual, which endures unto eternal life; which food indeed is God himself, insofar as he is truth to be contemplated, and goodness to be loved, by which the spirit is refreshed; Proverbs 9:5: "eat my bread"; Ecclesiasticus 15:3: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding." Likewise, obedience itself to the divine commandments; above, 4:34: "my food is to do the will of him who sent me." Likewise, also Christ himself. Below, in the same chapter: "I am the bread of life"; likewise: "my flesh is truly food, and my blood is truly drink." And this insofar as it is joined to the Word of God, which is the food by which the Angels live. Now he assigned a similar difference above in chapter 4:13, concerning bodily drink and spiritual drink, when he said: "whoever drinks of this water shall thirst again; but whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him shall not thirst forever" — the same difference which he here assigns between bodily and spiritual food. The reason for this is that bodily things are corruptible, but spiritual things, and especially God, are eternal. But it must be known, according to Augustine in the book On the Work of Monks, that from this saying, namely "labor not for the food that perishes," certain monks took occasion for error, saying that spiritual men ought not to work anything bodily. But this understanding is false, because Paul, who was most spiritual, labored with his own hands, as is found in Ephesians 4:28, where he himself says: "he who stole, let him now steal no more; but rather let him labor with his hands." Therefore the true understanding is that we should direct our work — that is, our principal study and intention — toward seeking the food that leads to eternal life, namely the spiritual goods. But we ought not to attend principally to temporal things, but only accessorily, that is, to procure them only by reason of the corruptible body, which must be sustained as long as we live in this life. Hence, against this, the Apostle pointedly says, 2 Thessalonians 3:10: "he who does not work, let him not eat"; as if he were to say: those who say that nothing bodily is to be done — since eating is something bodily — such men ought not to eat. Next, when he says "which the Son of man will give you," he sets down the giver of the spiritual food: and first he sets down the author of this food; second he makes manifest whence he has the authority to feed. Now the author and giver of the spiritual food is Christ; and therefore he says which — namely, the food that does not perish — the Son of man will give you. If he had said "the Son of God," it would not have seemed remarkable; but the fact that the Son of man gives it more raises attention. Yet in a spiritual sense the Son of man gives it for this reason: because human nature, weakened by sin, loathed spiritual food, and could not take it in its own spirituality; hence it was necessary that the Son of God take on flesh, and through it refresh us; Psalm 22:5: "you have prepared a table before me." But whence he has the authority of giving, he adds when he says "for this one the Father, God, has sealed"; as if he were to say: that the Son of man will give this, he has this only insofar as, by the singularity and eminence of the fullness of grace, he excels all the sons of men; hence he says this one — namely the Son of man — the Father has sealed: that is, has markedly distinguished him from the rest; Psalm 44:8: "God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness above your fellows." Or, according to Hilary, "has sealed," that is, has stamped with a seal. Now when a seal is impressed in wax, the wax retains the whole figure of the seal, just as the Son also received the whole figure of the Father. Now there is a twofold reception which the Son received from the Father. One is eternal; and it is not of this that what is here said, "has sealed," is to be understood, because in sealing, the nature receiving is one thing, and the nature impressing is another. But this is understood of the mystery of the Incarnation, because upon human nature God the Father impressed the Word, who is "the splendor and the figure of his substance," as is said in Hebrews 1:3. Or according to Chrysostom, "has sealed," that is, God the Father specially instructed him for this, that he should give eternal life to the world; below, 10:10: "I came that they may have life," etc. For thus, when someone is chosen to carry out some great office, he is said to be sealed for that office; Luke 10:1: "after these things the Lord appointed also seventy others as disciples," etc. Or "has sealed," that is, has made manifest by the voice at the Baptism, and by works, as was said above, chapter 5. Next, when he says "they said therefore to him: what shall we do that we may work the works of God?", he makes manifest what the spiritual food is, and first the question of the Jews is set down; second the response of Jesus Christ is added, at the words "Jesus answered," etc. Concerning the first it must be known that the Jews, instructed from the law, believed that nothing was eternal except God. Hence, when he had said that the spiritual food endures unto eternal life, they understood that food to be something divine. And therefore, seeking, they make mention not of food, but of the work of God, when they say "what shall we do that we may work the works of God?" In which they were not far from the truth, since the spiritual food is nothing other than to work the works of God; Luke 18:18: "what shall I do to possess eternal life?" The Lord's response is set down when he says "this is the work of God, that you believe in him," etc. Here it must be considered that the Apostle, in Romans 4, distinguishes faith from works, saying that Abraham was not justified by works, but by faith. What then is it that the Lord here says, that faith itself, or believing, is the work of God? But to this there is a twofold response. One, that the Apostle does not distinguish faith from works absolutely, but from exterior works. For there are certain exterior works, which are carried out with the bodily members, and which, because they are better known, are called works according to common usage; but others are interior, which are carried out in the soul itself, which are known only to the wise, and which turn to the heart. In another way it is said that believing itself can be reckoned among exterior works, not because faith is itself the works, but because it is their principle; hence he also pointedly says "that you believe in him." For it makes a difference whether one says "to believe God" — for thus I designate the object — or "to believe God" (as a witness) — for thus I designate a witness — or "to believe in God" — for thus I designate an end: so that in this way God can be held as the object of faith, as witness, and as end, but in different respects. For the object of faith can be a creature — for I believe that heaven was created; likewise a creature also can be a witness of faith, for I believe Paul, or any of the saints; but the end of faith cannot be anything but God, for our mind is borne only toward God as toward an end. But since the end has the character of the good, it is the object of love; and therefore to believe in God as in an end is proper to faith formed by charity; and this faith, thus formed, is the principle of all good works; and to this extent believing itself is called the work of God. But if faith is the work of God, how do men do the works of God? But this is resolved by Isaiah 26:12, when it says: "all our works he has wrought in us." For this very thing that we believe, and whatever good we work, is in us from God; Philippians 2:13: "it is he who works in us both to will and to accomplish." And therefore he pointedly says that believing is the work of God, in order to show that faith is a gift of God, as is said in Ephesians 2:8. Next, when he says "they said therefore to him: what sign then do you work?", the origin of the food is treated, and first the question of the Jews is set down; second the response of Christ, at the words "amen, amen I say to you, Moses did not give you bread from heaven." Concerning the first they do three things. First they ask for a sign; second they specify it; third they adduce the testimony of Scripture. Now they ask for a sign by proposing the question; hence they said: what sign do you work, that we may see, and believe you? Now this question is explained differently by Augustine, and differently by Chrysostom. For Chrysostom says that the Lord had invited them to faith. Now the arguments leading to faith are miracles; 1 Corinthians 14:22: "signs are given to unbelievers." And therefore for this they seek a sign by which they may believe; for it is the custom of the Jews to ask for signs; 1 Corinthians 1:22: "for the Jews seek signs." Hence he says "what sign then do you work?" But this seems ridiculous, that they should ask for some miracles for this purpose, since he had just performed some, by multiplying the loaves, and by walking upon the sea, which had occurred in their very presence, and which they could believe. But they say this for this reason: to provoke the Lord, and to induce him always to feed them. This is clear, because they make no mention of any other sign except that which was done for their fathers through Moses for forty years, as if by this they were asking that he should always feed them; hence they say "our fathers ate manna in the desert." Nor do they say: God fed our fathers with manna, lest they should seem to want to make him equal to God. Likewise they do not say, Moses fed them, lest they should seem to prefer Moses to Christ — as if wanting by this to entice him, so that he might continually feed them. Concerning that food it is spoken of in Exodus 16, and in Psalm 77:25: "man ate the bread of Angels." But Augustine says that the Lord said that he would give them food that endures unto eternal life; hence he seems, as it were, to prefer himself to Moses. But the Jews reckoned Moses greater than Christ; hence they said, below, chapter 9:29: "we know that God spoke to Moses; but as for this man, we do not know where he is from." Hence they required that Christ should do certain things greater than Moses had done; and therefore they bring back to memory the things that Moses did, saying: our fathers ate manna in the desert; as if he were to say: what you say about yourself is greater than what Moses did, because you promise food that does not perish; but the manna that Moses gave, if it was kept for another day, swarmed with worms. If therefore you wish us to believe you, you should do something greater than Moses; for what you did is not greater, because you satisfied five thousand men, but with five barley loaves, and only once; whereas he satisfied the whole people with manna from heaven for forty years, and this in the desert, just as it is written in Psalm 77:24: "he gave them bread from heaven to eat."”

“Our fathers did eat manna in the wilderness,.... Which was a sort of food prepared by angels in the air, and rained down from thence about the tents of the Israelites; it was a small round thing, as small as the hoar frost on the ground; it was like a coriander seed, and the colour of it was the colour of bdellium: it was so called, either from "to prepare", because it was prepared, and got ready for the Israelites; or from the first words that were spoken upon sight of it, , "what is it?" for they knew not what it was: and this the Jewish fathers fed upon all the while they were in the wilderness, till they came to Canaan's land, and they only; it was food peculiar to them: "our fathers did eat"; and so the Jews (f) observe on those words in Exo 16:35, ""and the children of Israel did eat manna forty years"; the children of Israel, , "not another". And the children of Israel saw, and said, what is it? and not the rest of the mixed multitude.'' Now these Jews object this miracle to Christ, and intimate, that he indeed had fed five thousand of them with barley loaves, and fishes, for one meal; but their fathers, in the times of Moses, to the number of six hundred thousand, and more, were fed, and that with manna, very sweet and delightful food, and for the space of forty years; even all the white they were in the wilderness: and therefore, unless he wrought as great a miracle, or a greater than this, and that of the like kind, they should not think fit to relinquish Moses, and follow him; and in proof of what they said, they produce Scripture, as it is written in Psa 78:24, or rather in Exo 16:15; and perhaps both places may be respected: he gave them bread from heaven to eat; they leave out the word Lord, being willing it should be understood of Moses, to whom they ascribed it, as appears from the following words of Christ, who denies that Moses gave it; and add the phrase "from heaven", to set forth the excellent nature of it, which is taken from Exo 16:4, where the manna, as here, is called "bread from heaven". (f) Zohar in Exod. fol. 75. 2.”

“After the Evangelist has set down how the disciples sought Christ, he here consequently treats of the crowds seeking him, and first the motive for seeking is set down; second, the opportunity for seeking, at the words "but other boats came," etc.; third, the seeking itself is set down, at the words "when therefore the crowd had seen," etc. Now what moved the crowds to seek Christ was the preceding miracle, namely that he had crossed the sea without a vehicle. This indeed became known to them, because in the evening he was not on the shore that was near the place where he had worked the miracle of the loaves, where there was only one boat, and that boat had crossed with the disciples to the other side without Christ. Hence, when in the morning they had not found Christ on the same side where he had been on the previous day, but he was already on the other side, and he had had no other boat in which to cross, they suspected that he had crossed by walking upon the sea. And this is what he says: on the next day — that is, the day after that on which he had worked the miracle of the loaves — the crowd that was standing across the sea, where he had worked the miracle, saw that there was no other boat there but one, because on the previous day there had been only that one, and saw that Jesus had not entered the boat with his disciples, etc. By this one boat is signified the Church, which is one, by the unity of faith and of the sacraments; Ephesians 4:5: "one faith, one Baptism." But by the fact that Jesus is not with the disciples is signified the bodily separation of Christ from them at the ascension; Mark, last chapter, 19: "the Lord Jesus indeed, after he had spoken to them, was taken up into heaven." The opportunity for seeking is given by the arrival of other boats from the other side of the sea, with which they were able to cross over to seek Christ; and therefore he says, "but other boats came" from the other side, namely from Tiberias, near the place where they had eaten the loaves, etc. By these other boats that came are signified the conventicles of heretics and of those who seek the things that are their own, and not the things of Jesus Christ — below: "you seek me because you ate of my loaves" — and which are separated either in faith, as regards heretics, or lacking charity, as regards the carnal, who are not properly in the Church, but are nevertheless alongside it, insofar as they put forward a feigned faith and have the appearance of holiness; according to that saying, 2 Timothy 3:5: "having indeed a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof." And 2 Corinthians 11:14: "it is no wonder if the ministers of Satan transform themselves." But the seeking was earnest; hence he says "when therefore the crowd had seen," etc., and first he shows how the crowd seeks Christ; second, how, once he is found, they question him. He says therefore first, that when the crowd had seen that Jesus was not there, nor his disciples, they got into the boats that had come from Tiberias, seeking him — which is praiseworthy; Isaiah 55:6: "seek the Lord while he may be found"; and Psalm 68:33: "seek the Lord, and your soul shall live." But once he is found they question him; hence he said, and when the crowds had found him, namely Christ, across the sea, they said to him: Rabbi, when did you come here? But this question can be understood in two ways. In one way, that they ask only about the time; and then, according to Chrysostom, their crudeness is to be reproached, because after so great a miracle they do not ask about the manner of crossing, namely how he had crossed without a boat, but only about the time of the crossing. Or it can be said that by saying "when," they ask not only about the time, but also about the other circumstances that concurred in the miraculous crossing. But note that above, after the meal, they wanted to make him king; but now, though they have him present, they do not want to make him king. The reason for this is that they wanted to make him king, stirred up by the passion of joy caused by the meal. Now passions of this kind quickly pass away, and therefore the things that are disposed according to these very passions are transitory; but the things that are disposed by reason endure more; Ecclesiasticus 27:12: "a wise man continues in wisdom as the sun; but a fool is changed as the moon"; Proverbs 11:18: "the wicked man makes unstable work." Next, when he says "Jesus answered them," etc., the Lord treats of spiritual food; and first he sets forth the truth concerning the spiritual; second, he excludes a contradiction, at the words "the Jews therefore murmured about him." Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets forth the truth of the spiritual food; second he intimates its origin, at the words "they said therefore to him: what sign then do you work?" etc.; third he teaches the manner of receiving this food itself, at the words "they said therefore to him: Lord, always give us this bread." Concerning the first he does two things. First he shows the spiritual food, and its power; second he makes manifest what it is, at the words "they said therefore to him: what shall we do that we may work the works of God?" Concerning the first he does two things. First he argues against their perverse desire; second he exhorts them to the truth, at the words "labor," etc. He says therefore: amen, amen I say to you, although you show yourselves as it were devout, yet you seek me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate of the loaves, and were filled; as if he were to say: you seek me on account of the flesh, not on account of the spirit, namely so that you may be fed again. And, as Augustine says, the place of these is held by those who seek Jesus, not for his own sake, but so that they may obtain certain worldly advantages; such as those who, having business dealings, approach prelates and clerics, not on account of Christ, but so that by their intercession they may be advanced with the great; such as those who take refuge in churches, not on account of Jesus, but because they are oppressed by those more powerful; such also as those who, drawing near to the Lord through holy orders, seek not the merits of the virtues, but the aids of the present life, namely riches and honors, as Gregory says in Moralia 23. And this is clear: for to work signs belongs to divine power; but to eat multiplied bread is something temporal. Since, therefore, they do not come to Christ on account of the power which they see in him, but on account of the fact that they eat of the loaves, they do not serve Christ but their own belly, as is said in Philippians 3, and Psalm 48:19: "he will confess to you when you have done well to him." He leads them back to the truth by setting before them the spiritual food, saying labor not for the food that perishes, but for that which endures unto eternal life, and first he sets forth its power; second its authority, at the words "which the Son of man has given you." The power of that food is considered in the fact that it does not perish. Hence it must be known concerning this, that bodily things are certain likenesses of spiritual things, inasmuch as they are caused and derived from them, and therefore they imitate the spiritual things themselves in some way. Hence, just as the body is sustained by food, so that by which the spirit is sustained is called its food, whatever that may be. But that by which the body is sustained, since it passes over into the nature of the body, is corruptible; but the food by which the spirit is sustained is incorruptible, because it is not changed into the spirit itself, but rather, conversely, the spirit is changed into the food. Hence it is the saying of Augustine: "I am the food of the full-grown: grow, and you shall eat me. Nor shall you change me into yourself, as the food of your flesh, but you shall be changed into me," as is said in the Book of Confessions. And therefore the Lord says "labor"; that is, seek by laboring, or merit by works, not the food that perishes, namely the bodily food; 1 Corinthians 6:13: "food for the belly, and the belly for food, but God will destroy both this and that" — because the use of foods will not always exist; but labor for that food, namely the spiritual, which endures unto eternal life; which food indeed is God himself, insofar as he is truth to be contemplated, and goodness to be loved, by which the spirit is refreshed; Proverbs 9:5: "eat my bread"; Ecclesiasticus 15:3: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding." Likewise, obedience itself to the divine commandments; above, 4:34: "my food is to do the will of him who sent me." Likewise, also Christ himself. Below, in the same chapter: "I am the bread of life"; likewise: "my flesh is truly food, and my blood is truly drink." And this insofar as it is joined to the Word of God, which is the food by which the Angels live. Now he assigned a similar difference above in chapter 4:13, concerning bodily drink and spiritual drink, when he said: "whoever drinks of this water shall thirst again; but whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him shall not thirst forever" — the same difference which he here assigns between bodily and spiritual food. The reason for this is that bodily things are corruptible, but spiritual things, and especially God, are eternal. But it must be known, according to Augustine in the book On the Work of Monks, that from this saying, namely "labor not for the food that perishes," certain monks took occasion for error, saying that spiritual men ought not to work anything bodily. But this understanding is false, because Paul, who was most spiritual, labored with his own hands, as is found in Ephesians 4:28, where he himself says: "he who stole, let him now steal no more; but rather let him labor with his hands." Therefore the true understanding is that we should direct our work — that is, our principal study and intention — toward seeking the food that leads to eternal life, namely the spiritual goods. But we ought not to attend principally to temporal things, but only accessorily, that is, to procure them only by reason of the corruptible body, which must be sustained as long as we live in this life. Hence, against this, the Apostle pointedly says, 2 Thessalonians 3:10: "he who does not work, let him not eat"; as if he were to say: those who say that nothing bodily is to be done — since eating is something bodily — such men ought not to eat. Next, when he says "which the Son of man will give you," he sets down the giver of the spiritual food: and first he sets down the author of this food; second he makes manifest whence he has the authority to feed. Now the author and giver of the spiritual food is Christ; and therefore he says which — namely, the food that does not perish — the Son of man will give you. If he had said "the Son of God," it would not have seemed remarkable; but the fact that the Son of man gives it more raises attention. Yet in a spiritual sense the Son of man gives it for this reason: because human nature, weakened by sin, loathed spiritual food, and could not take it in its own spirituality; hence it was necessary that the Son of God take on flesh, and through it refresh us; Psalm 22:5: "you have prepared a table before me." But whence he has the authority of giving, he adds when he says "for this one the Father, God, has sealed"; as if he were to say: that the Son of man will give this, he has this only insofar as, by the singularity and eminence of the fullness of grace, he excels all the sons of men; hence he says this one — namely the Son of man — the Father has sealed: that is, has markedly distinguished him from the rest; Psalm 44:8: "God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness above your fellows." Or, according to Hilary, "has sealed," that is, has stamped with a seal. Now when a seal is impressed in wax, the wax retains the whole figure of the seal, just as the Son also received the whole figure of the Father. Now there is a twofold reception which the Son received from the Father. One is eternal; and it is not of this that what is here said, "has sealed," is to be understood, because in sealing, the nature receiving is one thing, and the nature impressing is another. But this is understood of the mystery of the Incarnation, because upon human nature God the Father impressed the Word, who is "the splendor and the figure of his substance," as is said in Hebrews 1:3. Or according to Chrysostom, "has sealed," that is, God the Father specially instructed him for this, that he should give eternal life to the world; below, 10:10: "I came that they may have life," etc. For thus, when someone is chosen to carry out some great office, he is said to be sealed for that office; Luke 10:1: "after these things the Lord appointed also seventy others as disciples," etc. Or "has sealed," that is, has made manifest by the voice at the Baptism, and by works, as was said above, chapter 5. Next, when he says "they said therefore to him: what shall we do that we may work the works of God?", he makes manifest what the spiritual food is, and first the question of the Jews is set down; second the response of Jesus Christ is added, at the words "Jesus answered," etc. Concerning the first it must be known that the Jews, instructed from the law, believed that nothing was eternal except God. Hence, when he had said that the spiritual food endures unto eternal life, they understood that food to be something divine. And therefore, seeking, they make mention not of food, but of the work of God, when they say "what shall we do that we may work the works of God?" In which they were not far from the truth, since the spiritual food is nothing other than to work the works of God; Luke 18:18: "what shall I do to possess eternal life?" The Lord's response is set down when he says "this is the work of God, that you believe in him," etc. Here it must be considered that the Apostle, in Romans 4, distinguishes faith from works, saying that Abraham was not justified by works, but by faith. What then is it that the Lord here says, that faith itself, or believing, is the work of God? But to this there is a twofold response. One, that the Apostle does not distinguish faith from works absolutely, but from exterior works. For there are certain exterior works, which are carried out with the bodily members, and which, because they are better known, are called works according to common usage; but others are interior, which are carried out in the soul itself, which are known only to the wise, and which turn to the heart. In another way it is said that believing itself can be reckoned among exterior works, not because faith is itself the works, but because it is their principle; hence he also pointedly says "that you believe in him." For it makes a difference whether one says "to believe God" — for thus I designate the object — or "to believe God" (as a witness) — for thus I designate a witness — or "to believe in God" — for thus I designate an end: so that in this way God can be held as the object of faith, as witness, and as end, but in different respects. For the object of faith can be a creature — for I believe that heaven was created; likewise a creature also can be a witness of faith, for I believe Paul, or any of the saints; but the end of faith cannot be anything but God, for our mind is borne only toward God as toward an end. But since the end has the character of the good, it is the object of love; and therefore to believe in God as in an end is proper to faith formed by charity; and this faith, thus formed, is the principle of all good works; and to this extent believing itself is called the work of God. But if faith is the work of God, how do men do the works of God? But this is resolved by Isaiah 26:12, when it says: "all our works he has wrought in us." For this very thing that we believe, and whatever good we work, is in us from God; Philippians 2:13: "it is he who works in us both to will and to accomplish." And therefore he pointedly says that believing is the work of God, in order to show that faith is a gift of God, as is said in Ephesians 2:8. Next, when he says "they said therefore to him: what sign then do you work?", the origin of the food is treated, and first the question of the Jews is set down; second the response of Christ, at the words "amen, amen I say to you, Moses did not give you bread from heaven." Concerning the first they do three things. First they ask for a sign; second they specify it; third they adduce the testimony of Scripture. Now they ask for a sign by proposing the question; hence they said: what sign do you work, that we may see, and believe you? Now this question is explained differently by Augustine, and differently by Chrysostom. For Chrysostom says that the Lord had invited them to faith. Now the arguments leading to faith are miracles; 1 Corinthians 14:22: "signs are given to unbelievers." And therefore for this they seek a sign by which they may believe; for it is the custom of the Jews to ask for signs; 1 Corinthians 1:22: "for the Jews seek signs." Hence he says "what sign then do you work?" But this seems ridiculous, that they should ask for some miracles for this purpose, since he had just performed some, by multiplying the loaves, and by walking upon the sea, which had occurred in their very presence, and which they could believe. But they say this for this reason: to provoke the Lord, and to induce him always to feed them. This is clear, because they make no mention of any other sign except that which was done for their fathers through Moses for forty years, as if by this they were asking that he should always feed them; hence they say "our fathers ate manna in the desert." Nor do they say: God fed our fathers with manna, lest they should seem to want to make him equal to God. Likewise they do not say, Moses fed them, lest they should seem to prefer Moses to Christ — as if wanting by this to entice him, so that he might continually feed them. Concerning that food it is spoken of in Exodus 16, and in Psalm 77:25: "man ate the bread of Angels." But Augustine says that the Lord said that he would give them food that endures unto eternal life; hence he seems, as it were, to prefer himself to Moses. But the Jews reckoned Moses greater than Christ; hence they said, below, chapter 9:29: "we know that God spoke to Moses; but as for this man, we do not know where he is from." Hence they required that Christ should do certain things greater than Moses had done; and therefore they bring back to memory the things that Moses did, saying: our fathers ate manna in the desert; as if he were to say: what you say about yourself is greater than what Moses did, because you promise food that does not perish; but the manna that Moses gave, if it was kept for another day, swarmed with worms. If therefore you wish us to believe you, you should do something greater than Moses; for what you did is not greater, because you satisfied five thousand men, but with five barley loaves, and only once; whereas he satisfied the whole people with manna from heaven for forty years, and this in the desert, just as it is written in Psalm 77:24: "he gave them bread from heaven to eat."”

“Then Jesus said unto them, verily, verily, I say unto you,.... It is truth, and may be depended on, whether it will be believed or not: Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; in which Christ denies that that bread, or manna, did come from heaven; that is, from the highest heavens, only from the air, and was not such celestial bread he after speaks of, and which came down from the heaven of heavens: and moreover, he denies that Moses gave them that bread; it was the Lord that gave them it, as is expressly said in the passage referred to, in the above citation. Moses had no hand in it; he did not so much as pray for it, much less procure it, or prepare it: it was promised and prepared by God, and rained by him, and who directed to the gathering and use of it. This stands opposed to a notion of the Jews, that the manna was given by means of Moses, for his sake, and on account of his merits: for they say (g), "there arose up three good providers, or pastors for Israel, and they are these, Moses, and Aaron, and Miriam; and three good gifts were given by their means, and they are these, the well, the cloud, and the manna; the well by the merits of Miriam; the pillar of cloud by the merits of Aaron; , "the manna, by the merits of Moses".'' This our Lord denies; and affirms, but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven: he not only gave the manna to the Jewish fathers, and not Moses; but he also gives that bread which the manna was typical of, by which he means himself; who may be compared to bread, because of the original of it, or the matter of it, of which it is made, wheat, he is called a corn of wheat, Joh 12:24; and from its preparation for food, being threshed, and winnowed, and ground, and kneaded, and baked; all which may express the sufferings and death of Christ, by which he becomes fit food for faith; and from its being the main part of human sustenance, and from its nourishing and strengthening nature, and from its being a means of maintaining and supporting life: and he may be called the "true" bread, because he is the truth and substance of the types of him; the unleavened bread, eaten at the passover, was typical of him, as he was free from sin in nature and life; and from all error in doctrine; and so was the showbread a type of his intercession, and set forth the continuance of it, its efficacy and acceptance, of which the priests only shared; and so were the meat offerings in the sacrifices, which were offered up day by day: and particularly the manna, the bread from heaven, the Jews were now speaking of: Christ was the truth of that type; that was but shadowy bread, Christ is the true bread, or the antitype of it in its name; whether it be derived from "manah", to prepare, Christ being the bread of life, and salvation of God, prepared in the council and covenant of grace, and by his sufferings and death before the face of all people; or from the words "man hu", what is it? Christ being as little known by carnal men, as the manna was at first to the Israelites: and in its nature, kind, form, and quality; it was round in form, which might be expressive of the perfections of Christ, and particularly his eternity, being without beginning or end; it was white in colour, which may denote the purity and innocence of him; it was sweet in taste, as he, his fruits, his word, and ordinances, are to them that are born again; it was small in quantity, which may set forth the meanness of Christ in his state of humiliation: it was also typical of Christ in its usefulness; it was sufficient to supply a, great multitude, and that for many years, as the fulness of grace in Christ is sufficient for the whole family in heaven, and in earth, in time, and to all eternity; the Israelites all shared in it, and had all an equal portion of it; so all the people of God have an interest in Christ, and equally participate of the blessings of his grace, and shall enjoy the same eternal life and glory by him: one has neither more nor less than another; Christ is all in all, and made alike all things to them: and he may be called the bread "from heaven"; because he came from thence, not by change of place, but by assumption of nature, even from the highest heavens, the third heaven, from whence the manna came not: he is the Lord from heaven, and is such bread as has a virtue and tendency in it to nourish men for heaven, and is truly of a heavenly nature: and this is Christ's Father's gift, and is of pure grace, without any consideration of works and merits in men. Philo the Jew says (h), the heavenly food of the soul, which is called "manna", the divine word distributes alike to all that ask. (g) T. Bab. Taanith, fol. 9. 1. Seder Olam Rabba, p. 28. (h) Quis rer. divin. haeres. p. 507.”

“The question of the Jews having been posed, here the response of Christ is set forth. And first he shows the origin of the spiritual food; second he proves it, at the words "For the bread that comes down from heaven is the true bread." Concerning the first, it must be known that the Jews had proposed two things to Christ concerning the origin of the bodily food which their fathers had: namely, the giver, who was Moses, and the place, because it was from heaven; and so the Lord, removing these two things concerning the origin of the spiritual food, asserts that the giver of the spiritual food is different, and the place is different. Hence he says, removing the aforesaid points, "Amen, amen I say to you, Moses did not give you bread from heaven." It is another who gives, because it is my Father — not bodily bread, but the true bread from heaven. But against this: was not the bread which the fathers had in the desert truly bread? I answer: if "true" is taken as it is divided against the false, then that bread was true, for the miracle of the manna was not false; but if "true" is taken as truth is divided against figure, then that bread was not true, but a figure of the spiritual bread, namely of our Lord Jesus Christ, which the manna itself signified, as the Apostle says, 1 Corinthians 10:3: "all ate the same spiritual food." Likewise, against what he says — "he did not give you bread from heaven" — is what is said in Psalm 77:24: "he gave them the bread of heaven." I answer: heaven is taken in three ways. Sometimes for the air; Matthew 13:4: "the birds of the air ate it"; and in Psalm 17:14: "the Lord thundered from heaven." Sometimes for the starry heaven, according to that verse, Psalm 113:16: "the heaven of heaven is the Lord's"; and Matthew 24:29: "the stars will fall from heaven." Sometimes, indeed, for the spiritual goods themselves; Matthew 5:12: "rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven." The manna, therefore, was from heaven not the starry or spiritual heaven, but the aerial. Or it is said to be from heaven inasmuch as it was a figure of the true heavenly bread, our Lord Jesus Christ. Consequently, when he says "for the true bread is that which comes down from heaven and gives life to the world," he proves that it is from heaven also by its effect. For the true heaven is of a spiritual nature, to which life belongs of itself, and therefore it gives life of itself; below: "it is the spirit that gives life." Now God himself is the author of life. From this, then, it is known that this spiritual bread is from heaven, since it produces its proper effect, if it gives life. For that bodily bread did not give life, since all who ate the manna died; but this bread gives life, and therefore he says it is "the true bread," and not figural, "which comes down from heaven." And this is evident, because "it gives life to the world." For Christ, who is the true bread, gives life to whom he wills; below, 10:10: "I came that they may have life," and so on. He also comes down from heaven; above, 3:13: "no one has ascended into heaven except him who descended from heaven, the Son of Man who is in heaven." Thus, therefore, Christ, the true bread, gives life to the world by reason of his divinity, and comes down from heaven by reason of his human nature. For, as was said above at chapter 3, he is said to have descended from heaven by assuming human nature; Philippians 2:7: "he emptied himself, taking the form of a servant." "They said therefore," and so on. Here the obtaining of the spiritual food is treated, and first the petition for that food itself is set forth; second the exposition is given, at "But Jesus said to them: I am the bread of life," where he shows the manner of obtaining it. It must be known, concerning the first, that the Jews understood the Lord's words carnally; and therefore, because they were in a desire for carnal things, they ask carnal food from Christ; hence they said to him, "Lord, always give us this bread," that would refresh in this way. And the Samaritan woman understood the word about spiritual water carnally, and wishing to be free from need, said: "Lord, give me this water." And although these people understand the Lord's words about food carnally, and ask carnally, nevertheless their petition, understood spiritually, is fitting for us; Matthew 6:11: "give us this day our daily bread": because we cannot live without this bread. Consequently, when he says "But Jesus said to them: I am the bread of life," he shows the manner of obtaining it, showing first what this bread is; second how it is acquired, at "all that the Father gives me will come to me." Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets forth the explanation of the aforesaid bread; second he assigns the reason for the explanation, at "he who comes to me shall not hunger"; third he manifests the necessity of the explanation, at "but I said to you," and so on. Jesus therefore said to them, "I am the bread of life": for, as was said above, the word of wisdom is the special food of the mind, because by it the mind is sustained; Ecclesiasticus 15:3: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding." Now the bread of wisdom is said to be the bread of life, to distinguish it from bodily bread, which is the bread of death, which is fitting only for restoring the defect of mortality, whence it is necessary only in this mortal life. But the bread of divine wisdom is of itself life-giving, and has no contrary death. Likewise, bodily bread does not give life, but only sustains for a time a life already existing; but spiritual bread so gives life that it grants life, for the soul begins to live through this, that it cleaves to the Word of God; Psalm 35:10: "with you is the fountain of life." Since, therefore, every word of wisdom is derived from the only-begotten Word of God, Ecclesiasticus 1:5: "the fountain of wisdom is the only-begotten of God, abiding on high," therefore the Word of God itself is principally called the bread of life; and therefore Christ says, "I am the bread of life." And because the flesh of Christ is united to the Word of God itself, it also has the property of being life-giving, whence his body too, taken sacramentally, is life-giving: for through the mysteries which Christ fulfilled in his flesh, he gives life to the world; and thus the flesh of Christ, on account of the Lord's word, is bread — not of the accustomed life, but of that life which is not unlocked by death. And therefore the flesh of Christ is called bread; Genesis 49:20: "Asher, his bread is fat." It is also signified through the manna, 1 Corinthians 10:1ff. "Manna" is interpreted "what is this?" Because the Jews, seeing it, marveled, saying to one another, "what is this?" But nothing is more marvelous than the Son of God made man, so that it falls to anyone to ask, "what is this?" That is, how is the Son of God the son of man; how do two natures come to make one person of Christ? Isaiah 9:6: "his name shall be called Wonderful." It is also marvelous how Christ is under the sacrament. Consequently, when he says "he who comes to me shall not hunger," he assigns the reason for the explanation, and this from the effect of this bread. For bodily bread, once eaten, does not take away hunger forever, since it is corrupted and fails; and therefore it must be sought again for nourishment; but spiritual bread, giving life of itself, is never corrupted; and therefore a man, having eaten once, never hungers. And therefore he says, "he who comes to me shall not hunger, and he who believes in me shall never thirst." Now, as to what he says — namely, that "he who comes" and "he who believes" shall not hunger nor thirst — these do not differ, according to Augustine, because to come to him and to believe in him are the same thing: for we come to God not by steps of the body, but of the mind, the first of which is faith. To eat and to drink are likewise the same: for by both is signified the eternal satisfaction, where there is no want. Matthew 5:6: "blessed are they who hunger and thirst for justice, for they shall be satisfied": so that the same thing is food sustaining and drink refreshing. Now the reason why temporal things do not take away thirst forever is, first, because they are not taken all at once, but little by little, and as it were with movement, and therefore something always remains to be taken; and on account of this, just as delight and satisfaction arise from what has already been taken, so too desire remains from the taking. The other reason is that they are corrupted, whence a memory remains from the corrupted thing, and desire for them is generated again. Spiritual things, however, are both taken all at once, and are not corrupted nor do they fail; and therefore their satisfaction remains forever. Revelation 7:16: "they shall neither hunger nor thirst." Psalm 15:10: "you shall fill me with joy with your countenance; delights are at your right hand," that is, in spiritual goods, "even to the end." Consequently, when he says "but I said to you," etc., the necessity of the explanation is set forth. For someone might say: we asked for bread; but you do not answer, "I will give it to you," or "I will not"; but rather you say, "I am the bread of life"; and therefore your answer does not seem a good one. But that it is a good answer, the Lord shows, saying, "I said to you that you have also seen me, and have not believed": which is the same as if someone had bread before him, being ignorant of it, and it were said to him, "behold, bread is before you." And therefore he says, "I said to you (I am the living bread) and you have seen me, and have not believed"; that is, you desire bread, and you have it before you; and yet you do not take it, because you do not believe. In this he reproaches them for their unbelief; below, 15:24: "but they have seen, and have hated both me and my Father." Consequently, when he says "all that the Father gives me will come to me," he shows how it is acquired, and first he sets forth the manner of acquiring it; second, the assurance of arrival, at "and him who comes to me I will not cast out"; third he manifests what he says, at "because I came down from heaven," and so on. It must be known, concerning the first, that our very believing comes to us from the gift of God. Ephesians 2:8: "by grace you are saved, and not of yourselves, for it is the gift of God"; Philippians 1:29: "it has been given to you not only to believe in him, but also to suffer for him." Now it is sometimes said that God the Father gives believing men to the Son, as here, "all that the Father gives me will come to me." Sometimes the Son gives to the Father, as that text, 1 Corinthians 15:24: "when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God and the Father." From which we understand that just as the Father, in giving, does not take the kingdom away from himself, so neither does the Son. Now the Father gives to the Son, inasmuch as he makes a man cleave to his Word. 1 Corinthians 1:9: "through whom," namely the Father, "you have been called into the fellowship of his Son." But the Son delivers to the Father, inasmuch as the Word is manifestative of the Father himself. Below, 17:6: "Father, I have manifested your name to men." Thus, therefore, he says, "all that the Father gives me will come to me"; that is, those who believe in me, whom the Father makes cleave to me by his gift. But perhaps someone would say that it is not necessary that anyone make use of the gift of God: for many receive the gift of God who do not use it. How then does he say, "all that the Father gives me will come to me"? To which it must be said that in that giving is understood not only the habit, which is faith and the like, but also the interior instinct toward believing. Whatever, then, one does toward salvation, all of it is from the gift of God. But a question remains: for if all that the Father gives to Christ goes to him, as he himself says, then only those go to God whom the Father gives to him; therefore it ought not to be imputed to those who do not go, since they are not given to him. To which it must be said that it is not imputed to them, if they cannot come to faith without the help of God; but this is imputed to the one who does not come, because he himself provides the impediment that keeps him from coming, turning himself away from salvation, whose way, as far as it is in itself, is open to all. Now the goal of the arrival is set forth when he says "and him who comes to me I will not cast out." For someone might say: we will come to you; but you will not receive us. And therefore he says, excluding this, "him who comes to me" — by the steps of faith and good works — "I will not cast out," in which he gives us to understand that he himself is within: for that is "within" from which one goes out to "without." Let us therefore consider what this interior thing is, and how one is cast out from it. It must be known, then, that since all visible things are said to be, as it were, certain exterior things with respect to spiritual things, the more something is spiritual, the more interior it is. There is, therefore, a twofold interior. One is the deepest, namely the joy of eternal life, which, according to Augustine, is the more inward and sweet secret, without weariness, without the bitterness of evil thoughts, without the interruption of temptations and sorrows; concerning which it is said, Matthew 25:21: "enter into the joy of your lord." And Psalm 30:21: "you shall hide them in the secret of your face"; that is, in the full vision of your essence. And from this interior thing no one shall be cast out. Revelation 3:12: "he who shall overcome, I will make him a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go out no more," because, as is said in Matthew 25:46, "the just shall go into life everlasting." The other interior thing is the rectitude of conscience, which is a spiritual joy; and concerning this it is said, Wisdom 8:16: "entering into my house, I shall rest." And Song of Songs 1:3: "the king has brought me into his storerooms." And from this some are cast out. And therefore what the Lord says, "I will not cast out," can be understood in two ways. In one way, so that those are said to come to him who are given to him by the Father through eternal predestination; and concerning these he says, "him who comes to me," predestined by the Father, "I will not cast out"; Romans 11:2: "God has not cast away his people whom he foreknew." In the other way, because those who go out do not go out as though cast out by Christ, but the cause of their casting-out is on their own part, who, through unbelief and sins, withdraw from the secret place of a right conscience. And thus it is said, "I do not cast out," but they themselves cast themselves out; Jeremiah 23:33: "you are the burden, and I will cast you off, says the Lord." And in this way that man was cast out who had entered the wedding feast not having a wedding garment, as is said in Matthew 22:11ff. Now he assigns the reason for the foregoing, when he says "because I came down from heaven," etc., and first he sets forth the intention of fulfilling the Father's will; second he manifests what the Father's will is, at "this is the will of him who sent me, the Father"; third he shows the final fulfillment of the will, at "and I will raise him up on the last day." Concerning the first it must be known that this text can be read in two ways: in one way according to Augustine, in the other according to Chrysostom. According to Augustine, thus: "him who comes to me I will not cast out," and this because he comes to me who imitates my humility. Matthew 11:28, when the Lord said, "come to me, all you who labor," he consequently adds: "learn from me, for I am meek and humble of heart." Now the true meekness of the Son of God consists in this, that he subjected his own will to the will of the Father. And therefore he says "I will not cast out," because "I came down from heaven not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me." On this account the soul went out from God, because it was proud; and therefore it is necessary to return by humility, coming to Christ through the imitation of his humility, which consists in this, that he does not do his own will alone, but the will of God the Father. It must be known, moreover, that in Christ there was a twofold will. One according to the human nature, which is proper to him both by nature and by the will of the Father; the other according to the divine nature, which is the same as the will of the Father. His own will, therefore, namely the human will, he ordered under the divine will, because he himself showed his obedience under the effect of the paternal will, wishing to fulfill the Father's will. Psalm 39:9: "that I should do your will, O my God, I have desired it." We ask that this will be done in us when we say, Matthew 6:10: "your will be done." Those, therefore, are not cast out who do not do their own will, but the will of God. For the Devil, wishing to do his own will, which is a mark of pride, was cast out of heaven, and the first man out of Paradise. According to Chrysostom, however, thus: I do not cast out him who comes to me because I came for this, to fulfill the Father's will concerning the salvation of men. If, therefore, I was incarnated for the salvation of men, how ought I to cast them out? And this is what he says: "therefore I do not cast out, because I came down from heaven not to do my own will," that is, the human will, so as to acquire something proper to myself, "but the will of him who sent me," the Father, "who wills all men to be saved," as is said in 1 Timothy 2:4. And therefore, as far as it is from me, I cast no one out. Romans 5:10: "for if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, shall we be saved by his life." Now what the Father's will is, he explains first, when he says "for this is the will of him who sent me, the Father," etc.; second he assigns the reason, at "for this is the will of my Father," etc. He said, then: I will not cast out those who come to me, because I assumed flesh in order to do the Father's will. Now the will of him who sent me, the Father, is this: namely, that I should not cast out; and therefore I will not cast out. 1 Thessalonians 4:3: "this is the will of God, your sanctification." And therefore he says "that of all that he has given me, I should lose nothing of it"; that is, that I should lose nothing, until it comes to the future resurrection, in which some will be lost — not, however, of those who were given to him through eternal predestination, but the impious; Psalm 1:6: "the way of the impious shall perish." But those who are preserved up to that time will not be lost. By this, however, that he says "I will not lose," it is not to be understood that he has need of them, or that it would be a detriment to him if they perish. But he says this on account of his affection for their salvation, and their good, which he reckons as his own. But against this is what is said below, chapter 17:12: "none of them," namely of those whom you gave me, "has perished, except the son of perdition." Therefore some of those who were given to him through eternal predestination are lost. This, then — what he says, "I will not lose of it" — is not true. But it must be said that it is from among those who are given to him through present righteousness that some are lost; not, however, from among those given through eternal predestination. Now he sets forth the reason for the divine will when he says "for this is the will of my Father," etc. The reason why the Father wills that I should not lose anything of what he has given me is that it is the Father's will to give life spiritually to men, since he himself is the fountain of life. And because he is eternal, as far as concerns himself, it is his will that everyone who comes to me should have eternal life. And this is what he says: "this is the will of the Father who sent me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in him should have eternal life." But it must be noted that above, 5:24, he said: "he who sees the Son, and believes him who sent me, has eternal life," whereas here he says "he who believes in him" — so as to give us to understand the same divinity of the Father and the Son, the vision of which through essence is our ultimate end, and the object of faith. But what he says, "sees," is not to be understood of the vision through essence, which faith precedes, but of the bodily vision of Christ, which leads to faith. And therefore he says pointedly, "he who sees the Son, and believes in him"; above, 5:24: "he who believes in him (...) is not judged, but shall pass from death to life"; below, 20:31: "but these things are written, that you may believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that believing, you may have life in his name." This will of the Father, moreover, will likewise be fulfilled, and therefore he adds, "and I will raise him up on the last day": because he thus wills that not only in soul, but also in body, he should have eternal life (Daniel 12:2: "of those who sleep in the dust of the earth, some shall awake to life everlasting, and others to everlasting reproach") just as Christ also rose again; Romans 6:9: "Christ rising from the dead dies now no more," and so on.”

“The question of the Jews having been posed, here the response of Christ is set forth. And first he shows the origin of the spiritual food; second he proves it, at the words "For the bread that comes down from heaven is the true bread." Concerning the first, it must be known that the Jews had proposed two things to Christ concerning the origin of the bodily food which their fathers had: namely, the giver, who was Moses, and the place, because it was from heaven; and so the Lord, removing these two things concerning the origin of the spiritual food, asserts that the giver of the spiritual food is different, and the place is different. Hence he says, removing the aforesaid points, "Amen, amen I say to you, Moses did not give you bread from heaven." It is another who gives, because it is my Father — not bodily bread, but the true bread from heaven. But against this: was not the bread which the fathers had in the desert truly bread? I answer: if "true" is taken as it is divided against the false, then that bread was true, for the miracle of the manna was not false; but if "true" is taken as truth is divided against figure, then that bread was not true, but a figure of the spiritual bread, namely of our Lord Jesus Christ, which the manna itself signified, as the Apostle says, 1 Corinthians 10:3: "all ate the same spiritual food." Likewise, against what he says — "he did not give you bread from heaven" — is what is said in Psalm 77:24: "he gave them the bread of heaven." I answer: heaven is taken in three ways. Sometimes for the air; Matthew 13:4: "the birds of the air ate it"; and in Psalm 17:14: "the Lord thundered from heaven." Sometimes for the starry heaven, according to that verse, Psalm 113:16: "the heaven of heaven is the Lord's"; and Matthew 24:29: "the stars will fall from heaven." Sometimes, indeed, for the spiritual goods themselves; Matthew 5:12: "rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven." The manna, therefore, was from heaven not the starry or spiritual heaven, but the aerial. Or it is said to be from heaven inasmuch as it was a figure of the true heavenly bread, our Lord Jesus Christ. Consequently, when he says "for the true bread is that which comes down from heaven and gives life to the world," he proves that it is from heaven also by its effect. For the true heaven is of a spiritual nature, to which life belongs of itself, and therefore it gives life of itself; below: "it is the spirit that gives life." Now God himself is the author of life. From this, then, it is known that this spiritual bread is from heaven, since it produces its proper effect, if it gives life. For that bodily bread did not give life, since all who ate the manna died; but this bread gives life, and therefore he says it is "the true bread," and not figural, "which comes down from heaven." And this is evident, because "it gives life to the world." For Christ, who is the true bread, gives life to whom he wills; below, 10:10: "I came that they may have life," and so on. He also comes down from heaven; above, 3:13: "no one has ascended into heaven except him who descended from heaven, the Son of Man who is in heaven." Thus, therefore, Christ, the true bread, gives life to the world by reason of his divinity, and comes down from heaven by reason of his human nature. For, as was said above at chapter 3, he is said to have descended from heaven by assuming human nature; Philippians 2:7: "he emptied himself, taking the form of a servant." "They said therefore," and so on. Here the obtaining of the spiritual food is treated, and first the petition for that food itself is set forth; second the exposition is given, at "But Jesus said to them: I am the bread of life," where he shows the manner of obtaining it. It must be known, concerning the first, that the Jews understood the Lord's words carnally; and therefore, because they were in a desire for carnal things, they ask carnal food from Christ; hence they said to him, "Lord, always give us this bread," that would refresh in this way. And the Samaritan woman understood the word about spiritual water carnally, and wishing to be free from need, said: "Lord, give me this water." And although these people understand the Lord's words about food carnally, and ask carnally, nevertheless their petition, understood spiritually, is fitting for us; Matthew 6:11: "give us this day our daily bread": because we cannot live without this bread. Consequently, when he says "But Jesus said to them: I am the bread of life," he shows the manner of obtaining it, showing first what this bread is; second how it is acquired, at "all that the Father gives me will come to me." Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets forth the explanation of the aforesaid bread; second he assigns the reason for the explanation, at "he who comes to me shall not hunger"; third he manifests the necessity of the explanation, at "but I said to you," and so on. Jesus therefore said to them, "I am the bread of life": for, as was said above, the word of wisdom is the special food of the mind, because by it the mind is sustained; Ecclesiasticus 15:3: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding." Now the bread of wisdom is said to be the bread of life, to distinguish it from bodily bread, which is the bread of death, which is fitting only for restoring the defect of mortality, whence it is necessary only in this mortal life. But the bread of divine wisdom is of itself life-giving, and has no contrary death. Likewise, bodily bread does not give life, but only sustains for a time a life already existing; but spiritual bread so gives life that it grants life, for the soul begins to live through this, that it cleaves to the Word of God; Psalm 35:10: "with you is the fountain of life." Since, therefore, every word of wisdom is derived from the only-begotten Word of God, Ecclesiasticus 1:5: "the fountain of wisdom is the only-begotten of God, abiding on high," therefore the Word of God itself is principally called the bread of life; and therefore Christ says, "I am the bread of life." And because the flesh of Christ is united to the Word of God itself, it also has the property of being life-giving, whence his body too, taken sacramentally, is life-giving: for through the mysteries which Christ fulfilled in his flesh, he gives life to the world; and thus the flesh of Christ, on account of the Lord's word, is bread — not of the accustomed life, but of that life which is not unlocked by death. And therefore the flesh of Christ is called bread; Genesis 49:20: "Asher, his bread is fat." It is also signified through the manna, 1 Corinthians 10:1ff. "Manna" is interpreted "what is this?" Because the Jews, seeing it, marveled, saying to one another, "what is this?" But nothing is more marvelous than the Son of God made man, so that it falls to anyone to ask, "what is this?" That is, how is the Son of God the son of man; how do two natures come to make one person of Christ? Isaiah 9:6: "his name shall be called Wonderful." It is also marvelous how Christ is under the sacrament. Consequently, when he says "he who comes to me shall not hunger," he assigns the reason for the explanation, and this from the effect of this bread. For bodily bread, once eaten, does not take away hunger forever, since it is corrupted and fails; and therefore it must be sought again for nourishment; but spiritual bread, giving life of itself, is never corrupted; and therefore a man, having eaten once, never hungers. And therefore he says, "he who comes to me shall not hunger, and he who believes in me shall never thirst." Now, as to what he says — namely, that "he who comes" and "he who believes" shall not hunger nor thirst — these do not differ, according to Augustine, because to come to him and to believe in him are the same thing: for we come to God not by steps of the body, but of the mind, the first of which is faith. To eat and to drink are likewise the same: for by both is signified the eternal satisfaction, where there is no want. Matthew 5:6: "blessed are they who hunger and thirst for justice, for they shall be satisfied": so that the same thing is food sustaining and drink refreshing. Now the reason why temporal things do not take away thirst forever is, first, because they are not taken all at once, but little by little, and as it were with movement, and therefore something always remains to be taken; and on account of this, just as delight and satisfaction arise from what has already been taken, so too desire remains from the taking. The other reason is that they are corrupted, whence a memory remains from the corrupted thing, and desire for them is generated again. Spiritual things, however, are both taken all at once, and are not corrupted nor do they fail; and therefore their satisfaction remains forever. Revelation 7:16: "they shall neither hunger nor thirst." Psalm 15:10: "you shall fill me with joy with your countenance; delights are at your right hand," that is, in spiritual goods, "even to the end." Consequently, when he says "but I said to you," etc., the necessity of the explanation is set forth. For someone might say: we asked for bread; but you do not answer, "I will give it to you," or "I will not"; but rather you say, "I am the bread of life"; and therefore your answer does not seem a good one. But that it is a good answer, the Lord shows, saying, "I said to you that you have also seen me, and have not believed": which is the same as if someone had bread before him, being ignorant of it, and it were said to him, "behold, bread is before you." And therefore he says, "I said to you (I am the living bread) and you have seen me, and have not believed"; that is, you desire bread, and you have it before you; and yet you do not take it, because you do not believe. In this he reproaches them for their unbelief; below, 15:24: "but they have seen, and have hated both me and my Father." Consequently, when he says "all that the Father gives me will come to me," he shows how it is acquired, and first he sets forth the manner of acquiring it; second, the assurance of arrival, at "and him who comes to me I will not cast out"; third he manifests what he says, at "because I came down from heaven," and so on. It must be known, concerning the first, that our very believing comes to us from the gift of God. Ephesians 2:8: "by grace you are saved, and not of yourselves, for it is the gift of God"; Philippians 1:29: "it has been given to you not only to believe in him, but also to suffer for him." Now it is sometimes said that God the Father gives believing men to the Son, as here, "all that the Father gives me will come to me." Sometimes the Son gives to the Father, as that text, 1 Corinthians 15:24: "when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God and the Father." From which we understand that just as the Father, in giving, does not take the kingdom away from himself, so neither does the Son. Now the Father gives to the Son, inasmuch as he makes a man cleave to his Word. 1 Corinthians 1:9: "through whom," namely the Father, "you have been called into the fellowship of his Son." But the Son delivers to the Father, inasmuch as the Word is manifestative of the Father himself. Below, 17:6: "Father, I have manifested your name to men." Thus, therefore, he says, "all that the Father gives me will come to me"; that is, those who believe in me, whom the Father makes cleave to me by his gift. But perhaps someone would say that it is not necessary that anyone make use of the gift of God: for many receive the gift of God who do not use it. How then does he say, "all that the Father gives me will come to me"? To which it must be said that in that giving is understood not only the habit, which is faith and the like, but also the interior instinct toward believing. Whatever, then, one does toward salvation, all of it is from the gift of God. But a question remains: for if all that the Father gives to Christ goes to him, as he himself says, then only those go to God whom the Father gives to him; therefore it ought not to be imputed to those who do not go, since they are not given to him. To which it must be said that it is not imputed to them, if they cannot come to faith without the help of God; but this is imputed to the one who does not come, because he himself provides the impediment that keeps him from coming, turning himself away from salvation, whose way, as far as it is in itself, is open to all. Now the goal of the arrival is set forth when he says "and him who comes to me I will not cast out." For someone might say: we will come to you; but you will not receive us. And therefore he says, excluding this, "him who comes to me" — by the steps of faith and good works — "I will not cast out," in which he gives us to understand that he himself is within: for that is "within" from which one goes out to "without." Let us therefore consider what this interior thing is, and how one is cast out from it. It must be known, then, that since all visible things are said to be, as it were, certain exterior things with respect to spiritual things, the more something is spiritual, the more interior it is. There is, therefore, a twofold interior. One is the deepest, namely the joy of eternal life, which, according to Augustine, is the more inward and sweet secret, without weariness, without the bitterness of evil thoughts, without the interruption of temptations and sorrows; concerning which it is said, Matthew 25:21: "enter into the joy of your lord." And Psalm 30:21: "you shall hide them in the secret of your face"; that is, in the full vision of your essence. And from this interior thing no one shall be cast out. Revelation 3:12: "he who shall overcome, I will make him a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go out no more," because, as is said in Matthew 25:46, "the just shall go into life everlasting." The other interior thing is the rectitude of conscience, which is a spiritual joy; and concerning this it is said, Wisdom 8:16: "entering into my house, I shall rest." And Song of Songs 1:3: "the king has brought me into his storerooms." And from this some are cast out. And therefore what the Lord says, "I will not cast out," can be understood in two ways. In one way, so that those are said to come to him who are given to him by the Father through eternal predestination; and concerning these he says, "him who comes to me," predestined by the Father, "I will not cast out"; Romans 11:2: "God has not cast away his people whom he foreknew." In the other way, because those who go out do not go out as though cast out by Christ, but the cause of their casting-out is on their own part, who, through unbelief and sins, withdraw from the secret place of a right conscience. And thus it is said, "I do not cast out," but they themselves cast themselves out; Jeremiah 23:33: "you are the burden, and I will cast you off, says the Lord." And in this way that man was cast out who had entered the wedding feast not having a wedding garment, as is said in Matthew 22:11ff. Now he assigns the reason for the foregoing, when he says "because I came down from heaven," etc., and first he sets forth the intention of fulfilling the Father's will; second he manifests what the Father's will is, at "this is the will of him who sent me, the Father"; third he shows the final fulfillment of the will, at "and I will raise him up on the last day." Concerning the first it must be known that this text can be read in two ways: in one way according to Augustine, in the other according to Chrysostom. According to Augustine, thus: "him who comes to me I will not cast out," and this because he comes to me who imitates my humility. Matthew 11:28, when the Lord said, "come to me, all you who labor," he consequently adds: "learn from me, for I am meek and humble of heart." Now the true meekness of the Son of God consists in this, that he subjected his own will to the will of the Father. And therefore he says "I will not cast out," because "I came down from heaven not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me." On this account the soul went out from God, because it was proud; and therefore it is necessary to return by humility, coming to Christ through the imitation of his humility, which consists in this, that he does not do his own will alone, but the will of God the Father. It must be known, moreover, that in Christ there was a twofold will. One according to the human nature, which is proper to him both by nature and by the will of the Father; the other according to the divine nature, which is the same as the will of the Father. His own will, therefore, namely the human will, he ordered under the divine will, because he himself showed his obedience under the effect of the paternal will, wishing to fulfill the Father's will. Psalm 39:9: "that I should do your will, O my God, I have desired it." We ask that this will be done in us when we say, Matthew 6:10: "your will be done." Those, therefore, are not cast out who do not do their own will, but the will of God. For the Devil, wishing to do his own will, which is a mark of pride, was cast out of heaven, and the first man out of Paradise. According to Chrysostom, however, thus: I do not cast out him who comes to me because I came for this, to fulfill the Father's will concerning the salvation of men. If, therefore, I was incarnated for the salvation of men, how ought I to cast them out? And this is what he says: "therefore I do not cast out, because I came down from heaven not to do my own will," that is, the human will, so as to acquire something proper to myself, "but the will of him who sent me," the Father, "who wills all men to be saved," as is said in 1 Timothy 2:4. And therefore, as far as it is from me, I cast no one out. Romans 5:10: "for if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, shall we be saved by his life." Now what the Father's will is, he explains first, when he says "for this is the will of him who sent me, the Father," etc.; second he assigns the reason, at "for this is the will of my Father," etc. He said, then: I will not cast out those who come to me, because I assumed flesh in order to do the Father's will. Now the will of him who sent me, the Father, is this: namely, that I should not cast out; and therefore I will not cast out. 1 Thessalonians 4:3: "this is the will of God, your sanctification." And therefore he says "that of all that he has given me, I should lose nothing of it"; that is, that I should lose nothing, until it comes to the future resurrection, in which some will be lost — not, however, of those who were given to him through eternal predestination, but the impious; Psalm 1:6: "the way of the impious shall perish." But those who are preserved up to that time will not be lost. By this, however, that he says "I will not lose," it is not to be understood that he has need of them, or that it would be a detriment to him if they perish. But he says this on account of his affection for their salvation, and their good, which he reckons as his own. But against this is what is said below, chapter 17:12: "none of them," namely of those whom you gave me, "has perished, except the son of perdition." Therefore some of those who were given to him through eternal predestination are lost. This, then — what he says, "I will not lose of it" — is not true. But it must be said that it is from among those who are given to him through present righteousness that some are lost; not, however, from among those given through eternal predestination. Now he sets forth the reason for the divine will when he says "for this is the will of my Father," etc. The reason why the Father wills that I should not lose anything of what he has given me is that it is the Father's will to give life spiritually to men, since he himself is the fountain of life. And because he is eternal, as far as concerns himself, it is his will that everyone who comes to me should have eternal life. And this is what he says: "this is the will of the Father who sent me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in him should have eternal life." But it must be noted that above, 5:24, he said: "he who sees the Son, and believes him who sent me, has eternal life," whereas here he says "he who believes in him" — so as to give us to understand the same divinity of the Father and the Son, the vision of which through essence is our ultimate end, and the object of faith. But what he says, "sees," is not to be understood of the vision through essence, which faith precedes, but of the bodily vision of Christ, which leads to faith. And therefore he says pointedly, "he who sees the Son, and believes in him"; above, 5:24: "he who believes in him (...) is not judged, but shall pass from death to life"; below, 20:31: "but these things are written, that you may believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that believing, you may have life in his name." This will of the Father, moreover, will likewise be fulfilled, and therefore he adds, "and I will raise him up on the last day": because he thus wills that not only in soul, but also in body, he should have eternal life (Daniel 12:2: "of those who sleep in the dust of the earth, some shall awake to life everlasting, and others to everlasting reproach") just as Christ also rose again; Romans 6:9: "Christ rising from the dead dies now no more," and so on.”

“Then said they unto him,.... At least some of them: Lord, evermore give us this bread; that is so divine and heavenly, and has such a quickening virtue in it: these words are said by them either seriously, and to be understood of bread for their bodies, of which they imagined Christ was speaking; and so sprung from ignorance of his sense; and from sensuality in them who followed him for the loaves; and from a covetous disposition, being desirous of being supplied with such excellent food without charge; and from idleness, to save labour and pains in working for it; and from a vain desire of the continuance of this earthly life, being willing to live for ever, and therefore would have this bread evermore; and from a gross opinion of plenty and delicacy of corporeal food in the times of the Messiah; See Gill on Luk 14:15; or else these words are spoken ironically, by way of derision, as if there was no such bread; and if there was, that Christ could not give it. However, the words may be improved, when considered as a petition coming from, and suitable to, a sensible and enlightened soul: for such who are sensible of their famishing condition by nature, and of their need of Christ, the bread of life, and whose taste is changed, and have tasted how good this bread is, will earnestly desire always to be supplied with it, and to live upon it; for nothing is more grateful to them, and more nourishing and satisfying to their souls; they are never weary of it; it is always new and delightful to them, and they always stand in need of it, and wait in the use of means and ordinances for it; and this has always an abiding, lasting, virtue in it, to feed their souls, and nourish them up to everlasting life. Josephus (i) says of the "manna", which was a type of this bread, that there was such a divine quality in it, that whoever tasted of it needed nothing else: and the Jews also say (k), that "in the manna were all kinds of tastes, and everyone of the Israelites tasted all that he desired; for so it is written in Deu 2:7, "these forty years the Lord thy God hath been with thee, thou hast lacked nothing", or "not wanted anything"; what is anything? when he desired to eat anything, and said with his mouth, O that I had fat to eat, immediately there was in his mouth the taste of fat.--Young men tasted the taste of bread, old men the taste of honey, and children the taste of oil.'' Yea, they say (l), "whoever desired flesh, he tasted it, and whoever desired fish, he tasted it, and whoever desired fowl, chicken, pheasant, or pea hen, so he tasted whatever he desired.'' And to this agrees what is said in the apocryphal book of Wisdom, 16:20,21: "Thou feddest thine own people with angels' food, and didst send them from heaven bread, prepared without their labour, able to content every man's delight, and agreeing to every taste; for thy sustenance (or manna) declared thy sweetness unto thy children, and serving to the appetite of the eater, tempered itself to every man's liking.'' All which must be understood of that pleasure, satisfaction, and contentment which they had in it; for it was a very uncommon case to eat it, and live upon it as their common food for forty years together: and no doubt but that there was something remarkable in suiting it to their appetites, or giving them appetites suitable to that, to feed upon it, and relish it for so long a time: twice indeed in that length of time we read they complained of it, saying, that they had nothing but this manna before their eyes, and their souls loathed it as light bread, Num 11:6, and lusted after the flesh, and the fish they had eaten in Egypt. And so it is with some professors of Christ, and his Gospel; for there is a mixed multitude among them, as there was among the Israelites, who disrelish the preaching of Christ, and the truths of the Gospel respecting his person, blood, and righteousness, and salvation by him; they cannot bear to have these things frequently inculcated and insisted upon; their souls are ready to loath them as light bread, and want to have something else set before them, more suitable to their carnal appetites: but to such who are true believers in Christ, who have tasted that the Lord is gracious, Christ, the true manna, and bread of God, is all things to them; nor do they desire any other: they taste everything that is delightful, and find everything that is nourishing in him. (i) Antiqu. l. 3. c. 1. sect. 6. (k) Shemot Rabba, sect. 25. fol. 108. 4. (l) Bemidbar Rabba, sect. 7. fol. 188. 1.”

“The question of the Jews having been posed, here the response of Christ is set forth. And first he shows the origin of the spiritual food; second he proves it, at the words "For the bread that comes down from heaven is the true bread." Concerning the first, it must be known that the Jews had proposed two things to Christ concerning the origin of the bodily food which their fathers had: namely, the giver, who was Moses, and the place, because it was from heaven; and so the Lord, removing these two things concerning the origin of the spiritual food, asserts that the giver of the spiritual food is different, and the place is different. Hence he says, removing the aforesaid points, "Amen, amen I say to you, Moses did not give you bread from heaven." It is another who gives, because it is my Father — not bodily bread, but the true bread from heaven. But against this: was not the bread which the fathers had in the desert truly bread? I answer: if "true" is taken as it is divided against the false, then that bread was true, for the miracle of the manna was not false; but if "true" is taken as truth is divided against figure, then that bread was not true, but a figure of the spiritual bread, namely of our Lord Jesus Christ, which the manna itself signified, as the Apostle says, 1 Corinthians 10:3: "all ate the same spiritual food." Likewise, against what he says — "he did not give you bread from heaven" — is what is said in Psalm 77:24: "he gave them the bread of heaven." I answer: heaven is taken in three ways. Sometimes for the air; Matthew 13:4: "the birds of the air ate it"; and in Psalm 17:14: "the Lord thundered from heaven." Sometimes for the starry heaven, according to that verse, Psalm 113:16: "the heaven of heaven is the Lord's"; and Matthew 24:29: "the stars will fall from heaven." Sometimes, indeed, for the spiritual goods themselves; Matthew 5:12: "rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven." The manna, therefore, was from heaven not the starry or spiritual heaven, but the aerial. Or it is said to be from heaven inasmuch as it was a figure of the true heavenly bread, our Lord Jesus Christ. Consequently, when he says "for the true bread is that which comes down from heaven and gives life to the world," he proves that it is from heaven also by its effect. For the true heaven is of a spiritual nature, to which life belongs of itself, and therefore it gives life of itself; below: "it is the spirit that gives life." Now God himself is the author of life. From this, then, it is known that this spiritual bread is from heaven, since it produces its proper effect, if it gives life. For that bodily bread did not give life, since all who ate the manna died; but this bread gives life, and therefore he says it is "the true bread," and not figural, "which comes down from heaven." And this is evident, because "it gives life to the world." For Christ, who is the true bread, gives life to whom he wills; below, 10:10: "I came that they may have life," and so on. He also comes down from heaven; above, 3:13: "no one has ascended into heaven except him who descended from heaven, the Son of Man who is in heaven." Thus, therefore, Christ, the true bread, gives life to the world by reason of his divinity, and comes down from heaven by reason of his human nature. For, as was said above at chapter 3, he is said to have descended from heaven by assuming human nature; Philippians 2:7: "he emptied himself, taking the form of a servant." "They said therefore," and so on. Here the obtaining of the spiritual food is treated, and first the petition for that food itself is set forth; second the exposition is given, at "But Jesus said to them: I am the bread of life," where he shows the manner of obtaining it. It must be known, concerning the first, that the Jews understood the Lord's words carnally; and therefore, because they were in a desire for carnal things, they ask carnal food from Christ; hence they said to him, "Lord, always give us this bread," that would refresh in this way. And the Samaritan woman understood the word about spiritual water carnally, and wishing to be free from need, said: "Lord, give me this water." And although these people understand the Lord's words about food carnally, and ask carnally, nevertheless their petition, understood spiritually, is fitting for us; Matthew 6:11: "give us this day our daily bread": because we cannot live without this bread. Consequently, when he says "But Jesus said to them: I am the bread of life," he shows the manner of obtaining it, showing first what this bread is; second how it is acquired, at "all that the Father gives me will come to me." Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets forth the explanation of the aforesaid bread; second he assigns the reason for the explanation, at "he who comes to me shall not hunger"; third he manifests the necessity of the explanation, at "but I said to you," and so on. Jesus therefore said to them, "I am the bread of life": for, as was said above, the word of wisdom is the special food of the mind, because by it the mind is sustained; Ecclesiasticus 15:3: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding." Now the bread of wisdom is said to be the bread of life, to distinguish it from bodily bread, which is the bread of death, which is fitting only for restoring the defect of mortality, whence it is necessary only in this mortal life. But the bread of divine wisdom is of itself life-giving, and has no contrary death. Likewise, bodily bread does not give life, but only sustains for a time a life already existing; but spiritual bread so gives life that it grants life, for the soul begins to live through this, that it cleaves to the Word of God; Psalm 35:10: "with you is the fountain of life." Since, therefore, every word of wisdom is derived from the only-begotten Word of God, Ecclesiasticus 1:5: "the fountain of wisdom is the only-begotten of God, abiding on high," therefore the Word of God itself is principally called the bread of life; and therefore Christ says, "I am the bread of life." And because the flesh of Christ is united to the Word of God itself, it also has the property of being life-giving, whence his body too, taken sacramentally, is life-giving: for through the mysteries which Christ fulfilled in his flesh, he gives life to the world; and thus the flesh of Christ, on account of the Lord's word, is bread — not of the accustomed life, but of that life which is not unlocked by death. And therefore the flesh of Christ is called bread; Genesis 49:20: "Asher, his bread is fat." It is also signified through the manna, 1 Corinthians 10:1ff. "Manna" is interpreted "what is this?" Because the Jews, seeing it, marveled, saying to one another, "what is this?" But nothing is more marvelous than the Son of God made man, so that it falls to anyone to ask, "what is this?" That is, how is the Son of God the son of man; how do two natures come to make one person of Christ? Isaiah 9:6: "his name shall be called Wonderful." It is also marvelous how Christ is under the sacrament. Consequently, when he says "he who comes to me shall not hunger," he assigns the reason for the explanation, and this from the effect of this bread. For bodily bread, once eaten, does not take away hunger forever, since it is corrupted and fails; and therefore it must be sought again for nourishment; but spiritual bread, giving life of itself, is never corrupted; and therefore a man, having eaten once, never hungers. And therefore he says, "he who comes to me shall not hunger, and he who believes in me shall never thirst." Now, as to what he says — namely, that "he who comes" and "he who believes" shall not hunger nor thirst — these do not differ, according to Augustine, because to come to him and to believe in him are the same thing: for we come to God not by steps of the body, but of the mind, the first of which is faith. To eat and to drink are likewise the same: for by both is signified the eternal satisfaction, where there is no want. Matthew 5:6: "blessed are they who hunger and thirst for justice, for they shall be satisfied": so that the same thing is food sustaining and drink refreshing. Now the reason why temporal things do not take away thirst forever is, first, because they are not taken all at once, but little by little, and as it were with movement, and therefore something always remains to be taken; and on account of this, just as delight and satisfaction arise from what has already been taken, so too desire remains from the taking. The other reason is that they are corrupted, whence a memory remains from the corrupted thing, and desire for them is generated again. Spiritual things, however, are both taken all at once, and are not corrupted nor do they fail; and therefore their satisfaction remains forever. Revelation 7:16: "they shall neither hunger nor thirst." Psalm 15:10: "you shall fill me with joy with your countenance; delights are at your right hand," that is, in spiritual goods, "even to the end." Consequently, when he says "but I said to you," etc., the necessity of the explanation is set forth. For someone might say: we asked for bread; but you do not answer, "I will give it to you," or "I will not"; but rather you say, "I am the bread of life"; and therefore your answer does not seem a good one. But that it is a good answer, the Lord shows, saying, "I said to you that you have also seen me, and have not believed": which is the same as if someone had bread before him, being ignorant of it, and it were said to him, "behold, bread is before you." And therefore he says, "I said to you (I am the living bread) and you have seen me, and have not believed"; that is, you desire bread, and you have it before you; and yet you do not take it, because you do not believe. In this he reproaches them for their unbelief; below, 15:24: "but they have seen, and have hated both me and my Father." Consequently, when he says "all that the Father gives me will come to me," he shows how it is acquired, and first he sets forth the manner of acquiring it; second, the assurance of arrival, at "and him who comes to me I will not cast out"; third he manifests what he says, at "because I came down from heaven," and so on. It must be known, concerning the first, that our very believing comes to us from the gift of God. Ephesians 2:8: "by grace you are saved, and not of yourselves, for it is the gift of God"; Philippians 1:29: "it has been given to you not only to believe in him, but also to suffer for him." Now it is sometimes said that God the Father gives believing men to the Son, as here, "all that the Father gives me will come to me." Sometimes the Son gives to the Father, as that text, 1 Corinthians 15:24: "when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God and the Father." From which we understand that just as the Father, in giving, does not take the kingdom away from himself, so neither does the Son. Now the Father gives to the Son, inasmuch as he makes a man cleave to his Word. 1 Corinthians 1:9: "through whom," namely the Father, "you have been called into the fellowship of his Son." But the Son delivers to the Father, inasmuch as the Word is manifestative of the Father himself. Below, 17:6: "Father, I have manifested your name to men." Thus, therefore, he says, "all that the Father gives me will come to me"; that is, those who believe in me, whom the Father makes cleave to me by his gift. But perhaps someone would say that it is not necessary that anyone make use of the gift of God: for many receive the gift of God who do not use it. How then does he say, "all that the Father gives me will come to me"? To which it must be said that in that giving is understood not only the habit, which is faith and the like, but also the interior instinct toward believing. Whatever, then, one does toward salvation, all of it is from the gift of God. But a question remains: for if all that the Father gives to Christ goes to him, as he himself says, then only those go to God whom the Father gives to him; therefore it ought not to be imputed to those who do not go, since they are not given to him. To which it must be said that it is not imputed to them, if they cannot come to faith without the help of God; but this is imputed to the one who does not come, because he himself provides the impediment that keeps him from coming, turning himself away from salvation, whose way, as far as it is in itself, is open to all. Now the goal of the arrival is set forth when he says "and him who comes to me I will not cast out." For someone might say: we will come to you; but you will not receive us. And therefore he says, excluding this, "him who comes to me" — by the steps of faith and good works — "I will not cast out," in which he gives us to understand that he himself is within: for that is "within" from which one goes out to "without." Let us therefore consider what this interior thing is, and how one is cast out from it. It must be known, then, that since all visible things are said to be, as it were, certain exterior things with respect to spiritual things, the more something is spiritual, the more interior it is. There is, therefore, a twofold interior. One is the deepest, namely the joy of eternal life, which, according to Augustine, is the more inward and sweet secret, without weariness, without the bitterness of evil thoughts, without the interruption of temptations and sorrows; concerning which it is said, Matthew 25:21: "enter into the joy of your lord." And Psalm 30:21: "you shall hide them in the secret of your face"; that is, in the full vision of your essence. And from this interior thing no one shall be cast out. Revelation 3:12: "he who shall overcome, I will make him a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go out no more," because, as is said in Matthew 25:46, "the just shall go into life everlasting." The other interior thing is the rectitude of conscience, which is a spiritual joy; and concerning this it is said, Wisdom 8:16: "entering into my house, I shall rest." And Song of Songs 1:3: "the king has brought me into his storerooms." And from this some are cast out. And therefore what the Lord says, "I will not cast out," can be understood in two ways. In one way, so that those are said to come to him who are given to him by the Father through eternal predestination; and concerning these he says, "him who comes to me," predestined by the Father, "I will not cast out"; Romans 11:2: "God has not cast away his people whom he foreknew." In the other way, because those who go out do not go out as though cast out by Christ, but the cause of their casting-out is on their own part, who, through unbelief and sins, withdraw from the secret place of a right conscience. And thus it is said, "I do not cast out," but they themselves cast themselves out; Jeremiah 23:33: "you are the burden, and I will cast you off, says the Lord." And in this way that man was cast out who had entered the wedding feast not having a wedding garment, as is said in Matthew 22:11ff. Now he assigns the reason for the foregoing, when he says "because I came down from heaven," etc., and first he sets forth the intention of fulfilling the Father's will; second he manifests what the Father's will is, at "this is the will of him who sent me, the Father"; third he shows the final fulfillment of the will, at "and I will raise him up on the last day." Concerning the first it must be known that this text can be read in two ways: in one way according to Augustine, in the other according to Chrysostom. According to Augustine, thus: "him who comes to me I will not cast out," and this because he comes to me who imitates my humility. Matthew 11:28, when the Lord said, "come to me, all you who labor," he consequently adds: "learn from me, for I am meek and humble of heart." Now the true meekness of the Son of God consists in this, that he subjected his own will to the will of the Father. And therefore he says "I will not cast out," because "I came down from heaven not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me." On this account the soul went out from God, because it was proud; and therefore it is necessary to return by humility, coming to Christ through the imitation of his humility, which consists in this, that he does not do his own will alone, but the will of God the Father. It must be known, moreover, that in Christ there was a twofold will. One according to the human nature, which is proper to him both by nature and by the will of the Father; the other according to the divine nature, which is the same as the will of the Father. His own will, therefore, namely the human will, he ordered under the divine will, because he himself showed his obedience under the effect of the paternal will, wishing to fulfill the Father's will. Psalm 39:9: "that I should do your will, O my God, I have desired it." We ask that this will be done in us when we say, Matthew 6:10: "your will be done." Those, therefore, are not cast out who do not do their own will, but the will of God. For the Devil, wishing to do his own will, which is a mark of pride, was cast out of heaven, and the first man out of Paradise. According to Chrysostom, however, thus: I do not cast out him who comes to me because I came for this, to fulfill the Father's will concerning the salvation of men. If, therefore, I was incarnated for the salvation of men, how ought I to cast them out? And this is what he says: "therefore I do not cast out, because I came down from heaven not to do my own will," that is, the human will, so as to acquire something proper to myself, "but the will of him who sent me," the Father, "who wills all men to be saved," as is said in 1 Timothy 2:4. And therefore, as far as it is from me, I cast no one out. Romans 5:10: "for if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, shall we be saved by his life." Now what the Father's will is, he explains first, when he says "for this is the will of him who sent me, the Father," etc.; second he assigns the reason, at "for this is the will of my Father," etc. He said, then: I will not cast out those who come to me, because I assumed flesh in order to do the Father's will. Now the will of him who sent me, the Father, is this: namely, that I should not cast out; and therefore I will not cast out. 1 Thessalonians 4:3: "this is the will of God, your sanctification." And therefore he says "that of all that he has given me, I should lose nothing of it"; that is, that I should lose nothing, until it comes to the future resurrection, in which some will be lost — not, however, of those who were given to him through eternal predestination, but the impious; Psalm 1:6: "the way of the impious shall perish." But those who are preserved up to that time will not be lost. By this, however, that he says "I will not lose," it is not to be understood that he has need of them, or that it would be a detriment to him if they perish. But he says this on account of his affection for their salvation, and their good, which he reckons as his own. But against this is what is said below, chapter 17:12: "none of them," namely of those whom you gave me, "has perished, except the son of perdition." Therefore some of those who were given to him through eternal predestination are lost. This, then — what he says, "I will not lose of it" — is not true. But it must be said that it is from among those who are given to him through present righteousness that some are lost; not, however, from among those given through eternal predestination. Now he sets forth the reason for the divine will when he says "for this is the will of my Father," etc. The reason why the Father wills that I should not lose anything of what he has given me is that it is the Father's will to give life spiritually to men, since he himself is the fountain of life. And because he is eternal, as far as concerns himself, it is his will that everyone who comes to me should have eternal life. And this is what he says: "this is the will of the Father who sent me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in him should have eternal life." But it must be noted that above, 5:24, he said: "he who sees the Son, and believes him who sent me, has eternal life," whereas here he says "he who believes in him" — so as to give us to understand the same divinity of the Father and the Son, the vision of which through essence is our ultimate end, and the object of faith. But what he says, "sees," is not to be understood of the vision through essence, which faith precedes, but of the bodily vision of Christ, which leads to faith. And therefore he says pointedly, "he who sees the Son, and believes in him"; above, 5:24: "he who believes in him (...) is not judged, but shall pass from death to life"; below, 20:31: "but these things are written, that you may believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that believing, you may have life in his name." This will of the Father, moreover, will likewise be fulfilled, and therefore he adds, "and I will raise him up on the last day": because he thus wills that not only in soul, but also in body, he should have eternal life (Daniel 12:2: "of those who sleep in the dust of the earth, some shall awake to life everlasting, and others to everlasting reproach") just as Christ also rose again; Romans 6:9: "Christ rising from the dead dies now no more," and so on.”

“And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life,.... Christ is so called, because he gives life to dead sinners: men in a state of nature are dead in trespasses and sins; and whatever they feed upon tends to death; Christ, the true bread, only gives life, which is conveyed by the word, and made effectual by the Spirit: and because he supports and maintains the life he gives; it is not in the power of a believer to support the spiritual life he has; nor can he live on anything short of Christ; and there is enough in Christ for him to live upon: and because he quickens, and makes the saints lively in the exercise of grace, and discharge of duty, and renews their spiritual strength, and secures for them eternal life. He that cometh to me shall never hunger; not corporeally to hear him preach, or preached, or merely to his ordinances, to baptism, or the Lord's table; but so as to believe in him, feed, and live upon him, as the next clause explains it: and he that believeth on me shall never thirst; and which is owing, not to the power and will of man, but to divine teachings, and the powerful drawings of the efficacious grace of God; see Joh 6:44. Now of such it is said, that they shall never hunger and thirst; which is true of them in this life, though not to be understood as there were no sinful desires in them; much less, that there are no spiritual hungerings and thirstings after they are come to Christ; but that they shall not desire any other food but Christ; they shall be satisfied with him; nor shall they hereafter be in a starving and famishing condition, or want any good thing: and in the other world there will be no desires after that which is sinful, nor indeed after outward ordinances, in order to enjoy communion with God in them, as now, for they will then be needless; nor shall they have any uneasy desires after Christ, and his grace, and the enjoyment of him, since he will be all in all to them.”

“Lord, evermore give us this bread - Either meaning, "Let the miracle of the manna be renewed, and continue among us for ever:" or, "Let that bread of which thou hast spoken, become our constant nourishment." The Jews expected that, when the Messiah should come, he would give them all manner of delicacies, and, among the rest, manna, wine, and spicy oil. From the following extract, we may see where Mohammed got his Paradise. "Many affirm, says Rab. Mayemon, that the hope of Israel is this: That the Messiah shall come and raise the dead; and they shall be gathered together in the garden of Eden, and shall eat and drink and satiate themselves all the days of the world. There the houses shall be all builded with precious stones; the beds shall be made of silk; and the rivers shall flow with wine and spicy oil. He made manna to descend for them, in which was all manner of tastes; and every Israelite found in it what his palate was chiefly pleased with. If he desired fat in it, he had it. In it, the young man tasted bread, the old man honey, and the children oil. So shall it be in the world to come, (i.e. the days of the Messiah.) He shall give Israel peace, and they shall sit down in the garden of Eden, and all nations shall behold their condition; as it is said, My servants shall eat, but ye shall be hungry, etc., Isa 65:13." See Lightfoot.”

“The question of the Jews having been posed, here the response of Christ is set forth. And first he shows the origin of the spiritual food; second he proves it, at the words "For the bread that comes down from heaven is the true bread." Concerning the first, it must be known that the Jews had proposed two things to Christ concerning the origin of the bodily food which their fathers had: namely, the giver, who was Moses, and the place, because it was from heaven; and so the Lord, removing these two things concerning the origin of the spiritual food, asserts that the giver of the spiritual food is different, and the place is different. Hence he says, removing the aforesaid points, "Amen, amen I say to you, Moses did not give you bread from heaven." It is another who gives, because it is my Father — not bodily bread, but the true bread from heaven. But against this: was not the bread which the fathers had in the desert truly bread? I answer: if "true" is taken as it is divided against the false, then that bread was true, for the miracle of the manna was not false; but if "true" is taken as truth is divided against figure, then that bread was not true, but a figure of the spiritual bread, namely of our Lord Jesus Christ, which the manna itself signified, as the Apostle says, 1 Corinthians 10:3: "all ate the same spiritual food." Likewise, against what he says — "he did not give you bread from heaven" — is what is said in Psalm 77:24: "he gave them the bread of heaven." I answer: heaven is taken in three ways. Sometimes for the air; Matthew 13:4: "the birds of the air ate it"; and in Psalm 17:14: "the Lord thundered from heaven." Sometimes for the starry heaven, according to that verse, Psalm 113:16: "the heaven of heaven is the Lord's"; and Matthew 24:29: "the stars will fall from heaven." Sometimes, indeed, for the spiritual goods themselves; Matthew 5:12: "rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven." The manna, therefore, was from heaven not the starry or spiritual heaven, but the aerial. Or it is said to be from heaven inasmuch as it was a figure of the true heavenly bread, our Lord Jesus Christ. Consequently, when he says "for the true bread is that which comes down from heaven and gives life to the world," he proves that it is from heaven also by its effect. For the true heaven is of a spiritual nature, to which life belongs of itself, and therefore it gives life of itself; below: "it is the spirit that gives life." Now God himself is the author of life. From this, then, it is known that this spiritual bread is from heaven, since it produces its proper effect, if it gives life. For that bodily bread did not give life, since all who ate the manna died; but this bread gives life, and therefore he says it is "the true bread," and not figural, "which comes down from heaven." And this is evident, because "it gives life to the world." For Christ, who is the true bread, gives life to whom he wills; below, 10:10: "I came that they may have life," and so on. He also comes down from heaven; above, 3:13: "no one has ascended into heaven except him who descended from heaven, the Son of Man who is in heaven." Thus, therefore, Christ, the true bread, gives life to the world by reason of his divinity, and comes down from heaven by reason of his human nature. For, as was said above at chapter 3, he is said to have descended from heaven by assuming human nature; Philippians 2:7: "he emptied himself, taking the form of a servant." "They said therefore," and so on. Here the obtaining of the spiritual food is treated, and first the petition for that food itself is set forth; second the exposition is given, at "But Jesus said to them: I am the bread of life," where he shows the manner of obtaining it. It must be known, concerning the first, that the Jews understood the Lord's words carnally; and therefore, because they were in a desire for carnal things, they ask carnal food from Christ; hence they said to him, "Lord, always give us this bread," that would refresh in this way. And the Samaritan woman understood the word about spiritual water carnally, and wishing to be free from need, said: "Lord, give me this water." And although these people understand the Lord's words about food carnally, and ask carnally, nevertheless their petition, understood spiritually, is fitting for us; Matthew 6:11: "give us this day our daily bread": because we cannot live without this bread. Consequently, when he says "But Jesus said to them: I am the bread of life," he shows the manner of obtaining it, showing first what this bread is; second how it is acquired, at "all that the Father gives me will come to me." Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets forth the explanation of the aforesaid bread; second he assigns the reason for the explanation, at "he who comes to me shall not hunger"; third he manifests the necessity of the explanation, at "but I said to you," and so on. Jesus therefore said to them, "I am the bread of life": for, as was said above, the word of wisdom is the special food of the mind, because by it the mind is sustained; Ecclesiasticus 15:3: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding." Now the bread of wisdom is said to be the bread of life, to distinguish it from bodily bread, which is the bread of death, which is fitting only for restoring the defect of mortality, whence it is necessary only in this mortal life. But the bread of divine wisdom is of itself life-giving, and has no contrary death. Likewise, bodily bread does not give life, but only sustains for a time a life already existing; but spiritual bread so gives life that it grants life, for the soul begins to live through this, that it cleaves to the Word of God; Psalm 35:10: "with you is the fountain of life." Since, therefore, every word of wisdom is derived from the only-begotten Word of God, Ecclesiasticus 1:5: "the fountain of wisdom is the only-begotten of God, abiding on high," therefore the Word of God itself is principally called the bread of life; and therefore Christ says, "I am the bread of life." And because the flesh of Christ is united to the Word of God itself, it also has the property of being life-giving, whence his body too, taken sacramentally, is life-giving: for through the mysteries which Christ fulfilled in his flesh, he gives life to the world; and thus the flesh of Christ, on account of the Lord's word, is bread — not of the accustomed life, but of that life which is not unlocked by death. And therefore the flesh of Christ is called bread; Genesis 49:20: "Asher, his bread is fat." It is also signified through the manna, 1 Corinthians 10:1ff. "Manna" is interpreted "what is this?" Because the Jews, seeing it, marveled, saying to one another, "what is this?" But nothing is more marvelous than the Son of God made man, so that it falls to anyone to ask, "what is this?" That is, how is the Son of God the son of man; how do two natures come to make one person of Christ? Isaiah 9:6: "his name shall be called Wonderful." It is also marvelous how Christ is under the sacrament. Consequently, when he says "he who comes to me shall not hunger," he assigns the reason for the explanation, and this from the effect of this bread. For bodily bread, once eaten, does not take away hunger forever, since it is corrupted and fails; and therefore it must be sought again for nourishment; but spiritual bread, giving life of itself, is never corrupted; and therefore a man, having eaten once, never hungers. And therefore he says, "he who comes to me shall not hunger, and he who believes in me shall never thirst." Now, as to what he says — namely, that "he who comes" and "he who believes" shall not hunger nor thirst — these do not differ, according to Augustine, because to come to him and to believe in him are the same thing: for we come to God not by steps of the body, but of the mind, the first of which is faith. To eat and to drink are likewise the same: for by both is signified the eternal satisfaction, where there is no want. Matthew 5:6: "blessed are they who hunger and thirst for justice, for they shall be satisfied": so that the same thing is food sustaining and drink refreshing. Now the reason why temporal things do not take away thirst forever is, first, because they are not taken all at once, but little by little, and as it were with movement, and therefore something always remains to be taken; and on account of this, just as delight and satisfaction arise from what has already been taken, so too desire remains from the taking. The other reason is that they are corrupted, whence a memory remains from the corrupted thing, and desire for them is generated again. Spiritual things, however, are both taken all at once, and are not corrupted nor do they fail; and therefore their satisfaction remains forever. Revelation 7:16: "they shall neither hunger nor thirst." Psalm 15:10: "you shall fill me with joy with your countenance; delights are at your right hand," that is, in spiritual goods, "even to the end." Consequently, when he says "but I said to you," etc., the necessity of the explanation is set forth. For someone might say: we asked for bread; but you do not answer, "I will give it to you," or "I will not"; but rather you say, "I am the bread of life"; and therefore your answer does not seem a good one. But that it is a good answer, the Lord shows, saying, "I said to you that you have also seen me, and have not believed": which is the same as if someone had bread before him, being ignorant of it, and it were said to him, "behold, bread is before you." And therefore he says, "I said to you (I am the living bread) and you have seen me, and have not believed"; that is, you desire bread, and you have it before you; and yet you do not take it, because you do not believe. In this he reproaches them for their unbelief; below, 15:24: "but they have seen, and have hated both me and my Father." Consequently, when he says "all that the Father gives me will come to me," he shows how it is acquired, and first he sets forth the manner of acquiring it; second, the assurance of arrival, at "and him who comes to me I will not cast out"; third he manifests what he says, at "because I came down from heaven," and so on. It must be known, concerning the first, that our very believing comes to us from the gift of God. Ephesians 2:8: "by grace you are saved, and not of yourselves, for it is the gift of God"; Philippians 1:29: "it has been given to you not only to believe in him, but also to suffer for him." Now it is sometimes said that God the Father gives believing men to the Son, as here, "all that the Father gives me will come to me." Sometimes the Son gives to the Father, as that text, 1 Corinthians 15:24: "when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God and the Father." From which we understand that just as the Father, in giving, does not take the kingdom away from himself, so neither does the Son. Now the Father gives to the Son, inasmuch as he makes a man cleave to his Word. 1 Corinthians 1:9: "through whom," namely the Father, "you have been called into the fellowship of his Son." But the Son delivers to the Father, inasmuch as the Word is manifestative of the Father himself. Below, 17:6: "Father, I have manifested your name to men." Thus, therefore, he says, "all that the Father gives me will come to me"; that is, those who believe in me, whom the Father makes cleave to me by his gift. But perhaps someone would say that it is not necessary that anyone make use of the gift of God: for many receive the gift of God who do not use it. How then does he say, "all that the Father gives me will come to me"? To which it must be said that in that giving is understood not only the habit, which is faith and the like, but also the interior instinct toward believing. Whatever, then, one does toward salvation, all of it is from the gift of God. But a question remains: for if all that the Father gives to Christ goes to him, as he himself says, then only those go to God whom the Father gives to him; therefore it ought not to be imputed to those who do not go, since they are not given to him. To which it must be said that it is not imputed to them, if they cannot come to faith without the help of God; but this is imputed to the one who does not come, because he himself provides the impediment that keeps him from coming, turning himself away from salvation, whose way, as far as it is in itself, is open to all. Now the goal of the arrival is set forth when he says "and him who comes to me I will not cast out." For someone might say: we will come to you; but you will not receive us. And therefore he says, excluding this, "him who comes to me" — by the steps of faith and good works — "I will not cast out," in which he gives us to understand that he himself is within: for that is "within" from which one goes out to "without." Let us therefore consider what this interior thing is, and how one is cast out from it. It must be known, then, that since all visible things are said to be, as it were, certain exterior things with respect to spiritual things, the more something is spiritual, the more interior it is. There is, therefore, a twofold interior. One is the deepest, namely the joy of eternal life, which, according to Augustine, is the more inward and sweet secret, without weariness, without the bitterness of evil thoughts, without the interruption of temptations and sorrows; concerning which it is said, Matthew 25:21: "enter into the joy of your lord." And Psalm 30:21: "you shall hide them in the secret of your face"; that is, in the full vision of your essence. And from this interior thing no one shall be cast out. Revelation 3:12: "he who shall overcome, I will make him a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go out no more," because, as is said in Matthew 25:46, "the just shall go into life everlasting." The other interior thing is the rectitude of conscience, which is a spiritual joy; and concerning this it is said, Wisdom 8:16: "entering into my house, I shall rest." And Song of Songs 1:3: "the king has brought me into his storerooms." And from this some are cast out. And therefore what the Lord says, "I will not cast out," can be understood in two ways. In one way, so that those are said to come to him who are given to him by the Father through eternal predestination; and concerning these he says, "him who comes to me," predestined by the Father, "I will not cast out"; Romans 11:2: "God has not cast away his people whom he foreknew." In the other way, because those who go out do not go out as though cast out by Christ, but the cause of their casting-out is on their own part, who, through unbelief and sins, withdraw from the secret place of a right conscience. And thus it is said, "I do not cast out," but they themselves cast themselves out; Jeremiah 23:33: "you are the burden, and I will cast you off, says the Lord." And in this way that man was cast out who had entered the wedding feast not having a wedding garment, as is said in Matthew 22:11ff. Now he assigns the reason for the foregoing, when he says "because I came down from heaven," etc., and first he sets forth the intention of fulfilling the Father's will; second he manifests what the Father's will is, at "this is the will of him who sent me, the Father"; third he shows the final fulfillment of the will, at "and I will raise him up on the last day." Concerning the first it must be known that this text can be read in two ways: in one way according to Augustine, in the other according to Chrysostom. According to Augustine, thus: "him who comes to me I will not cast out," and this because he comes to me who imitates my humility. Matthew 11:28, when the Lord said, "come to me, all you who labor," he consequently adds: "learn from me, for I am meek and humble of heart." Now the true meekness of the Son of God consists in this, that he subjected his own will to the will of the Father. And therefore he says "I will not cast out," because "I came down from heaven not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me." On this account the soul went out from God, because it was proud; and therefore it is necessary to return by humility, coming to Christ through the imitation of his humility, which consists in this, that he does not do his own will alone, but the will of God the Father. It must be known, moreover, that in Christ there was a twofold will. One according to the human nature, which is proper to him both by nature and by the will of the Father; the other according to the divine nature, which is the same as the will of the Father. His own will, therefore, namely the human will, he ordered under the divine will, because he himself showed his obedience under the effect of the paternal will, wishing to fulfill the Father's will. Psalm 39:9: "that I should do your will, O my God, I have desired it." We ask that this will be done in us when we say, Matthew 6:10: "your will be done." Those, therefore, are not cast out who do not do their own will, but the will of God. For the Devil, wishing to do his own will, which is a mark of pride, was cast out of heaven, and the first man out of Paradise. According to Chrysostom, however, thus: I do not cast out him who comes to me because I came for this, to fulfill the Father's will concerning the salvation of men. If, therefore, I was incarnated for the salvation of men, how ought I to cast them out? And this is what he says: "therefore I do not cast out, because I came down from heaven not to do my own will," that is, the human will, so as to acquire something proper to myself, "but the will of him who sent me," the Father, "who wills all men to be saved," as is said in 1 Timothy 2:4. And therefore, as far as it is from me, I cast no one out. Romans 5:10: "for if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, shall we be saved by his life." Now what the Father's will is, he explains first, when he says "for this is the will of him who sent me, the Father," etc.; second he assigns the reason, at "for this is the will of my Father," etc. He said, then: I will not cast out those who come to me, because I assumed flesh in order to do the Father's will. Now the will of him who sent me, the Father, is this: namely, that I should not cast out; and therefore I will not cast out. 1 Thessalonians 4:3: "this is the will of God, your sanctification." And therefore he says "that of all that he has given me, I should lose nothing of it"; that is, that I should lose nothing, until it comes to the future resurrection, in which some will be lost — not, however, of those who were given to him through eternal predestination, but the impious; Psalm 1:6: "the way of the impious shall perish." But those who are preserved up to that time will not be lost. By this, however, that he says "I will not lose," it is not to be understood that he has need of them, or that it would be a detriment to him if they perish. But he says this on account of his affection for their salvation, and their good, which he reckons as his own. But against this is what is said below, chapter 17:12: "none of them," namely of those whom you gave me, "has perished, except the son of perdition." Therefore some of those who were given to him through eternal predestination are lost. This, then — what he says, "I will not lose of it" — is not true. But it must be said that it is from among those who are given to him through present righteousness that some are lost; not, however, from among those given through eternal predestination. Now he sets forth the reason for the divine will when he says "for this is the will of my Father," etc. The reason why the Father wills that I should not lose anything of what he has given me is that it is the Father's will to give life spiritually to men, since he himself is the fountain of life. And because he is eternal, as far as concerns himself, it is his will that everyone who comes to me should have eternal life. And this is what he says: "this is the will of the Father who sent me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in him should have eternal life." But it must be noted that above, 5:24, he said: "he who sees the Son, and believes him who sent me, has eternal life," whereas here he says "he who believes in him" — so as to give us to understand the same divinity of the Father and the Son, the vision of which through essence is our ultimate end, and the object of faith. But what he says, "sees," is not to be understood of the vision through essence, which faith precedes, but of the bodily vision of Christ, which leads to faith. And therefore he says pointedly, "he who sees the Son, and believes in him"; above, 5:24: "he who believes in him (...) is not judged, but shall pass from death to life"; below, 20:31: "but these things are written, that you may believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that believing, you may have life in his name." This will of the Father, moreover, will likewise be fulfilled, and therefore he adds, "and I will raise him up on the last day": because he thus wills that not only in soul, but also in body, he should have eternal life (Daniel 12:2: "of those who sleep in the dust of the earth, some shall awake to life everlasting, and others to everlasting reproach") just as Christ also rose again; Romans 6:9: "Christ rising from the dead dies now no more," and so on.”

“The question of the Jews having been posed, here the response of Christ is set forth. And first he shows the origin of the spiritual food; second he proves it, at the words "For the bread that comes down from heaven is the true bread." Concerning the first, it must be known that the Jews had proposed two things to Christ concerning the origin of the bodily food which their fathers had: namely, the giver, who was Moses, and the place, because it was from heaven; and so the Lord, removing these two things concerning the origin of the spiritual food, asserts that the giver of the spiritual food is different, and the place is different. Hence he says, removing the aforesaid points, "Amen, amen I say to you, Moses did not give you bread from heaven." It is another who gives, because it is my Father — not bodily bread, but the true bread from heaven. But against this: was not the bread which the fathers had in the desert truly bread? I answer: if "true" is taken as it is divided against the false, then that bread was true, for the miracle of the manna was not false; but if "true" is taken as truth is divided against figure, then that bread was not true, but a figure of the spiritual bread, namely of our Lord Jesus Christ, which the manna itself signified, as the Apostle says, 1 Corinthians 10:3: "all ate the same spiritual food." Likewise, against what he says — "he did not give you bread from heaven" — is what is said in Psalm 77:24: "he gave them the bread of heaven." I answer: heaven is taken in three ways. Sometimes for the air; Matthew 13:4: "the birds of the air ate it"; and in Psalm 17:14: "the Lord thundered from heaven." Sometimes for the starry heaven, according to that verse, Psalm 113:16: "the heaven of heaven is the Lord's"; and Matthew 24:29: "the stars will fall from heaven." Sometimes, indeed, for the spiritual goods themselves; Matthew 5:12: "rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven." The manna, therefore, was from heaven not the starry or spiritual heaven, but the aerial. Or it is said to be from heaven inasmuch as it was a figure of the true heavenly bread, our Lord Jesus Christ. Consequently, when he says "for the true bread is that which comes down from heaven and gives life to the world," he proves that it is from heaven also by its effect. For the true heaven is of a spiritual nature, to which life belongs of itself, and therefore it gives life of itself; below: "it is the spirit that gives life." Now God himself is the author of life. From this, then, it is known that this spiritual bread is from heaven, since it produces its proper effect, if it gives life. For that bodily bread did not give life, since all who ate the manna died; but this bread gives life, and therefore he says it is "the true bread," and not figural, "which comes down from heaven." And this is evident, because "it gives life to the world." For Christ, who is the true bread, gives life to whom he wills; below, 10:10: "I came that they may have life," and so on. He also comes down from heaven; above, 3:13: "no one has ascended into heaven except him who descended from heaven, the Son of Man who is in heaven." Thus, therefore, Christ, the true bread, gives life to the world by reason of his divinity, and comes down from heaven by reason of his human nature. For, as was said above at chapter 3, he is said to have descended from heaven by assuming human nature; Philippians 2:7: "he emptied himself, taking the form of a servant." "They said therefore," and so on. Here the obtaining of the spiritual food is treated, and first the petition for that food itself is set forth; second the exposition is given, at "But Jesus said to them: I am the bread of life," where he shows the manner of obtaining it. It must be known, concerning the first, that the Jews understood the Lord's words carnally; and therefore, because they were in a desire for carnal things, they ask carnal food from Christ; hence they said to him, "Lord, always give us this bread," that would refresh in this way. And the Samaritan woman understood the word about spiritual water carnally, and wishing to be free from need, said: "Lord, give me this water." And although these people understand the Lord's words about food carnally, and ask carnally, nevertheless their petition, understood spiritually, is fitting for us; Matthew 6:11: "give us this day our daily bread": because we cannot live without this bread. Consequently, when he says "But Jesus said to them: I am the bread of life," he shows the manner of obtaining it, showing first what this bread is; second how it is acquired, at "all that the Father gives me will come to me." Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets forth the explanation of the aforesaid bread; second he assigns the reason for the explanation, at "he who comes to me shall not hunger"; third he manifests the necessity of the explanation, at "but I said to you," and so on. Jesus therefore said to them, "I am the bread of life": for, as was said above, the word of wisdom is the special food of the mind, because by it the mind is sustained; Ecclesiasticus 15:3: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding." Now the bread of wisdom is said to be the bread of life, to distinguish it from bodily bread, which is the bread of death, which is fitting only for restoring the defect of mortality, whence it is necessary only in this mortal life. But the bread of divine wisdom is of itself life-giving, and has no contrary death. Likewise, bodily bread does not give life, but only sustains for a time a life already existing; but spiritual bread so gives life that it grants life, for the soul begins to live through this, that it cleaves to the Word of God; Psalm 35:10: "with you is the fountain of life." Since, therefore, every word of wisdom is derived from the only-begotten Word of God, Ecclesiasticus 1:5: "the fountain of wisdom is the only-begotten of God, abiding on high," therefore the Word of God itself is principally called the bread of life; and therefore Christ says, "I am the bread of life." And because the flesh of Christ is united to the Word of God itself, it also has the property of being life-giving, whence his body too, taken sacramentally, is life-giving: for through the mysteries which Christ fulfilled in his flesh, he gives life to the world; and thus the flesh of Christ, on account of the Lord's word, is bread — not of the accustomed life, but of that life which is not unlocked by death. And therefore the flesh of Christ is called bread; Genesis 49:20: "Asher, his bread is fat." It is also signified through the manna, 1 Corinthians 10:1ff. "Manna" is interpreted "what is this?" Because the Jews, seeing it, marveled, saying to one another, "what is this?" But nothing is more marvelous than the Son of God made man, so that it falls to anyone to ask, "what is this?" That is, how is the Son of God the son of man; how do two natures come to make one person of Christ? Isaiah 9:6: "his name shall be called Wonderful." It is also marvelous how Christ is under the sacrament. Consequently, when he says "he who comes to me shall not hunger," he assigns the reason for the explanation, and this from the effect of this bread. For bodily bread, once eaten, does not take away hunger forever, since it is corrupted and fails; and therefore it must be sought again for nourishment; but spiritual bread, giving life of itself, is never corrupted; and therefore a man, having eaten once, never hungers. And therefore he says, "he who comes to me shall not hunger, and he who believes in me shall never thirst." Now, as to what he says — namely, that "he who comes" and "he who believes" shall not hunger nor thirst — these do not differ, according to Augustine, because to come to him and to believe in him are the same thing: for we come to God not by steps of the body, but of the mind, the first of which is faith. To eat and to drink are likewise the same: for by both is signified the eternal satisfaction, where there is no want. Matthew 5:6: "blessed are they who hunger and thirst for justice, for they shall be satisfied": so that the same thing is food sustaining and drink refreshing. Now the reason why temporal things do not take away thirst forever is, first, because they are not taken all at once, but little by little, and as it were with movement, and therefore something always remains to be taken; and on account of this, just as delight and satisfaction arise from what has already been taken, so too desire remains from the taking. The other reason is that they are corrupted, whence a memory remains from the corrupted thing, and desire for them is generated again. Spiritual things, however, are both taken all at once, and are not corrupted nor do they fail; and therefore their satisfaction remains forever. Revelation 7:16: "they shall neither hunger nor thirst." Psalm 15:10: "you shall fill me with joy with your countenance; delights are at your right hand," that is, in spiritual goods, "even to the end." Consequently, when he says "but I said to you," etc., the necessity of the explanation is set forth. For someone might say: we asked for bread; but you do not answer, "I will give it to you," or "I will not"; but rather you say, "I am the bread of life"; and therefore your answer does not seem a good one. But that it is a good answer, the Lord shows, saying, "I said to you that you have also seen me, and have not believed": which is the same as if someone had bread before him, being ignorant of it, and it were said to him, "behold, bread is before you." And therefore he says, "I said to you (I am the living bread) and you have seen me, and have not believed"; that is, you desire bread, and you have it before you; and yet you do not take it, because you do not believe. In this he reproaches them for their unbelief; below, 15:24: "but they have seen, and have hated both me and my Father." Consequently, when he says "all that the Father gives me will come to me," he shows how it is acquired, and first he sets forth the manner of acquiring it; second, the assurance of arrival, at "and him who comes to me I will not cast out"; third he manifests what he says, at "because I came down from heaven," and so on. It must be known, concerning the first, that our very believing comes to us from the gift of God. Ephesians 2:8: "by grace you are saved, and not of yourselves, for it is the gift of God"; Philippians 1:29: "it has been given to you not only to believe in him, but also to suffer for him." Now it is sometimes said that God the Father gives believing men to the Son, as here, "all that the Father gives me will come to me." Sometimes the Son gives to the Father, as that text, 1 Corinthians 15:24: "when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God and the Father." From which we understand that just as the Father, in giving, does not take the kingdom away from himself, so neither does the Son. Now the Father gives to the Son, inasmuch as he makes a man cleave to his Word. 1 Corinthians 1:9: "through whom," namely the Father, "you have been called into the fellowship of his Son." But the Son delivers to the Father, inasmuch as the Word is manifestative of the Father himself. Below, 17:6: "Father, I have manifested your name to men." Thus, therefore, he says, "all that the Father gives me will come to me"; that is, those who believe in me, whom the Father makes cleave to me by his gift. But perhaps someone would say that it is not necessary that anyone make use of the gift of God: for many receive the gift of God who do not use it. How then does he say, "all that the Father gives me will come to me"? To which it must be said that in that giving is understood not only the habit, which is faith and the like, but also the interior instinct toward believing. Whatever, then, one does toward salvation, all of it is from the gift of God. But a question remains: for if all that the Father gives to Christ goes to him, as he himself says, then only those go to God whom the Father gives to him; therefore it ought not to be imputed to those who do not go, since they are not given to him. To which it must be said that it is not imputed to them, if they cannot come to faith without the help of God; but this is imputed to the one who does not come, because he himself provides the impediment that keeps him from coming, turning himself away from salvation, whose way, as far as it is in itself, is open to all. Now the goal of the arrival is set forth when he says "and him who comes to me I will not cast out." For someone might say: we will come to you; but you will not receive us. And therefore he says, excluding this, "him who comes to me" — by the steps of faith and good works — "I will not cast out," in which he gives us to understand that he himself is within: for that is "within" from which one goes out to "without." Let us therefore consider what this interior thing is, and how one is cast out from it. It must be known, then, that since all visible things are said to be, as it were, certain exterior things with respect to spiritual things, the more something is spiritual, the more interior it is. There is, therefore, a twofold interior. One is the deepest, namely the joy of eternal life, which, according to Augustine, is the more inward and sweet secret, without weariness, without the bitterness of evil thoughts, without the interruption of temptations and sorrows; concerning which it is said, Matthew 25:21: "enter into the joy of your lord." And Psalm 30:21: "you shall hide them in the secret of your face"; that is, in the full vision of your essence. And from this interior thing no one shall be cast out. Revelation 3:12: "he who shall overcome, I will make him a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go out no more," because, as is said in Matthew 25:46, "the just shall go into life everlasting." The other interior thing is the rectitude of conscience, which is a spiritual joy; and concerning this it is said, Wisdom 8:16: "entering into my house, I shall rest." And Song of Songs 1:3: "the king has brought me into his storerooms." And from this some are cast out. And therefore what the Lord says, "I will not cast out," can be understood in two ways. In one way, so that those are said to come to him who are given to him by the Father through eternal predestination; and concerning these he says, "him who comes to me," predestined by the Father, "I will not cast out"; Romans 11:2: "God has not cast away his people whom he foreknew." In the other way, because those who go out do not go out as though cast out by Christ, but the cause of their casting-out is on their own part, who, through unbelief and sins, withdraw from the secret place of a right conscience. And thus it is said, "I do not cast out," but they themselves cast themselves out; Jeremiah 23:33: "you are the burden, and I will cast you off, says the Lord." And in this way that man was cast out who had entered the wedding feast not having a wedding garment, as is said in Matthew 22:11ff. Now he assigns the reason for the foregoing, when he says "because I came down from heaven," etc., and first he sets forth the intention of fulfilling the Father's will; second he manifests what the Father's will is, at "this is the will of him who sent me, the Father"; third he shows the final fulfillment of the will, at "and I will raise him up on the last day." Concerning the first it must be known that this text can be read in two ways: in one way according to Augustine, in the other according to Chrysostom. According to Augustine, thus: "him who comes to me I will not cast out," and this because he comes to me who imitates my humility. Matthew 11:28, when the Lord said, "come to me, all you who labor," he consequently adds: "learn from me, for I am meek and humble of heart." Now the true meekness of the Son of God consists in this, that he subjected his own will to the will of the Father. And therefore he says "I will not cast out," because "I came down from heaven not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me." On this account the soul went out from God, because it was proud; and therefore it is necessary to return by humility, coming to Christ through the imitation of his humility, which consists in this, that he does not do his own will alone, but the will of God the Father. It must be known, moreover, that in Christ there was a twofold will. One according to the human nature, which is proper to him both by nature and by the will of the Father; the other according to the divine nature, which is the same as the will of the Father. His own will, therefore, namely the human will, he ordered under the divine will, because he himself showed his obedience under the effect of the paternal will, wishing to fulfill the Father's will. Psalm 39:9: "that I should do your will, O my God, I have desired it." We ask that this will be done in us when we say, Matthew 6:10: "your will be done." Those, therefore, are not cast out who do not do their own will, but the will of God. For the Devil, wishing to do his own will, which is a mark of pride, was cast out of heaven, and the first man out of Paradise. According to Chrysostom, however, thus: I do not cast out him who comes to me because I came for this, to fulfill the Father's will concerning the salvation of men. If, therefore, I was incarnated for the salvation of men, how ought I to cast them out? And this is what he says: "therefore I do not cast out, because I came down from heaven not to do my own will," that is, the human will, so as to acquire something proper to myself, "but the will of him who sent me," the Father, "who wills all men to be saved," as is said in 1 Timothy 2:4. And therefore, as far as it is from me, I cast no one out. Romans 5:10: "for if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, shall we be saved by his life." Now what the Father's will is, he explains first, when he says "for this is the will of him who sent me, the Father," etc.; second he assigns the reason, at "for this is the will of my Father," etc. He said, then: I will not cast out those who come to me, because I assumed flesh in order to do the Father's will. Now the will of him who sent me, the Father, is this: namely, that I should not cast out; and therefore I will not cast out. 1 Thessalonians 4:3: "this is the will of God, your sanctification." And therefore he says "that of all that he has given me, I should lose nothing of it"; that is, that I should lose nothing, until it comes to the future resurrection, in which some will be lost — not, however, of those who were given to him through eternal predestination, but the impious; Psalm 1:6: "the way of the impious shall perish." But those who are preserved up to that time will not be lost. By this, however, that he says "I will not lose," it is not to be understood that he has need of them, or that it would be a detriment to him if they perish. But he says this on account of his affection for their salvation, and their good, which he reckons as his own. But against this is what is said below, chapter 17:12: "none of them," namely of those whom you gave me, "has perished, except the son of perdition." Therefore some of those who were given to him through eternal predestination are lost. This, then — what he says, "I will not lose of it" — is not true. But it must be said that it is from among those who are given to him through present righteousness that some are lost; not, however, from among those given through eternal predestination. Now he sets forth the reason for the divine will when he says "for this is the will of my Father," etc. The reason why the Father wills that I should not lose anything of what he has given me is that it is the Father's will to give life spiritually to men, since he himself is the fountain of life. And because he is eternal, as far as concerns himself, it is his will that everyone who comes to me should have eternal life. And this is what he says: "this is the will of the Father who sent me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in him should have eternal life." But it must be noted that above, 5:24, he said: "he who sees the Son, and believes him who sent me, has eternal life," whereas here he says "he who believes in him" — so as to give us to understand the same divinity of the Father and the Son, the vision of which through essence is our ultimate end, and the object of faith. But what he says, "sees," is not to be understood of the vision through essence, which faith precedes, but of the bodily vision of Christ, which leads to faith. And therefore he says pointedly, "he who sees the Son, and believes in him"; above, 5:24: "he who believes in him (...) is not judged, but shall pass from death to life"; below, 20:31: "but these things are written, that you may believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that believing, you may have life in his name." This will of the Father, moreover, will likewise be fulfilled, and therefore he adds, "and I will raise him up on the last day": because he thus wills that not only in soul, but also in body, he should have eternal life (Daniel 12:2: "of those who sleep in the dust of the earth, some shall awake to life everlasting, and others to everlasting reproach") just as Christ also rose again; Romans 6:9: "Christ rising from the dead dies now no more," and so on.”

“All that the Father giveth me,.... The "all" design not the apostles only, who were given to Christ as such; for these did not all, in a spiritual manner, come to him, and believe in him; one of them was a devil, and the son of perdition; much less every individual of mankind: these are, in some sense, given to Christ to subserve some ends of his mediatorial kingdom, and are subject to his power and control, but do not come to him, and believe in him: but the whole body of the elect are here meant, who, when they were chosen by God the Father, were given and put into the hands of Christ, as his seed, his spouse, his sheep, his portion, and inheritance, and to be saved by him with an everlasting salvation; which is an instance of love and care on the Father's part, to give them to Christ; and of grace and condescension in him to receive them, and take the care of them; and of distinguishing goodness to them: and though Christ here expresses this act of his Father's in the present tense, "giveth", perhaps to signify the continuance and unchangeableness of it; yet he delivers it in the past tense, in Joh 6:39, "hath given"; and so all the Oriental versions render it here. And it certainly respects an act of God, antecedent to coming to Christ, and believing in him, which is a fruit and effect of electing love, as is clear from what follows: shall come unto me; such who are given to Christ in eternal election, and in the everlasting covenant of grace, shall, and do, in time, come to Christ, and believe in him to the saving of their souls; which is not to be ascribed to, any power and will in them, but to the power and grace of God. It is not here said, that such who are given to Christ have a "power" to come to him, or "may" come if they will, but they shall come; efficacious grace will bring them to Christ, as poor perishing sinners, to venture on him for life and salvation: and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out; such who come to Christ in a spiritual manner, and are brought to believe in him truly and really, he not only receives kindly, but keeps and preserves them by his power, and will not cast them out, or thrust them from him into perdition: the words are very strongly and emphatically expressed in the original, "I will not, not, or never, never, cast out without"; or cast out of doors. Christ will never cast them out of his affections; nor out of his arms; nor out of that family that is named of him; nor out of, and from his church, which is his body, and of which they are members; nor out of a state of justification and salvation; and therefore they shall never perish, but have everlasting life. The three glorious doctrines of grace, of eternal election, efficacious grace in conversion, and the final perseverance of the saints, are clearly contained in these words.”

“The question of the Jews having been posed, here the response of Christ is set forth. And first he shows the origin of the spiritual food; second he proves it, at the words "For the bread that comes down from heaven is the true bread." Concerning the first, it must be known that the Jews had proposed two things to Christ concerning the origin of the bodily food which their fathers had: namely, the giver, who was Moses, and the place, because it was from heaven; and so the Lord, removing these two things concerning the origin of the spiritual food, asserts that the giver of the spiritual food is different, and the place is different. Hence he says, removing the aforesaid points, "Amen, amen I say to you, Moses did not give you bread from heaven." It is another who gives, because it is my Father — not bodily bread, but the true bread from heaven. But against this: was not the bread which the fathers had in the desert truly bread? I answer: if "true" is taken as it is divided against the false, then that bread was true, for the miracle of the manna was not false; but if "true" is taken as truth is divided against figure, then that bread was not true, but a figure of the spiritual bread, namely of our Lord Jesus Christ, which the manna itself signified, as the Apostle says, 1 Corinthians 10:3: "all ate the same spiritual food." Likewise, against what he says — "he did not give you bread from heaven" — is what is said in Psalm 77:24: "he gave them the bread of heaven." I answer: heaven is taken in three ways. Sometimes for the air; Matthew 13:4: "the birds of the air ate it"; and in Psalm 17:14: "the Lord thundered from heaven." Sometimes for the starry heaven, according to that verse, Psalm 113:16: "the heaven of heaven is the Lord's"; and Matthew 24:29: "the stars will fall from heaven." Sometimes, indeed, for the spiritual goods themselves; Matthew 5:12: "rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven." The manna, therefore, was from heaven not the starry or spiritual heaven, but the aerial. Or it is said to be from heaven inasmuch as it was a figure of the true heavenly bread, our Lord Jesus Christ. Consequently, when he says "for the true bread is that which comes down from heaven and gives life to the world," he proves that it is from heaven also by its effect. For the true heaven is of a spiritual nature, to which life belongs of itself, and therefore it gives life of itself; below: "it is the spirit that gives life." Now God himself is the author of life. From this, then, it is known that this spiritual bread is from heaven, since it produces its proper effect, if it gives life. For that bodily bread did not give life, since all who ate the manna died; but this bread gives life, and therefore he says it is "the true bread," and not figural, "which comes down from heaven." And this is evident, because "it gives life to the world." For Christ, who is the true bread, gives life to whom he wills; below, 10:10: "I came that they may have life," and so on. He also comes down from heaven; above, 3:13: "no one has ascended into heaven except him who descended from heaven, the Son of Man who is in heaven." Thus, therefore, Christ, the true bread, gives life to the world by reason of his divinity, and comes down from heaven by reason of his human nature. For, as was said above at chapter 3, he is said to have descended from heaven by assuming human nature; Philippians 2:7: "he emptied himself, taking the form of a servant." "They said therefore," and so on. Here the obtaining of the spiritual food is treated, and first the petition for that food itself is set forth; second the exposition is given, at "But Jesus said to them: I am the bread of life," where he shows the manner of obtaining it. It must be known, concerning the first, that the Jews understood the Lord's words carnally; and therefore, because they were in a desire for carnal things, they ask carnal food from Christ; hence they said to him, "Lord, always give us this bread," that would refresh in this way. And the Samaritan woman understood the word about spiritual water carnally, and wishing to be free from need, said: "Lord, give me this water." And although these people understand the Lord's words about food carnally, and ask carnally, nevertheless their petition, understood spiritually, is fitting for us; Matthew 6:11: "give us this day our daily bread": because we cannot live without this bread. Consequently, when he says "But Jesus said to them: I am the bread of life," he shows the manner of obtaining it, showing first what this bread is; second how it is acquired, at "all that the Father gives me will come to me." Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets forth the explanation of the aforesaid bread; second he assigns the reason for the explanation, at "he who comes to me shall not hunger"; third he manifests the necessity of the explanation, at "but I said to you," and so on. Jesus therefore said to them, "I am the bread of life": for, as was said above, the word of wisdom is the special food of the mind, because by it the mind is sustained; Ecclesiasticus 15:3: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding." Now the bread of wisdom is said to be the bread of life, to distinguish it from bodily bread, which is the bread of death, which is fitting only for restoring the defect of mortality, whence it is necessary only in this mortal life. But the bread of divine wisdom is of itself life-giving, and has no contrary death. Likewise, bodily bread does not give life, but only sustains for a time a life already existing; but spiritual bread so gives life that it grants life, for the soul begins to live through this, that it cleaves to the Word of God; Psalm 35:10: "with you is the fountain of life." Since, therefore, every word of wisdom is derived from the only-begotten Word of God, Ecclesiasticus 1:5: "the fountain of wisdom is the only-begotten of God, abiding on high," therefore the Word of God itself is principally called the bread of life; and therefore Christ says, "I am the bread of life." And because the flesh of Christ is united to the Word of God itself, it also has the property of being life-giving, whence his body too, taken sacramentally, is life-giving: for through the mysteries which Christ fulfilled in his flesh, he gives life to the world; and thus the flesh of Christ, on account of the Lord's word, is bread — not of the accustomed life, but of that life which is not unlocked by death. And therefore the flesh of Christ is called bread; Genesis 49:20: "Asher, his bread is fat." It is also signified through the manna, 1 Corinthians 10:1ff. "Manna" is interpreted "what is this?" Because the Jews, seeing it, marveled, saying to one another, "what is this?" But nothing is more marvelous than the Son of God made man, so that it falls to anyone to ask, "what is this?" That is, how is the Son of God the son of man; how do two natures come to make one person of Christ? Isaiah 9:6: "his name shall be called Wonderful." It is also marvelous how Christ is under the sacrament. Consequently, when he says "he who comes to me shall not hunger," he assigns the reason for the explanation, and this from the effect of this bread. For bodily bread, once eaten, does not take away hunger forever, since it is corrupted and fails; and therefore it must be sought again for nourishment; but spiritual bread, giving life of itself, is never corrupted; and therefore a man, having eaten once, never hungers. And therefore he says, "he who comes to me shall not hunger, and he who believes in me shall never thirst." Now, as to what he says — namely, that "he who comes" and "he who believes" shall not hunger nor thirst — these do not differ, according to Augustine, because to come to him and to believe in him are the same thing: for we come to God not by steps of the body, but of the mind, the first of which is faith. To eat and to drink are likewise the same: for by both is signified the eternal satisfaction, where there is no want. Matthew 5:6: "blessed are they who hunger and thirst for justice, for they shall be satisfied": so that the same thing is food sustaining and drink refreshing. Now the reason why temporal things do not take away thirst forever is, first, because they are not taken all at once, but little by little, and as it were with movement, and therefore something always remains to be taken; and on account of this, just as delight and satisfaction arise from what has already been taken, so too desire remains from the taking. The other reason is that they are corrupted, whence a memory remains from the corrupted thing, and desire for them is generated again. Spiritual things, however, are both taken all at once, and are not corrupted nor do they fail; and therefore their satisfaction remains forever. Revelation 7:16: "they shall neither hunger nor thirst." Psalm 15:10: "you shall fill me with joy with your countenance; delights are at your right hand," that is, in spiritual goods, "even to the end." Consequently, when he says "but I said to you," etc., the necessity of the explanation is set forth. For someone might say: we asked for bread; but you do not answer, "I will give it to you," or "I will not"; but rather you say, "I am the bread of life"; and therefore your answer does not seem a good one. But that it is a good answer, the Lord shows, saying, "I said to you that you have also seen me, and have not believed": which is the same as if someone had bread before him, being ignorant of it, and it were said to him, "behold, bread is before you." And therefore he says, "I said to you (I am the living bread) and you have seen me, and have not believed"; that is, you desire bread, and you have it before you; and yet you do not take it, because you do not believe. In this he reproaches them for their unbelief; below, 15:24: "but they have seen, and have hated both me and my Father." Consequently, when he says "all that the Father gives me will come to me," he shows how it is acquired, and first he sets forth the manner of acquiring it; second, the assurance of arrival, at "and him who comes to me I will not cast out"; third he manifests what he says, at "because I came down from heaven," and so on. It must be known, concerning the first, that our very believing comes to us from the gift of God. Ephesians 2:8: "by grace you are saved, and not of yourselves, for it is the gift of God"; Philippians 1:29: "it has been given to you not only to believe in him, but also to suffer for him." Now it is sometimes said that God the Father gives believing men to the Son, as here, "all that the Father gives me will come to me." Sometimes the Son gives to the Father, as that text, 1 Corinthians 15:24: "when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God and the Father." From which we understand that just as the Father, in giving, does not take the kingdom away from himself, so neither does the Son. Now the Father gives to the Son, inasmuch as he makes a man cleave to his Word. 1 Corinthians 1:9: "through whom," namely the Father, "you have been called into the fellowship of his Son." But the Son delivers to the Father, inasmuch as the Word is manifestative of the Father himself. Below, 17:6: "Father, I have manifested your name to men." Thus, therefore, he says, "all that the Father gives me will come to me"; that is, those who believe in me, whom the Father makes cleave to me by his gift. But perhaps someone would say that it is not necessary that anyone make use of the gift of God: for many receive the gift of God who do not use it. How then does he say, "all that the Father gives me will come to me"? To which it must be said that in that giving is understood not only the habit, which is faith and the like, but also the interior instinct toward believing. Whatever, then, one does toward salvation, all of it is from the gift of God. But a question remains: for if all that the Father gives to Christ goes to him, as he himself says, then only those go to God whom the Father gives to him; therefore it ought not to be imputed to those who do not go, since they are not given to him. To which it must be said that it is not imputed to them, if they cannot come to faith without the help of God; but this is imputed to the one who does not come, because he himself provides the impediment that keeps him from coming, turning himself away from salvation, whose way, as far as it is in itself, is open to all. Now the goal of the arrival is set forth when he says "and him who comes to me I will not cast out." For someone might say: we will come to you; but you will not receive us. And therefore he says, excluding this, "him who comes to me" — by the steps of faith and good works — "I will not cast out," in which he gives us to understand that he himself is within: for that is "within" from which one goes out to "without." Let us therefore consider what this interior thing is, and how one is cast out from it. It must be known, then, that since all visible things are said to be, as it were, certain exterior things with respect to spiritual things, the more something is spiritual, the more interior it is. There is, therefore, a twofold interior. One is the deepest, namely the joy of eternal life, which, according to Augustine, is the more inward and sweet secret, without weariness, without the bitterness of evil thoughts, without the interruption of temptations and sorrows; concerning which it is said, Matthew 25:21: "enter into the joy of your lord." And Psalm 30:21: "you shall hide them in the secret of your face"; that is, in the full vision of your essence. And from this interior thing no one shall be cast out. Revelation 3:12: "he who shall overcome, I will make him a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go out no more," because, as is said in Matthew 25:46, "the just shall go into life everlasting." The other interior thing is the rectitude of conscience, which is a spiritual joy; and concerning this it is said, Wisdom 8:16: "entering into my house, I shall rest." And Song of Songs 1:3: "the king has brought me into his storerooms." And from this some are cast out. And therefore what the Lord says, "I will not cast out," can be understood in two ways. In one way, so that those are said to come to him who are given to him by the Father through eternal predestination; and concerning these he says, "him who comes to me," predestined by the Father, "I will not cast out"; Romans 11:2: "God has not cast away his people whom he foreknew." In the other way, because those who go out do not go out as though cast out by Christ, but the cause of their casting-out is on their own part, who, through unbelief and sins, withdraw from the secret place of a right conscience. And thus it is said, "I do not cast out," but they themselves cast themselves out; Jeremiah 23:33: "you are the burden, and I will cast you off, says the Lord." And in this way that man was cast out who had entered the wedding feast not having a wedding garment, as is said in Matthew 22:11ff. Now he assigns the reason for the foregoing, when he says "because I came down from heaven," etc., and first he sets forth the intention of fulfilling the Father's will; second he manifests what the Father's will is, at "this is the will of him who sent me, the Father"; third he shows the final fulfillment of the will, at "and I will raise him up on the last day." Concerning the first it must be known that this text can be read in two ways: in one way according to Augustine, in the other according to Chrysostom. According to Augustine, thus: "him who comes to me I will not cast out," and this because he comes to me who imitates my humility. Matthew 11:28, when the Lord said, "come to me, all you who labor," he consequently adds: "learn from me, for I am meek and humble of heart." Now the true meekness of the Son of God consists in this, that he subjected his own will to the will of the Father. And therefore he says "I will not cast out," because "I came down from heaven not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me." On this account the soul went out from God, because it was proud; and therefore it is necessary to return by humility, coming to Christ through the imitation of his humility, which consists in this, that he does not do his own will alone, but the will of God the Father. It must be known, moreover, that in Christ there was a twofold will. One according to the human nature, which is proper to him both by nature and by the will of the Father; the other according to the divine nature, which is the same as the will of the Father. His own will, therefore, namely the human will, he ordered under the divine will, because he himself showed his obedience under the effect of the paternal will, wishing to fulfill the Father's will. Psalm 39:9: "that I should do your will, O my God, I have desired it." We ask that this will be done in us when we say, Matthew 6:10: "your will be done." Those, therefore, are not cast out who do not do their own will, but the will of God. For the Devil, wishing to do his own will, which is a mark of pride, was cast out of heaven, and the first man out of Paradise. According to Chrysostom, however, thus: I do not cast out him who comes to me because I came for this, to fulfill the Father's will concerning the salvation of men. If, therefore, I was incarnated for the salvation of men, how ought I to cast them out? And this is what he says: "therefore I do not cast out, because I came down from heaven not to do my own will," that is, the human will, so as to acquire something proper to myself, "but the will of him who sent me," the Father, "who wills all men to be saved," as is said in 1 Timothy 2:4. And therefore, as far as it is from me, I cast no one out. Romans 5:10: "for if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, shall we be saved by his life." Now what the Father's will is, he explains first, when he says "for this is the will of him who sent me, the Father," etc.; second he assigns the reason, at "for this is the will of my Father," etc. He said, then: I will not cast out those who come to me, because I assumed flesh in order to do the Father's will. Now the will of him who sent me, the Father, is this: namely, that I should not cast out; and therefore I will not cast out. 1 Thessalonians 4:3: "this is the will of God, your sanctification." And therefore he says "that of all that he has given me, I should lose nothing of it"; that is, that I should lose nothing, until it comes to the future resurrection, in which some will be lost — not, however, of those who were given to him through eternal predestination, but the impious; Psalm 1:6: "the way of the impious shall perish." But those who are preserved up to that time will not be lost. By this, however, that he says "I will not lose," it is not to be understood that he has need of them, or that it would be a detriment to him if they perish. But he says this on account of his affection for their salvation, and their good, which he reckons as his own. But against this is what is said below, chapter 17:12: "none of them," namely of those whom you gave me, "has perished, except the son of perdition." Therefore some of those who were given to him through eternal predestination are lost. This, then — what he says, "I will not lose of it" — is not true. But it must be said that it is from among those who are given to him through present righteousness that some are lost; not, however, from among those given through eternal predestination. Now he sets forth the reason for the divine will when he says "for this is the will of my Father," etc. The reason why the Father wills that I should not lose anything of what he has given me is that it is the Father's will to give life spiritually to men, since he himself is the fountain of life. And because he is eternal, as far as concerns himself, it is his will that everyone who comes to me should have eternal life. And this is what he says: "this is the will of the Father who sent me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in him should have eternal life." But it must be noted that above, 5:24, he said: "he who sees the Son, and believes him who sent me, has eternal life," whereas here he says "he who believes in him" — so as to give us to understand the same divinity of the Father and the Son, the vision of which through essence is our ultimate end, and the object of faith. But what he says, "sees," is not to be understood of the vision through essence, which faith precedes, but of the bodily vision of Christ, which leads to faith. And therefore he says pointedly, "he who sees the Son, and believes in him"; above, 5:24: "he who believes in him (...) is not judged, but shall pass from death to life"; below, 20:31: "but these things are written, that you may believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that believing, you may have life in his name." This will of the Father, moreover, will likewise be fulfilled, and therefore he adds, "and I will raise him up on the last day": because he thus wills that not only in soul, but also in body, he should have eternal life (Daniel 12:2: "of those who sleep in the dust of the earth, some shall awake to life everlasting, and others to everlasting reproach") just as Christ also rose again; Romans 6:9: "Christ rising from the dead dies now no more," and so on.”

“For I came down from heaven,.... by change of place, or local motion; for Christ is the immense, infinite, and omnipresent God, and cannot be said properly to move from place to place; for he fills all places, even heaven and earth, with his presence, and was in heaven as the Son of God, at the same time he was here on earth as the son of man: wherefore this must be understood in a manner becoming his proper deity, his divine sonship, and personality: this descent was by the assumption of the human nature into union with his divine person, which was an instance of amazing grace and condescension. The Jew (m) objects to this, and says, "if this respects the descent of the soul, the soul of every man descended from thence; but if it respects the body, the rest of the evangelists contradict his words, particularly Luke, when he says, Luk 2:7 that his mother brought him forth at Bethlehem.'' But this descent regards neither his soul nor body, but his divine person, which always was in heaven, and not any local descent of that; but, as before observed, an assumption of human nature, which he took of the virgin on earth; and so there is no contradiction between the evangelists; nor is descent from heaven unsuitable to Christ as a divine person, since it is ascribed to God, Gen 11:7; and if God may be said to go down from heaven by some display of his power, and intimation of his presence, Christ may be said to descend from heaven by that marvellous work of his, taking upon him our nature, and walking up and down on earth in the form of a servant; and which was done with this view, as he says, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me; that is, not to do his own will, as separate from his Father's, and much less as contrary to it; otherwise he did come to do his own will, which, as God, was the same with his Father's, he being one with him in nature, and so in power and will; and though his will, as man, was distinct from his Father's, yet not repugnant, but resigned unto it: and this will he came to do, was to preach the Gospel, fulfil the law, work miracles, and obtain the eternal redemption and salvation of his people. What the above Jewish writer (n) objects to this part of the text is of very little moment: whose words are; "moreover, what he says, "not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me", shows, that he that sent, is not one and the same with him that is sent, seeing the will of him that is sent, is not as the will of him that sends.'' It is readily granted that they are not one and the same person; they are two distinct persons, which sending, and being sent, do clearly show; but then they are one in nature, though distinct in person, and they agree in will and work. Christ came not to do any will of his own different from that of his Father's; nor do these words imply a difference of wills in them, much less a contrariety in them, but rather the sameness of them. (m) R. Isaac Chizzuk Emuna, par. 2. c. 44. p. 434. (n) R. Chizzuk Emmuna, par. 2. c. 44. p. 434.”

“All that the Father giveth me - The neuter gender, παν, is probably used here for the masculine, πας. Shall come to me - All that are drawn by the Father, Joh 6:44, i.e. all those who are influenced by his Spirit, and yield to those influences: for as many as are Led (not driven or dragged) by the Spirit of God, they are the children of God, Rom 8:14. God sent his prophets to proclaim his salvation to this people; and he accompanied their preaching with the influence of his Spirit. Those who yielded were saved: those who did not yield to these drawings were lost. This Spirit still continued to work and to allure; but the people being uncircumcised both in heart and ears, they always resisted the Holy Ghost; as their fathers did, so did they; Act 7:51. And though Christ would have gathered them together, as a hen would her chickens under her wings, yet they would not. See the note on Mat 23:37. Those who come at the call of God, he is represented here as giving to Christ, because it is through his blood alone that they can be saved. God, by his Spirit, convinces of sin, righteousness, and judgment; those who acknowledge their iniquity, and their need of salvation, he gives to Christ, i.e. points out unto them the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world. Our Lord may here also refer to the calling of the Gentiles; for these, according to the ancient promise, Psa 2:8, were given to Christ: and they, on the preaching of the Gospel, gladly came unto him. See ample proofs of this in the Acts of the Apostles. I will in no wise cast out - The words are exceedingly emphatical - ου μη εκβαλω εξω, I will by no means thrust out of doors; excellently rendered by Matthew of Erberg in his Italian Bible - Io non cacciaro fuori, I will not chase him out of the house. Our blessed Lord alludes to the case of a person in deep distress and poverty, who comes to a nobleman's house, in order to get relief: the person appears; and the owner, far from treating the poor man with asperity, welcomes, receives him kindly, and supplies his wants. So does Jesus. Newer did he reject the suit of a penitent, however grievous his crimes might have been. He is come to the house of mercy; he is lying at the threshold: the servants bid him come in - he obeys, and stands trembling, waiting for the appearing of the Master, doubtful whether he is to be received or rejected: the Master appears, and not only grants his suit, but receives him into the number of his family: he alleges his unfitness, his unworthiness, his guilt, his crimes, his ingratitude: no matter, all shall be blotted out through the blood of the Lamb, and he be put among the children, and on none of these accounts shall he be put out of the house. The Gentiles shall be as welcome as the Jews; and the invitation to them be as free, as full, and as hearty: they shall become his adopted children, and never be cast out, as the Jews have been. O thou God of love! how able and Willing art thou to save the vilest of the vile, who come unto thee! Thou art not the God of the Jews only, thou art also the God of the Gentiles. Rejoice, therefore, ye Gentiles, with his people.”

“All that, &c.--This comprehensive and very grand passage is expressed with a peculiar artistic precision. The opening general statement (Joh 6:37) consists of two members: (1) "ALL THAT THE FATHER GIVETH ME SHALL COME TO ME"--that is, "Though ye, as I told you, have no faith in Me, My errand into the world shall in no wise be defeated; for all that the Father giveth Me shall infallibly come to Me." Observe, what is given Him by the Father is expressed in the singular number and neuter gender--literally, "everything"; while those who come to Him are put in the masculine gender and singular number--"every one." The whole mass, so to speak, is gifted by the Father to the Son as a unity, which the Son evolves, one by one, in the execution of His trust. So Joh 17:2, "that He should give eternal life to all that which Thou hast given Him" [BENGEL]. This "shall" expresses the glorious certainty of it, the Father being pledged to see to it that the gift be no empty mockery. (2) "AND HIM THAT COMETH TO MEI WILL IN NO WISE CAST OUT." As the former was the divine, this is just the human side of the same thing. True, the "coming" ones of the second clause are just the "given" ones of the first. But had our Lord merely said, "When those that have been given Me of My Father shall come to Me, I will receive them"--besides being very flat, the impression conveyed would have been quite different, sounding as if there were no other laws in operation, in the movement of sinners to Christ, but such as are wholly divine and inscrutable to us; whereas, though He does speak of it as a sublime certainty which men's refusals cannot frustrate, He speaks of that certainty as taking effect only by men's voluntary advances to Him and acceptance of Him--"Him that cometh to Me," "whosoever will," throwing the door wide open. Only it is not the simply willing, but the actually coming, whom He will not cast out; for the word here employed usually denotes arrival, as distinguished from the ordinary word, which rather expresses the act of coming (see Joh 8:42, Greek), [WEBSTER and WILKINSON]. "In no wise" is an emphatic negative, to meet the fears of the timid (as in Rev 21:27, to meet the presumption of the hardened). These, then, being the two members of the general opening statement, what follows is meant to take in both,”

“The question of the Jews having been posed, here the response of Christ is set forth. And first he shows the origin of the spiritual food; second he proves it, at the words "For the bread that comes down from heaven is the true bread." Concerning the first, it must be known that the Jews had proposed two things to Christ concerning the origin of the bodily food which their fathers had: namely, the giver, who was Moses, and the place, because it was from heaven; and so the Lord, removing these two things concerning the origin of the spiritual food, asserts that the giver of the spiritual food is different, and the place is different. Hence he says, removing the aforesaid points, "Amen, amen I say to you, Moses did not give you bread from heaven." It is another who gives, because it is my Father — not bodily bread, but the true bread from heaven. But against this: was not the bread which the fathers had in the desert truly bread? I answer: if "true" is taken as it is divided against the false, then that bread was true, for the miracle of the manna was not false; but if "true" is taken as truth is divided against figure, then that bread was not true, but a figure of the spiritual bread, namely of our Lord Jesus Christ, which the manna itself signified, as the Apostle says, 1 Corinthians 10:3: "all ate the same spiritual food." Likewise, against what he says — "he did not give you bread from heaven" — is what is said in Psalm 77:24: "he gave them the bread of heaven." I answer: heaven is taken in three ways. Sometimes for the air; Matthew 13:4: "the birds of the air ate it"; and in Psalm 17:14: "the Lord thundered from heaven." Sometimes for the starry heaven, according to that verse, Psalm 113:16: "the heaven of heaven is the Lord's"; and Matthew 24:29: "the stars will fall from heaven." Sometimes, indeed, for the spiritual goods themselves; Matthew 5:12: "rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven." The manna, therefore, was from heaven not the starry or spiritual heaven, but the aerial. Or it is said to be from heaven inasmuch as it was a figure of the true heavenly bread, our Lord Jesus Christ. Consequently, when he says "for the true bread is that which comes down from heaven and gives life to the world," he proves that it is from heaven also by its effect. For the true heaven is of a spiritual nature, to which life belongs of itself, and therefore it gives life of itself; below: "it is the spirit that gives life." Now God himself is the author of life. From this, then, it is known that this spiritual bread is from heaven, since it produces its proper effect, if it gives life. For that bodily bread did not give life, since all who ate the manna died; but this bread gives life, and therefore he says it is "the true bread," and not figural, "which comes down from heaven." And this is evident, because "it gives life to the world." For Christ, who is the true bread, gives life to whom he wills; below, 10:10: "I came that they may have life," and so on. He also comes down from heaven; above, 3:13: "no one has ascended into heaven except him who descended from heaven, the Son of Man who is in heaven." Thus, therefore, Christ, the true bread, gives life to the world by reason of his divinity, and comes down from heaven by reason of his human nature. For, as was said above at chapter 3, he is said to have descended from heaven by assuming human nature; Philippians 2:7: "he emptied himself, taking the form of a servant." "They said therefore," and so on. Here the obtaining of the spiritual food is treated, and first the petition for that food itself is set forth; second the exposition is given, at "But Jesus said to them: I am the bread of life," where he shows the manner of obtaining it. It must be known, concerning the first, that the Jews understood the Lord's words carnally; and therefore, because they were in a desire for carnal things, they ask carnal food from Christ; hence they said to him, "Lord, always give us this bread," that would refresh in this way. And the Samaritan woman understood the word about spiritual water carnally, and wishing to be free from need, said: "Lord, give me this water." And although these people understand the Lord's words about food carnally, and ask carnally, nevertheless their petition, understood spiritually, is fitting for us; Matthew 6:11: "give us this day our daily bread": because we cannot live without this bread. Consequently, when he says "But Jesus said to them: I am the bread of life," he shows the manner of obtaining it, showing first what this bread is; second how it is acquired, at "all that the Father gives me will come to me." Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets forth the explanation of the aforesaid bread; second he assigns the reason for the explanation, at "he who comes to me shall not hunger"; third he manifests the necessity of the explanation, at "but I said to you," and so on. Jesus therefore said to them, "I am the bread of life": for, as was said above, the word of wisdom is the special food of the mind, because by it the mind is sustained; Ecclesiasticus 15:3: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding." Now the bread of wisdom is said to be the bread of life, to distinguish it from bodily bread, which is the bread of death, which is fitting only for restoring the defect of mortality, whence it is necessary only in this mortal life. But the bread of divine wisdom is of itself life-giving, and has no contrary death. Likewise, bodily bread does not give life, but only sustains for a time a life already existing; but spiritual bread so gives life that it grants life, for the soul begins to live through this, that it cleaves to the Word of God; Psalm 35:10: "with you is the fountain of life." Since, therefore, every word of wisdom is derived from the only-begotten Word of God, Ecclesiasticus 1:5: "the fountain of wisdom is the only-begotten of God, abiding on high," therefore the Word of God itself is principally called the bread of life; and therefore Christ says, "I am the bread of life." And because the flesh of Christ is united to the Word of God itself, it also has the property of being life-giving, whence his body too, taken sacramentally, is life-giving: for through the mysteries which Christ fulfilled in his flesh, he gives life to the world; and thus the flesh of Christ, on account of the Lord's word, is bread — not of the accustomed life, but of that life which is not unlocked by death. And therefore the flesh of Christ is called bread; Genesis 49:20: "Asher, his bread is fat." It is also signified through the manna, 1 Corinthians 10:1ff. "Manna" is interpreted "what is this?" Because the Jews, seeing it, marveled, saying to one another, "what is this?" But nothing is more marvelous than the Son of God made man, so that it falls to anyone to ask, "what is this?" That is, how is the Son of God the son of man; how do two natures come to make one person of Christ? Isaiah 9:6: "his name shall be called Wonderful." It is also marvelous how Christ is under the sacrament. Consequently, when he says "he who comes to me shall not hunger," he assigns the reason for the explanation, and this from the effect of this bread. For bodily bread, once eaten, does not take away hunger forever, since it is corrupted and fails; and therefore it must be sought again for nourishment; but spiritual bread, giving life of itself, is never corrupted; and therefore a man, having eaten once, never hungers. And therefore he says, "he who comes to me shall not hunger, and he who believes in me shall never thirst." Now, as to what he says — namely, that "he who comes" and "he who believes" shall not hunger nor thirst — these do not differ, according to Augustine, because to come to him and to believe in him are the same thing: for we come to God not by steps of the body, but of the mind, the first of which is faith. To eat and to drink are likewise the same: for by both is signified the eternal satisfaction, where there is no want. Matthew 5:6: "blessed are they who hunger and thirst for justice, for they shall be satisfied": so that the same thing is food sustaining and drink refreshing. Now the reason why temporal things do not take away thirst forever is, first, because they are not taken all at once, but little by little, and as it were with movement, and therefore something always remains to be taken; and on account of this, just as delight and satisfaction arise from what has already been taken, so too desire remains from the taking. The other reason is that they are corrupted, whence a memory remains from the corrupted thing, and desire for them is generated again. Spiritual things, however, are both taken all at once, and are not corrupted nor do they fail; and therefore their satisfaction remains forever. Revelation 7:16: "they shall neither hunger nor thirst." Psalm 15:10: "you shall fill me with joy with your countenance; delights are at your right hand," that is, in spiritual goods, "even to the end." Consequently, when he says "but I said to you," etc., the necessity of the explanation is set forth. For someone might say: we asked for bread; but you do not answer, "I will give it to you," or "I will not"; but rather you say, "I am the bread of life"; and therefore your answer does not seem a good one. But that it is a good answer, the Lord shows, saying, "I said to you that you have also seen me, and have not believed": which is the same as if someone had bread before him, being ignorant of it, and it were said to him, "behold, bread is before you." And therefore he says, "I said to you (I am the living bread) and you have seen me, and have not believed"; that is, you desire bread, and you have it before you; and yet you do not take it, because you do not believe. In this he reproaches them for their unbelief; below, 15:24: "but they have seen, and have hated both me and my Father." Consequently, when he says "all that the Father gives me will come to me," he shows how it is acquired, and first he sets forth the manner of acquiring it; second, the assurance of arrival, at "and him who comes to me I will not cast out"; third he manifests what he says, at "because I came down from heaven," and so on. It must be known, concerning the first, that our very believing comes to us from the gift of God. Ephesians 2:8: "by grace you are saved, and not of yourselves, for it is the gift of God"; Philippians 1:29: "it has been given to you not only to believe in him, but also to suffer for him." Now it is sometimes said that God the Father gives believing men to the Son, as here, "all that the Father gives me will come to me." Sometimes the Son gives to the Father, as that text, 1 Corinthians 15:24: "when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God and the Father." From which we understand that just as the Father, in giving, does not take the kingdom away from himself, so neither does the Son. Now the Father gives to the Son, inasmuch as he makes a man cleave to his Word. 1 Corinthians 1:9: "through whom," namely the Father, "you have been called into the fellowship of his Son." But the Son delivers to the Father, inasmuch as the Word is manifestative of the Father himself. Below, 17:6: "Father, I have manifested your name to men." Thus, therefore, he says, "all that the Father gives me will come to me"; that is, those who believe in me, whom the Father makes cleave to me by his gift. But perhaps someone would say that it is not necessary that anyone make use of the gift of God: for many receive the gift of God who do not use it. How then does he say, "all that the Father gives me will come to me"? To which it must be said that in that giving is understood not only the habit, which is faith and the like, but also the interior instinct toward believing. Whatever, then, one does toward salvation, all of it is from the gift of God. But a question remains: for if all that the Father gives to Christ goes to him, as he himself says, then only those go to God whom the Father gives to him; therefore it ought not to be imputed to those who do not go, since they are not given to him. To which it must be said that it is not imputed to them, if they cannot come to faith without the help of God; but this is imputed to the one who does not come, because he himself provides the impediment that keeps him from coming, turning himself away from salvation, whose way, as far as it is in itself, is open to all. Now the goal of the arrival is set forth when he says "and him who comes to me I will not cast out." For someone might say: we will come to you; but you will not receive us. And therefore he says, excluding this, "him who comes to me" — by the steps of faith and good works — "I will not cast out," in which he gives us to understand that he himself is within: for that is "within" from which one goes out to "without." Let us therefore consider what this interior thing is, and how one is cast out from it. It must be known, then, that since all visible things are said to be, as it were, certain exterior things with respect to spiritual things, the more something is spiritual, the more interior it is. There is, therefore, a twofold interior. One is the deepest, namely the joy of eternal life, which, according to Augustine, is the more inward and sweet secret, without weariness, without the bitterness of evil thoughts, without the interruption of temptations and sorrows; concerning which it is said, Matthew 25:21: "enter into the joy of your lord." And Psalm 30:21: "you shall hide them in the secret of your face"; that is, in the full vision of your essence. And from this interior thing no one shall be cast out. Revelation 3:12: "he who shall overcome, I will make him a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go out no more," because, as is said in Matthew 25:46, "the just shall go into life everlasting." The other interior thing is the rectitude of conscience, which is a spiritual joy; and concerning this it is said, Wisdom 8:16: "entering into my house, I shall rest." And Song of Songs 1:3: "the king has brought me into his storerooms." And from this some are cast out. And therefore what the Lord says, "I will not cast out," can be understood in two ways. In one way, so that those are said to come to him who are given to him by the Father through eternal predestination; and concerning these he says, "him who comes to me," predestined by the Father, "I will not cast out"; Romans 11:2: "God has not cast away his people whom he foreknew." In the other way, because those who go out do not go out as though cast out by Christ, but the cause of their casting-out is on their own part, who, through unbelief and sins, withdraw from the secret place of a right conscience. And thus it is said, "I do not cast out," but they themselves cast themselves out; Jeremiah 23:33: "you are the burden, and I will cast you off, says the Lord." And in this way that man was cast out who had entered the wedding feast not having a wedding garment, as is said in Matthew 22:11ff. Now he assigns the reason for the foregoing, when he says "because I came down from heaven," etc., and first he sets forth the intention of fulfilling the Father's will; second he manifests what the Father's will is, at "this is the will of him who sent me, the Father"; third he shows the final fulfillment of the will, at "and I will raise him up on the last day." Concerning the first it must be known that this text can be read in two ways: in one way according to Augustine, in the other according to Chrysostom. According to Augustine, thus: "him who comes to me I will not cast out," and this because he comes to me who imitates my humility. Matthew 11:28, when the Lord said, "come to me, all you who labor," he consequently adds: "learn from me, for I am meek and humble of heart." Now the true meekness of the Son of God consists in this, that he subjected his own will to the will of the Father. And therefore he says "I will not cast out," because "I came down from heaven not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me." On this account the soul went out from God, because it was proud; and therefore it is necessary to return by humility, coming to Christ through the imitation of his humility, which consists in this, that he does not do his own will alone, but the will of God the Father. It must be known, moreover, that in Christ there was a twofold will. One according to the human nature, which is proper to him both by nature and by the will of the Father; the other according to the divine nature, which is the same as the will of the Father. His own will, therefore, namely the human will, he ordered under the divine will, because he himself showed his obedience under the effect of the paternal will, wishing to fulfill the Father's will. Psalm 39:9: "that I should do your will, O my God, I have desired it." We ask that this will be done in us when we say, Matthew 6:10: "your will be done." Those, therefore, are not cast out who do not do their own will, but the will of God. For the Devil, wishing to do his own will, which is a mark of pride, was cast out of heaven, and the first man out of Paradise. According to Chrysostom, however, thus: I do not cast out him who comes to me because I came for this, to fulfill the Father's will concerning the salvation of men. If, therefore, I was incarnated for the salvation of men, how ought I to cast them out? And this is what he says: "therefore I do not cast out, because I came down from heaven not to do my own will," that is, the human will, so as to acquire something proper to myself, "but the will of him who sent me," the Father, "who wills all men to be saved," as is said in 1 Timothy 2:4. And therefore, as far as it is from me, I cast no one out. Romans 5:10: "for if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, shall we be saved by his life." Now what the Father's will is, he explains first, when he says "for this is the will of him who sent me, the Father," etc.; second he assigns the reason, at "for this is the will of my Father," etc. He said, then: I will not cast out those who come to me, because I assumed flesh in order to do the Father's will. Now the will of him who sent me, the Father, is this: namely, that I should not cast out; and therefore I will not cast out. 1 Thessalonians 4:3: "this is the will of God, your sanctification." And therefore he says "that of all that he has given me, I should lose nothing of it"; that is, that I should lose nothing, until it comes to the future resurrection, in which some will be lost — not, however, of those who were given to him through eternal predestination, but the impious; Psalm 1:6: "the way of the impious shall perish." But those who are preserved up to that time will not be lost. By this, however, that he says "I will not lose," it is not to be understood that he has need of them, or that it would be a detriment to him if they perish. But he says this on account of his affection for their salvation, and their good, which he reckons as his own. But against this is what is said below, chapter 17:12: "none of them," namely of those whom you gave me, "has perished, except the son of perdition." Therefore some of those who were given to him through eternal predestination are lost. This, then — what he says, "I will not lose of it" — is not true. But it must be said that it is from among those who are given to him through present righteousness that some are lost; not, however, from among those given through eternal predestination. Now he sets forth the reason for the divine will when he says "for this is the will of my Father," etc. The reason why the Father wills that I should not lose anything of what he has given me is that it is the Father's will to give life spiritually to men, since he himself is the fountain of life. And because he is eternal, as far as concerns himself, it is his will that everyone who comes to me should have eternal life. And this is what he says: "this is the will of the Father who sent me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in him should have eternal life." But it must be noted that above, 5:24, he said: "he who sees the Son, and believes him who sent me, has eternal life," whereas here he says "he who believes in him" — so as to give us to understand the same divinity of the Father and the Son, the vision of which through essence is our ultimate end, and the object of faith. But what he says, "sees," is not to be understood of the vision through essence, which faith precedes, but of the bodily vision of Christ, which leads to faith. And therefore he says pointedly, "he who sees the Son, and believes in him"; above, 5:24: "he who believes in him (...) is not judged, but shall pass from death to life"; below, 20:31: "but these things are written, that you may believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that believing, you may have life in his name." This will of the Father, moreover, will likewise be fulfilled, and therefore he adds, "and I will raise him up on the last day": because he thus wills that not only in soul, but also in body, he should have eternal life (Daniel 12:2: "of those who sleep in the dust of the earth, some shall awake to life everlasting, and others to everlasting reproach") just as Christ also rose again; Romans 6:9: "Christ rising from the dead dies now no more," and so on.”

“And this is the Father's will which hath sent me,.... This explains both who he was that sent him; the Father of him, and of his people; whose sending of him does not suppose any change of place, or inequality between them, or disrespect unto him, or compulsion of him, but agreement between them, and love to the persons on whose account he was sent; and also what is the will he came to do, and is what was declared by him to Christ, when he gave the elect to him: for this expresses his secret will in the council and covenant of grace, that of all which he hath given me, I should lose nothing; that is, that of all the elect which were given to Christ by his Father, in eternal election, he should not lose anyone of them, not the meanest among them, nor anything of theirs, their grace, or glory, or anything belonging to them, either to their souls or bodies, and particularly the latter; but should raise it up again at the last day; even every part of their bodies, and every dust belonging to them; their bodies being given to Christ, and redeemed by his blood, as well as their souls: so the Jews (o), speaking of the resurrection, and making mention of that passage in Num 23:10, "who shall count the dust of Jacob?" add, "and he (i.e. God) shall order it all, , "and not anything shall be lost", but all shall rise again; for, lo, it is said, Dan 12:2, "and many of them that sleep in the dust", &c.'' (o) Zohar in Exod. fol. 43. 4.”

“The question of the Jews having been posed, here the response of Christ is set forth. And first he shows the origin of the spiritual food; second he proves it, at the words "For the bread that comes down from heaven is the true bread." Concerning the first, it must be known that the Jews had proposed two things to Christ concerning the origin of the bodily food which their fathers had: namely, the giver, who was Moses, and the place, because it was from heaven; and so the Lord, removing these two things concerning the origin of the spiritual food, asserts that the giver of the spiritual food is different, and the place is different. Hence he says, removing the aforesaid points, "Amen, amen I say to you, Moses did not give you bread from heaven." It is another who gives, because it is my Father — not bodily bread, but the true bread from heaven. But against this: was not the bread which the fathers had in the desert truly bread? I answer: if "true" is taken as it is divided against the false, then that bread was true, for the miracle of the manna was not false; but if "true" is taken as truth is divided against figure, then that bread was not true, but a figure of the spiritual bread, namely of our Lord Jesus Christ, which the manna itself signified, as the Apostle says, 1 Corinthians 10:3: "all ate the same spiritual food." Likewise, against what he says — "he did not give you bread from heaven" — is what is said in Psalm 77:24: "he gave them the bread of heaven." I answer: heaven is taken in three ways. Sometimes for the air; Matthew 13:4: "the birds of the air ate it"; and in Psalm 17:14: "the Lord thundered from heaven." Sometimes for the starry heaven, according to that verse, Psalm 113:16: "the heaven of heaven is the Lord's"; and Matthew 24:29: "the stars will fall from heaven." Sometimes, indeed, for the spiritual goods themselves; Matthew 5:12: "rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven." The manna, therefore, was from heaven not the starry or spiritual heaven, but the aerial. Or it is said to be from heaven inasmuch as it was a figure of the true heavenly bread, our Lord Jesus Christ. Consequently, when he says "for the true bread is that which comes down from heaven and gives life to the world," he proves that it is from heaven also by its effect. For the true heaven is of a spiritual nature, to which life belongs of itself, and therefore it gives life of itself; below: "it is the spirit that gives life." Now God himself is the author of life. From this, then, it is known that this spiritual bread is from heaven, since it produces its proper effect, if it gives life. For that bodily bread did not give life, since all who ate the manna died; but this bread gives life, and therefore he says it is "the true bread," and not figural, "which comes down from heaven." And this is evident, because "it gives life to the world." For Christ, who is the true bread, gives life to whom he wills; below, 10:10: "I came that they may have life," and so on. He also comes down from heaven; above, 3:13: "no one has ascended into heaven except him who descended from heaven, the Son of Man who is in heaven." Thus, therefore, Christ, the true bread, gives life to the world by reason of his divinity, and comes down from heaven by reason of his human nature. For, as was said above at chapter 3, he is said to have descended from heaven by assuming human nature; Philippians 2:7: "he emptied himself, taking the form of a servant." "They said therefore," and so on. Here the obtaining of the spiritual food is treated, and first the petition for that food itself is set forth; second the exposition is given, at "But Jesus said to them: I am the bread of life," where he shows the manner of obtaining it. It must be known, concerning the first, that the Jews understood the Lord's words carnally; and therefore, because they were in a desire for carnal things, they ask carnal food from Christ; hence they said to him, "Lord, always give us this bread," that would refresh in this way. And the Samaritan woman understood the word about spiritual water carnally, and wishing to be free from need, said: "Lord, give me this water." And although these people understand the Lord's words about food carnally, and ask carnally, nevertheless their petition, understood spiritually, is fitting for us; Matthew 6:11: "give us this day our daily bread": because we cannot live without this bread. Consequently, when he says "But Jesus said to them: I am the bread of life," he shows the manner of obtaining it, showing first what this bread is; second how it is acquired, at "all that the Father gives me will come to me." Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets forth the explanation of the aforesaid bread; second he assigns the reason for the explanation, at "he who comes to me shall not hunger"; third he manifests the necessity of the explanation, at "but I said to you," and so on. Jesus therefore said to them, "I am the bread of life": for, as was said above, the word of wisdom is the special food of the mind, because by it the mind is sustained; Ecclesiasticus 15:3: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding." Now the bread of wisdom is said to be the bread of life, to distinguish it from bodily bread, which is the bread of death, which is fitting only for restoring the defect of mortality, whence it is necessary only in this mortal life. But the bread of divine wisdom is of itself life-giving, and has no contrary death. Likewise, bodily bread does not give life, but only sustains for a time a life already existing; but spiritual bread so gives life that it grants life, for the soul begins to live through this, that it cleaves to the Word of God; Psalm 35:10: "with you is the fountain of life." Since, therefore, every word of wisdom is derived from the only-begotten Word of God, Ecclesiasticus 1:5: "the fountain of wisdom is the only-begotten of God, abiding on high," therefore the Word of God itself is principally called the bread of life; and therefore Christ says, "I am the bread of life." And because the flesh of Christ is united to the Word of God itself, it also has the property of being life-giving, whence his body too, taken sacramentally, is life-giving: for through the mysteries which Christ fulfilled in his flesh, he gives life to the world; and thus the flesh of Christ, on account of the Lord's word, is bread — not of the accustomed life, but of that life which is not unlocked by death. And therefore the flesh of Christ is called bread; Genesis 49:20: "Asher, his bread is fat." It is also signified through the manna, 1 Corinthians 10:1ff. "Manna" is interpreted "what is this?" Because the Jews, seeing it, marveled, saying to one another, "what is this?" But nothing is more marvelous than the Son of God made man, so that it falls to anyone to ask, "what is this?" That is, how is the Son of God the son of man; how do two natures come to make one person of Christ? Isaiah 9:6: "his name shall be called Wonderful." It is also marvelous how Christ is under the sacrament. Consequently, when he says "he who comes to me shall not hunger," he assigns the reason for the explanation, and this from the effect of this bread. For bodily bread, once eaten, does not take away hunger forever, since it is corrupted and fails; and therefore it must be sought again for nourishment; but spiritual bread, giving life of itself, is never corrupted; and therefore a man, having eaten once, never hungers. And therefore he says, "he who comes to me shall not hunger, and he who believes in me shall never thirst." Now, as to what he says — namely, that "he who comes" and "he who believes" shall not hunger nor thirst — these do not differ, according to Augustine, because to come to him and to believe in him are the same thing: for we come to God not by steps of the body, but of the mind, the first of which is faith. To eat and to drink are likewise the same: for by both is signified the eternal satisfaction, where there is no want. Matthew 5:6: "blessed are they who hunger and thirst for justice, for they shall be satisfied": so that the same thing is food sustaining and drink refreshing. Now the reason why temporal things do not take away thirst forever is, first, because they are not taken all at once, but little by little, and as it were with movement, and therefore something always remains to be taken; and on account of this, just as delight and satisfaction arise from what has already been taken, so too desire remains from the taking. The other reason is that they are corrupted, whence a memory remains from the corrupted thing, and desire for them is generated again. Spiritual things, however, are both taken all at once, and are not corrupted nor do they fail; and therefore their satisfaction remains forever. Revelation 7:16: "they shall neither hunger nor thirst." Psalm 15:10: "you shall fill me with joy with your countenance; delights are at your right hand," that is, in spiritual goods, "even to the end." Consequently, when he says "but I said to you," etc., the necessity of the explanation is set forth. For someone might say: we asked for bread; but you do not answer, "I will give it to you," or "I will not"; but rather you say, "I am the bread of life"; and therefore your answer does not seem a good one. But that it is a good answer, the Lord shows, saying, "I said to you that you have also seen me, and have not believed": which is the same as if someone had bread before him, being ignorant of it, and it were said to him, "behold, bread is before you." And therefore he says, "I said to you (I am the living bread) and you have seen me, and have not believed"; that is, you desire bread, and you have it before you; and yet you do not take it, because you do not believe. In this he reproaches them for their unbelief; below, 15:24: "but they have seen, and have hated both me and my Father." Consequently, when he says "all that the Father gives me will come to me," he shows how it is acquired, and first he sets forth the manner of acquiring it; second, the assurance of arrival, at "and him who comes to me I will not cast out"; third he manifests what he says, at "because I came down from heaven," and so on. It must be known, concerning the first, that our very believing comes to us from the gift of God. Ephesians 2:8: "by grace you are saved, and not of yourselves, for it is the gift of God"; Philippians 1:29: "it has been given to you not only to believe in him, but also to suffer for him." Now it is sometimes said that God the Father gives believing men to the Son, as here, "all that the Father gives me will come to me." Sometimes the Son gives to the Father, as that text, 1 Corinthians 15:24: "when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God and the Father." From which we understand that just as the Father, in giving, does not take the kingdom away from himself, so neither does the Son. Now the Father gives to the Son, inasmuch as he makes a man cleave to his Word. 1 Corinthians 1:9: "through whom," namely the Father, "you have been called into the fellowship of his Son." But the Son delivers to the Father, inasmuch as the Word is manifestative of the Father himself. Below, 17:6: "Father, I have manifested your name to men." Thus, therefore, he says, "all that the Father gives me will come to me"; that is, those who believe in me, whom the Father makes cleave to me by his gift. But perhaps someone would say that it is not necessary that anyone make use of the gift of God: for many receive the gift of God who do not use it. How then does he say, "all that the Father gives me will come to me"? To which it must be said that in that giving is understood not only the habit, which is faith and the like, but also the interior instinct toward believing. Whatever, then, one does toward salvation, all of it is from the gift of God. But a question remains: for if all that the Father gives to Christ goes to him, as he himself says, then only those go to God whom the Father gives to him; therefore it ought not to be imputed to those who do not go, since they are not given to him. To which it must be said that it is not imputed to them, if they cannot come to faith without the help of God; but this is imputed to the one who does not come, because he himself provides the impediment that keeps him from coming, turning himself away from salvation, whose way, as far as it is in itself, is open to all. Now the goal of the arrival is set forth when he says "and him who comes to me I will not cast out." For someone might say: we will come to you; but you will not receive us. And therefore he says, excluding this, "him who comes to me" — by the steps of faith and good works — "I will not cast out," in which he gives us to understand that he himself is within: for that is "within" from which one goes out to "without." Let us therefore consider what this interior thing is, and how one is cast out from it. It must be known, then, that since all visible things are said to be, as it were, certain exterior things with respect to spiritual things, the more something is spiritual, the more interior it is. There is, therefore, a twofold interior. One is the deepest, namely the joy of eternal life, which, according to Augustine, is the more inward and sweet secret, without weariness, without the bitterness of evil thoughts, without the interruption of temptations and sorrows; concerning which it is said, Matthew 25:21: "enter into the joy of your lord." And Psalm 30:21: "you shall hide them in the secret of your face"; that is, in the full vision of your essence. And from this interior thing no one shall be cast out. Revelation 3:12: "he who shall overcome, I will make him a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go out no more," because, as is said in Matthew 25:46, "the just shall go into life everlasting." The other interior thing is the rectitude of conscience, which is a spiritual joy; and concerning this it is said, Wisdom 8:16: "entering into my house, I shall rest." And Song of Songs 1:3: "the king has brought me into his storerooms." And from this some are cast out. And therefore what the Lord says, "I will not cast out," can be understood in two ways. In one way, so that those are said to come to him who are given to him by the Father through eternal predestination; and concerning these he says, "him who comes to me," predestined by the Father, "I will not cast out"; Romans 11:2: "God has not cast away his people whom he foreknew." In the other way, because those who go out do not go out as though cast out by Christ, but the cause of their casting-out is on their own part, who, through unbelief and sins, withdraw from the secret place of a right conscience. And thus it is said, "I do not cast out," but they themselves cast themselves out; Jeremiah 23:33: "you are the burden, and I will cast you off, says the Lord." And in this way that man was cast out who had entered the wedding feast not having a wedding garment, as is said in Matthew 22:11ff. Now he assigns the reason for the foregoing, when he says "because I came down from heaven," etc., and first he sets forth the intention of fulfilling the Father's will; second he manifests what the Father's will is, at "this is the will of him who sent me, the Father"; third he shows the final fulfillment of the will, at "and I will raise him up on the last day." Concerning the first it must be known that this text can be read in two ways: in one way according to Augustine, in the other according to Chrysostom. According to Augustine, thus: "him who comes to me I will not cast out," and this because he comes to me who imitates my humility. Matthew 11:28, when the Lord said, "come to me, all you who labor," he consequently adds: "learn from me, for I am meek and humble of heart." Now the true meekness of the Son of God consists in this, that he subjected his own will to the will of the Father. And therefore he says "I will not cast out," because "I came down from heaven not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me." On this account the soul went out from God, because it was proud; and therefore it is necessary to return by humility, coming to Christ through the imitation of his humility, which consists in this, that he does not do his own will alone, but the will of God the Father. It must be known, moreover, that in Christ there was a twofold will. One according to the human nature, which is proper to him both by nature and by the will of the Father; the other according to the divine nature, which is the same as the will of the Father. His own will, therefore, namely the human will, he ordered under the divine will, because he himself showed his obedience under the effect of the paternal will, wishing to fulfill the Father's will. Psalm 39:9: "that I should do your will, O my God, I have desired it." We ask that this will be done in us when we say, Matthew 6:10: "your will be done." Those, therefore, are not cast out who do not do their own will, but the will of God. For the Devil, wishing to do his own will, which is a mark of pride, was cast out of heaven, and the first man out of Paradise. According to Chrysostom, however, thus: I do not cast out him who comes to me because I came for this, to fulfill the Father's will concerning the salvation of men. If, therefore, I was incarnated for the salvation of men, how ought I to cast them out? And this is what he says: "therefore I do not cast out, because I came down from heaven not to do my own will," that is, the human will, so as to acquire something proper to myself, "but the will of him who sent me," the Father, "who wills all men to be saved," as is said in 1 Timothy 2:4. And therefore, as far as it is from me, I cast no one out. Romans 5:10: "for if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, shall we be saved by his life." Now what the Father's will is, he explains first, when he says "for this is the will of him who sent me, the Father," etc.; second he assigns the reason, at "for this is the will of my Father," etc. He said, then: I will not cast out those who come to me, because I assumed flesh in order to do the Father's will. Now the will of him who sent me, the Father, is this: namely, that I should not cast out; and therefore I will not cast out. 1 Thessalonians 4:3: "this is the will of God, your sanctification." And therefore he says "that of all that he has given me, I should lose nothing of it"; that is, that I should lose nothing, until it comes to the future resurrection, in which some will be lost — not, however, of those who were given to him through eternal predestination, but the impious; Psalm 1:6: "the way of the impious shall perish." But those who are preserved up to that time will not be lost. By this, however, that he says "I will not lose," it is not to be understood that he has need of them, or that it would be a detriment to him if they perish. But he says this on account of his affection for their salvation, and their good, which he reckons as his own. But against this is what is said below, chapter 17:12: "none of them," namely of those whom you gave me, "has perished, except the son of perdition." Therefore some of those who were given to him through eternal predestination are lost. This, then — what he says, "I will not lose of it" — is not true. But it must be said that it is from among those who are given to him through present righteousness that some are lost; not, however, from among those given through eternal predestination. Now he sets forth the reason for the divine will when he says "for this is the will of my Father," etc. The reason why the Father wills that I should not lose anything of what he has given me is that it is the Father's will to give life spiritually to men, since he himself is the fountain of life. And because he is eternal, as far as concerns himself, it is his will that everyone who comes to me should have eternal life. And this is what he says: "this is the will of the Father who sent me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in him should have eternal life." But it must be noted that above, 5:24, he said: "he who sees the Son, and believes him who sent me, has eternal life," whereas here he says "he who believes in him" — so as to give us to understand the same divinity of the Father and the Son, the vision of which through essence is our ultimate end, and the object of faith. But what he says, "sees," is not to be understood of the vision through essence, which faith precedes, but of the bodily vision of Christ, which leads to faith. And therefore he says pointedly, "he who sees the Son, and believes in him"; above, 5:24: "he who believes in him (...) is not judged, but shall pass from death to life"; below, 20:31: "but these things are written, that you may believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that believing, you may have life in his name." This will of the Father, moreover, will likewise be fulfilled, and therefore he adds, "and I will raise him up on the last day": because he thus wills that not only in soul, but also in body, he should have eternal life (Daniel 12:2: "of those who sleep in the dust of the earth, some shall awake to life everlasting, and others to everlasting reproach") just as Christ also rose again; Romans 6:9: "Christ rising from the dead dies now no more," and so on.”

“And this is the will of him that sent me,.... The Vulgate Latin adds, "of my Father"; and all the Oriental versions read only, "and this is the will of my Father"; this is his declared, his revealed will in the Gospel, which the sons of men are made acquainted with, as the other was his secret will, which was only known to the Son till he discovered it. That everyone which seeth the Son, and believeth on him; who so sees him as to believe in him; for this is not to be understood of a corporeal sight of Christ, or of a mere speculative knowledge of him, or historical faith in him; for it is not so to see him, as merely to believe what he is, the Son of God, the Messiah and Saviour of the world, or what he says, but to trust in him for righteousness, life, and happiness. Men are by nature blind, their eyes are shut to all that is spiritually good; it is the Spirit of God that opens blind eyes, and illuminates the understanding: and in his light men see not only themselves, their sin, and want of righteousness, and their lost state and condition, but Christ, and a beauty, glory, and excellency in him, ability and willingness to save, a suitableness in him for them, and a fulness of all grace; they see righteousness, peace, pardon, cleansing, wisdom, strength, grace, life, and salvation, and go out of themselves to him for all: and such a sight, though it may be but glimmering, is saving, and is self-abasing, soul rejoicing, surprising, and transforming; is attended with certainty, reality, and evidence, and is a foretaste of glory; for it is the will of God, and not man, of a gracious Father, of an unchangeable and eternal being, whose will cannot be resisted, and made void, that such may have everlasting life; which will be a life of glory, and will consist in possessing glory both in soul and body; in beholding glory, the glory of one another, the glory of angels, the glory of divine truths, and mysterious providences, the glory of the divine perfections, and of the Lord Jesus Christ; and it will be a life of perfection, of perfect knowledge, holiness, obedience, love, peace, and joy; a life free from all the miseries and inconveniences of this, both in a natural and spiritual sense; a life of pleasure, and which will last for ever: to which Christ adds, and I will raise him up at the last day; Christ will be the efficient cause, as well as he is the exemplar, the earnest, and first fruits of the resurrection of the dead; he will indeed raise all the dead by his power, but the saints particularly, by virtue of union to him, as the members of his body, and in the first place; and the very same shall rise, and with the same numerical body, that were given to him, and believe in him: and this will be at the last of the last days, at the end of all things; and is mentioned to show, that length of time will not hinder the resurrection of the dead, and in opposition to a Jewish notion, that the resurrection of the dead would be at the Messiah's coming: it will be at his second coming, but was not to be at his first; there was indeed then a resurrection of some particular persons, but not a general one of all the saints: that the Jews expect the resurrection of the dead when the Messiah comes, appears from their Targums, Talmuds, and other writers; so the Targumist on Hos 14:8, "They shall be gathered from their captivity, they shall sit under the shadow of their Messiah, "and the dead shall live", and good shall be multiplied in the land.'' And in the Talmud (p) it is said, "the holy blessed God will quicken the righteous, and they shall not return to their dust.'' The gloss upon it is, "the holy blessed God will quicken them "in the days of" the Messiah.'' And so the land of the living is said to be, "the land, whose dead live first in the days of the Messiah (q).'' And hence R. Jeremiah desired to he buried with his clothes and shoes on, and staff in his hand, that when the Messiah came, he might be ready (r) with which agree others of the more modern writers; so Kimchi on Isa 66:5. "They shall live at the resurrection of the dead, in the days of the Messiah.'' And the same writer on Jer 23:20 observes it is said, ""ye" shall consider, and not "they" shall consider; which intimates the "resurrection of the dead in the days of the Messiah".'' And says Aben Ezra on Dan 12:2, "The righteous which die in captivity shall live, when the Redeemer comes;'' though some of their writers differ in this point, and will not allow the days of the Messiah, and the resurrection of the dead, to be one and the same (s). (p) T. Bab. Sanhedrin, fol. 92. 1. (q) T. Hieros. Kilaim, fol. 32. 3. (r) T. Hieros. Kilaim, foi. 32. 3. col. 2. (s) Zohar in Gen. fol. 82. 4.”

“I should lose nothing - It is the will of God that every soul who believes should continue in the faith, and have a resurrection unto life eternal. But he wills this continuance in salvation, without purposing to force the persons so to continue. God may will a thing to be, without willing that it shall be. Judas was given to Christ by the Father, Joh 17:12. The Father willed that this Judas should continue in the faith, and have a resurrection unto life eternal: but Judas sinned and perished. Now it is evident that God willed that Judas might be saved, without willing that he must be saved infallibly and unconditionally. When a man is a worker together with the grace of God, he is saved; when he receives that grace of God in vain, he is lost - not through a lack of will or mercy in God, but through lack of his co-operation with Divine grace. God saves no man as a stock or a stone, but as a reasonable being and free agent. "That which thou hast heard, thou mayest hold fast, and persevere in, if thou wilt," Says St. Augustin. In eo quod audieras, et tenueras, perseverares, si velles. De Correct. & Grat. c. 7. See Calmet. Raise it up again at the last day - The Jews believed that the wicked should have no resurrection; and that the principle that led to the resurrection of the body, in the righteous, was the indwelling Spirit of God. This is positively asserted in the Shir Hashirim Rabba. See Schoettgen.”

“The question of the Jews having been posed, here the response of Christ is set forth. And first he shows the origin of the spiritual food; second he proves it, at the words "For the bread that comes down from heaven is the true bread." Concerning the first, it must be known that the Jews had proposed two things to Christ concerning the origin of the bodily food which their fathers had: namely, the giver, who was Moses, and the place, because it was from heaven; and so the Lord, removing these two things concerning the origin of the spiritual food, asserts that the giver of the spiritual food is different, and the place is different. Hence he says, removing the aforesaid points, "Amen, amen I say to you, Moses did not give you bread from heaven." It is another who gives, because it is my Father — not bodily bread, but the true bread from heaven. But against this: was not the bread which the fathers had in the desert truly bread? I answer: if "true" is taken as it is divided against the false, then that bread was true, for the miracle of the manna was not false; but if "true" is taken as truth is divided against figure, then that bread was not true, but a figure of the spiritual bread, namely of our Lord Jesus Christ, which the manna itself signified, as the Apostle says, 1 Corinthians 10:3: "all ate the same spiritual food." Likewise, against what he says — "he did not give you bread from heaven" — is what is said in Psalm 77:24: "he gave them the bread of heaven." I answer: heaven is taken in three ways. Sometimes for the air; Matthew 13:4: "the birds of the air ate it"; and in Psalm 17:14: "the Lord thundered from heaven." Sometimes for the starry heaven, according to that verse, Psalm 113:16: "the heaven of heaven is the Lord's"; and Matthew 24:29: "the stars will fall from heaven." Sometimes, indeed, for the spiritual goods themselves; Matthew 5:12: "rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven." The manna, therefore, was from heaven not the starry or spiritual heaven, but the aerial. Or it is said to be from heaven inasmuch as it was a figure of the true heavenly bread, our Lord Jesus Christ. Consequently, when he says "for the true bread is that which comes down from heaven and gives life to the world," he proves that it is from heaven also by its effect. For the true heaven is of a spiritual nature, to which life belongs of itself, and therefore it gives life of itself; below: "it is the spirit that gives life." Now God himself is the author of life. From this, then, it is known that this spiritual bread is from heaven, since it produces its proper effect, if it gives life. For that bodily bread did not give life, since all who ate the manna died; but this bread gives life, and therefore he says it is "the true bread," and not figural, "which comes down from heaven." And this is evident, because "it gives life to the world." For Christ, who is the true bread, gives life to whom he wills; below, 10:10: "I came that they may have life," and so on. He also comes down from heaven; above, 3:13: "no one has ascended into heaven except him who descended from heaven, the Son of Man who is in heaven." Thus, therefore, Christ, the true bread, gives life to the world by reason of his divinity, and comes down from heaven by reason of his human nature. For, as was said above at chapter 3, he is said to have descended from heaven by assuming human nature; Philippians 2:7: "he emptied himself, taking the form of a servant." "They said therefore," and so on. Here the obtaining of the spiritual food is treated, and first the petition for that food itself is set forth; second the exposition is given, at "But Jesus said to them: I am the bread of life," where he shows the manner of obtaining it. It must be known, concerning the first, that the Jews understood the Lord's words carnally; and therefore, because they were in a desire for carnal things, they ask carnal food from Christ; hence they said to him, "Lord, always give us this bread," that would refresh in this way. And the Samaritan woman understood the word about spiritual water carnally, and wishing to be free from need, said: "Lord, give me this water." And although these people understand the Lord's words about food carnally, and ask carnally, nevertheless their petition, understood spiritually, is fitting for us; Matthew 6:11: "give us this day our daily bread": because we cannot live without this bread. Consequently, when he says "But Jesus said to them: I am the bread of life," he shows the manner of obtaining it, showing first what this bread is; second how it is acquired, at "all that the Father gives me will come to me." Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets forth the explanation of the aforesaid bread; second he assigns the reason for the explanation, at "he who comes to me shall not hunger"; third he manifests the necessity of the explanation, at "but I said to you," and so on. Jesus therefore said to them, "I am the bread of life": for, as was said above, the word of wisdom is the special food of the mind, because by it the mind is sustained; Ecclesiasticus 15:3: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding." Now the bread of wisdom is said to be the bread of life, to distinguish it from bodily bread, which is the bread of death, which is fitting only for restoring the defect of mortality, whence it is necessary only in this mortal life. But the bread of divine wisdom is of itself life-giving, and has no contrary death. Likewise, bodily bread does not give life, but only sustains for a time a life already existing; but spiritual bread so gives life that it grants life, for the soul begins to live through this, that it cleaves to the Word of God; Psalm 35:10: "with you is the fountain of life." Since, therefore, every word of wisdom is derived from the only-begotten Word of God, Ecclesiasticus 1:5: "the fountain of wisdom is the only-begotten of God, abiding on high," therefore the Word of God itself is principally called the bread of life; and therefore Christ says, "I am the bread of life." And because the flesh of Christ is united to the Word of God itself, it also has the property of being life-giving, whence his body too, taken sacramentally, is life-giving: for through the mysteries which Christ fulfilled in his flesh, he gives life to the world; and thus the flesh of Christ, on account of the Lord's word, is bread — not of the accustomed life, but of that life which is not unlocked by death. And therefore the flesh of Christ is called bread; Genesis 49:20: "Asher, his bread is fat." It is also signified through the manna, 1 Corinthians 10:1ff. "Manna" is interpreted "what is this?" Because the Jews, seeing it, marveled, saying to one another, "what is this?" But nothing is more marvelous than the Son of God made man, so that it falls to anyone to ask, "what is this?" That is, how is the Son of God the son of man; how do two natures come to make one person of Christ? Isaiah 9:6: "his name shall be called Wonderful." It is also marvelous how Christ is under the sacrament. Consequently, when he says "he who comes to me shall not hunger," he assigns the reason for the explanation, and this from the effect of this bread. For bodily bread, once eaten, does not take away hunger forever, since it is corrupted and fails; and therefore it must be sought again for nourishment; but spiritual bread, giving life of itself, is never corrupted; and therefore a man, having eaten once, never hungers. And therefore he says, "he who comes to me shall not hunger, and he who believes in me shall never thirst." Now, as to what he says — namely, that "he who comes" and "he who believes" shall not hunger nor thirst — these do not differ, according to Augustine, because to come to him and to believe in him are the same thing: for we come to God not by steps of the body, but of the mind, the first of which is faith. To eat and to drink are likewise the same: for by both is signified the eternal satisfaction, where there is no want. Matthew 5:6: "blessed are they who hunger and thirst for justice, for they shall be satisfied": so that the same thing is food sustaining and drink refreshing. Now the reason why temporal things do not take away thirst forever is, first, because they are not taken all at once, but little by little, and as it were with movement, and therefore something always remains to be taken; and on account of this, just as delight and satisfaction arise from what has already been taken, so too desire remains from the taking. The other reason is that they are corrupted, whence a memory remains from the corrupted thing, and desire for them is generated again. Spiritual things, however, are both taken all at once, and are not corrupted nor do they fail; and therefore their satisfaction remains forever. Revelation 7:16: "they shall neither hunger nor thirst." Psalm 15:10: "you shall fill me with joy with your countenance; delights are at your right hand," that is, in spiritual goods, "even to the end." Consequently, when he says "but I said to you," etc., the necessity of the explanation is set forth. For someone might say: we asked for bread; but you do not answer, "I will give it to you," or "I will not"; but rather you say, "I am the bread of life"; and therefore your answer does not seem a good one. But that it is a good answer, the Lord shows, saying, "I said to you that you have also seen me, and have not believed": which is the same as if someone had bread before him, being ignorant of it, and it were said to him, "behold, bread is before you." And therefore he says, "I said to you (I am the living bread) and you have seen me, and have not believed"; that is, you desire bread, and you have it before you; and yet you do not take it, because you do not believe. In this he reproaches them for their unbelief; below, 15:24: "but they have seen, and have hated both me and my Father." Consequently, when he says "all that the Father gives me will come to me," he shows how it is acquired, and first he sets forth the manner of acquiring it; second, the assurance of arrival, at "and him who comes to me I will not cast out"; third he manifests what he says, at "because I came down from heaven," and so on. It must be known, concerning the first, that our very believing comes to us from the gift of God. Ephesians 2:8: "by grace you are saved, and not of yourselves, for it is the gift of God"; Philippians 1:29: "it has been given to you not only to believe in him, but also to suffer for him." Now it is sometimes said that God the Father gives believing men to the Son, as here, "all that the Father gives me will come to me." Sometimes the Son gives to the Father, as that text, 1 Corinthians 15:24: "when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God and the Father." From which we understand that just as the Father, in giving, does not take the kingdom away from himself, so neither does the Son. Now the Father gives to the Son, inasmuch as he makes a man cleave to his Word. 1 Corinthians 1:9: "through whom," namely the Father, "you have been called into the fellowship of his Son." But the Son delivers to the Father, inasmuch as the Word is manifestative of the Father himself. Below, 17:6: "Father, I have manifested your name to men." Thus, therefore, he says, "all that the Father gives me will come to me"; that is, those who believe in me, whom the Father makes cleave to me by his gift. But perhaps someone would say that it is not necessary that anyone make use of the gift of God: for many receive the gift of God who do not use it. How then does he say, "all that the Father gives me will come to me"? To which it must be said that in that giving is understood not only the habit, which is faith and the like, but also the interior instinct toward believing. Whatever, then, one does toward salvation, all of it is from the gift of God. But a question remains: for if all that the Father gives to Christ goes to him, as he himself says, then only those go to God whom the Father gives to him; therefore it ought not to be imputed to those who do not go, since they are not given to him. To which it must be said that it is not imputed to them, if they cannot come to faith without the help of God; but this is imputed to the one who does not come, because he himself provides the impediment that keeps him from coming, turning himself away from salvation, whose way, as far as it is in itself, is open to all. Now the goal of the arrival is set forth when he says "and him who comes to me I will not cast out." For someone might say: we will come to you; but you will not receive us. And therefore he says, excluding this, "him who comes to me" — by the steps of faith and good works — "I will not cast out," in which he gives us to understand that he himself is within: for that is "within" from which one goes out to "without." Let us therefore consider what this interior thing is, and how one is cast out from it. It must be known, then, that since all visible things are said to be, as it were, certain exterior things with respect to spiritual things, the more something is spiritual, the more interior it is. There is, therefore, a twofold interior. One is the deepest, namely the joy of eternal life, which, according to Augustine, is the more inward and sweet secret, without weariness, without the bitterness of evil thoughts, without the interruption of temptations and sorrows; concerning which it is said, Matthew 25:21: "enter into the joy of your lord." And Psalm 30:21: "you shall hide them in the secret of your face"; that is, in the full vision of your essence. And from this interior thing no one shall be cast out. Revelation 3:12: "he who shall overcome, I will make him a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go out no more," because, as is said in Matthew 25:46, "the just shall go into life everlasting." The other interior thing is the rectitude of conscience, which is a spiritual joy; and concerning this it is said, Wisdom 8:16: "entering into my house, I shall rest." And Song of Songs 1:3: "the king has brought me into his storerooms." And from this some are cast out. And therefore what the Lord says, "I will not cast out," can be understood in two ways. In one way, so that those are said to come to him who are given to him by the Father through eternal predestination; and concerning these he says, "him who comes to me," predestined by the Father, "I will not cast out"; Romans 11:2: "God has not cast away his people whom he foreknew." In the other way, because those who go out do not go out as though cast out by Christ, but the cause of their casting-out is on their own part, who, through unbelief and sins, withdraw from the secret place of a right conscience. And thus it is said, "I do not cast out," but they themselves cast themselves out; Jeremiah 23:33: "you are the burden, and I will cast you off, says the Lord." And in this way that man was cast out who had entered the wedding feast not having a wedding garment, as is said in Matthew 22:11ff. Now he assigns the reason for the foregoing, when he says "because I came down from heaven," etc., and first he sets forth the intention of fulfilling the Father's will; second he manifests what the Father's will is, at "this is the will of him who sent me, the Father"; third he shows the final fulfillment of the will, at "and I will raise him up on the last day." Concerning the first it must be known that this text can be read in two ways: in one way according to Augustine, in the other according to Chrysostom. According to Augustine, thus: "him who comes to me I will not cast out," and this because he comes to me who imitates my humility. Matthew 11:28, when the Lord said, "come to me, all you who labor," he consequently adds: "learn from me, for I am meek and humble of heart." Now the true meekness of the Son of God consists in this, that he subjected his own will to the will of the Father. And therefore he says "I will not cast out," because "I came down from heaven not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me." On this account the soul went out from God, because it was proud; and therefore it is necessary to return by humility, coming to Christ through the imitation of his humility, which consists in this, that he does not do his own will alone, but the will of God the Father. It must be known, moreover, that in Christ there was a twofold will. One according to the human nature, which is proper to him both by nature and by the will of the Father; the other according to the divine nature, which is the same as the will of the Father. His own will, therefore, namely the human will, he ordered under the divine will, because he himself showed his obedience under the effect of the paternal will, wishing to fulfill the Father's will. Psalm 39:9: "that I should do your will, O my God, I have desired it." We ask that this will be done in us when we say, Matthew 6:10: "your will be done." Those, therefore, are not cast out who do not do their own will, but the will of God. For the Devil, wishing to do his own will, which is a mark of pride, was cast out of heaven, and the first man out of Paradise. According to Chrysostom, however, thus: I do not cast out him who comes to me because I came for this, to fulfill the Father's will concerning the salvation of men. If, therefore, I was incarnated for the salvation of men, how ought I to cast them out? And this is what he says: "therefore I do not cast out, because I came down from heaven not to do my own will," that is, the human will, so as to acquire something proper to myself, "but the will of him who sent me," the Father, "who wills all men to be saved," as is said in 1 Timothy 2:4. And therefore, as far as it is from me, I cast no one out. Romans 5:10: "for if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, shall we be saved by his life." Now what the Father's will is, he explains first, when he says "for this is the will of him who sent me, the Father," etc.; second he assigns the reason, at "for this is the will of my Father," etc. He said, then: I will not cast out those who come to me, because I assumed flesh in order to do the Father's will. Now the will of him who sent me, the Father, is this: namely, that I should not cast out; and therefore I will not cast out. 1 Thessalonians 4:3: "this is the will of God, your sanctification." And therefore he says "that of all that he has given me, I should lose nothing of it"; that is, that I should lose nothing, until it comes to the future resurrection, in which some will be lost — not, however, of those who were given to him through eternal predestination, but the impious; Psalm 1:6: "the way of the impious shall perish." But those who are preserved up to that time will not be lost. By this, however, that he says "I will not lose," it is not to be understood that he has need of them, or that it would be a detriment to him if they perish. But he says this on account of his affection for their salvation, and their good, which he reckons as his own. But against this is what is said below, chapter 17:12: "none of them," namely of those whom you gave me, "has perished, except the son of perdition." Therefore some of those who were given to him through eternal predestination are lost. This, then — what he says, "I will not lose of it" — is not true. But it must be said that it is from among those who are given to him through present righteousness that some are lost; not, however, from among those given through eternal predestination. Now he sets forth the reason for the divine will when he says "for this is the will of my Father," etc. The reason why the Father wills that I should not lose anything of what he has given me is that it is the Father's will to give life spiritually to men, since he himself is the fountain of life. And because he is eternal, as far as concerns himself, it is his will that everyone who comes to me should have eternal life. And this is what he says: "this is the will of the Father who sent me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in him should have eternal life." But it must be noted that above, 5:24, he said: "he who sees the Son, and believes him who sent me, has eternal life," whereas here he says "he who believes in him" — so as to give us to understand the same divinity of the Father and the Son, the vision of which through essence is our ultimate end, and the object of faith. But what he says, "sees," is not to be understood of the vision through essence, which faith precedes, but of the bodily vision of Christ, which leads to faith. And therefore he says pointedly, "he who sees the Son, and believes in him"; above, 5:24: "he who believes in him (...) is not judged, but shall pass from death to life"; below, 20:31: "but these things are written, that you may believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that believing, you may have life in his name." This will of the Father, moreover, will likewise be fulfilled, and therefore he adds, "and I will raise him up on the last day": because he thus wills that not only in soul, but also in body, he should have eternal life (Daniel 12:2: "of those who sleep in the dust of the earth, some shall awake to life everlasting, and others to everlasting reproach") just as Christ also rose again; Romans 6:9: "Christ rising from the dead dies now no more," and so on.”

“Having set forth the teaching of Christ, here the contradiction of the aforesaid teaching is excluded, and first with respect to the murmuring crowds; second with respect to the doubting disciples, at the place "Many therefore of his disciples, hearing this, said" etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he expresses the murmuring of the crowds about the origin of the spiritual food; second he mitigates their dispute about the eating of the spiritual food, at the place "The Jews therefore disputed among themselves." Concerning the first he does two things. First the murmuring of the crowds is set down; second the repression of the murmuring, at the place "Jesus therefore answered, and said to them." Concerning the first he does two things. First the occasion of the murmuring is set down; second the words of those murmuring are set down, at the place "Is not this the son of Joseph?" He concludes therefore from the aforesaid words of Christ, that certain persons murmured about a certain one of the words spoken, namely because he had said: "I am the living bread, which came down from heaven" (John 6:51); which spiritual bread indeed they did not grasp nor desire. And therefore they murmured, because they did not have a mind grounded in spiritual things, and they had an ancient custom of this matter, according to Psalm 105:25: "they murmured in their tents"; and 1 Corinthians 10:10: "neither murmur, as some of them murmured." Now, as Chrysostom says, up to this point they had not murmured, because they always hoped that they would obtain bodily food; when that hope was withdrawn, they immediately begin to murmur, although they put forward another cause. But they do not openly contradict him, because of the reverence which they still had for him, from the memory of the preceding miracle. Now he sets down the words of those murmuring when he says "Is not this the son of Joseph?" For because they were carnal, they considered only the carnal generation of Christ, by which they were hindered from knowing the spiritual and eternal generation; and therefore they speak only of the carnal generation, according to what was said above, John 3:31: "he who is of the earth, speaks of the earth," and they do not grasp the spiritual; hence they add: "How then does he say, that I came down from heaven?" Now they call him the son of Joseph on account of common reputation: because Joseph was his foster-father, according to Luke 3:23: "as he was supposed, the son of Joseph." Now the repression of the murmuring is set down when he says "Jesus therefore answered, and said to them," and first he represses their murmuring; second he satisfies their doubt, at the place "Amen, amen I say to you: he who believes in me has eternal life." Concerning the first he does two things. First he restrains their murmuring; second he assigns the cause of their murmuring, at the place "No one can come to me" etc. Knowing therefore their murmuring, Jesus answered; and repressing their very murmuring, he said to them, "Murmur not" etc. For this is a wholesome teaching: for he who murmurs shows that his mind is not made firm in God, and therefore it is said in Wisdom 1:11: "Keep yourselves from murmuring, for it profits nothing." Now the cause of the murmuring is their unbelief; and therefore he shows this, saying "No one can come to me" etc., where first he shows that the drawing of the Father is necessary in order that one may come to Christ; second he shows the manner of drawing, at the place "it is written in the prophets" etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets down the deficiency of human capacity; second the aid of divine help; third the end, or fruit, of that help. Human capacity, therefore, is deficient for coming to Christ through faith; and therefore he says, "No one can come to me." Second, divine help is efficacious to come to the rescue, hence he adds, "unless the Father, who sent me, draws him." But the end, or fruit, is the best; hence it follows, "and I will raise him up on the last day." He says therefore first: it is not surprising if you murmur, because you have not yet been drawn by the Father to me. For "no one can come to me" — by believing in me — "unless the Father, who sent me, draws him." But here there is a threefold question. The first concerns what he says, "unless the Father draws him." For since we come to Christ by believing, as was said above in this same chapter, to come to Christ is to believe in him; but no one can believe except willingly. Since, then, drawing implies a certain violence, therefore whoever comes to Christ drawn, is compelled. I answer that it must be said that what is here said about this drawing of the Father does not imply compulsion, since not everything that draws exercises violence. Thus, then, the Father draws to the Son in many ways, according to the manifold manner of drawing without violence in human beings. For one man draws another by persuading through reason; and in this way the Father draws men to the Son, by showing him to be his Son; and this in two ways: either through interior revelation — Matthew 16:17: "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona, because flesh and blood has not revealed to you" — namely, that Christ is the Son of the living God — "but my Father"; or through the working of miracles, which he has from the Father — John 5:36: "the works which the Father has given me, these very works give testimony of me." Likewise, one draws another by alluring; Proverbs 7:21: "with the flatteries of her lips she drew him on." And in this way those who attend to Jesus because of the authority of the paternal majesty are drawn by the Father. For whoever believes in Christ because he believes him to be the Son of God — this man the Father draws to the Son, that is, the paternal majesty draws him. In this way Arius is not drawn, who believed Christ not to be the true Son of God, nor begotten of the substance of the Father. Nor was Photinus drawn in this way, who taught that Christ was a mere man. Thus, then, they are drawn by the Father, enticed by his majesty; but they are also drawn by the Son, by the admirable delight and love of the truth, which is the Son of God himself. For if, as Augustine says, "each man's own pleasure draws him," how much more strongly ought a man to be drawn to Christ, if he delights in truth, beatitude, justice, everlasting life — all of which is Christ? If, then, we are to be drawn by him, let us be drawn through the love of truth; according to Psalm 36:4: "delight in the Lord, and he will give you the petitions of your heart." Hence the bride said, Song of Songs 1:3: "Draw me after you; we will run to the odor of your ointments." But because not only exterior revelation, or its object, has the power of drawing, but also an interior instinct impelling and moving one to believe, therefore the Father draws many to the Son through the instinct of a divine operation moving the heart of man interiorly to believe; Philippians 2:13: "it is God who works in us to will and to accomplish"; Hosea 11:4: "I will draw them with the cords of Adam, with the bands of love"; Proverbs 21:1: "the heart of the king is in the hand of the Lord: he will incline it wherever he wills." The second question is this: since it is said that the Son draws to the Father — Matthew 11:27: "no one knows the Father but the Son, and he to whom the Son wills to reveal him"; and below, John 17:6: "Father, I have manifested your name to the men whom you gave me" — how is it here said that the Father draws to the Son? But it must be said that this can be answered in two ways: for we can speak of Christ either according as he is man, or according as he is God. Now according as he is man, Christ is the way; below, John 14:6: "I am the way"; and according as he is Christ, he leads to the Father, as a way leads to its terminus or end. But the Father draws to Christ as man insofar as he gives us his power, that we may believe in Christ; Ephesians 2:8: "by grace you have been saved, and this not of yourselves, for it is the gift of God." Insofar as he is Christ, he is the Word of God, and manifestative of the Father. Thus the Son draws to the Father. But the Father draws to the Son insofar as he manifests him. The third question concerns what he says, that no one can come unless drawn by the Father: because according to this, if someone does not come to Christ, it is not imputed to him, but to him who does not draw them. I answer that it must be said that truly no one can come unless drawn by the Father: for just as a heavy body cannot by nature be carried upward of itself unless it is drawn by another, so the human heart, tending of itself toward lower things, cannot be raised upward unless drawn. But if it is not raised up, the deficiency is not on the part of the one drawing, who, as far as is in him, fails no one; but it is on account of an impediment in the one who is not drawn. But, as far as this pertains, we can speak in one way about men in the state of unimpaired nature, and in another way in the state of corrupted nature; for in unimpaired nature there was no impediment prohibiting this drawing, whence at that time all men could be participants of this drawing. But in corrupted nature all are equally prohibited from this drawing by the impediment of sin; and therefore all need to be drawn. But God, as far as is in him, extends his hand to all to draw them, and, what is more, not only draws the hand of the one receiving, but even converts those turned away from himself, according to Lamentations 5:21: "Convert us, Lord, and we shall be converted"; and Psalm 84:7, according to another reading: "God, you, turning us, will give us life." Since, then, God is ready to give grace to all, and to draw them to himself, it is not imputed to him if someone does not accept, but to him who does not accept. But as to why he does not draw all those turned away, but only some, although all are equally turned away: a reason indeed can be assigned in general, namely that in those who are not drawn, the order of divine justice may appear and shine forth; but in those who are drawn, the immensity of divine mercy. But why in particular he draws this one, and does not draw that one, there is no reason at all, except the good pleasure of the divine will. Hence Augustine says: "whom he draws and whom he does not draw, why he draws that one and does not draw this one, do not wish to judge, if you do not wish to err. But receive, and understand: if you are not yet drawn, pray that you may be drawn." This can also be shown by an example. For a reason can be assigned why a builder places some stones lower down, and some higher up, and some on the sides, from the arrangement of the house, whose completion requires this. But why he places these stones here and those there, depends on his simple will. And hence it is that the first reason of the arrangement is referred to the will of the builder. Thus, then, God, for the completion of the universe, draws some indeed, that his mercy may appear in them; but he does not draw others, that his justice may be shown in them. But he draws these, he does not draw those, according to the good pleasure of his will. Likewise also, why in the Church he made some apostles, others confessors, others martyrs, the reason is on account of the adornment and completion of the Church. But why he made Peter an apostle, Stephen a martyr, and Nicholas a confessor, there is no other reason than his own will. Thus, then, the deficiency of human capacity, and the aid of divine help, are evident. There follows the end and fruit of the help, when he says "and I will raise him up on the last day" — even insofar as he is man: for through the things which Christ did in his flesh, we obtain the fruit of the resurrection; 1 Corinthians 15:21: "as by man came death, so also by man comes the resurrection of the dead." "I," therefore, according as I am man, "will raise him up," not only to the life of nature, but also to the life of glory, and this "on the last day." For the Catholic faith holds that the state of the world will be renewed; Revelation 21:1: "I saw a new heaven and a new earth." And among the other things which will concur toward this renewal, we believe that the motion of the heavens will cease, and consequently time; Revelation 10:5: "and the angel whom I saw standing upon the sea and upon the earth, lifted up his hand to heaven." And further on: "that there shall be time no longer." Because, then, with time ceasing at the resurrection, night and day will also cease, according to Zechariah 14:7: "there shall be one day, which is known to the Lord, not day nor night"; therefore he says, "I will raise him up on the last day." But as to why the motion of the heavens, and time, will last until then, neither less nor more, it must be known that that which exists for the sake of another thing is disposed in different ways according to the different disposition of that for the sake of which it exists. But all bodily things were made for the sake of man; and therefore they must be disposed in different ways according to the different disposition of man. Because, then, in men, when they rise again, the state of incorruption will begin, according to 1 Corinthians 15:54: "this mortal shall put on incorruption," therefore corruption will then also cease in things; hence the motion of the heavens will cease, which is the cause of generation and corruption in bodily things; Romans 8:21: "the creature itself shall be delivered from the servitude of corruption into the liberty of the children of God." Thus, then, it is evident that the drawing of the Father is necessary for us for faith. Consequently, when he says "it is written in the prophets" etc., he determines the manner of drawing, and first he sets down the manner of drawing; second, the efficacy of the drawing, at the place "everyone who has heard from the Father, and has learned, comes to me"; third, he excludes a supposed manner of drawing, at the place "not that anyone has seen the Father." Now the manner of drawing is fitting, because he draws by revealing and teaching; and this is what he says: "it is written in the prophets: they shall all be teachable by God" etc. Bede says this is written in Joel; but it does not seem to be expressly there, although something consonant with it is said; and Joel 2:22: "sons of Zion, rejoice in the Lord your God, because he will give you a teacher of justice." Therefore, according to Bede, he says "in the prophets," so as to give one to understand that this sense can be gathered from various sayings of the prophets. But this seems to be said more expressly in Isaiah 54:13: "I will make all your sons taught by the Lord." It is also said in Jeremiah 3:15: "I will give you shepherds according to my own heart, who shall feed you with knowledge and doctrine." Now this that he says, "they shall all be," can be understood in three ways. In one way, so that the word "all" stands for all the men of the world; in another way, so that it stands for all who are in the Church of Christ; in a third way, for all who will be in the kingdom of heaven. But if it is said in the first way, it seems not to be true; for he immediately adds, "everyone who has heard from the Father and has learned, comes to me." If, then, all men of the world will be teachable, therefore all will come to Christ. But this is false, because faith is not the possession of all. But to this a threefold response is given. For, according to Chrysostom, in the first way it must be said that this is said of the majority: "they shall all be," he says, "all," that is, the majority; according to which manner it is said in Matthew 8:11: "many will come from the east and the west," etc. Second, that "all," as far as it is from God, will be teachable; but that some are not taught, is on their own part. For the sun, as far as it is in itself, illumines all; but it can fail to be seen by some, if they close their eyes, or if they are blind. And in this way the Apostle says, 1 Timothy 2:4: "he wills all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth." In a third way, according to Augustine, that this is a fitting distribution, so that it is said "all shall be teachable by God," that is, all who are taught, are taught by God, just as we speak of some master of letters. For we say, if he is in a city: this man alone teaches all the boys of the city, because no one is taught in it except by him. And in this way it is said above, John 1:9: "that was the true light, which enlightens every man coming into this world." But if it is explained of those who are gathered in the Church, it is said "they shall all be" — namely, those who are in the Church — "teachable by God"; for in Isaiah 54:13 it is said: "I will make all your sons taught by the Lord" — in which indeed is shown the sublimity of the Christian faith, which does not cling to human doctrine, but to the doctrine of God. For the doctrine of the Old Testament was given through the prophets; but the doctrine of the New Testament is through the Son of God himself; Hebrews 1:1: "in many parts and in many ways" — that is, in the Old Testament — "God speaking in times past to the fathers by the prophets, last of all in these days has spoken to us by his Son"; and in the same place, 2:3: "which having begun to be declared by the Lord, was confirmed unto us by them that heard him." Thus, then, all who are in the Church are taught, not by the apostles, not by the prophets, but by God himself. And, according to Augustine, this very fact that we are taught by a man, is from God, who teaches interiorly; Matthew 23:10: "one is your master, Christ." For understanding, which is necessary above all for doctrine, is given to us from God. But if it is explained of those who are in the kingdom of heaven, etc., then "all shall be teachable by God," because they will see his essence immediately; 1 John 3:2: "we shall see him as he is." Now the drawing of the Father is most efficacious: because "everyone who has heard from the Father, and has learned, comes to me." Where he sets down two things: one, namely, that pertains to the gift of God, when he says "has heard," that is, with God revealing; the other that pertains to free will, when he says "and has learned," that is, through assent; and these two things are necessary in every teaching of the faith. "Everyone who has heard from the Father" — teaching and manifesting — "and has learned" — offering assent — "comes to me"; he comes, I say, in three ways: through the knowledge of the truth, through the affection of love, and through the imitation of works. And in each of these it is necessary that one hear and learn. For he who comes through the knowledge of the truth must hear, with God inspiring, according to Psalm 84:9: "I will hear what the Lord God will speak in me," and learn through affection, as has been said. But he who comes through love and desire, as is said below, John 7:37: "if anyone thirsts, let him come to me, and drink" — he too must hear the word of the Father, and grasp it, so that he may learn, and be moved in affection. For he learns the word who grasps it according to the intention of the one speaking; but the word of God the Father breathes forth love: whoever, therefore, grasps it with the fervor of love, learns it; Wisdom 7:27: "she conveys herself into holy souls, she makes them friends of God and prophets." But through the imitation of works one goes to Christ, according to Matthew 11:28: "come to me, all you who labor and are burdened, and I will refresh you." And in this way too, whoever learns, comes to Christ: for as the conclusion stands in relation to things knowable, so does operation in relation to things that can be done. Now in the sciences, whoever learns perfectly arrives at the conclusion; therefore in matters of action, he who perfectly learns the words arrives at right action; Isaiah 50:5: "the Lord has opened my ear; and I do not contradict." But because some might suppose that all men visibly hear and learn from the Father, therefore, so that the Lord might exclude this, he adds, "not that anyone has seen the Father" — that is, no man living in this life has seen the Father in his essence, according to Exodus 33:20: "man shall not see me, and live" — "except he," namely the Son, "who is from God, he has seen the Father" — his own Father — through essence. Or: no one has seen the Father with the vision of comprehension, with which vision neither man nor angel has ever seen him, nor can see him, except him who is from God, that is, the Son; Matthew 11:27: "no one knows the Father but the Son." The reason for this indeed is that, since every vision or cognition comes about through some likeness, according to the mode of likeness which creatures have to God, according to this they have knowledge of him. Hence the philosophers also say that the intelligences know the first cause according to this likeness of it which they have. But every creature indeed participates in some likeness of God, but one infinitely distant from the likeness of his nature, and therefore no creature can know him perfectly and totally, as he is in his own nature. But the Son, because he received the whole nature of the Father perfectly through eternal generation, therefore sees and comprehends him totally. But attention must be paid to the fitting order of speaking. For above, when he was speaking of the knowledge of others, he used the word "hearing"; but here, when he speaks of the knowledge of the Son, he uses the word "vision": for the knowledge that is through sight is immediate and open; but that which is through hearing comes about by the mediation of the one who has seen. Thus we too have received the knowledge which we have of the Father from the Son, who has seen him: so that in this way no one knows the Father except through Christ, who manifests him, and no one comes to the Son unless he has heard from the Father manifesting him.”

“Having set forth the teaching of Christ, here the contradiction of the aforesaid teaching is excluded, and first with respect to the murmuring crowds; second with respect to the doubting disciples, at the place "Many therefore of his disciples, hearing this, said" etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he expresses the murmuring of the crowds about the origin of the spiritual food; second he mitigates their dispute about the eating of the spiritual food, at the place "The Jews therefore disputed among themselves." Concerning the first he does two things. First the murmuring of the crowds is set down; second the repression of the murmuring, at the place "Jesus therefore answered, and said to them." Concerning the first he does two things. First the occasion of the murmuring is set down; second the words of those murmuring are set down, at the place "Is not this the son of Joseph?" He concludes therefore from the aforesaid words of Christ, that certain persons murmured about a certain one of the words spoken, namely because he had said: "I am the living bread, which came down from heaven" (John 6:51); which spiritual bread indeed they did not grasp nor desire. And therefore they murmured, because they did not have a mind grounded in spiritual things, and they had an ancient custom of this matter, according to Psalm 105:25: "they murmured in their tents"; and 1 Corinthians 10:10: "neither murmur, as some of them murmured." Now, as Chrysostom says, up to this point they had not murmured, because they always hoped that they would obtain bodily food; when that hope was withdrawn, they immediately begin to murmur, although they put forward another cause. But they do not openly contradict him, because of the reverence which they still had for him, from the memory of the preceding miracle. Now he sets down the words of those murmuring when he says "Is not this the son of Joseph?" For because they were carnal, they considered only the carnal generation of Christ, by which they were hindered from knowing the spiritual and eternal generation; and therefore they speak only of the carnal generation, according to what was said above, John 3:31: "he who is of the earth, speaks of the earth," and they do not grasp the spiritual; hence they add: "How then does he say, that I came down from heaven?" Now they call him the son of Joseph on account of common reputation: because Joseph was his foster-father, according to Luke 3:23: "as he was supposed, the son of Joseph." Now the repression of the murmuring is set down when he says "Jesus therefore answered, and said to them," and first he represses their murmuring; second he satisfies their doubt, at the place "Amen, amen I say to you: he who believes in me has eternal life." Concerning the first he does two things. First he restrains their murmuring; second he assigns the cause of their murmuring, at the place "No one can come to me" etc. Knowing therefore their murmuring, Jesus answered; and repressing their very murmuring, he said to them, "Murmur not" etc. For this is a wholesome teaching: for he who murmurs shows that his mind is not made firm in God, and therefore it is said in Wisdom 1:11: "Keep yourselves from murmuring, for it profits nothing." Now the cause of the murmuring is their unbelief; and therefore he shows this, saying "No one can come to me" etc., where first he shows that the drawing of the Father is necessary in order that one may come to Christ; second he shows the manner of drawing, at the place "it is written in the prophets" etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets down the deficiency of human capacity; second the aid of divine help; third the end, or fruit, of that help. Human capacity, therefore, is deficient for coming to Christ through faith; and therefore he says, "No one can come to me." Second, divine help is efficacious to come to the rescue, hence he adds, "unless the Father, who sent me, draws him." But the end, or fruit, is the best; hence it follows, "and I will raise him up on the last day." He says therefore first: it is not surprising if you murmur, because you have not yet been drawn by the Father to me. For "no one can come to me" — by believing in me — "unless the Father, who sent me, draws him." But here there is a threefold question. The first concerns what he says, "unless the Father draws him." For since we come to Christ by believing, as was said above in this same chapter, to come to Christ is to believe in him; but no one can believe except willingly. Since, then, drawing implies a certain violence, therefore whoever comes to Christ drawn, is compelled. I answer that it must be said that what is here said about this drawing of the Father does not imply compulsion, since not everything that draws exercises violence. Thus, then, the Father draws to the Son in many ways, according to the manifold manner of drawing without violence in human beings. For one man draws another by persuading through reason; and in this way the Father draws men to the Son, by showing him to be his Son; and this in two ways: either through interior revelation — Matthew 16:17: "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona, because flesh and blood has not revealed to you" — namely, that Christ is the Son of the living God — "but my Father"; or through the working of miracles, which he has from the Father — John 5:36: "the works which the Father has given me, these very works give testimony of me." Likewise, one draws another by alluring; Proverbs 7:21: "with the flatteries of her lips she drew him on." And in this way those who attend to Jesus because of the authority of the paternal majesty are drawn by the Father. For whoever believes in Christ because he believes him to be the Son of God — this man the Father draws to the Son, that is, the paternal majesty draws him. In this way Arius is not drawn, who believed Christ not to be the true Son of God, nor begotten of the substance of the Father. Nor was Photinus drawn in this way, who taught that Christ was a mere man. Thus, then, they are drawn by the Father, enticed by his majesty; but they are also drawn by the Son, by the admirable delight and love of the truth, which is the Son of God himself. For if, as Augustine says, "each man's own pleasure draws him," how much more strongly ought a man to be drawn to Christ, if he delights in truth, beatitude, justice, everlasting life — all of which is Christ? If, then, we are to be drawn by him, let us be drawn through the love of truth; according to Psalm 36:4: "delight in the Lord, and he will give you the petitions of your heart." Hence the bride said, Song of Songs 1:3: "Draw me after you; we will run to the odor of your ointments." But because not only exterior revelation, or its object, has the power of drawing, but also an interior instinct impelling and moving one to believe, therefore the Father draws many to the Son through the instinct of a divine operation moving the heart of man interiorly to believe; Philippians 2:13: "it is God who works in us to will and to accomplish"; Hosea 11:4: "I will draw them with the cords of Adam, with the bands of love"; Proverbs 21:1: "the heart of the king is in the hand of the Lord: he will incline it wherever he wills." The second question is this: since it is said that the Son draws to the Father — Matthew 11:27: "no one knows the Father but the Son, and he to whom the Son wills to reveal him"; and below, John 17:6: "Father, I have manifested your name to the men whom you gave me" — how is it here said that the Father draws to the Son? But it must be said that this can be answered in two ways: for we can speak of Christ either according as he is man, or according as he is God. Now according as he is man, Christ is the way; below, John 14:6: "I am the way"; and according as he is Christ, he leads to the Father, as a way leads to its terminus or end. But the Father draws to Christ as man insofar as he gives us his power, that we may believe in Christ; Ephesians 2:8: "by grace you have been saved, and this not of yourselves, for it is the gift of God." Insofar as he is Christ, he is the Word of God, and manifestative of the Father. Thus the Son draws to the Father. But the Father draws to the Son insofar as he manifests him. The third question concerns what he says, that no one can come unless drawn by the Father: because according to this, if someone does not come to Christ, it is not imputed to him, but to him who does not draw them. I answer that it must be said that truly no one can come unless drawn by the Father: for just as a heavy body cannot by nature be carried upward of itself unless it is drawn by another, so the human heart, tending of itself toward lower things, cannot be raised upward unless drawn. But if it is not raised up, the deficiency is not on the part of the one drawing, who, as far as is in him, fails no one; but it is on account of an impediment in the one who is not drawn. But, as far as this pertains, we can speak in one way about men in the state of unimpaired nature, and in another way in the state of corrupted nature; for in unimpaired nature there was no impediment prohibiting this drawing, whence at that time all men could be participants of this drawing. But in corrupted nature all are equally prohibited from this drawing by the impediment of sin; and therefore all need to be drawn. But God, as far as is in him, extends his hand to all to draw them, and, what is more, not only draws the hand of the one receiving, but even converts those turned away from himself, according to Lamentations 5:21: "Convert us, Lord, and we shall be converted"; and Psalm 84:7, according to another reading: "God, you, turning us, will give us life." Since, then, God is ready to give grace to all, and to draw them to himself, it is not imputed to him if someone does not accept, but to him who does not accept. But as to why he does not draw all those turned away, but only some, although all are equally turned away: a reason indeed can be assigned in general, namely that in those who are not drawn, the order of divine justice may appear and shine forth; but in those who are drawn, the immensity of divine mercy. But why in particular he draws this one, and does not draw that one, there is no reason at all, except the good pleasure of the divine will. Hence Augustine says: "whom he draws and whom he does not draw, why he draws that one and does not draw this one, do not wish to judge, if you do not wish to err. But receive, and understand: if you are not yet drawn, pray that you may be drawn." This can also be shown by an example. For a reason can be assigned why a builder places some stones lower down, and some higher up, and some on the sides, from the arrangement of the house, whose completion requires this. But why he places these stones here and those there, depends on his simple will. And hence it is that the first reason of the arrangement is referred to the will of the builder. Thus, then, God, for the completion of the universe, draws some indeed, that his mercy may appear in them; but he does not draw others, that his justice may be shown in them. But he draws these, he does not draw those, according to the good pleasure of his will. Likewise also, why in the Church he made some apostles, others confessors, others martyrs, the reason is on account of the adornment and completion of the Church. But why he made Peter an apostle, Stephen a martyr, and Nicholas a confessor, there is no other reason than his own will. Thus, then, the deficiency of human capacity, and the aid of divine help, are evident. There follows the end and fruit of the help, when he says "and I will raise him up on the last day" — even insofar as he is man: for through the things which Christ did in his flesh, we obtain the fruit of the resurrection; 1 Corinthians 15:21: "as by man came death, so also by man comes the resurrection of the dead." "I," therefore, according as I am man, "will raise him up," not only to the life of nature, but also to the life of glory, and this "on the last day." For the Catholic faith holds that the state of the world will be renewed; Revelation 21:1: "I saw a new heaven and a new earth." And among the other things which will concur toward this renewal, we believe that the motion of the heavens will cease, and consequently time; Revelation 10:5: "and the angel whom I saw standing upon the sea and upon the earth, lifted up his hand to heaven." And further on: "that there shall be time no longer." Because, then, with time ceasing at the resurrection, night and day will also cease, according to Zechariah 14:7: "there shall be one day, which is known to the Lord, not day nor night"; therefore he says, "I will raise him up on the last day." But as to why the motion of the heavens, and time, will last until then, neither less nor more, it must be known that that which exists for the sake of another thing is disposed in different ways according to the different disposition of that for the sake of which it exists. But all bodily things were made for the sake of man; and therefore they must be disposed in different ways according to the different disposition of man. Because, then, in men, when they rise again, the state of incorruption will begin, according to 1 Corinthians 15:54: "this mortal shall put on incorruption," therefore corruption will then also cease in things; hence the motion of the heavens will cease, which is the cause of generation and corruption in bodily things; Romans 8:21: "the creature itself shall be delivered from the servitude of corruption into the liberty of the children of God." Thus, then, it is evident that the drawing of the Father is necessary for us for faith. Consequently, when he says "it is written in the prophets" etc., he determines the manner of drawing, and first he sets down the manner of drawing; second, the efficacy of the drawing, at the place "everyone who has heard from the Father, and has learned, comes to me"; third, he excludes a supposed manner of drawing, at the place "not that anyone has seen the Father." Now the manner of drawing is fitting, because he draws by revealing and teaching; and this is what he says: "it is written in the prophets: they shall all be teachable by God" etc. Bede says this is written in Joel; but it does not seem to be expressly there, although something consonant with it is said; and Joel 2:22: "sons of Zion, rejoice in the Lord your God, because he will give you a teacher of justice." Therefore, according to Bede, he says "in the prophets," so as to give one to understand that this sense can be gathered from various sayings of the prophets. But this seems to be said more expressly in Isaiah 54:13: "I will make all your sons taught by the Lord." It is also said in Jeremiah 3:15: "I will give you shepherds according to my own heart, who shall feed you with knowledge and doctrine." Now this that he says, "they shall all be," can be understood in three ways. In one way, so that the word "all" stands for all the men of the world; in another way, so that it stands for all who are in the Church of Christ; in a third way, for all who will be in the kingdom of heaven. But if it is said in the first way, it seems not to be true; for he immediately adds, "everyone who has heard from the Father and has learned, comes to me." If, then, all men of the world will be teachable, therefore all will come to Christ. But this is false, because faith is not the possession of all. But to this a threefold response is given. For, according to Chrysostom, in the first way it must be said that this is said of the majority: "they shall all be," he says, "all," that is, the majority; according to which manner it is said in Matthew 8:11: "many will come from the east and the west," etc. Second, that "all," as far as it is from God, will be teachable; but that some are not taught, is on their own part. For the sun, as far as it is in itself, illumines all; but it can fail to be seen by some, if they close their eyes, or if they are blind. And in this way the Apostle says, 1 Timothy 2:4: "he wills all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth." In a third way, according to Augustine, that this is a fitting distribution, so that it is said "all shall be teachable by God," that is, all who are taught, are taught by God, just as we speak of some master of letters. For we say, if he is in a city: this man alone teaches all the boys of the city, because no one is taught in it except by him. And in this way it is said above, John 1:9: "that was the true light, which enlightens every man coming into this world." But if it is explained of those who are gathered in the Church, it is said "they shall all be" — namely, those who are in the Church — "teachable by God"; for in Isaiah 54:13 it is said: "I will make all your sons taught by the Lord" — in which indeed is shown the sublimity of the Christian faith, which does not cling to human doctrine, but to the doctrine of God. For the doctrine of the Old Testament was given through the prophets; but the doctrine of the New Testament is through the Son of God himself; Hebrews 1:1: "in many parts and in many ways" — that is, in the Old Testament — "God speaking in times past to the fathers by the prophets, last of all in these days has spoken to us by his Son"; and in the same place, 2:3: "which having begun to be declared by the Lord, was confirmed unto us by them that heard him." Thus, then, all who are in the Church are taught, not by the apostles, not by the prophets, but by God himself. And, according to Augustine, this very fact that we are taught by a man, is from God, who teaches interiorly; Matthew 23:10: "one is your master, Christ." For understanding, which is necessary above all for doctrine, is given to us from God. But if it is explained of those who are in the kingdom of heaven, etc., then "all shall be teachable by God," because they will see his essence immediately; 1 John 3:2: "we shall see him as he is." Now the drawing of the Father is most efficacious: because "everyone who has heard from the Father, and has learned, comes to me." Where he sets down two things: one, namely, that pertains to the gift of God, when he says "has heard," that is, with God revealing; the other that pertains to free will, when he says "and has learned," that is, through assent; and these two things are necessary in every teaching of the faith. "Everyone who has heard from the Father" — teaching and manifesting — "and has learned" — offering assent — "comes to me"; he comes, I say, in three ways: through the knowledge of the truth, through the affection of love, and through the imitation of works. And in each of these it is necessary that one hear and learn. For he who comes through the knowledge of the truth must hear, with God inspiring, according to Psalm 84:9: "I will hear what the Lord God will speak in me," and learn through affection, as has been said. But he who comes through love and desire, as is said below, John 7:37: "if anyone thirsts, let him come to me, and drink" — he too must hear the word of the Father, and grasp it, so that he may learn, and be moved in affection. For he learns the word who grasps it according to the intention of the one speaking; but the word of God the Father breathes forth love: whoever, therefore, grasps it with the fervor of love, learns it; Wisdom 7:27: "she conveys herself into holy souls, she makes them friends of God and prophets." But through the imitation of works one goes to Christ, according to Matthew 11:28: "come to me, all you who labor and are burdened, and I will refresh you." And in this way too, whoever learns, comes to Christ: for as the conclusion stands in relation to things knowable, so does operation in relation to things that can be done. Now in the sciences, whoever learns perfectly arrives at the conclusion; therefore in matters of action, he who perfectly learns the words arrives at right action; Isaiah 50:5: "the Lord has opened my ear; and I do not contradict." But because some might suppose that all men visibly hear and learn from the Father, therefore, so that the Lord might exclude this, he adds, "not that anyone has seen the Father" — that is, no man living in this life has seen the Father in his essence, according to Exodus 33:20: "man shall not see me, and live" — "except he," namely the Son, "who is from God, he has seen the Father" — his own Father — through essence. Or: no one has seen the Father with the vision of comprehension, with which vision neither man nor angel has ever seen him, nor can see him, except him who is from God, that is, the Son; Matthew 11:27: "no one knows the Father but the Son." The reason for this indeed is that, since every vision or cognition comes about through some likeness, according to the mode of likeness which creatures have to God, according to this they have knowledge of him. Hence the philosophers also say that the intelligences know the first cause according to this likeness of it which they have. But every creature indeed participates in some likeness of God, but one infinitely distant from the likeness of his nature, and therefore no creature can know him perfectly and totally, as he is in his own nature. But the Son, because he received the whole nature of the Father perfectly through eternal generation, therefore sees and comprehends him totally. But attention must be paid to the fitting order of speaking. For above, when he was speaking of the knowledge of others, he used the word "hearing"; but here, when he speaks of the knowledge of the Son, he uses the word "vision": for the knowledge that is through sight is immediate and open; but that which is through hearing comes about by the mediation of the one who has seen. Thus we too have received the knowledge which we have of the Father from the Son, who has seen him: so that in this way no one knows the Father except through Christ, who manifests him, and no one comes to the Son unless he has heard from the Father manifesting him.”

“Having set forth the teaching of Christ, here the contradiction of the aforesaid teaching is excluded, and first with respect to the murmuring crowds; second with respect to the doubting disciples, at the place "Many therefore of his disciples, hearing this, said" etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he expresses the murmuring of the crowds about the origin of the spiritual food; second he mitigates their dispute about the eating of the spiritual food, at the place "The Jews therefore disputed among themselves." Concerning the first he does two things. First the murmuring of the crowds is set down; second the repression of the murmuring, at the place "Jesus therefore answered, and said to them." Concerning the first he does two things. First the occasion of the murmuring is set down; second the words of those murmuring are set down, at the place "Is not this the son of Joseph?" He concludes therefore from the aforesaid words of Christ, that certain persons murmured about a certain one of the words spoken, namely because he had said: "I am the living bread, which came down from heaven" (John 6:51); which spiritual bread indeed they did not grasp nor desire. And therefore they murmured, because they did not have a mind grounded in spiritual things, and they had an ancient custom of this matter, according to Psalm 105:25: "they murmured in their tents"; and 1 Corinthians 10:10: "neither murmur, as some of them murmured." Now, as Chrysostom says, up to this point they had not murmured, because they always hoped that they would obtain bodily food; when that hope was withdrawn, they immediately begin to murmur, although they put forward another cause. But they do not openly contradict him, because of the reverence which they still had for him, from the memory of the preceding miracle. Now he sets down the words of those murmuring when he says "Is not this the son of Joseph?" For because they were carnal, they considered only the carnal generation of Christ, by which they were hindered from knowing the spiritual and eternal generation; and therefore they speak only of the carnal generation, according to what was said above, John 3:31: "he who is of the earth, speaks of the earth," and they do not grasp the spiritual; hence they add: "How then does he say, that I came down from heaven?" Now they call him the son of Joseph on account of common reputation: because Joseph was his foster-father, according to Luke 3:23: "as he was supposed, the son of Joseph." Now the repression of the murmuring is set down when he says "Jesus therefore answered, and said to them," and first he represses their murmuring; second he satisfies their doubt, at the place "Amen, amen I say to you: he who believes in me has eternal life." Concerning the first he does two things. First he restrains their murmuring; second he assigns the cause of their murmuring, at the place "No one can come to me" etc. Knowing therefore their murmuring, Jesus answered; and repressing their very murmuring, he said to them, "Murmur not" etc. For this is a wholesome teaching: for he who murmurs shows that his mind is not made firm in God, and therefore it is said in Wisdom 1:11: "Keep yourselves from murmuring, for it profits nothing." Now the cause of the murmuring is their unbelief; and therefore he shows this, saying "No one can come to me" etc., where first he shows that the drawing of the Father is necessary in order that one may come to Christ; second he shows the manner of drawing, at the place "it is written in the prophets" etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets down the deficiency of human capacity; second the aid of divine help; third the end, or fruit, of that help. Human capacity, therefore, is deficient for coming to Christ through faith; and therefore he says, "No one can come to me." Second, divine help is efficacious to come to the rescue, hence he adds, "unless the Father, who sent me, draws him." But the end, or fruit, is the best; hence it follows, "and I will raise him up on the last day." He says therefore first: it is not surprising if you murmur, because you have not yet been drawn by the Father to me. For "no one can come to me" — by believing in me — "unless the Father, who sent me, draws him." But here there is a threefold question. The first concerns what he says, "unless the Father draws him." For since we come to Christ by believing, as was said above in this same chapter, to come to Christ is to believe in him; but no one can believe except willingly. Since, then, drawing implies a certain violence, therefore whoever comes to Christ drawn, is compelled. I answer that it must be said that what is here said about this drawing of the Father does not imply compulsion, since not everything that draws exercises violence. Thus, then, the Father draws to the Son in many ways, according to the manifold manner of drawing without violence in human beings. For one man draws another by persuading through reason; and in this way the Father draws men to the Son, by showing him to be his Son; and this in two ways: either through interior revelation — Matthew 16:17: "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona, because flesh and blood has not revealed to you" — namely, that Christ is the Son of the living God — "but my Father"; or through the working of miracles, which he has from the Father — John 5:36: "the works which the Father has given me, these very works give testimony of me." Likewise, one draws another by alluring; Proverbs 7:21: "with the flatteries of her lips she drew him on." And in this way those who attend to Jesus because of the authority of the paternal majesty are drawn by the Father. For whoever believes in Christ because he believes him to be the Son of God — this man the Father draws to the Son, that is, the paternal majesty draws him. In this way Arius is not drawn, who believed Christ not to be the true Son of God, nor begotten of the substance of the Father. Nor was Photinus drawn in this way, who taught that Christ was a mere man. Thus, then, they are drawn by the Father, enticed by his majesty; but they are also drawn by the Son, by the admirable delight and love of the truth, which is the Son of God himself. For if, as Augustine says, "each man's own pleasure draws him," how much more strongly ought a man to be drawn to Christ, if he delights in truth, beatitude, justice, everlasting life — all of which is Christ? If, then, we are to be drawn by him, let us be drawn through the love of truth; according to Psalm 36:4: "delight in the Lord, and he will give you the petitions of your heart." Hence the bride said, Song of Songs 1:3: "Draw me after you; we will run to the odor of your ointments." But because not only exterior revelation, or its object, has the power of drawing, but also an interior instinct impelling and moving one to believe, therefore the Father draws many to the Son through the instinct of a divine operation moving the heart of man interiorly to believe; Philippians 2:13: "it is God who works in us to will and to accomplish"; Hosea 11:4: "I will draw them with the cords of Adam, with the bands of love"; Proverbs 21:1: "the heart of the king is in the hand of the Lord: he will incline it wherever he wills." The second question is this: since it is said that the Son draws to the Father — Matthew 11:27: "no one knows the Father but the Son, and he to whom the Son wills to reveal him"; and below, John 17:6: "Father, I have manifested your name to the men whom you gave me" — how is it here said that the Father draws to the Son? But it must be said that this can be answered in two ways: for we can speak of Christ either according as he is man, or according as he is God. Now according as he is man, Christ is the way; below, John 14:6: "I am the way"; and according as he is Christ, he leads to the Father, as a way leads to its terminus or end. But the Father draws to Christ as man insofar as he gives us his power, that we may believe in Christ; Ephesians 2:8: "by grace you have been saved, and this not of yourselves, for it is the gift of God." Insofar as he is Christ, he is the Word of God, and manifestative of the Father. Thus the Son draws to the Father. But the Father draws to the Son insofar as he manifests him. The third question concerns what he says, that no one can come unless drawn by the Father: because according to this, if someone does not come to Christ, it is not imputed to him, but to him who does not draw them. I answer that it must be said that truly no one can come unless drawn by the Father: for just as a heavy body cannot by nature be carried upward of itself unless it is drawn by another, so the human heart, tending of itself toward lower things, cannot be raised upward unless drawn. But if it is not raised up, the deficiency is not on the part of the one drawing, who, as far as is in him, fails no one; but it is on account of an impediment in the one who is not drawn. But, as far as this pertains, we can speak in one way about men in the state of unimpaired nature, and in another way in the state of corrupted nature; for in unimpaired nature there was no impediment prohibiting this drawing, whence at that time all men could be participants of this drawing. But in corrupted nature all are equally prohibited from this drawing by the impediment of sin; and therefore all need to be drawn. But God, as far as is in him, extends his hand to all to draw them, and, what is more, not only draws the hand of the one receiving, but even converts those turned away from himself, according to Lamentations 5:21: "Convert us, Lord, and we shall be converted"; and Psalm 84:7, according to another reading: "God, you, turning us, will give us life." Since, then, God is ready to give grace to all, and to draw them to himself, it is not imputed to him if someone does not accept, but to him who does not accept. But as to why he does not draw all those turned away, but only some, although all are equally turned away: a reason indeed can be assigned in general, namely that in those who are not drawn, the order of divine justice may appear and shine forth; but in those who are drawn, the immensity of divine mercy. But why in particular he draws this one, and does not draw that one, there is no reason at all, except the good pleasure of the divine will. Hence Augustine says: "whom he draws and whom he does not draw, why he draws that one and does not draw this one, do not wish to judge, if you do not wish to err. But receive, and understand: if you are not yet drawn, pray that you may be drawn." This can also be shown by an example. For a reason can be assigned why a builder places some stones lower down, and some higher up, and some on the sides, from the arrangement of the house, whose completion requires this. But why he places these stones here and those there, depends on his simple will. And hence it is that the first reason of the arrangement is referred to the will of the builder. Thus, then, God, for the completion of the universe, draws some indeed, that his mercy may appear in them; but he does not draw others, that his justice may be shown in them. But he draws these, he does not draw those, according to the good pleasure of his will. Likewise also, why in the Church he made some apostles, others confessors, others martyrs, the reason is on account of the adornment and completion of the Church. But why he made Peter an apostle, Stephen a martyr, and Nicholas a confessor, there is no other reason than his own will. Thus, then, the deficiency of human capacity, and the aid of divine help, are evident. There follows the end and fruit of the help, when he says "and I will raise him up on the last day" — even insofar as he is man: for through the things which Christ did in his flesh, we obtain the fruit of the resurrection; 1 Corinthians 15:21: "as by man came death, so also by man comes the resurrection of the dead." "I," therefore, according as I am man, "will raise him up," not only to the life of nature, but also to the life of glory, and this "on the last day." For the Catholic faith holds that the state of the world will be renewed; Revelation 21:1: "I saw a new heaven and a new earth." And among the other things which will concur toward this renewal, we believe that the motion of the heavens will cease, and consequently time; Revelation 10:5: "and the angel whom I saw standing upon the sea and upon the earth, lifted up his hand to heaven." And further on: "that there shall be time no longer." Because, then, with time ceasing at the resurrection, night and day will also cease, according to Zechariah 14:7: "there shall be one day, which is known to the Lord, not day nor night"; therefore he says, "I will raise him up on the last day." But as to why the motion of the heavens, and time, will last until then, neither less nor more, it must be known that that which exists for the sake of another thing is disposed in different ways according to the different disposition of that for the sake of which it exists. But all bodily things were made for the sake of man; and therefore they must be disposed in different ways according to the different disposition of man. Because, then, in men, when they rise again, the state of incorruption will begin, according to 1 Corinthians 15:54: "this mortal shall put on incorruption," therefore corruption will then also cease in things; hence the motion of the heavens will cease, which is the cause of generation and corruption in bodily things; Romans 8:21: "the creature itself shall be delivered from the servitude of corruption into the liberty of the children of God." Thus, then, it is evident that the drawing of the Father is necessary for us for faith. Consequently, when he says "it is written in the prophets" etc., he determines the manner of drawing, and first he sets down the manner of drawing; second, the efficacy of the drawing, at the place "everyone who has heard from the Father, and has learned, comes to me"; third, he excludes a supposed manner of drawing, at the place "not that anyone has seen the Father." Now the manner of drawing is fitting, because he draws by revealing and teaching; and this is what he says: "it is written in the prophets: they shall all be teachable by God" etc. Bede says this is written in Joel; but it does not seem to be expressly there, although something consonant with it is said; and Joel 2:22: "sons of Zion, rejoice in the Lord your God, because he will give you a teacher of justice." Therefore, according to Bede, he says "in the prophets," so as to give one to understand that this sense can be gathered from various sayings of the prophets. But this seems to be said more expressly in Isaiah 54:13: "I will make all your sons taught by the Lord." It is also said in Jeremiah 3:15: "I will give you shepherds according to my own heart, who shall feed you with knowledge and doctrine." Now this that he says, "they shall all be," can be understood in three ways. In one way, so that the word "all" stands for all the men of the world; in another way, so that it stands for all who are in the Church of Christ; in a third way, for all who will be in the kingdom of heaven. But if it is said in the first way, it seems not to be true; for he immediately adds, "everyone who has heard from the Father and has learned, comes to me." If, then, all men of the world will be teachable, therefore all will come to Christ. But this is false, because faith is not the possession of all. But to this a threefold response is given. For, according to Chrysostom, in the first way it must be said that this is said of the majority: "they shall all be," he says, "all," that is, the majority; according to which manner it is said in Matthew 8:11: "many will come from the east and the west," etc. Second, that "all," as far as it is from God, will be teachable; but that some are not taught, is on their own part. For the sun, as far as it is in itself, illumines all; but it can fail to be seen by some, if they close their eyes, or if they are blind. And in this way the Apostle says, 1 Timothy 2:4: "he wills all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth." In a third way, according to Augustine, that this is a fitting distribution, so that it is said "all shall be teachable by God," that is, all who are taught, are taught by God, just as we speak of some master of letters. For we say, if he is in a city: this man alone teaches all the boys of the city, because no one is taught in it except by him. And in this way it is said above, John 1:9: "that was the true light, which enlightens every man coming into this world." But if it is explained of those who are gathered in the Church, it is said "they shall all be" — namely, those who are in the Church — "teachable by God"; for in Isaiah 54:13 it is said: "I will make all your sons taught by the Lord" — in which indeed is shown the sublimity of the Christian faith, which does not cling to human doctrine, but to the doctrine of God. For the doctrine of the Old Testament was given through the prophets; but the doctrine of the New Testament is through the Son of God himself; Hebrews 1:1: "in many parts and in many ways" — that is, in the Old Testament — "God speaking in times past to the fathers by the prophets, last of all in these days has spoken to us by his Son"; and in the same place, 2:3: "which having begun to be declared by the Lord, was confirmed unto us by them that heard him." Thus, then, all who are in the Church are taught, not by the apostles, not by the prophets, but by God himself. And, according to Augustine, this very fact that we are taught by a man, is from God, who teaches interiorly; Matthew 23:10: "one is your master, Christ." For understanding, which is necessary above all for doctrine, is given to us from God. But if it is explained of those who are in the kingdom of heaven, etc., then "all shall be teachable by God," because they will see his essence immediately; 1 John 3:2: "we shall see him as he is." Now the drawing of the Father is most efficacious: because "everyone who has heard from the Father, and has learned, comes to me." Where he sets down two things: one, namely, that pertains to the gift of God, when he says "has heard," that is, with God revealing; the other that pertains to free will, when he says "and has learned," that is, through assent; and these two things are necessary in every teaching of the faith. "Everyone who has heard from the Father" — teaching and manifesting — "and has learned" — offering assent — "comes to me"; he comes, I say, in three ways: through the knowledge of the truth, through the affection of love, and through the imitation of works. And in each of these it is necessary that one hear and learn. For he who comes through the knowledge of the truth must hear, with God inspiring, according to Psalm 84:9: "I will hear what the Lord God will speak in me," and learn through affection, as has been said. But he who comes through love and desire, as is said below, John 7:37: "if anyone thirsts, let him come to me, and drink" — he too must hear the word of the Father, and grasp it, so that he may learn, and be moved in affection. For he learns the word who grasps it according to the intention of the one speaking; but the word of God the Father breathes forth love: whoever, therefore, grasps it with the fervor of love, learns it; Wisdom 7:27: "she conveys herself into holy souls, she makes them friends of God and prophets." But through the imitation of works one goes to Christ, according to Matthew 11:28: "come to me, all you who labor and are burdened, and I will refresh you." And in this way too, whoever learns, comes to Christ: for as the conclusion stands in relation to things knowable, so does operation in relation to things that can be done. Now in the sciences, whoever learns perfectly arrives at the conclusion; therefore in matters of action, he who perfectly learns the words arrives at right action; Isaiah 50:5: "the Lord has opened my ear; and I do not contradict." But because some might suppose that all men visibly hear and learn from the Father, therefore, so that the Lord might exclude this, he adds, "not that anyone has seen the Father" — that is, no man living in this life has seen the Father in his essence, according to Exodus 33:20: "man shall not see me, and live" — "except he," namely the Son, "who is from God, he has seen the Father" — his own Father — through essence. Or: no one has seen the Father with the vision of comprehension, with which vision neither man nor angel has ever seen him, nor can see him, except him who is from God, that is, the Son; Matthew 11:27: "no one knows the Father but the Son." The reason for this indeed is that, since every vision or cognition comes about through some likeness, according to the mode of likeness which creatures have to God, according to this they have knowledge of him. Hence the philosophers also say that the intelligences know the first cause according to this likeness of it which they have. But every creature indeed participates in some likeness of God, but one infinitely distant from the likeness of his nature, and therefore no creature can know him perfectly and totally, as he is in his own nature. But the Son, because he received the whole nature of the Father perfectly through eternal generation, therefore sees and comprehends him totally. But attention must be paid to the fitting order of speaking. For above, when he was speaking of the knowledge of others, he used the word "hearing"; but here, when he speaks of the knowledge of the Son, he uses the word "vision": for the knowledge that is through sight is immediate and open; but that which is through hearing comes about by the mediation of the one who has seen. Thus we too have received the knowledge which we have of the Father from the Son, who has seen him: so that in this way no one knows the Father except through Christ, who manifests him, and no one comes to the Son unless he has heard from the Father manifesting him.”

“No man can come to me,.... That is, by faith, as in Joh 6:35; for otherwise they could corporeally come to him, but not spiritually; because they had neither power nor will of themselves; being dead in trespasses and sins, and impotent to everything that is spiritual: and whilst men are in a state of unregeneracy, blindness, and darkness, they see no need of coming to Christ, nor anything in him worth coming for; they are prejudiced against him, and their hearts are set on other things; and besides, coming to Christ and believing in Christ being the same thing, it is certain faith is not of a man's self, it is the gift of God, and the operation of his Spirit; and therefore efficacious grace must be exerted to enable a soul to come to Christ; which is expressed in the following words, except the Father which hath sent me, draw him: which is not to be understood of moral persuasion, or a being persuaded and prevailed upon to come to Christ by the consideration of the mighty works which God had done to justify that he was the true Messiah, but of the internal and powerful influence of the grace of God; for this act of drawing is something distinct from, and superior to, both doctrine and miracles. The Capernaites had heard the doctrine of Christ, which was taught with authority, and had seen his miracles, which were full proofs of his being the Messiah, and yet believed not, but murmured at his person and parentage. This gave occasion to Christ to observe to them, that something more than these was necessary to their coming to him, or savingly believing in him; even the powerful and efficacious grace of the Father in drawing: and if it be considered what men in conversion are drawn off "from" and "to", from their beloved lusts and darling righteousness; to look unto, and rely upon Christ alone for salvation; from that which was before so very agreeable, to that which, previous to this work, was so very disagreeable; to what else can this be ascribed, but to unfrustrable and insuperable grace? but though this act of drawing is an act of power, yet not of force; God in drawing of unwilling, makes willing in the day of his power: he enlightens the understanding, bends the will, gives an heart of flesh, sweetly allures by the power of his grace, and engages the soul to come to Christ, and give up itself to him; he draws with the bands of love. Drawing, though it supposes power and influence, yet not always coaction and force: music draws the ear, love the heart, and pleasure the mind. "Trahit sua quemque voluptas", says the poet. The Jews have a saying (t), that the proselytes, in the days of the Messiah, shall be all of them, , "proselytes drawn": that is, such as shall freely and voluntarily become proselytes, as those who are drawn by the Father are. And I will raise him at the last day; See Gill on Joh 6:40; compare with this verse Joh 6:40. (t) T. Bab. Avoda Zara, fol. 3. 2. & 24. 1.”

“Having set forth the teaching of Christ, here the contradiction of the aforesaid teaching is excluded, and first with respect to the murmuring crowds; second with respect to the doubting disciples, at the place "Many therefore of his disciples, hearing this, said" etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he expresses the murmuring of the crowds about the origin of the spiritual food; second he mitigates their dispute about the eating of the spiritual food, at the place "The Jews therefore disputed among themselves." Concerning the first he does two things. First the murmuring of the crowds is set down; second the repression of the murmuring, at the place "Jesus therefore answered, and said to them." Concerning the first he does two things. First the occasion of the murmuring is set down; second the words of those murmuring are set down, at the place "Is not this the son of Joseph?" He concludes therefore from the aforesaid words of Christ, that certain persons murmured about a certain one of the words spoken, namely because he had said: "I am the living bread, which came down from heaven" (John 6:51); which spiritual bread indeed they did not grasp nor desire. And therefore they murmured, because they did not have a mind grounded in spiritual things, and they had an ancient custom of this matter, according to Psalm 105:25: "they murmured in their tents"; and 1 Corinthians 10:10: "neither murmur, as some of them murmured." Now, as Chrysostom says, up to this point they had not murmured, because they always hoped that they would obtain bodily food; when that hope was withdrawn, they immediately begin to murmur, although they put forward another cause. But they do not openly contradict him, because of the reverence which they still had for him, from the memory of the preceding miracle. Now he sets down the words of those murmuring when he says "Is not this the son of Joseph?" For because they were carnal, they considered only the carnal generation of Christ, by which they were hindered from knowing the spiritual and eternal generation; and therefore they speak only of the carnal generation, according to what was said above, John 3:31: "he who is of the earth, speaks of the earth," and they do not grasp the spiritual; hence they add: "How then does he say, that I came down from heaven?" Now they call him the son of Joseph on account of common reputation: because Joseph was his foster-father, according to Luke 3:23: "as he was supposed, the son of Joseph." Now the repression of the murmuring is set down when he says "Jesus therefore answered, and said to them," and first he represses their murmuring; second he satisfies their doubt, at the place "Amen, amen I say to you: he who believes in me has eternal life." Concerning the first he does two things. First he restrains their murmuring; second he assigns the cause of their murmuring, at the place "No one can come to me" etc. Knowing therefore their murmuring, Jesus answered; and repressing their very murmuring, he said to them, "Murmur not" etc. For this is a wholesome teaching: for he who murmurs shows that his mind is not made firm in God, and therefore it is said in Wisdom 1:11: "Keep yourselves from murmuring, for it profits nothing." Now the cause of the murmuring is their unbelief; and therefore he shows this, saying "No one can come to me" etc., where first he shows that the drawing of the Father is necessary in order that one may come to Christ; second he shows the manner of drawing, at the place "it is written in the prophets" etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets down the deficiency of human capacity; second the aid of divine help; third the end, or fruit, of that help. Human capacity, therefore, is deficient for coming to Christ through faith; and therefore he says, "No one can come to me." Second, divine help is efficacious to come to the rescue, hence he adds, "unless the Father, who sent me, draws him." But the end, or fruit, is the best; hence it follows, "and I will raise him up on the last day." He says therefore first: it is not surprising if you murmur, because you have not yet been drawn by the Father to me. For "no one can come to me" — by believing in me — "unless the Father, who sent me, draws him." But here there is a threefold question. The first concerns what he says, "unless the Father draws him." For since we come to Christ by believing, as was said above in this same chapter, to come to Christ is to believe in him; but no one can believe except willingly. Since, then, drawing implies a certain violence, therefore whoever comes to Christ drawn, is compelled. I answer that it must be said that what is here said about this drawing of the Father does not imply compulsion, since not everything that draws exercises violence. Thus, then, the Father draws to the Son in many ways, according to the manifold manner of drawing without violence in human beings. For one man draws another by persuading through reason; and in this way the Father draws men to the Son, by showing him to be his Son; and this in two ways: either through interior revelation — Matthew 16:17: "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona, because flesh and blood has not revealed to you" — namely, that Christ is the Son of the living God — "but my Father"; or through the working of miracles, which he has from the Father — John 5:36: "the works which the Father has given me, these very works give testimony of me." Likewise, one draws another by alluring; Proverbs 7:21: "with the flatteries of her lips she drew him on." And in this way those who attend to Jesus because of the authority of the paternal majesty are drawn by the Father. For whoever believes in Christ because he believes him to be the Son of God — this man the Father draws to the Son, that is, the paternal majesty draws him. In this way Arius is not drawn, who believed Christ not to be the true Son of God, nor begotten of the substance of the Father. Nor was Photinus drawn in this way, who taught that Christ was a mere man. Thus, then, they are drawn by the Father, enticed by his majesty; but they are also drawn by the Son, by the admirable delight and love of the truth, which is the Son of God himself. For if, as Augustine says, "each man's own pleasure draws him," how much more strongly ought a man to be drawn to Christ, if he delights in truth, beatitude, justice, everlasting life — all of which is Christ? If, then, we are to be drawn by him, let us be drawn through the love of truth; according to Psalm 36:4: "delight in the Lord, and he will give you the petitions of your heart." Hence the bride said, Song of Songs 1:3: "Draw me after you; we will run to the odor of your ointments." But because not only exterior revelation, or its object, has the power of drawing, but also an interior instinct impelling and moving one to believe, therefore the Father draws many to the Son through the instinct of a divine operation moving the heart of man interiorly to believe; Philippians 2:13: "it is God who works in us to will and to accomplish"; Hosea 11:4: "I will draw them with the cords of Adam, with the bands of love"; Proverbs 21:1: "the heart of the king is in the hand of the Lord: he will incline it wherever he wills." The second question is this: since it is said that the Son draws to the Father — Matthew 11:27: "no one knows the Father but the Son, and he to whom the Son wills to reveal him"; and below, John 17:6: "Father, I have manifested your name to the men whom you gave me" — how is it here said that the Father draws to the Son? But it must be said that this can be answered in two ways: for we can speak of Christ either according as he is man, or according as he is God. Now according as he is man, Christ is the way; below, John 14:6: "I am the way"; and according as he is Christ, he leads to the Father, as a way leads to its terminus or end. But the Father draws to Christ as man insofar as he gives us his power, that we may believe in Christ; Ephesians 2:8: "by grace you have been saved, and this not of yourselves, for it is the gift of God." Insofar as he is Christ, he is the Word of God, and manifestative of the Father. Thus the Son draws to the Father. But the Father draws to the Son insofar as he manifests him. The third question concerns what he says, that no one can come unless drawn by the Father: because according to this, if someone does not come to Christ, it is not imputed to him, but to him who does not draw them. I answer that it must be said that truly no one can come unless drawn by the Father: for just as a heavy body cannot by nature be carried upward of itself unless it is drawn by another, so the human heart, tending of itself toward lower things, cannot be raised upward unless drawn. But if it is not raised up, the deficiency is not on the part of the one drawing, who, as far as is in him, fails no one; but it is on account of an impediment in the one who is not drawn. But, as far as this pertains, we can speak in one way about men in the state of unimpaired nature, and in another way in the state of corrupted nature; for in unimpaired nature there was no impediment prohibiting this drawing, whence at that time all men could be participants of this drawing. But in corrupted nature all are equally prohibited from this drawing by the impediment of sin; and therefore all need to be drawn. But God, as far as is in him, extends his hand to all to draw them, and, what is more, not only draws the hand of the one receiving, but even converts those turned away from himself, according to Lamentations 5:21: "Convert us, Lord, and we shall be converted"; and Psalm 84:7, according to another reading: "God, you, turning us, will give us life." Since, then, God is ready to give grace to all, and to draw them to himself, it is not imputed to him if someone does not accept, but to him who does not accept. But as to why he does not draw all those turned away, but only some, although all are equally turned away: a reason indeed can be assigned in general, namely that in those who are not drawn, the order of divine justice may appear and shine forth; but in those who are drawn, the immensity of divine mercy. But why in particular he draws this one, and does not draw that one, there is no reason at all, except the good pleasure of the divine will. Hence Augustine says: "whom he draws and whom he does not draw, why he draws that one and does not draw this one, do not wish to judge, if you do not wish to err. But receive, and understand: if you are not yet drawn, pray that you may be drawn." This can also be shown by an example. For a reason can be assigned why a builder places some stones lower down, and some higher up, and some on the sides, from the arrangement of the house, whose completion requires this. But why he places these stones here and those there, depends on his simple will. And hence it is that the first reason of the arrangement is referred to the will of the builder. Thus, then, God, for the completion of the universe, draws some indeed, that his mercy may appear in them; but he does not draw others, that his justice may be shown in them. But he draws these, he does not draw those, according to the good pleasure of his will. Likewise also, why in the Church he made some apostles, others confessors, others martyrs, the reason is on account of the adornment and completion of the Church. But why he made Peter an apostle, Stephen a martyr, and Nicholas a confessor, there is no other reason than his own will. Thus, then, the deficiency of human capacity, and the aid of divine help, are evident. There follows the end and fruit of the help, when he says "and I will raise him up on the last day" — even insofar as he is man: for through the things which Christ did in his flesh, we obtain the fruit of the resurrection; 1 Corinthians 15:21: "as by man came death, so also by man comes the resurrection of the dead." "I," therefore, according as I am man, "will raise him up," not only to the life of nature, but also to the life of glory, and this "on the last day." For the Catholic faith holds that the state of the world will be renewed; Revelation 21:1: "I saw a new heaven and a new earth." And among the other things which will concur toward this renewal, we believe that the motion of the heavens will cease, and consequently time; Revelation 10:5: "and the angel whom I saw standing upon the sea and upon the earth, lifted up his hand to heaven." And further on: "that there shall be time no longer." Because, then, with time ceasing at the resurrection, night and day will also cease, according to Zechariah 14:7: "there shall be one day, which is known to the Lord, not day nor night"; therefore he says, "I will raise him up on the last day." But as to why the motion of the heavens, and time, will last until then, neither less nor more, it must be known that that which exists for the sake of another thing is disposed in different ways according to the different disposition of that for the sake of which it exists. But all bodily things were made for the sake of man; and therefore they must be disposed in different ways according to the different disposition of man. Because, then, in men, when they rise again, the state of incorruption will begin, according to 1 Corinthians 15:54: "this mortal shall put on incorruption," therefore corruption will then also cease in things; hence the motion of the heavens will cease, which is the cause of generation and corruption in bodily things; Romans 8:21: "the creature itself shall be delivered from the servitude of corruption into the liberty of the children of God." Thus, then, it is evident that the drawing of the Father is necessary for us for faith. Consequently, when he says "it is written in the prophets" etc., he determines the manner of drawing, and first he sets down the manner of drawing; second, the efficacy of the drawing, at the place "everyone who has heard from the Father, and has learned, comes to me"; third, he excludes a supposed manner of drawing, at the place "not that anyone has seen the Father." Now the manner of drawing is fitting, because he draws by revealing and teaching; and this is what he says: "it is written in the prophets: they shall all be teachable by God" etc. Bede says this is written in Joel; but it does not seem to be expressly there, although something consonant with it is said; and Joel 2:22: "sons of Zion, rejoice in the Lord your God, because he will give you a teacher of justice." Therefore, according to Bede, he says "in the prophets," so as to give one to understand that this sense can be gathered from various sayings of the prophets. But this seems to be said more expressly in Isaiah 54:13: "I will make all your sons taught by the Lord." It is also said in Jeremiah 3:15: "I will give you shepherds according to my own heart, who shall feed you with knowledge and doctrine." Now this that he says, "they shall all be," can be understood in three ways. In one way, so that the word "all" stands for all the men of the world; in another way, so that it stands for all who are in the Church of Christ; in a third way, for all who will be in the kingdom of heaven. But if it is said in the first way, it seems not to be true; for he immediately adds, "everyone who has heard from the Father and has learned, comes to me." If, then, all men of the world will be teachable, therefore all will come to Christ. But this is false, because faith is not the possession of all. But to this a threefold response is given. For, according to Chrysostom, in the first way it must be said that this is said of the majority: "they shall all be," he says, "all," that is, the majority; according to which manner it is said in Matthew 8:11: "many will come from the east and the west," etc. Second, that "all," as far as it is from God, will be teachable; but that some are not taught, is on their own part. For the sun, as far as it is in itself, illumines all; but it can fail to be seen by some, if they close their eyes, or if they are blind. And in this way the Apostle says, 1 Timothy 2:4: "he wills all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth." In a third way, according to Augustine, that this is a fitting distribution, so that it is said "all shall be teachable by God," that is, all who are taught, are taught by God, just as we speak of some master of letters. For we say, if he is in a city: this man alone teaches all the boys of the city, because no one is taught in it except by him. And in this way it is said above, John 1:9: "that was the true light, which enlightens every man coming into this world." But if it is explained of those who are gathered in the Church, it is said "they shall all be" — namely, those who are in the Church — "teachable by God"; for in Isaiah 54:13 it is said: "I will make all your sons taught by the Lord" — in which indeed is shown the sublimity of the Christian faith, which does not cling to human doctrine, but to the doctrine of God. For the doctrine of the Old Testament was given through the prophets; but the doctrine of the New Testament is through the Son of God himself; Hebrews 1:1: "in many parts and in many ways" — that is, in the Old Testament — "God speaking in times past to the fathers by the prophets, last of all in these days has spoken to us by his Son"; and in the same place, 2:3: "which having begun to be declared by the Lord, was confirmed unto us by them that heard him." Thus, then, all who are in the Church are taught, not by the apostles, not by the prophets, but by God himself. And, according to Augustine, this very fact that we are taught by a man, is from God, who teaches interiorly; Matthew 23:10: "one is your master, Christ." For understanding, which is necessary above all for doctrine, is given to us from God. But if it is explained of those who are in the kingdom of heaven, etc., then "all shall be teachable by God," because they will see his essence immediately; 1 John 3:2: "we shall see him as he is." Now the drawing of the Father is most efficacious: because "everyone who has heard from the Father, and has learned, comes to me." Where he sets down two things: one, namely, that pertains to the gift of God, when he says "has heard," that is, with God revealing; the other that pertains to free will, when he says "and has learned," that is, through assent; and these two things are necessary in every teaching of the faith. "Everyone who has heard from the Father" — teaching and manifesting — "and has learned" — offering assent — "comes to me"; he comes, I say, in three ways: through the knowledge of the truth, through the affection of love, and through the imitation of works. And in each of these it is necessary that one hear and learn. For he who comes through the knowledge of the truth must hear, with God inspiring, according to Psalm 84:9: "I will hear what the Lord God will speak in me," and learn through affection, as has been said. But he who comes through love and desire, as is said below, John 7:37: "if anyone thirsts, let him come to me, and drink" — he too must hear the word of the Father, and grasp it, so that he may learn, and be moved in affection. For he learns the word who grasps it according to the intention of the one speaking; but the word of God the Father breathes forth love: whoever, therefore, grasps it with the fervor of love, learns it; Wisdom 7:27: "she conveys herself into holy souls, she makes them friends of God and prophets." But through the imitation of works one goes to Christ, according to Matthew 11:28: "come to me, all you who labor and are burdened, and I will refresh you." And in this way too, whoever learns, comes to Christ: for as the conclusion stands in relation to things knowable, so does operation in relation to things that can be done. Now in the sciences, whoever learns perfectly arrives at the conclusion; therefore in matters of action, he who perfectly learns the words arrives at right action; Isaiah 50:5: "the Lord has opened my ear; and I do not contradict." But because some might suppose that all men visibly hear and learn from the Father, therefore, so that the Lord might exclude this, he adds, "not that anyone has seen the Father" — that is, no man living in this life has seen the Father in his essence, according to Exodus 33:20: "man shall not see me, and live" — "except he," namely the Son, "who is from God, he has seen the Father" — his own Father — through essence. Or: no one has seen the Father with the vision of comprehension, with which vision neither man nor angel has ever seen him, nor can see him, except him who is from God, that is, the Son; Matthew 11:27: "no one knows the Father but the Son." The reason for this indeed is that, since every vision or cognition comes about through some likeness, according to the mode of likeness which creatures have to God, according to this they have knowledge of him. Hence the philosophers also say that the intelligences know the first cause according to this likeness of it which they have. But every creature indeed participates in some likeness of God, but one infinitely distant from the likeness of his nature, and therefore no creature can know him perfectly and totally, as he is in his own nature. But the Son, because he received the whole nature of the Father perfectly through eternal generation, therefore sees and comprehends him totally. But attention must be paid to the fitting order of speaking. For above, when he was speaking of the knowledge of others, he used the word "hearing"; but here, when he speaks of the knowledge of the Son, he uses the word "vision": for the knowledge that is through sight is immediate and open; but that which is through hearing comes about by the mediation of the one who has seen. Thus we too have received the knowledge which we have of the Father from the Son, who has seen him: so that in this way no one knows the Father except through Christ, who manifests him, and no one comes to the Son unless he has heard from the Father manifesting him.”

“It is written in the prophets,.... In the book of the prophets, as the Ethiopic version renders it: the Jews divided the books of the Old Testament into three parts, the Law, the Prophets, and the Hagiographa; now in that division which was called the Prophets, are the following words: or in one of the prophets, namely, in Isa 54:13; so the Syriac version reads, "in the prophet"; though some think reference is had to more prophets, and more passages than one, as besides the above mentioned, Jer 31:34 Mic 4:2; and they shall be all taught of God; by his Spirit to know themselves, and Jesus Christ; that is, all that are ordained to eternal life; all that are given to Christ, and are chosen in him; all the children of Zion, and who are the children of God; these are all, sooner or later, in a special manner, taught of God: and which does not intend mere external instructions, and objective teachings by the ministry of the word, for many are so taught, who never come to Christ; but special teachings, such as are attended with the energy of divine grace, and the power of the Spirit of God, who guides into all truth, savingly and spiritually: for this is to be understood of their being taught in the Gospel of Christ, and not in the law, as the Targum paraphrases it, "all thy children shall learn in the law of the Lord.'' And that this prophecy refers to Gospel times, is clear from the citation and application of the first verse of it, to the church in the times of the apostles, Gal 4:27. The Jews themselves acknowledge the prophecy belongs to the times of the Messiah, to which they expressly apply (u) the words in Isa 54:5, "thy Maker is thy husband", &c. And one of their modern commentators allows (w), that this very passage, "all thy children shall be taught of God", refers, "to the time to come"; that is, to the times of the Messiah: in this citation, those words, "thy children", are left out, to show that the words are not to be restrained to the people of the Jews, as they might seem by that clause, and to whom the Jews would limit them: for so they say (x), "they are truly taught of God from whom prophecy comes, which does not to all the world, but to Israel only, of whom it is written, "and all thy children are taught of God".'' But our Lord, by these words, instructs us, and would have us observe, that all that the Father hath given him, whether Jews or Gentiles, of whom he had been speaking in the preceding verses, should be taught of God; and so taught, as to be drawn and brought to him, and believe in him, and have everlasting life: wherefore he infers from hence, that every man, whether a Jew or a Gentile, that is taught of God, will come to him in a spiritual way, and trust in him for eternal life and happiness, as follows: every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me; everyone that has heard the voice of the Father's love, grace, and mercy in the Gospel, and has learned of him the way of peace, life, and salvation by Christ, under the influence of his grace, comes unto Christ; being encouraged by the declarations and promises of grace he has heard and learned, and ventures his soul on Christ, and commits it to him; trusting and relying on his person, blood, righteousness, and sacrifice, for justification, pardon, atonement, acceptance with God, and eternal life. (u) Shemot Rabba, sect. 15. fol. 102. 4. (w) Kimichi in loc. (x) Zohar in Exod. fol. 70. 1.”

“Having set forth the teaching of Christ, here the contradiction of the aforesaid teaching is excluded, and first with respect to the murmuring crowds; second with respect to the doubting disciples, at the place "Many therefore of his disciples, hearing this, said" etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he expresses the murmuring of the crowds about the origin of the spiritual food; second he mitigates their dispute about the eating of the spiritual food, at the place "The Jews therefore disputed among themselves." Concerning the first he does two things. First the murmuring of the crowds is set down; second the repression of the murmuring, at the place "Jesus therefore answered, and said to them." Concerning the first he does two things. First the occasion of the murmuring is set down; second the words of those murmuring are set down, at the place "Is not this the son of Joseph?" He concludes therefore from the aforesaid words of Christ, that certain persons murmured about a certain one of the words spoken, namely because he had said: "I am the living bread, which came down from heaven" (John 6:51); which spiritual bread indeed they did not grasp nor desire. And therefore they murmured, because they did not have a mind grounded in spiritual things, and they had an ancient custom of this matter, according to Psalm 105:25: "they murmured in their tents"; and 1 Corinthians 10:10: "neither murmur, as some of them murmured." Now, as Chrysostom says, up to this point they had not murmured, because they always hoped that they would obtain bodily food; when that hope was withdrawn, they immediately begin to murmur, although they put forward another cause. But they do not openly contradict him, because of the reverence which they still had for him, from the memory of the preceding miracle. Now he sets down the words of those murmuring when he says "Is not this the son of Joseph?" For because they were carnal, they considered only the carnal generation of Christ, by which they were hindered from knowing the spiritual and eternal generation; and therefore they speak only of the carnal generation, according to what was said above, John 3:31: "he who is of the earth, speaks of the earth," and they do not grasp the spiritual; hence they add: "How then does he say, that I came down from heaven?" Now they call him the son of Joseph on account of common reputation: because Joseph was his foster-father, according to Luke 3:23: "as he was supposed, the son of Joseph." Now the repression of the murmuring is set down when he says "Jesus therefore answered, and said to them," and first he represses their murmuring; second he satisfies their doubt, at the place "Amen, amen I say to you: he who believes in me has eternal life." Concerning the first he does two things. First he restrains their murmuring; second he assigns the cause of their murmuring, at the place "No one can come to me" etc. Knowing therefore their murmuring, Jesus answered; and repressing their very murmuring, he said to them, "Murmur not" etc. For this is a wholesome teaching: for he who murmurs shows that his mind is not made firm in God, and therefore it is said in Wisdom 1:11: "Keep yourselves from murmuring, for it profits nothing." Now the cause of the murmuring is their unbelief; and therefore he shows this, saying "No one can come to me" etc., where first he shows that the drawing of the Father is necessary in order that one may come to Christ; second he shows the manner of drawing, at the place "it is written in the prophets" etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets down the deficiency of human capacity; second the aid of divine help; third the end, or fruit, of that help. Human capacity, therefore, is deficient for coming to Christ through faith; and therefore he says, "No one can come to me." Second, divine help is efficacious to come to the rescue, hence he adds, "unless the Father, who sent me, draws him." But the end, or fruit, is the best; hence it follows, "and I will raise him up on the last day." He says therefore first: it is not surprising if you murmur, because you have not yet been drawn by the Father to me. For "no one can come to me" — by believing in me — "unless the Father, who sent me, draws him." But here there is a threefold question. The first concerns what he says, "unless the Father draws him." For since we come to Christ by believing, as was said above in this same chapter, to come to Christ is to believe in him; but no one can believe except willingly. Since, then, drawing implies a certain violence, therefore whoever comes to Christ drawn, is compelled. I answer that it must be said that what is here said about this drawing of the Father does not imply compulsion, since not everything that draws exercises violence. Thus, then, the Father draws to the Son in many ways, according to the manifold manner of drawing without violence in human beings. For one man draws another by persuading through reason; and in this way the Father draws men to the Son, by showing him to be his Son; and this in two ways: either through interior revelation — Matthew 16:17: "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona, because flesh and blood has not revealed to you" — namely, that Christ is the Son of the living God — "but my Father"; or through the working of miracles, which he has from the Father — John 5:36: "the works which the Father has given me, these very works give testimony of me." Likewise, one draws another by alluring; Proverbs 7:21: "with the flatteries of her lips she drew him on." And in this way those who attend to Jesus because of the authority of the paternal majesty are drawn by the Father. For whoever believes in Christ because he believes him to be the Son of God — this man the Father draws to the Son, that is, the paternal majesty draws him. In this way Arius is not drawn, who believed Christ not to be the true Son of God, nor begotten of the substance of the Father. Nor was Photinus drawn in this way, who taught that Christ was a mere man. Thus, then, they are drawn by the Father, enticed by his majesty; but they are also drawn by the Son, by the admirable delight and love of the truth, which is the Son of God himself. For if, as Augustine says, "each man's own pleasure draws him," how much more strongly ought a man to be drawn to Christ, if he delights in truth, beatitude, justice, everlasting life — all of which is Christ? If, then, we are to be drawn by him, let us be drawn through the love of truth; according to Psalm 36:4: "delight in the Lord, and he will give you the petitions of your heart." Hence the bride said, Song of Songs 1:3: "Draw me after you; we will run to the odor of your ointments." But because not only exterior revelation, or its object, has the power of drawing, but also an interior instinct impelling and moving one to believe, therefore the Father draws many to the Son through the instinct of a divine operation moving the heart of man interiorly to believe; Philippians 2:13: "it is God who works in us to will and to accomplish"; Hosea 11:4: "I will draw them with the cords of Adam, with the bands of love"; Proverbs 21:1: "the heart of the king is in the hand of the Lord: he will incline it wherever he wills." The second question is this: since it is said that the Son draws to the Father — Matthew 11:27: "no one knows the Father but the Son, and he to whom the Son wills to reveal him"; and below, John 17:6: "Father, I have manifested your name to the men whom you gave me" — how is it here said that the Father draws to the Son? But it must be said that this can be answered in two ways: for we can speak of Christ either according as he is man, or according as he is God. Now according as he is man, Christ is the way; below, John 14:6: "I am the way"; and according as he is Christ, he leads to the Father, as a way leads to its terminus or end. But the Father draws to Christ as man insofar as he gives us his power, that we may believe in Christ; Ephesians 2:8: "by grace you have been saved, and this not of yourselves, for it is the gift of God." Insofar as he is Christ, he is the Word of God, and manifestative of the Father. Thus the Son draws to the Father. But the Father draws to the Son insofar as he manifests him. The third question concerns what he says, that no one can come unless drawn by the Father: because according to this, if someone does not come to Christ, it is not imputed to him, but to him who does not draw them. I answer that it must be said that truly no one can come unless drawn by the Father: for just as a heavy body cannot by nature be carried upward of itself unless it is drawn by another, so the human heart, tending of itself toward lower things, cannot be raised upward unless drawn. But if it is not raised up, the deficiency is not on the part of the one drawing, who, as far as is in him, fails no one; but it is on account of an impediment in the one who is not drawn. But, as far as this pertains, we can speak in one way about men in the state of unimpaired nature, and in another way in the state of corrupted nature; for in unimpaired nature there was no impediment prohibiting this drawing, whence at that time all men could be participants of this drawing. But in corrupted nature all are equally prohibited from this drawing by the impediment of sin; and therefore all need to be drawn. But God, as far as is in him, extends his hand to all to draw them, and, what is more, not only draws the hand of the one receiving, but even converts those turned away from himself, according to Lamentations 5:21: "Convert us, Lord, and we shall be converted"; and Psalm 84:7, according to another reading: "God, you, turning us, will give us life." Since, then, God is ready to give grace to all, and to draw them to himself, it is not imputed to him if someone does not accept, but to him who does not accept. But as to why he does not draw all those turned away, but only some, although all are equally turned away: a reason indeed can be assigned in general, namely that in those who are not drawn, the order of divine justice may appear and shine forth; but in those who are drawn, the immensity of divine mercy. But why in particular he draws this one, and does not draw that one, there is no reason at all, except the good pleasure of the divine will. Hence Augustine says: "whom he draws and whom he does not draw, why he draws that one and does not draw this one, do not wish to judge, if you do not wish to err. But receive, and understand: if you are not yet drawn, pray that you may be drawn." This can also be shown by an example. For a reason can be assigned why a builder places some stones lower down, and some higher up, and some on the sides, from the arrangement of the house, whose completion requires this. But why he places these stones here and those there, depends on his simple will. And hence it is that the first reason of the arrangement is referred to the will of the builder. Thus, then, God, for the completion of the universe, draws some indeed, that his mercy may appear in them; but he does not draw others, that his justice may be shown in them. But he draws these, he does not draw those, according to the good pleasure of his will. Likewise also, why in the Church he made some apostles, others confessors, others martyrs, the reason is on account of the adornment and completion of the Church. But why he made Peter an apostle, Stephen a martyr, and Nicholas a confessor, there is no other reason than his own will. Thus, then, the deficiency of human capacity, and the aid of divine help, are evident. There follows the end and fruit of the help, when he says "and I will raise him up on the last day" — even insofar as he is man: for through the things which Christ did in his flesh, we obtain the fruit of the resurrection; 1 Corinthians 15:21: "as by man came death, so also by man comes the resurrection of the dead." "I," therefore, according as I am man, "will raise him up," not only to the life of nature, but also to the life of glory, and this "on the last day." For the Catholic faith holds that the state of the world will be renewed; Revelation 21:1: "I saw a new heaven and a new earth." And among the other things which will concur toward this renewal, we believe that the motion of the heavens will cease, and consequently time; Revelation 10:5: "and the angel whom I saw standing upon the sea and upon the earth, lifted up his hand to heaven." And further on: "that there shall be time no longer." Because, then, with time ceasing at the resurrection, night and day will also cease, according to Zechariah 14:7: "there shall be one day, which is known to the Lord, not day nor night"; therefore he says, "I will raise him up on the last day." But as to why the motion of the heavens, and time, will last until then, neither less nor more, it must be known that that which exists for the sake of another thing is disposed in different ways according to the different disposition of that for the sake of which it exists. But all bodily things were made for the sake of man; and therefore they must be disposed in different ways according to the different disposition of man. Because, then, in men, when they rise again, the state of incorruption will begin, according to 1 Corinthians 15:54: "this mortal shall put on incorruption," therefore corruption will then also cease in things; hence the motion of the heavens will cease, which is the cause of generation and corruption in bodily things; Romans 8:21: "the creature itself shall be delivered from the servitude of corruption into the liberty of the children of God." Thus, then, it is evident that the drawing of the Father is necessary for us for faith. Consequently, when he says "it is written in the prophets" etc., he determines the manner of drawing, and first he sets down the manner of drawing; second, the efficacy of the drawing, at the place "everyone who has heard from the Father, and has learned, comes to me"; third, he excludes a supposed manner of drawing, at the place "not that anyone has seen the Father." Now the manner of drawing is fitting, because he draws by revealing and teaching; and this is what he says: "it is written in the prophets: they shall all be teachable by God" etc. Bede says this is written in Joel; but it does not seem to be expressly there, although something consonant with it is said; and Joel 2:22: "sons of Zion, rejoice in the Lord your God, because he will give you a teacher of justice." Therefore, according to Bede, he says "in the prophets," so as to give one to understand that this sense can be gathered from various sayings of the prophets. But this seems to be said more expressly in Isaiah 54:13: "I will make all your sons taught by the Lord." It is also said in Jeremiah 3:15: "I will give you shepherds according to my own heart, who shall feed you with knowledge and doctrine." Now this that he says, "they shall all be," can be understood in three ways. In one way, so that the word "all" stands for all the men of the world; in another way, so that it stands for all who are in the Church of Christ; in a third way, for all who will be in the kingdom of heaven. But if it is said in the first way, it seems not to be true; for he immediately adds, "everyone who has heard from the Father and has learned, comes to me." If, then, all men of the world will be teachable, therefore all will come to Christ. But this is false, because faith is not the possession of all. But to this a threefold response is given. For, according to Chrysostom, in the first way it must be said that this is said of the majority: "they shall all be," he says, "all," that is, the majority; according to which manner it is said in Matthew 8:11: "many will come from the east and the west," etc. Second, that "all," as far as it is from God, will be teachable; but that some are not taught, is on their own part. For the sun, as far as it is in itself, illumines all; but it can fail to be seen by some, if they close their eyes, or if they are blind. And in this way the Apostle says, 1 Timothy 2:4: "he wills all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth." In a third way, according to Augustine, that this is a fitting distribution, so that it is said "all shall be teachable by God," that is, all who are taught, are taught by God, just as we speak of some master of letters. For we say, if he is in a city: this man alone teaches all the boys of the city, because no one is taught in it except by him. And in this way it is said above, John 1:9: "that was the true light, which enlightens every man coming into this world." But if it is explained of those who are gathered in the Church, it is said "they shall all be" — namely, those who are in the Church — "teachable by God"; for in Isaiah 54:13 it is said: "I will make all your sons taught by the Lord" — in which indeed is shown the sublimity of the Christian faith, which does not cling to human doctrine, but to the doctrine of God. For the doctrine of the Old Testament was given through the prophets; but the doctrine of the New Testament is through the Son of God himself; Hebrews 1:1: "in many parts and in many ways" — that is, in the Old Testament — "God speaking in times past to the fathers by the prophets, last of all in these days has spoken to us by his Son"; and in the same place, 2:3: "which having begun to be declared by the Lord, was confirmed unto us by them that heard him." Thus, then, all who are in the Church are taught, not by the apostles, not by the prophets, but by God himself. And, according to Augustine, this very fact that we are taught by a man, is from God, who teaches interiorly; Matthew 23:10: "one is your master, Christ." For understanding, which is necessary above all for doctrine, is given to us from God. But if it is explained of those who are in the kingdom of heaven, etc., then "all shall be teachable by God," because they will see his essence immediately; 1 John 3:2: "we shall see him as he is." Now the drawing of the Father is most efficacious: because "everyone who has heard from the Father, and has learned, comes to me." Where he sets down two things: one, namely, that pertains to the gift of God, when he says "has heard," that is, with God revealing; the other that pertains to free will, when he says "and has learned," that is, through assent; and these two things are necessary in every teaching of the faith. "Everyone who has heard from the Father" — teaching and manifesting — "and has learned" — offering assent — "comes to me"; he comes, I say, in three ways: through the knowledge of the truth, through the affection of love, and through the imitation of works. And in each of these it is necessary that one hear and learn. For he who comes through the knowledge of the truth must hear, with God inspiring, according to Psalm 84:9: "I will hear what the Lord God will speak in me," and learn through affection, as has been said. But he who comes through love and desire, as is said below, John 7:37: "if anyone thirsts, let him come to me, and drink" — he too must hear the word of the Father, and grasp it, so that he may learn, and be moved in affection. For he learns the word who grasps it according to the intention of the one speaking; but the word of God the Father breathes forth love: whoever, therefore, grasps it with the fervor of love, learns it; Wisdom 7:27: "she conveys herself into holy souls, she makes them friends of God and prophets." But through the imitation of works one goes to Christ, according to Matthew 11:28: "come to me, all you who labor and are burdened, and I will refresh you." And in this way too, whoever learns, comes to Christ: for as the conclusion stands in relation to things knowable, so does operation in relation to things that can be done. Now in the sciences, whoever learns perfectly arrives at the conclusion; therefore in matters of action, he who perfectly learns the words arrives at right action; Isaiah 50:5: "the Lord has opened my ear; and I do not contradict." But because some might suppose that all men visibly hear and learn from the Father, therefore, so that the Lord might exclude this, he adds, "not that anyone has seen the Father" — that is, no man living in this life has seen the Father in his essence, according to Exodus 33:20: "man shall not see me, and live" — "except he," namely the Son, "who is from God, he has seen the Father" — his own Father — through essence. Or: no one has seen the Father with the vision of comprehension, with which vision neither man nor angel has ever seen him, nor can see him, except him who is from God, that is, the Son; Matthew 11:27: "no one knows the Father but the Son." The reason for this indeed is that, since every vision or cognition comes about through some likeness, according to the mode of likeness which creatures have to God, according to this they have knowledge of him. Hence the philosophers also say that the intelligences know the first cause according to this likeness of it which they have. But every creature indeed participates in some likeness of God, but one infinitely distant from the likeness of his nature, and therefore no creature can know him perfectly and totally, as he is in his own nature. But the Son, because he received the whole nature of the Father perfectly through eternal generation, therefore sees and comprehends him totally. But attention must be paid to the fitting order of speaking. For above, when he was speaking of the knowledge of others, he used the word "hearing"; but here, when he speaks of the knowledge of the Son, he uses the word "vision": for the knowledge that is through sight is immediate and open; but that which is through hearing comes about by the mediation of the one who has seen. Thus we too have received the knowledge which we have of the Father from the Son, who has seen him: so that in this way no one knows the Father except through Christ, who manifests him, and no one comes to the Son unless he has heard from the Father manifesting him.”

“Having set forth the teaching of Christ, here the contradiction of the aforesaid teaching is excluded, and first with respect to the murmuring crowds; second with respect to the doubting disciples, at the place "Many therefore of his disciples, hearing this, said" etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he expresses the murmuring of the crowds about the origin of the spiritual food; second he mitigates their dispute about the eating of the spiritual food, at the place "The Jews therefore disputed among themselves." Concerning the first he does two things. First the murmuring of the crowds is set down; second the repression of the murmuring, at the place "Jesus therefore answered, and said to them." Concerning the first he does two things. First the occasion of the murmuring is set down; second the words of those murmuring are set down, at the place "Is not this the son of Joseph?" He concludes therefore from the aforesaid words of Christ, that certain persons murmured about a certain one of the words spoken, namely because he had said: "I am the living bread, which came down from heaven" (John 6:51); which spiritual bread indeed they did not grasp nor desire. And therefore they murmured, because they did not have a mind grounded in spiritual things, and they had an ancient custom of this matter, according to Psalm 105:25: "they murmured in their tents"; and 1 Corinthians 10:10: "neither murmur, as some of them murmured." Now, as Chrysostom says, up to this point they had not murmured, because they always hoped that they would obtain bodily food; when that hope was withdrawn, they immediately begin to murmur, although they put forward another cause. But they do not openly contradict him, because of the reverence which they still had for him, from the memory of the preceding miracle. Now he sets down the words of those murmuring when he says "Is not this the son of Joseph?" For because they were carnal, they considered only the carnal generation of Christ, by which they were hindered from knowing the spiritual and eternal generation; and therefore they speak only of the carnal generation, according to what was said above, John 3:31: "he who is of the earth, speaks of the earth," and they do not grasp the spiritual; hence they add: "How then does he say, that I came down from heaven?" Now they call him the son of Joseph on account of common reputation: because Joseph was his foster-father, according to Luke 3:23: "as he was supposed, the son of Joseph." Now the repression of the murmuring is set down when he says "Jesus therefore answered, and said to them," and first he represses their murmuring; second he satisfies their doubt, at the place "Amen, amen I say to you: he who believes in me has eternal life." Concerning the first he does two things. First he restrains their murmuring; second he assigns the cause of their murmuring, at the place "No one can come to me" etc. Knowing therefore their murmuring, Jesus answered; and repressing their very murmuring, he said to them, "Murmur not" etc. For this is a wholesome teaching: for he who murmurs shows that his mind is not made firm in God, and therefore it is said in Wisdom 1:11: "Keep yourselves from murmuring, for it profits nothing." Now the cause of the murmuring is their unbelief; and therefore he shows this, saying "No one can come to me" etc., where first he shows that the drawing of the Father is necessary in order that one may come to Christ; second he shows the manner of drawing, at the place "it is written in the prophets" etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets down the deficiency of human capacity; second the aid of divine help; third the end, or fruit, of that help. Human capacity, therefore, is deficient for coming to Christ through faith; and therefore he says, "No one can come to me." Second, divine help is efficacious to come to the rescue, hence he adds, "unless the Father, who sent me, draws him." But the end, or fruit, is the best; hence it follows, "and I will raise him up on the last day." He says therefore first: it is not surprising if you murmur, because you have not yet been drawn by the Father to me. For "no one can come to me" — by believing in me — "unless the Father, who sent me, draws him." But here there is a threefold question. The first concerns what he says, "unless the Father draws him." For since we come to Christ by believing, as was said above in this same chapter, to come to Christ is to believe in him; but no one can believe except willingly. Since, then, drawing implies a certain violence, therefore whoever comes to Christ drawn, is compelled. I answer that it must be said that what is here said about this drawing of the Father does not imply compulsion, since not everything that draws exercises violence. Thus, then, the Father draws to the Son in many ways, according to the manifold manner of drawing without violence in human beings. For one man draws another by persuading through reason; and in this way the Father draws men to the Son, by showing him to be his Son; and this in two ways: either through interior revelation — Matthew 16:17: "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona, because flesh and blood has not revealed to you" — namely, that Christ is the Son of the living God — "but my Father"; or through the working of miracles, which he has from the Father — John 5:36: "the works which the Father has given me, these very works give testimony of me." Likewise, one draws another by alluring; Proverbs 7:21: "with the flatteries of her lips she drew him on." And in this way those who attend to Jesus because of the authority of the paternal majesty are drawn by the Father. For whoever believes in Christ because he believes him to be the Son of God — this man the Father draws to the Son, that is, the paternal majesty draws him. In this way Arius is not drawn, who believed Christ not to be the true Son of God, nor begotten of the substance of the Father. Nor was Photinus drawn in this way, who taught that Christ was a mere man. Thus, then, they are drawn by the Father, enticed by his majesty; but they are also drawn by the Son, by the admirable delight and love of the truth, which is the Son of God himself. For if, as Augustine says, "each man's own pleasure draws him," how much more strongly ought a man to be drawn to Christ, if he delights in truth, beatitude, justice, everlasting life — all of which is Christ? If, then, we are to be drawn by him, let us be drawn through the love of truth; according to Psalm 36:4: "delight in the Lord, and he will give you the petitions of your heart." Hence the bride said, Song of Songs 1:3: "Draw me after you; we will run to the odor of your ointments." But because not only exterior revelation, or its object, has the power of drawing, but also an interior instinct impelling and moving one to believe, therefore the Father draws many to the Son through the instinct of a divine operation moving the heart of man interiorly to believe; Philippians 2:13: "it is God who works in us to will and to accomplish"; Hosea 11:4: "I will draw them with the cords of Adam, with the bands of love"; Proverbs 21:1: "the heart of the king is in the hand of the Lord: he will incline it wherever he wills." The second question is this: since it is said that the Son draws to the Father — Matthew 11:27: "no one knows the Father but the Son, and he to whom the Son wills to reveal him"; and below, John 17:6: "Father, I have manifested your name to the men whom you gave me" — how is it here said that the Father draws to the Son? But it must be said that this can be answered in two ways: for we can speak of Christ either according as he is man, or according as he is God. Now according as he is man, Christ is the way; below, John 14:6: "I am the way"; and according as he is Christ, he leads to the Father, as a way leads to its terminus or end. But the Father draws to Christ as man insofar as he gives us his power, that we may believe in Christ; Ephesians 2:8: "by grace you have been saved, and this not of yourselves, for it is the gift of God." Insofar as he is Christ, he is the Word of God, and manifestative of the Father. Thus the Son draws to the Father. But the Father draws to the Son insofar as he manifests him. The third question concerns what he says, that no one can come unless drawn by the Father: because according to this, if someone does not come to Christ, it is not imputed to him, but to him who does not draw them. I answer that it must be said that truly no one can come unless drawn by the Father: for just as a heavy body cannot by nature be carried upward of itself unless it is drawn by another, so the human heart, tending of itself toward lower things, cannot be raised upward unless drawn. But if it is not raised up, the deficiency is not on the part of the one drawing, who, as far as is in him, fails no one; but it is on account of an impediment in the one who is not drawn. But, as far as this pertains, we can speak in one way about men in the state of unimpaired nature, and in another way in the state of corrupted nature; for in unimpaired nature there was no impediment prohibiting this drawing, whence at that time all men could be participants of this drawing. But in corrupted nature all are equally prohibited from this drawing by the impediment of sin; and therefore all need to be drawn. But God, as far as is in him, extends his hand to all to draw them, and, what is more, not only draws the hand of the one receiving, but even converts those turned away from himself, according to Lamentations 5:21: "Convert us, Lord, and we shall be converted"; and Psalm 84:7, according to another reading: "God, you, turning us, will give us life." Since, then, God is ready to give grace to all, and to draw them to himself, it is not imputed to him if someone does not accept, but to him who does not accept. But as to why he does not draw all those turned away, but only some, although all are equally turned away: a reason indeed can be assigned in general, namely that in those who are not drawn, the order of divine justice may appear and shine forth; but in those who are drawn, the immensity of divine mercy. But why in particular he draws this one, and does not draw that one, there is no reason at all, except the good pleasure of the divine will. Hence Augustine says: "whom he draws and whom he does not draw, why he draws that one and does not draw this one, do not wish to judge, if you do not wish to err. But receive, and understand: if you are not yet drawn, pray that you may be drawn." This can also be shown by an example. For a reason can be assigned why a builder places some stones lower down, and some higher up, and some on the sides, from the arrangement of the house, whose completion requires this. But why he places these stones here and those there, depends on his simple will. And hence it is that the first reason of the arrangement is referred to the will of the builder. Thus, then, God, for the completion of the universe, draws some indeed, that his mercy may appear in them; but he does not draw others, that his justice may be shown in them. But he draws these, he does not draw those, according to the good pleasure of his will. Likewise also, why in the Church he made some apostles, others confessors, others martyrs, the reason is on account of the adornment and completion of the Church. But why he made Peter an apostle, Stephen a martyr, and Nicholas a confessor, there is no other reason than his own will. Thus, then, the deficiency of human capacity, and the aid of divine help, are evident. There follows the end and fruit of the help, when he says "and I will raise him up on the last day" — even insofar as he is man: for through the things which Christ did in his flesh, we obtain the fruit of the resurrection; 1 Corinthians 15:21: "as by man came death, so also by man comes the resurrection of the dead." "I," therefore, according as I am man, "will raise him up," not only to the life of nature, but also to the life of glory, and this "on the last day." For the Catholic faith holds that the state of the world will be renewed; Revelation 21:1: "I saw a new heaven and a new earth." And among the other things which will concur toward this renewal, we believe that the motion of the heavens will cease, and consequently time; Revelation 10:5: "and the angel whom I saw standing upon the sea and upon the earth, lifted up his hand to heaven." And further on: "that there shall be time no longer." Because, then, with time ceasing at the resurrection, night and day will also cease, according to Zechariah 14:7: "there shall be one day, which is known to the Lord, not day nor night"; therefore he says, "I will raise him up on the last day." But as to why the motion of the heavens, and time, will last until then, neither less nor more, it must be known that that which exists for the sake of another thing is disposed in different ways according to the different disposition of that for the sake of which it exists. But all bodily things were made for the sake of man; and therefore they must be disposed in different ways according to the different disposition of man. Because, then, in men, when they rise again, the state of incorruption will begin, according to 1 Corinthians 15:54: "this mortal shall put on incorruption," therefore corruption will then also cease in things; hence the motion of the heavens will cease, which is the cause of generation and corruption in bodily things; Romans 8:21: "the creature itself shall be delivered from the servitude of corruption into the liberty of the children of God." Thus, then, it is evident that the drawing of the Father is necessary for us for faith. Consequently, when he says "it is written in the prophets" etc., he determines the manner of drawing, and first he sets down the manner of drawing; second, the efficacy of the drawing, at the place "everyone who has heard from the Father, and has learned, comes to me"; third, he excludes a supposed manner of drawing, at the place "not that anyone has seen the Father." Now the manner of drawing is fitting, because he draws by revealing and teaching; and this is what he says: "it is written in the prophets: they shall all be teachable by God" etc. Bede says this is written in Joel; but it does not seem to be expressly there, although something consonant with it is said; and Joel 2:22: "sons of Zion, rejoice in the Lord your God, because he will give you a teacher of justice." Therefore, according to Bede, he says "in the prophets," so as to give one to understand that this sense can be gathered from various sayings of the prophets. But this seems to be said more expressly in Isaiah 54:13: "I will make all your sons taught by the Lord." It is also said in Jeremiah 3:15: "I will give you shepherds according to my own heart, who shall feed you with knowledge and doctrine." Now this that he says, "they shall all be," can be understood in three ways. In one way, so that the word "all" stands for all the men of the world; in another way, so that it stands for all who are in the Church of Christ; in a third way, for all who will be in the kingdom of heaven. But if it is said in the first way, it seems not to be true; for he immediately adds, "everyone who has heard from the Father and has learned, comes to me." If, then, all men of the world will be teachable, therefore all will come to Christ. But this is false, because faith is not the possession of all. But to this a threefold response is given. For, according to Chrysostom, in the first way it must be said that this is said of the majority: "they shall all be," he says, "all," that is, the majority; according to which manner it is said in Matthew 8:11: "many will come from the east and the west," etc. Second, that "all," as far as it is from God, will be teachable; but that some are not taught, is on their own part. For the sun, as far as it is in itself, illumines all; but it can fail to be seen by some, if they close their eyes, or if they are blind. And in this way the Apostle says, 1 Timothy 2:4: "he wills all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth." In a third way, according to Augustine, that this is a fitting distribution, so that it is said "all shall be teachable by God," that is, all who are taught, are taught by God, just as we speak of some master of letters. For we say, if he is in a city: this man alone teaches all the boys of the city, because no one is taught in it except by him. And in this way it is said above, John 1:9: "that was the true light, which enlightens every man coming into this world." But if it is explained of those who are gathered in the Church, it is said "they shall all be" — namely, those who are in the Church — "teachable by God"; for in Isaiah 54:13 it is said: "I will make all your sons taught by the Lord" — in which indeed is shown the sublimity of the Christian faith, which does not cling to human doctrine, but to the doctrine of God. For the doctrine of the Old Testament was given through the prophets; but the doctrine of the New Testament is through the Son of God himself; Hebrews 1:1: "in many parts and in many ways" — that is, in the Old Testament — "God speaking in times past to the fathers by the prophets, last of all in these days has spoken to us by his Son"; and in the same place, 2:3: "which having begun to be declared by the Lord, was confirmed unto us by them that heard him." Thus, then, all who are in the Church are taught, not by the apostles, not by the prophets, but by God himself. And, according to Augustine, this very fact that we are taught by a man, is from God, who teaches interiorly; Matthew 23:10: "one is your master, Christ." For understanding, which is necessary above all for doctrine, is given to us from God. But if it is explained of those who are in the kingdom of heaven, etc., then "all shall be teachable by God," because they will see his essence immediately; 1 John 3:2: "we shall see him as he is." Now the drawing of the Father is most efficacious: because "everyone who has heard from the Father, and has learned, comes to me." Where he sets down two things: one, namely, that pertains to the gift of God, when he says "has heard," that is, with God revealing; the other that pertains to free will, when he says "and has learned," that is, through assent; and these two things are necessary in every teaching of the faith. "Everyone who has heard from the Father" — teaching and manifesting — "and has learned" — offering assent — "comes to me"; he comes, I say, in three ways: through the knowledge of the truth, through the affection of love, and through the imitation of works. And in each of these it is necessary that one hear and learn. For he who comes through the knowledge of the truth must hear, with God inspiring, according to Psalm 84:9: "I will hear what the Lord God will speak in me," and learn through affection, as has been said. But he who comes through love and desire, as is said below, John 7:37: "if anyone thirsts, let him come to me, and drink" — he too must hear the word of the Father, and grasp it, so that he may learn, and be moved in affection. For he learns the word who grasps it according to the intention of the one speaking; but the word of God the Father breathes forth love: whoever, therefore, grasps it with the fervor of love, learns it; Wisdom 7:27: "she conveys herself into holy souls, she makes them friends of God and prophets." But through the imitation of works one goes to Christ, according to Matthew 11:28: "come to me, all you who labor and are burdened, and I will refresh you." And in this way too, whoever learns, comes to Christ: for as the conclusion stands in relation to things knowable, so does operation in relation to things that can be done. Now in the sciences, whoever learns perfectly arrives at the conclusion; therefore in matters of action, he who perfectly learns the words arrives at right action; Isaiah 50:5: "the Lord has opened my ear; and I do not contradict." But because some might suppose that all men visibly hear and learn from the Father, therefore, so that the Lord might exclude this, he adds, "not that anyone has seen the Father" — that is, no man living in this life has seen the Father in his essence, according to Exodus 33:20: "man shall not see me, and live" — "except he," namely the Son, "who is from God, he has seen the Father" — his own Father — through essence. Or: no one has seen the Father with the vision of comprehension, with which vision neither man nor angel has ever seen him, nor can see him, except him who is from God, that is, the Son; Matthew 11:27: "no one knows the Father but the Son." The reason for this indeed is that, since every vision or cognition comes about through some likeness, according to the mode of likeness which creatures have to God, according to this they have knowledge of him. Hence the philosophers also say that the intelligences know the first cause according to this likeness of it which they have. But every creature indeed participates in some likeness of God, but one infinitely distant from the likeness of his nature, and therefore no creature can know him perfectly and totally, as he is in his own nature. But the Son, because he received the whole nature of the Father perfectly through eternal generation, therefore sees and comprehends him totally. But attention must be paid to the fitting order of speaking. For above, when he was speaking of the knowledge of others, he used the word "hearing"; but here, when he speaks of the knowledge of the Son, he uses the word "vision": for the knowledge that is through sight is immediate and open; but that which is through hearing comes about by the mediation of the one who has seen. Thus we too have received the knowledge which we have of the Father from the Son, who has seen him: so that in this way no one knows the Father except through Christ, who manifests him, and no one comes to the Son unless he has heard from the Father manifesting him.”

“With the murmuring of the Jews checked, the Lord accordingly satisfies the doubt that had arisen in the hearts of the Jews concerning the word he had spoken, namely, I am the bread which came down from heaven, where he intends to prove that this is true of himself; and he argues thus: that bread came down from heaven which gives life to the world; but I am the bread giving life to the world; therefore I am the bread which came down from heaven, and so on. Concerning this he does three things. First, he sets down, as it were, the minor premise of his argument, namely, I am the bread of life; second, he sets down the major premise, namely, that the bread which came down from heaven ought to give life, at the place, your fathers ate manna in the desert, and they died; third, he sets down the conclusion, at the place, I am the living bread. Concerning the first he does two things. First he makes clear his proposal; second he brings forward what was intended as, so to speak, proven, at the place, I am the bread of life. His proposal is to show that he is the bread of life. Now bread gives life inasmuch as it is taken. But it is agreed that whoever believes in Christ takes him within himself, according to that word of Ephesians 3:17: that Christ may dwell through faith in our hearts. If therefore he who believes in Christ has life, it is clear that by eating this bread he is given life; therefore this bread is the bread of life. And this is what he says: Amen, amen, I say to you, whoever believes in me — namely with formed faith, which perfects not only the intellect but also the affection (for one does not tend toward the thing believed unless one loves it) — has eternal life. Now Christ is in us in two ways: namely in the intellect through faith, inasmuch as it is faith; and in the affection through charity, which informs faith: 1 John 4:16, whoever abides in charity abides in God, and God in him. Whoever therefore believes in Christ in such a way as to tend toward him has him in affection and in intellect; and if we add that Christ is eternal life, as is said in 1 John 5:20, that we may be in his true Son Jesus Christ: this is the true God and eternal life; and above, John 1:4, in him was life — we can infer that whoever believes in Christ has eternal life. He has it, I say, in cause and in hope, and will one day have it in reality. Having made clear his proposal, he brings forward what was intended, when he says, I am the bread of life, that is, giving life, as evidently follows from what has been said. Concerning this bread, Genesis 49:20: Asher, his bread is fat, he shall yield delights — namely of eternal life — to kings. Accordingly, when he says, your fathers ate manna in the desert, and they died, he sets down the major premise: namely, that to give life is the effect of bread descending from heaven. And first he prefaces the manifestation of the proposal; second he sets down what was intended, at the place, this is the bread which comes down from heaven. Now he makes clear his proposal by its contrary. For it was said above that Moses did not give the Jews bread from heaven, but only from the air; but all bread which is not from the true heaven cannot give sufficient life; therefore this is proper to heavenly bread, that it gives life. And therefore the bread of Moses, in which you take pride, does not give life; and this he proves when he says, your fathers ate manna in the desert, and they died. Here he first reproaches their vice, when he says your fathers, etc. — whose sons you are, not only according to the origin of the flesh, but also according to the imitation of their works, because you are murmurers, just as they also murmured in their tents, as is said in Psalm 105:25; and therefore he said to them, Matthew 23:32, fill up the measure of your fathers. Whence, as Augustine says, the people are said to have offended God in no matter more than by murmuring against God. Second, he insinuates the short span of time, when he says in the desert: for it was not a long time in which the manna was given to them, nor did it come with them into the land of promise, but only in the desert, as is said in Joshua 5:12. This bread, however, preserves and refreshes forever. Third, he makes clear the deficiency of the food, because it did not preserve unfailing life; hence he says, and they died. For, as is found in Joshua 5, all who murmured, except Joshua and Caleb, died in the desert. Whence this was also the cause of the second circumcision, namely that all the people who went out from Egypt died in the desert, as is said in the same place. But it is asked of what death God here speaks. For if he speaks of bodily death, there will be no difference between that bread which was in the desert and our bread which came down from heaven, because even Christians who take this one die bodily. But if he speaks of spiritual death, it is clear that here and there some die spiritually and some do not. For Moses, and many who pleased God, did not die, although others died. Likewise, those who take this bread unworthily also die spiritually; 1 Corinthians 11:29: for he who eats and drinks unworthily eats and drinks judgment to himself. To this it must be said that that food agrees with our spiritual food. They agree indeed as to this, that each signifies the same thing: for both that one and this one signify Christ, on account of which it is called the same food; 1 Corinthians 10:3: all ate the same spiritual food. He says the same because both are a figure of spiritual food. But they differ, because that one only prefigured, whereas this bread contains what it prefigures, namely Christ himself. It must therefore be said that each of these foods can be taken in two ways: either as to the sign only, that is, that it is taken only as food, its meaning not understood; and by this neither spiritual nor bodily death is removed. Or it can be taken as to both, that is, that the visible food is so taken that the spiritual food is understood, and is spiritually tasted, so that it spiritually satisfies; and in this way those who ate the manna spiritually did not die spiritually. But those also who eat the Eucharist spiritually, and now live spiritually without sin, will also live bodily forever. Our food, therefore, has more than their food, because it contains in itself what it prefigures. Having made clear the proposal, therefore, he brings forward what was intended; hence he says, this is the bread which comes down from heaven. And according to the Gloss, he says this pointing to himself. But this is not the Lord's meaning, because since he immediately adds, I am the living bread which came down from heaven, it would be a repetition of words. It must therefore be said that the Lord intends this: namely, to say that that bread comes down from heaven which can do this, namely give life; but I am such; therefore I am the bread which comes down from heaven. And the reason that bread coming down from heaven gives unfailing life is that all food nourishes according to the property of its own nature; but heavenly things are incorruptible; and therefore, because that food is heavenly, it is not corrupted, and as long as it remains it gives life. Whoever therefore eats of it will not die. Just as if some bodily food were never corrupted, giving nourishment, it would always give life. And therefore this bread was signified by the tree of life which was in the middle of paradise, in a certain way giving life forever, according to that word of Genesis 3:22: now therefore lest perhaps he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever. If therefore this is the effect of this bread, namely that whoever eats of it does not die, and I am such: therefore, and so on. I am the living bread, etc. Concerning this, then, he does two things. First he speaks of himself in general; second specifically, at the place, and the bread which I will give is my flesh. Concerning the first he does two things. First he concludes the origin of himself. Second he shows his power, at the place, if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. He said, then, I am the living bread, and therefore I can give life. For bodily bread does not give life forever, because it does not have life in itself; but it gives life, once altered and converted into nourishment, by the power of the one living. Who came down from heaven: this was expounded above, in chapter 3, namely how he came down. And by this the heresies of those saying Christ was a mere man are excluded, because according to this he would not have come down from heaven. Now his power is to give eternal life; and therefore he says, if anyone eats of this bread — spiritually, that is — he will live, not only in the present through faith and righteousness, but forever; below, John 11:26: everyone who lives and believes in me will never die. Accordingly he speaks of the body, when he says, and the bread which I will give is my flesh. For he had said that he was the living bread, and lest it be understood that this belonged to him only inasmuch as he is the Word, or according to the soul only, he therefore shows that his flesh also is life-giving: for it is the instrument of his divinity; hence, since an instrument acts by the power of the agent, just as the divinity of Christ is life-giving, so also, as Damascene says, the flesh, by the power of the Word joined to it, gives life; hence Christ by his touch healed the sick. Thus, then, what he said above, I am the living bread, pertains to the power of the Word; but what he adds here pertains to the communion of his body, namely to the sacrament of the Eucharist. Here we can consider four things concerning this sacrament: namely, its species, the authority of its institutor, the truth of the sacrament, and its usefulness. The species of the sacrament indeed: this is bread; Proverbs 9:5: come, and eat my bread. The reason for this is that this is the sacrament of the body of Christ; but the body of Christ is the Church, which rises into the unity of one body out of many faithful; hence this is the sacrament of the unity of the Church; Romans 12:5: we are all one body. Because, then, bread is made up of many grains, therefore this species is fitting for this sacrament; and therefore he says, and the bread which I will give is my flesh. The author of this sacrament is Christ: for although the priest consecrates, nevertheless Christ himself gives power to the sacrament, because even the priest himself consecrates in the person of Christ. Hence in the other sacraments the priest uses his own words, or those of the Church, but in this one he uses the words of Christ: because just as Christ gave his own body to death by his own will, so by his own power he gives himself as food; Matthew 26:26: taking bread, he blessed, and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, and said, take and eat: this is my body. And therefore he says, which I will give: and he says I will give, because this sacrament was not yet instituted. Now the truth of this sacrament is insinuated when he says, is my flesh. He does not say, however, signifies my flesh, but is my flesh; because according to the truth of the matter, what is taken is truly the body of Christ; Job 31:31: if the men of my tabernacle have not said: who will give us of his flesh, that we may be filled? But since in this sacrament the whole Christ is contained, why did he say only, is my flesh? In answer to this, it must be known that in that mystical sacrament the whole Christ is contained according to truth, but the body is there by force of the conversion, while the divinity and the soul are there by natural concomitance. For if it be granted — though impossible — that the divinity were separated from the body of Christ, the divinity would no longer be in the sacrament. Likewise also, if someone had consecrated during the three days of his death, the soul of Christ would not have been there, but such a body as it was on the cross, or in the tomb. The reason he rather says flesh is that, since this sacrament is a remembrance of the Lord's passion, according to that word of 1 Corinthians 11:26: as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the cup, you shall show forth the death of the Lord — and the passion of Christ was from weakness, according to that word of 2 Corinthians 13:4: he died from weakness, etc. — therefore, so that the weakness from which he died might be insinuated, he rather says, is my flesh: for this word signifies weakness. Now the usefulness of this sacrament is great, and universal. Great indeed, because it works in us now spiritual life, and at length eternal life, as has been said. For, as appears from what has been said above, since this sacrament is of the Lord's passion, it contains in itself Christ having suffered; hence whatever is the effect of the Lord's passion is also wholly the effect of this sacrament. For this sacrament is nothing other than the application of the Lord's passion to us. For it was not fitting that Christ should always be with us according to his presence; and therefore he willed to supply for this through this sacrament. Whence it is clear that the destruction of death, which Christ destroyed by dying, and the reparation of life, which he effected by rising, is the effect of this sacrament. Universal, however, because the life which it confers is not only the life of one man, but, as far as it is in itself, of the whole world: for which the death of Christ is sufficient; 1 John 2:2: he is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world. It must be noted, however, that it is one way in this sacrament, and another way in the others: for the other sacraments have singular effects, as in Baptism only the one baptized receives grace; but in the immolation of this sacrament the effect is universal, because not only does the priest obtain the effect, but also those for whom he prays, and the whole Church, both of the living and of the dead. The reason for this is that in it is contained the universal cause itself of all the sacraments, namely Christ. Nor yet, if a layman takes this sacrament, does it profit others as far as concerns the work performed, inasmuch as it is considered as reception; although from the intention of the one performing it and of the one receiving it, it can be communicated to all to whom he directs his intention. From which it is clear that laypeople who receive the Eucharist for those who are in Purgatory are in error.”

“With the murmuring of the Jews checked, the Lord accordingly satisfies the doubt that had arisen in the hearts of the Jews concerning the word he had spoken, namely, I am the bread which came down from heaven, where he intends to prove that this is true of himself; and he argues thus: that bread came down from heaven which gives life to the world; but I am the bread giving life to the world; therefore I am the bread which came down from heaven, and so on. Concerning this he does three things. First, he sets down, as it were, the minor premise of his argument, namely, I am the bread of life; second, he sets down the major premise, namely, that the bread which came down from heaven ought to give life, at the place, your fathers ate manna in the desert, and they died; third, he sets down the conclusion, at the place, I am the living bread. Concerning the first he does two things. First he makes clear his proposal; second he brings forward what was intended as, so to speak, proven, at the place, I am the bread of life. His proposal is to show that he is the bread of life. Now bread gives life inasmuch as it is taken. But it is agreed that whoever believes in Christ takes him within himself, according to that word of Ephesians 3:17: that Christ may dwell through faith in our hearts. If therefore he who believes in Christ has life, it is clear that by eating this bread he is given life; therefore this bread is the bread of life. And this is what he says: Amen, amen, I say to you, whoever believes in me — namely with formed faith, which perfects not only the intellect but also the affection (for one does not tend toward the thing believed unless one loves it) — has eternal life. Now Christ is in us in two ways: namely in the intellect through faith, inasmuch as it is faith; and in the affection through charity, which informs faith: 1 John 4:16, whoever abides in charity abides in God, and God in him. Whoever therefore believes in Christ in such a way as to tend toward him has him in affection and in intellect; and if we add that Christ is eternal life, as is said in 1 John 5:20, that we may be in his true Son Jesus Christ: this is the true God and eternal life; and above, John 1:4, in him was life — we can infer that whoever believes in Christ has eternal life. He has it, I say, in cause and in hope, and will one day have it in reality. Having made clear his proposal, he brings forward what was intended, when he says, I am the bread of life, that is, giving life, as evidently follows from what has been said. Concerning this bread, Genesis 49:20: Asher, his bread is fat, he shall yield delights — namely of eternal life — to kings. Accordingly, when he says, your fathers ate manna in the desert, and they died, he sets down the major premise: namely, that to give life is the effect of bread descending from heaven. And first he prefaces the manifestation of the proposal; second he sets down what was intended, at the place, this is the bread which comes down from heaven. Now he makes clear his proposal by its contrary. For it was said above that Moses did not give the Jews bread from heaven, but only from the air; but all bread which is not from the true heaven cannot give sufficient life; therefore this is proper to heavenly bread, that it gives life. And therefore the bread of Moses, in which you take pride, does not give life; and this he proves when he says, your fathers ate manna in the desert, and they died. Here he first reproaches their vice, when he says your fathers, etc. — whose sons you are, not only according to the origin of the flesh, but also according to the imitation of their works, because you are murmurers, just as they also murmured in their tents, as is said in Psalm 105:25; and therefore he said to them, Matthew 23:32, fill up the measure of your fathers. Whence, as Augustine says, the people are said to have offended God in no matter more than by murmuring against God. Second, he insinuates the short span of time, when he says in the desert: for it was not a long time in which the manna was given to them, nor did it come with them into the land of promise, but only in the desert, as is said in Joshua 5:12. This bread, however, preserves and refreshes forever. Third, he makes clear the deficiency of the food, because it did not preserve unfailing life; hence he says, and they died. For, as is found in Joshua 5, all who murmured, except Joshua and Caleb, died in the desert. Whence this was also the cause of the second circumcision, namely that all the people who went out from Egypt died in the desert, as is said in the same place. But it is asked of what death God here speaks. For if he speaks of bodily death, there will be no difference between that bread which was in the desert and our bread which came down from heaven, because even Christians who take this one die bodily. But if he speaks of spiritual death, it is clear that here and there some die spiritually and some do not. For Moses, and many who pleased God, did not die, although others died. Likewise, those who take this bread unworthily also die spiritually; 1 Corinthians 11:29: for he who eats and drinks unworthily eats and drinks judgment to himself. To this it must be said that that food agrees with our spiritual food. They agree indeed as to this, that each signifies the same thing: for both that one and this one signify Christ, on account of which it is called the same food; 1 Corinthians 10:3: all ate the same spiritual food. He says the same because both are a figure of spiritual food. But they differ, because that one only prefigured, whereas this bread contains what it prefigures, namely Christ himself. It must therefore be said that each of these foods can be taken in two ways: either as to the sign only, that is, that it is taken only as food, its meaning not understood; and by this neither spiritual nor bodily death is removed. Or it can be taken as to both, that is, that the visible food is so taken that the spiritual food is understood, and is spiritually tasted, so that it spiritually satisfies; and in this way those who ate the manna spiritually did not die spiritually. But those also who eat the Eucharist spiritually, and now live spiritually without sin, will also live bodily forever. Our food, therefore, has more than their food, because it contains in itself what it prefigures. Having made clear the proposal, therefore, he brings forward what was intended; hence he says, this is the bread which comes down from heaven. And according to the Gloss, he says this pointing to himself. But this is not the Lord's meaning, because since he immediately adds, I am the living bread which came down from heaven, it would be a repetition of words. It must therefore be said that the Lord intends this: namely, to say that that bread comes down from heaven which can do this, namely give life; but I am such; therefore I am the bread which comes down from heaven. And the reason that bread coming down from heaven gives unfailing life is that all food nourishes according to the property of its own nature; but heavenly things are incorruptible; and therefore, because that food is heavenly, it is not corrupted, and as long as it remains it gives life. Whoever therefore eats of it will not die. Just as if some bodily food were never corrupted, giving nourishment, it would always give life. And therefore this bread was signified by the tree of life which was in the middle of paradise, in a certain way giving life forever, according to that word of Genesis 3:22: now therefore lest perhaps he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever. If therefore this is the effect of this bread, namely that whoever eats of it does not die, and I am such: therefore, and so on. I am the living bread, etc. Concerning this, then, he does two things. First he speaks of himself in general; second specifically, at the place, and the bread which I will give is my flesh. Concerning the first he does two things. First he concludes the origin of himself. Second he shows his power, at the place, if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. He said, then, I am the living bread, and therefore I can give life. For bodily bread does not give life forever, because it does not have life in itself; but it gives life, once altered and converted into nourishment, by the power of the one living. Who came down from heaven: this was expounded above, in chapter 3, namely how he came down. And by this the heresies of those saying Christ was a mere man are excluded, because according to this he would not have come down from heaven. Now his power is to give eternal life; and therefore he says, if anyone eats of this bread — spiritually, that is — he will live, not only in the present through faith and righteousness, but forever; below, John 11:26: everyone who lives and believes in me will never die. Accordingly he speaks of the body, when he says, and the bread which I will give is my flesh. For he had said that he was the living bread, and lest it be understood that this belonged to him only inasmuch as he is the Word, or according to the soul only, he therefore shows that his flesh also is life-giving: for it is the instrument of his divinity; hence, since an instrument acts by the power of the agent, just as the divinity of Christ is life-giving, so also, as Damascene says, the flesh, by the power of the Word joined to it, gives life; hence Christ by his touch healed the sick. Thus, then, what he said above, I am the living bread, pertains to the power of the Word; but what he adds here pertains to the communion of his body, namely to the sacrament of the Eucharist. Here we can consider four things concerning this sacrament: namely, its species, the authority of its institutor, the truth of the sacrament, and its usefulness. The species of the sacrament indeed: this is bread; Proverbs 9:5: come, and eat my bread. The reason for this is that this is the sacrament of the body of Christ; but the body of Christ is the Church, which rises into the unity of one body out of many faithful; hence this is the sacrament of the unity of the Church; Romans 12:5: we are all one body. Because, then, bread is made up of many grains, therefore this species is fitting for this sacrament; and therefore he says, and the bread which I will give is my flesh. The author of this sacrament is Christ: for although the priest consecrates, nevertheless Christ himself gives power to the sacrament, because even the priest himself consecrates in the person of Christ. Hence in the other sacraments the priest uses his own words, or those of the Church, but in this one he uses the words of Christ: because just as Christ gave his own body to death by his own will, so by his own power he gives himself as food; Matthew 26:26: taking bread, he blessed, and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, and said, take and eat: this is my body. And therefore he says, which I will give: and he says I will give, because this sacrament was not yet instituted. Now the truth of this sacrament is insinuated when he says, is my flesh. He does not say, however, signifies my flesh, but is my flesh; because according to the truth of the matter, what is taken is truly the body of Christ; Job 31:31: if the men of my tabernacle have not said: who will give us of his flesh, that we may be filled? But since in this sacrament the whole Christ is contained, why did he say only, is my flesh? In answer to this, it must be known that in that mystical sacrament the whole Christ is contained according to truth, but the body is there by force of the conversion, while the divinity and the soul are there by natural concomitance. For if it be granted — though impossible — that the divinity were separated from the body of Christ, the divinity would no longer be in the sacrament. Likewise also, if someone had consecrated during the three days of his death, the soul of Christ would not have been there, but such a body as it was on the cross, or in the tomb. The reason he rather says flesh is that, since this sacrament is a remembrance of the Lord's passion, according to that word of 1 Corinthians 11:26: as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the cup, you shall show forth the death of the Lord — and the passion of Christ was from weakness, according to that word of 2 Corinthians 13:4: he died from weakness, etc. — therefore, so that the weakness from which he died might be insinuated, he rather says, is my flesh: for this word signifies weakness. Now the usefulness of this sacrament is great, and universal. Great indeed, because it works in us now spiritual life, and at length eternal life, as has been said. For, as appears from what has been said above, since this sacrament is of the Lord's passion, it contains in itself Christ having suffered; hence whatever is the effect of the Lord's passion is also wholly the effect of this sacrament. For this sacrament is nothing other than the application of the Lord's passion to us. For it was not fitting that Christ should always be with us according to his presence; and therefore he willed to supply for this through this sacrament. Whence it is clear that the destruction of death, which Christ destroyed by dying, and the reparation of life, which he effected by rising, is the effect of this sacrament. Universal, however, because the life which it confers is not only the life of one man, but, as far as it is in itself, of the whole world: for which the death of Christ is sufficient; 1 John 2:2: he is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world. It must be noted, however, that it is one way in this sacrament, and another way in the others: for the other sacraments have singular effects, as in Baptism only the one baptized receives grace; but in the immolation of this sacrament the effect is universal, because not only does the priest obtain the effect, but also those for whom he prays, and the whole Church, both of the living and of the dead. The reason for this is that in it is contained the universal cause itself of all the sacraments, namely Christ. Nor yet, if a layman takes this sacrament, does it profit others as far as concerns the work performed, inasmuch as it is considered as reception; although from the intention of the one performing it and of the one receiving it, it can be communicated to all to whom he directs his intention. From which it is clear that laypeople who receive the Eucharist for those who are in Purgatory are in error.”

“This is the bread which cometh down from heaven,.... Namely, that of which he had spoken Joh 6:32, meaning himself: that a man may eat thereof, and not die; for this heavenly bread is soul quickening, soul strengthening, and soul satisfying food; nor can there be any want where this is: eating of it is not to be understood corporeally, as these Capernaites took it; nor sacramentally, as if it was confined to the ordinance of the Lord's supper, which was not, as yet, instituted; but more largely of eating and feeding upon Christ spiritually by faith: he is, by the believer, to be fed upon wholly, and only; all of him, and none but him, and that daily; for there is the same need of daily bread for our souls, as for our bodies; and also largely and freely, as such may do; and likewise joyfully, with gladness and singleness of heart: such as are Christ's beloved, and his friends, "may" eat; they have liberty, a hearty welcome to eat; and so have everyone that have a will, an inclination, a desire to eat; and all overcomers, whom Christ makes more than conquerors, Sol 5:1 Rev 2:7; which liberty is owing to Christ's gracious invitation, and to his and the Father's free gift; and to the openness and ease of access of all sensible sinners to him: and the consequence and effect of such eating is, that it secures from dying, not from a corporeal death, to which men are appointed, and saints themselves are subject; though it is indeed abolished by Christ as a penal evil; nor shall his people continue under the power of it, but shall rise again to everlasting life: but then they are, through eating this bread, secured from a spiritual death; for though there may be a decline, as to the exercise of grace, and a want of liveliness, and they may fear they are ready to die, and conclude they are free among the dead, and that their strength and hope are perished; yet he that lives and believes in Christ, the resurrection, and the life, shall never die; and such are also secure from an eternal death, on them the second death shall have no power, nor shall they ever be hurt by it.”

“With the murmuring of the Jews checked, the Lord accordingly satisfies the doubt that had arisen in the hearts of the Jews concerning the word he had spoken, namely, I am the bread which came down from heaven, where he intends to prove that this is true of himself; and he argues thus: that bread came down from heaven which gives life to the world; but I am the bread giving life to the world; therefore I am the bread which came down from heaven, and so on. Concerning this he does three things. First, he sets down, as it were, the minor premise of his argument, namely, I am the bread of life; second, he sets down the major premise, namely, that the bread which came down from heaven ought to give life, at the place, your fathers ate manna in the desert, and they died; third, he sets down the conclusion, at the place, I am the living bread. Concerning the first he does two things. First he makes clear his proposal; second he brings forward what was intended as, so to speak, proven, at the place, I am the bread of life. His proposal is to show that he is the bread of life. Now bread gives life inasmuch as it is taken. But it is agreed that whoever believes in Christ takes him within himself, according to that word of Ephesians 3:17: that Christ may dwell through faith in our hearts. If therefore he who believes in Christ has life, it is clear that by eating this bread he is given life; therefore this bread is the bread of life. And this is what he says: Amen, amen, I say to you, whoever believes in me — namely with formed faith, which perfects not only the intellect but also the affection (for one does not tend toward the thing believed unless one loves it) — has eternal life. Now Christ is in us in two ways: namely in the intellect through faith, inasmuch as it is faith; and in the affection through charity, which informs faith: 1 John 4:16, whoever abides in charity abides in God, and God in him. Whoever therefore believes in Christ in such a way as to tend toward him has him in affection and in intellect; and if we add that Christ is eternal life, as is said in 1 John 5:20, that we may be in his true Son Jesus Christ: this is the true God and eternal life; and above, John 1:4, in him was life — we can infer that whoever believes in Christ has eternal life. He has it, I say, in cause and in hope, and will one day have it in reality. Having made clear his proposal, he brings forward what was intended, when he says, I am the bread of life, that is, giving life, as evidently follows from what has been said. Concerning this bread, Genesis 49:20: Asher, his bread is fat, he shall yield delights — namely of eternal life — to kings. Accordingly, when he says, your fathers ate manna in the desert, and they died, he sets down the major premise: namely, that to give life is the effect of bread descending from heaven. And first he prefaces the manifestation of the proposal; second he sets down what was intended, at the place, this is the bread which comes down from heaven. Now he makes clear his proposal by its contrary. For it was said above that Moses did not give the Jews bread from heaven, but only from the air; but all bread which is not from the true heaven cannot give sufficient life; therefore this is proper to heavenly bread, that it gives life. And therefore the bread of Moses, in which you take pride, does not give life; and this he proves when he says, your fathers ate manna in the desert, and they died. Here he first reproaches their vice, when he says your fathers, etc. — whose sons you are, not only according to the origin of the flesh, but also according to the imitation of their works, because you are murmurers, just as they also murmured in their tents, as is said in Psalm 105:25; and therefore he said to them, Matthew 23:32, fill up the measure of your fathers. Whence, as Augustine says, the people are said to have offended God in no matter more than by murmuring against God. Second, he insinuates the short span of time, when he says in the desert: for it was not a long time in which the manna was given to them, nor did it come with them into the land of promise, but only in the desert, as is said in Joshua 5:12. This bread, however, preserves and refreshes forever. Third, he makes clear the deficiency of the food, because it did not preserve unfailing life; hence he says, and they died. For, as is found in Joshua 5, all who murmured, except Joshua and Caleb, died in the desert. Whence this was also the cause of the second circumcision, namely that all the people who went out from Egypt died in the desert, as is said in the same place. But it is asked of what death God here speaks. For if he speaks of bodily death, there will be no difference between that bread which was in the desert and our bread which came down from heaven, because even Christians who take this one die bodily. But if he speaks of spiritual death, it is clear that here and there some die spiritually and some do not. For Moses, and many who pleased God, did not die, although others died. Likewise, those who take this bread unworthily also die spiritually; 1 Corinthians 11:29: for he who eats and drinks unworthily eats and drinks judgment to himself. To this it must be said that that food agrees with our spiritual food. They agree indeed as to this, that each signifies the same thing: for both that one and this one signify Christ, on account of which it is called the same food; 1 Corinthians 10:3: all ate the same spiritual food. He says the same because both are a figure of spiritual food. But they differ, because that one only prefigured, whereas this bread contains what it prefigures, namely Christ himself. It must therefore be said that each of these foods can be taken in two ways: either as to the sign only, that is, that it is taken only as food, its meaning not understood; and by this neither spiritual nor bodily death is removed. Or it can be taken as to both, that is, that the visible food is so taken that the spiritual food is understood, and is spiritually tasted, so that it spiritually satisfies; and in this way those who ate the manna spiritually did not die spiritually. But those also who eat the Eucharist spiritually, and now live spiritually without sin, will also live bodily forever. Our food, therefore, has more than their food, because it contains in itself what it prefigures. Having made clear the proposal, therefore, he brings forward what was intended; hence he says, this is the bread which comes down from heaven. And according to the Gloss, he says this pointing to himself. But this is not the Lord's meaning, because since he immediately adds, I am the living bread which came down from heaven, it would be a repetition of words. It must therefore be said that the Lord intends this: namely, to say that that bread comes down from heaven which can do this, namely give life; but I am such; therefore I am the bread which comes down from heaven. And the reason that bread coming down from heaven gives unfailing life is that all food nourishes according to the property of its own nature; but heavenly things are incorruptible; and therefore, because that food is heavenly, it is not corrupted, and as long as it remains it gives life. Whoever therefore eats of it will not die. Just as if some bodily food were never corrupted, giving nourishment, it would always give life. And therefore this bread was signified by the tree of life which was in the middle of paradise, in a certain way giving life forever, according to that word of Genesis 3:22: now therefore lest perhaps he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever. If therefore this is the effect of this bread, namely that whoever eats of it does not die, and I am such: therefore, and so on. I am the living bread, etc. Concerning this, then, he does two things. First he speaks of himself in general; second specifically, at the place, and the bread which I will give is my flesh. Concerning the first he does two things. First he concludes the origin of himself. Second he shows his power, at the place, if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. He said, then, I am the living bread, and therefore I can give life. For bodily bread does not give life forever, because it does not have life in itself; but it gives life, once altered and converted into nourishment, by the power of the one living. Who came down from heaven: this was expounded above, in chapter 3, namely how he came down. And by this the heresies of those saying Christ was a mere man are excluded, because according to this he would not have come down from heaven. Now his power is to give eternal life; and therefore he says, if anyone eats of this bread — spiritually, that is — he will live, not only in the present through faith and righteousness, but forever; below, John 11:26: everyone who lives and believes in me will never die. Accordingly he speaks of the body, when he says, and the bread which I will give is my flesh. For he had said that he was the living bread, and lest it be understood that this belonged to him only inasmuch as he is the Word, or according to the soul only, he therefore shows that his flesh also is life-giving: for it is the instrument of his divinity; hence, since an instrument acts by the power of the agent, just as the divinity of Christ is life-giving, so also, as Damascene says, the flesh, by the power of the Word joined to it, gives life; hence Christ by his touch healed the sick. Thus, then, what he said above, I am the living bread, pertains to the power of the Word; but what he adds here pertains to the communion of his body, namely to the sacrament of the Eucharist. Here we can consider four things concerning this sacrament: namely, its species, the authority of its institutor, the truth of the sacrament, and its usefulness. The species of the sacrament indeed: this is bread; Proverbs 9:5: come, and eat my bread. The reason for this is that this is the sacrament of the body of Christ; but the body of Christ is the Church, which rises into the unity of one body out of many faithful; hence this is the sacrament of the unity of the Church; Romans 12:5: we are all one body. Because, then, bread is made up of many grains, therefore this species is fitting for this sacrament; and therefore he says, and the bread which I will give is my flesh. The author of this sacrament is Christ: for although the priest consecrates, nevertheless Christ himself gives power to the sacrament, because even the priest himself consecrates in the person of Christ. Hence in the other sacraments the priest uses his own words, or those of the Church, but in this one he uses the words of Christ: because just as Christ gave his own body to death by his own will, so by his own power he gives himself as food; Matthew 26:26: taking bread, he blessed, and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, and said, take and eat: this is my body. And therefore he says, which I will give: and he says I will give, because this sacrament was not yet instituted. Now the truth of this sacrament is insinuated when he says, is my flesh. He does not say, however, signifies my flesh, but is my flesh; because according to the truth of the matter, what is taken is truly the body of Christ; Job 31:31: if the men of my tabernacle have not said: who will give us of his flesh, that we may be filled? But since in this sacrament the whole Christ is contained, why did he say only, is my flesh? In answer to this, it must be known that in that mystical sacrament the whole Christ is contained according to truth, but the body is there by force of the conversion, while the divinity and the soul are there by natural concomitance. For if it be granted — though impossible — that the divinity were separated from the body of Christ, the divinity would no longer be in the sacrament. Likewise also, if someone had consecrated during the three days of his death, the soul of Christ would not have been there, but such a body as it was on the cross, or in the tomb. The reason he rather says flesh is that, since this sacrament is a remembrance of the Lord's passion, according to that word of 1 Corinthians 11:26: as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the cup, you shall show forth the death of the Lord — and the passion of Christ was from weakness, according to that word of 2 Corinthians 13:4: he died from weakness, etc. — therefore, so that the weakness from which he died might be insinuated, he rather says, is my flesh: for this word signifies weakness. Now the usefulness of this sacrament is great, and universal. Great indeed, because it works in us now spiritual life, and at length eternal life, as has been said. For, as appears from what has been said above, since this sacrament is of the Lord's passion, it contains in itself Christ having suffered; hence whatever is the effect of the Lord's passion is also wholly the effect of this sacrament. For this sacrament is nothing other than the application of the Lord's passion to us. For it was not fitting that Christ should always be with us according to his presence; and therefore he willed to supply for this through this sacrament. Whence it is clear that the destruction of death, which Christ destroyed by dying, and the reparation of life, which he effected by rising, is the effect of this sacrament. Universal, however, because the life which it confers is not only the life of one man, but, as far as it is in itself, of the whole world: for which the death of Christ is sufficient; 1 John 2:2: he is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world. It must be noted, however, that it is one way in this sacrament, and another way in the others: for the other sacraments have singular effects, as in Baptism only the one baptized receives grace; but in the immolation of this sacrament the effect is universal, because not only does the priest obtain the effect, but also those for whom he prays, and the whole Church, both of the living and of the dead. The reason for this is that in it is contained the universal cause itself of all the sacraments, namely Christ. Nor yet, if a layman takes this sacrament, does it profit others as far as concerns the work performed, inasmuch as it is considered as reception; although from the intention of the one performing it and of the one receiving it, it can be communicated to all to whom he directs his intention. From which it is clear that laypeople who receive the Eucharist for those who are in Purgatory are in error.”

“I am the living bread which came down from heaven,.... This is the same with what is said in Joh 6:33, which is true of Christ, as he has life in him; and is the author and giver of life to others; and is of an heavenly original, and came from heaven to give life to men: and such is the virtue of this living and heavenly bread, that if any man eat of this bread he shall live for ever; not a natural, but a spiritual life; a life of sanctification, which is begun here, and will be perfected hereafter; and a life of glory, which will never end: and the bread that I will give is my flesh; or "body", as all the Oriental versions render it. Here our Lord explains more clearly and fully what he means, under the notion of bread; and which shows, that by bread he did not design merely his doctrine, but his flesh, his human nature; though not as abstracted from his deity, but as in union with it: which I will give for the life of the world; and which he did by the offering up of his body, and making his soul, or giving himself an offering, a propitiatory sacrifice for sin; which was done in the most free and voluntary manner, in the room and stead of his people, to procure eternal life for them, even for the whole world of his elect; whether among Jews or Gentiles; particularly the latter are here meant, in opposition to a notion of the Jews, that the world, or the Gentiles, would receive no benefit by the Messiah when he came; See Gill on Joh 3:16.”

“With the murmuring of the Jews checked, the Lord accordingly satisfies the doubt that had arisen in the hearts of the Jews concerning the word he had spoken, namely, I am the bread which came down from heaven, where he intends to prove that this is true of himself; and he argues thus: that bread came down from heaven which gives life to the world; but I am the bread giving life to the world; therefore I am the bread which came down from heaven, and so on. Concerning this he does three things. First, he sets down, as it were, the minor premise of his argument, namely, I am the bread of life; second, he sets down the major premise, namely, that the bread which came down from heaven ought to give life, at the place, your fathers ate manna in the desert, and they died; third, he sets down the conclusion, at the place, I am the living bread. Concerning the first he does two things. First he makes clear his proposal; second he brings forward what was intended as, so to speak, proven, at the place, I am the bread of life. His proposal is to show that he is the bread of life. Now bread gives life inasmuch as it is taken. But it is agreed that whoever believes in Christ takes him within himself, according to that word of Ephesians 3:17: that Christ may dwell through faith in our hearts. If therefore he who believes in Christ has life, it is clear that by eating this bread he is given life; therefore this bread is the bread of life. And this is what he says: Amen, amen, I say to you, whoever believes in me — namely with formed faith, which perfects not only the intellect but also the affection (for one does not tend toward the thing believed unless one loves it) — has eternal life. Now Christ is in us in two ways: namely in the intellect through faith, inasmuch as it is faith; and in the affection through charity, which informs faith: 1 John 4:16, whoever abides in charity abides in God, and God in him. Whoever therefore believes in Christ in such a way as to tend toward him has him in affection and in intellect; and if we add that Christ is eternal life, as is said in 1 John 5:20, that we may be in his true Son Jesus Christ: this is the true God and eternal life; and above, John 1:4, in him was life — we can infer that whoever believes in Christ has eternal life. He has it, I say, in cause and in hope, and will one day have it in reality. Having made clear his proposal, he brings forward what was intended, when he says, I am the bread of life, that is, giving life, as evidently follows from what has been said. Concerning this bread, Genesis 49:20: Asher, his bread is fat, he shall yield delights — namely of eternal life — to kings. Accordingly, when he says, your fathers ate manna in the desert, and they died, he sets down the major premise: namely, that to give life is the effect of bread descending from heaven. And first he prefaces the manifestation of the proposal; second he sets down what was intended, at the place, this is the bread which comes down from heaven. Now he makes clear his proposal by its contrary. For it was said above that Moses did not give the Jews bread from heaven, but only from the air; but all bread which is not from the true heaven cannot give sufficient life; therefore this is proper to heavenly bread, that it gives life. And therefore the bread of Moses, in which you take pride, does not give life; and this he proves when he says, your fathers ate manna in the desert, and they died. Here he first reproaches their vice, when he says your fathers, etc. — whose sons you are, not only according to the origin of the flesh, but also according to the imitation of their works, because you are murmurers, just as they also murmured in their tents, as is said in Psalm 105:25; and therefore he said to them, Matthew 23:32, fill up the measure of your fathers. Whence, as Augustine says, the people are said to have offended God in no matter more than by murmuring against God. Second, he insinuates the short span of time, when he says in the desert: for it was not a long time in which the manna was given to them, nor did it come with them into the land of promise, but only in the desert, as is said in Joshua 5:12. This bread, however, preserves and refreshes forever. Third, he makes clear the deficiency of the food, because it did not preserve unfailing life; hence he says, and they died. For, as is found in Joshua 5, all who murmured, except Joshua and Caleb, died in the desert. Whence this was also the cause of the second circumcision, namely that all the people who went out from Egypt died in the desert, as is said in the same place. But it is asked of what death God here speaks. For if he speaks of bodily death, there will be no difference between that bread which was in the desert and our bread which came down from heaven, because even Christians who take this one die bodily. But if he speaks of spiritual death, it is clear that here and there some die spiritually and some do not. For Moses, and many who pleased God, did not die, although others died. Likewise, those who take this bread unworthily also die spiritually; 1 Corinthians 11:29: for he who eats and drinks unworthily eats and drinks judgment to himself. To this it must be said that that food agrees with our spiritual food. They agree indeed as to this, that each signifies the same thing: for both that one and this one signify Christ, on account of which it is called the same food; 1 Corinthians 10:3: all ate the same spiritual food. He says the same because both are a figure of spiritual food. But they differ, because that one only prefigured, whereas this bread contains what it prefigures, namely Christ himself. It must therefore be said that each of these foods can be taken in two ways: either as to the sign only, that is, that it is taken only as food, its meaning not understood; and by this neither spiritual nor bodily death is removed. Or it can be taken as to both, that is, that the visible food is so taken that the spiritual food is understood, and is spiritually tasted, so that it spiritually satisfies; and in this way those who ate the manna spiritually did not die spiritually. But those also who eat the Eucharist spiritually, and now live spiritually without sin, will also live bodily forever. Our food, therefore, has more than their food, because it contains in itself what it prefigures. Having made clear the proposal, therefore, he brings forward what was intended; hence he says, this is the bread which comes down from heaven. And according to the Gloss, he says this pointing to himself. But this is not the Lord's meaning, because since he immediately adds, I am the living bread which came down from heaven, it would be a repetition of words. It must therefore be said that the Lord intends this: namely, to say that that bread comes down from heaven which can do this, namely give life; but I am such; therefore I am the bread which comes down from heaven. And the reason that bread coming down from heaven gives unfailing life is that all food nourishes according to the property of its own nature; but heavenly things are incorruptible; and therefore, because that food is heavenly, it is not corrupted, and as long as it remains it gives life. Whoever therefore eats of it will not die. Just as if some bodily food were never corrupted, giving nourishment, it would always give life. And therefore this bread was signified by the tree of life which was in the middle of paradise, in a certain way giving life forever, according to that word of Genesis 3:22: now therefore lest perhaps he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever. If therefore this is the effect of this bread, namely that whoever eats of it does not die, and I am such: therefore, and so on. I am the living bread, etc. Concerning this, then, he does two things. First he speaks of himself in general; second specifically, at the place, and the bread which I will give is my flesh. Concerning the first he does two things. First he concludes the origin of himself. Second he shows his power, at the place, if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. He said, then, I am the living bread, and therefore I can give life. For bodily bread does not give life forever, because it does not have life in itself; but it gives life, once altered and converted into nourishment, by the power of the one living. Who came down from heaven: this was expounded above, in chapter 3, namely how he came down. And by this the heresies of those saying Christ was a mere man are excluded, because according to this he would not have come down from heaven. Now his power is to give eternal life; and therefore he says, if anyone eats of this bread — spiritually, that is — he will live, not only in the present through faith and righteousness, but forever; below, John 11:26: everyone who lives and believes in me will never die. Accordingly he speaks of the body, when he says, and the bread which I will give is my flesh. For he had said that he was the living bread, and lest it be understood that this belonged to him only inasmuch as he is the Word, or according to the soul only, he therefore shows that his flesh also is life-giving: for it is the instrument of his divinity; hence, since an instrument acts by the power of the agent, just as the divinity of Christ is life-giving, so also, as Damascene says, the flesh, by the power of the Word joined to it, gives life; hence Christ by his touch healed the sick. Thus, then, what he said above, I am the living bread, pertains to the power of the Word; but what he adds here pertains to the communion of his body, namely to the sacrament of the Eucharist. Here we can consider four things concerning this sacrament: namely, its species, the authority of its institutor, the truth of the sacrament, and its usefulness. The species of the sacrament indeed: this is bread; Proverbs 9:5: come, and eat my bread. The reason for this is that this is the sacrament of the body of Christ; but the body of Christ is the Church, which rises into the unity of one body out of many faithful; hence this is the sacrament of the unity of the Church; Romans 12:5: we are all one body. Because, then, bread is made up of many grains, therefore this species is fitting for this sacrament; and therefore he says, and the bread which I will give is my flesh. The author of this sacrament is Christ: for although the priest consecrates, nevertheless Christ himself gives power to the sacrament, because even the priest himself consecrates in the person of Christ. Hence in the other sacraments the priest uses his own words, or those of the Church, but in this one he uses the words of Christ: because just as Christ gave his own body to death by his own will, so by his own power he gives himself as food; Matthew 26:26: taking bread, he blessed, and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, and said, take and eat: this is my body. And therefore he says, which I will give: and he says I will give, because this sacrament was not yet instituted. Now the truth of this sacrament is insinuated when he says, is my flesh. He does not say, however, signifies my flesh, but is my flesh; because according to the truth of the matter, what is taken is truly the body of Christ; Job 31:31: if the men of my tabernacle have not said: who will give us of his flesh, that we may be filled? But since in this sacrament the whole Christ is contained, why did he say only, is my flesh? In answer to this, it must be known that in that mystical sacrament the whole Christ is contained according to truth, but the body is there by force of the conversion, while the divinity and the soul are there by natural concomitance. For if it be granted — though impossible — that the divinity were separated from the body of Christ, the divinity would no longer be in the sacrament. Likewise also, if someone had consecrated during the three days of his death, the soul of Christ would not have been there, but such a body as it was on the cross, or in the tomb. The reason he rather says flesh is that, since this sacrament is a remembrance of the Lord's passion, according to that word of 1 Corinthians 11:26: as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the cup, you shall show forth the death of the Lord — and the passion of Christ was from weakness, according to that word of 2 Corinthians 13:4: he died from weakness, etc. — therefore, so that the weakness from which he died might be insinuated, he rather says, is my flesh: for this word signifies weakness. Now the usefulness of this sacrament is great, and universal. Great indeed, because it works in us now spiritual life, and at length eternal life, as has been said. For, as appears from what has been said above, since this sacrament is of the Lord's passion, it contains in itself Christ having suffered; hence whatever is the effect of the Lord's passion is also wholly the effect of this sacrament. For this sacrament is nothing other than the application of the Lord's passion to us. For it was not fitting that Christ should always be with us according to his presence; and therefore he willed to supply for this through this sacrament. Whence it is clear that the destruction of death, which Christ destroyed by dying, and the reparation of life, which he effected by rising, is the effect of this sacrament. Universal, however, because the life which it confers is not only the life of one man, but, as far as it is in itself, of the whole world: for which the death of Christ is sufficient; 1 John 2:2: he is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world. It must be noted, however, that it is one way in this sacrament, and another way in the others: for the other sacraments have singular effects, as in Baptism only the one baptized receives grace; but in the immolation of this sacrament the effect is universal, because not only does the priest obtain the effect, but also those for whom he prays, and the whole Church, both of the living and of the dead. The reason for this is that in it is contained the universal cause itself of all the sacraments, namely Christ. Nor yet, if a layman takes this sacrament, does it profit others as far as concerns the work performed, inasmuch as it is considered as reception; although from the intention of the one performing it and of the one receiving it, it can be communicated to all to whom he directs his intention. From which it is clear that laypeople who receive the Eucharist for those who are in Purgatory are in error.”

“Which I shall give: this shews His power; for it shews that He was not crucified as a servant, in subjection to the Father, but of his own accord; for though He is said to have been given up by the Father, yet He delivered Himself up also. And observe, the bread which is taken by us in the mysteries, is not only the sign of Christ’s flesh, but is itself the very flesh of Christ; for He does not say, The bread which I will give, is the sign of My flesh, but, is My flesh. The bread is by a mystical benediction conveyed in unutterable words, and by the indwelling of the Holy Ghost, transmuted into the flesh of Christ. But why see we not the flesh? Because, if the flesh were seen, it would revolt us to such a degree, that we should be unable to partake of it. And therefore in condescension to our infirmity, the mystical food is given to us under an appearance suitable to our minds. He gave His flesh for the life of the world, in that, by dying, He destroyed death. By the life of the world too, I understand the resurrection; our Lord’s death having brought about the resurrection of the whole human race. It may mean too the sanctified, beatified, spiritual life; for though all have not attained to this life, yet our Lord gave Himself for the world, and, as far as lies in Him, the whole world is sanctified.”

“With the murmuring of the Jews checked, the Lord accordingly satisfies the doubt that had arisen in the hearts of the Jews concerning the word he had spoken, namely, I am the bread which came down from heaven, where he intends to prove that this is true of himself; and he argues thus: that bread came down from heaven which gives life to the world; but I am the bread giving life to the world; therefore I am the bread which came down from heaven, and so on. Concerning this he does three things. First, he sets down, as it were, the minor premise of his argument, namely, I am the bread of life; second, he sets down the major premise, namely, that the bread which came down from heaven ought to give life, at the place, your fathers ate manna in the desert, and they died; third, he sets down the conclusion, at the place, I am the living bread. Concerning the first he does two things. First he makes clear his proposal; second he brings forward what was intended as, so to speak, proven, at the place, I am the bread of life. His proposal is to show that he is the bread of life. Now bread gives life inasmuch as it is taken. But it is agreed that whoever believes in Christ takes him within himself, according to that word of Ephesians 3:17: that Christ may dwell through faith in our hearts. If therefore he who believes in Christ has life, it is clear that by eating this bread he is given life; therefore this bread is the bread of life. And this is what he says: Amen, amen, I say to you, whoever believes in me — namely with formed faith, which perfects not only the intellect but also the affection (for one does not tend toward the thing believed unless one loves it) — has eternal life. Now Christ is in us in two ways: namely in the intellect through faith, inasmuch as it is faith; and in the affection through charity, which informs faith: 1 John 4:16, whoever abides in charity abides in God, and God in him. Whoever therefore believes in Christ in such a way as to tend toward him has him in affection and in intellect; and if we add that Christ is eternal life, as is said in 1 John 5:20, that we may be in his true Son Jesus Christ: this is the true God and eternal life; and above, John 1:4, in him was life — we can infer that whoever believes in Christ has eternal life. He has it, I say, in cause and in hope, and will one day have it in reality. Having made clear his proposal, he brings forward what was intended, when he says, I am the bread of life, that is, giving life, as evidently follows from what has been said. Concerning this bread, Genesis 49:20: Asher, his bread is fat, he shall yield delights — namely of eternal life — to kings. Accordingly, when he says, your fathers ate manna in the desert, and they died, he sets down the major premise: namely, that to give life is the effect of bread descending from heaven. And first he prefaces the manifestation of the proposal; second he sets down what was intended, at the place, this is the bread which comes down from heaven. Now he makes clear his proposal by its contrary. For it was said above that Moses did not give the Jews bread from heaven, but only from the air; but all bread which is not from the true heaven cannot give sufficient life; therefore this is proper to heavenly bread, that it gives life. And therefore the bread of Moses, in which you take pride, does not give life; and this he proves when he says, your fathers ate manna in the desert, and they died. Here he first reproaches their vice, when he says your fathers, etc. — whose sons you are, not only according to the origin of the flesh, but also according to the imitation of their works, because you are murmurers, just as they also murmured in their tents, as is said in Psalm 105:25; and therefore he said to them, Matthew 23:32, fill up the measure of your fathers. Whence, as Augustine says, the people are said to have offended God in no matter more than by murmuring against God. Second, he insinuates the short span of time, when he says in the desert: for it was not a long time in which the manna was given to them, nor did it come with them into the land of promise, but only in the desert, as is said in Joshua 5:12. This bread, however, preserves and refreshes forever. Third, he makes clear the deficiency of the food, because it did not preserve unfailing life; hence he says, and they died. For, as is found in Joshua 5, all who murmured, except Joshua and Caleb, died in the desert. Whence this was also the cause of the second circumcision, namely that all the people who went out from Egypt died in the desert, as is said in the same place. But it is asked of what death God here speaks. For if he speaks of bodily death, there will be no difference between that bread which was in the desert and our bread which came down from heaven, because even Christians who take this one die bodily. But if he speaks of spiritual death, it is clear that here and there some die spiritually and some do not. For Moses, and many who pleased God, did not die, although others died. Likewise, those who take this bread unworthily also die spiritually; 1 Corinthians 11:29: for he who eats and drinks unworthily eats and drinks judgment to himself. To this it must be said that that food agrees with our spiritual food. They agree indeed as to this, that each signifies the same thing: for both that one and this one signify Christ, on account of which it is called the same food; 1 Corinthians 10:3: all ate the same spiritual food. He says the same because both are a figure of spiritual food. But they differ, because that one only prefigured, whereas this bread contains what it prefigures, namely Christ himself. It must therefore be said that each of these foods can be taken in two ways: either as to the sign only, that is, that it is taken only as food, its meaning not understood; and by this neither spiritual nor bodily death is removed. Or it can be taken as to both, that is, that the visible food is so taken that the spiritual food is understood, and is spiritually tasted, so that it spiritually satisfies; and in this way those who ate the manna spiritually did not die spiritually. But those also who eat the Eucharist spiritually, and now live spiritually without sin, will also live bodily forever. Our food, therefore, has more than their food, because it contains in itself what it prefigures. Having made clear the proposal, therefore, he brings forward what was intended; hence he says, this is the bread which comes down from heaven. And according to the Gloss, he says this pointing to himself. But this is not the Lord's meaning, because since he immediately adds, I am the living bread which came down from heaven, it would be a repetition of words. It must therefore be said that the Lord intends this: namely, to say that that bread comes down from heaven which can do this, namely give life; but I am such; therefore I am the bread which comes down from heaven. And the reason that bread coming down from heaven gives unfailing life is that all food nourishes according to the property of its own nature; but heavenly things are incorruptible; and therefore, because that food is heavenly, it is not corrupted, and as long as it remains it gives life. Whoever therefore eats of it will not die. Just as if some bodily food were never corrupted, giving nourishment, it would always give life. And therefore this bread was signified by the tree of life which was in the middle of paradise, in a certain way giving life forever, according to that word of Genesis 3:22: now therefore lest perhaps he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever. If therefore this is the effect of this bread, namely that whoever eats of it does not die, and I am such: therefore, and so on. I am the living bread, etc. Concerning this, then, he does two things. First he speaks of himself in general; second specifically, at the place, and the bread which I will give is my flesh. Concerning the first he does two things. First he concludes the origin of himself. Second he shows his power, at the place, if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. He said, then, I am the living bread, and therefore I can give life. For bodily bread does not give life forever, because it does not have life in itself; but it gives life, once altered and converted into nourishment, by the power of the one living. Who came down from heaven: this was expounded above, in chapter 3, namely how he came down. And by this the heresies of those saying Christ was a mere man are excluded, because according to this he would not have come down from heaven. Now his power is to give eternal life; and therefore he says, if anyone eats of this bread — spiritually, that is — he will live, not only in the present through faith and righteousness, but forever; below, John 11:26: everyone who lives and believes in me will never die. Accordingly he speaks of the body, when he says, and the bread which I will give is my flesh. For he had said that he was the living bread, and lest it be understood that this belonged to him only inasmuch as he is the Word, or according to the soul only, he therefore shows that his flesh also is life-giving: for it is the instrument of his divinity; hence, since an instrument acts by the power of the agent, just as the divinity of Christ is life-giving, so also, as Damascene says, the flesh, by the power of the Word joined to it, gives life; hence Christ by his touch healed the sick. Thus, then, what he said above, I am the living bread, pertains to the power of the Word; but what he adds here pertains to the communion of his body, namely to the sacrament of the Eucharist. Here we can consider four things concerning this sacrament: namely, its species, the authority of its institutor, the truth of the sacrament, and its usefulness. The species of the sacrament indeed: this is bread; Proverbs 9:5: come, and eat my bread. The reason for this is that this is the sacrament of the body of Christ; but the body of Christ is the Church, which rises into the unity of one body out of many faithful; hence this is the sacrament of the unity of the Church; Romans 12:5: we are all one body. Because, then, bread is made up of many grains, therefore this species is fitting for this sacrament; and therefore he says, and the bread which I will give is my flesh. The author of this sacrament is Christ: for although the priest consecrates, nevertheless Christ himself gives power to the sacrament, because even the priest himself consecrates in the person of Christ. Hence in the other sacraments the priest uses his own words, or those of the Church, but in this one he uses the words of Christ: because just as Christ gave his own body to death by his own will, so by his own power he gives himself as food; Matthew 26:26: taking bread, he blessed, and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, and said, take and eat: this is my body. And therefore he says, which I will give: and he says I will give, because this sacrament was not yet instituted. Now the truth of this sacrament is insinuated when he says, is my flesh. He does not say, however, signifies my flesh, but is my flesh; because according to the truth of the matter, what is taken is truly the body of Christ; Job 31:31: if the men of my tabernacle have not said: who will give us of his flesh, that we may be filled? But since in this sacrament the whole Christ is contained, why did he say only, is my flesh? In answer to this, it must be known that in that mystical sacrament the whole Christ is contained according to truth, but the body is there by force of the conversion, while the divinity and the soul are there by natural concomitance. For if it be granted — though impossible — that the divinity were separated from the body of Christ, the divinity would no longer be in the sacrament. Likewise also, if someone had consecrated during the three days of his death, the soul of Christ would not have been there, but such a body as it was on the cross, or in the tomb. The reason he rather says flesh is that, since this sacrament is a remembrance of the Lord's passion, according to that word of 1 Corinthians 11:26: as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the cup, you shall show forth the death of the Lord — and the passion of Christ was from weakness, according to that word of 2 Corinthians 13:4: he died from weakness, etc. — therefore, so that the weakness from which he died might be insinuated, he rather says, is my flesh: for this word signifies weakness. Now the usefulness of this sacrament is great, and universal. Great indeed, because it works in us now spiritual life, and at length eternal life, as has been said. For, as appears from what has been said above, since this sacrament is of the Lord's passion, it contains in itself Christ having suffered; hence whatever is the effect of the Lord's passion is also wholly the effect of this sacrament. For this sacrament is nothing other than the application of the Lord's passion to us. For it was not fitting that Christ should always be with us according to his presence; and therefore he willed to supply for this through this sacrament. Whence it is clear that the destruction of death, which Christ destroyed by dying, and the reparation of life, which he effected by rising, is the effect of this sacrament. Universal, however, because the life which it confers is not only the life of one man, but, as far as it is in itself, of the whole world: for which the death of Christ is sufficient; 1 John 2:2: he is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world. It must be noted, however, that it is one way in this sacrament, and another way in the others: for the other sacraments have singular effects, as in Baptism only the one baptized receives grace; but in the immolation of this sacrament the effect is universal, because not only does the priest obtain the effect, but also those for whom he prays, and the whole Church, both of the living and of the dead. The reason for this is that in it is contained the universal cause itself of all the sacraments, namely Christ. Nor yet, if a layman takes this sacrament, does it profit others as far as concerns the work performed, inasmuch as it is considered as reception; although from the intention of the one performing it and of the one receiving it, it can be communicated to all to whom he directs his intention. From which it is clear that laypeople who receive the Eucharist for those who are in Purgatory are in error.”

“Above, the Lord repressed the murmuring of the Jews, which had arisen from the origin of the spiritual food; here he represses their quarreling, which was among them concerning the eating of this food. And first he sets down their quarrel; second the Lord suppresses it, at the words "Jesus therefore said to them," etc.; third the Evangelist designates the place, at the words "these things he said in the synagogue, teaching in Capharnaum." Concerning the first, it should be known that the Evangelist introduces the quarrel of the Jews by way of a conclusion, when he says "the Jews therefore quarreled," etc. And indeed quite fittingly: for, according to Augustine, the Lord had spoken to them of the food of unity, by which those who are refreshed are made of one mind, according to that word of Psalm 67:4 (Vulgate numbering): "let the just feast, and rejoice in the sight of God, and be delighted with gladness," and there follows, according to another reading: "who makes those of one mind to dwell in the house." Because, therefore, the Jews had not partaken of the food of concord, they therefore quarreled with one another; Isaiah 58:4: "behold, you fast unto strife and contention." Now from the fact that they quarreled with one another they showed themselves to be carnal; 1 Corinthians 3:3: "since there is among you envying and contention, are you not carnal?" And therefore they understood these words of the Lord in a carnal manner; namely, that the flesh of Christ would be eaten as carnal food; hence they say, "how can this man give us his flesh to eat?" As if they were saying: this is impossible, just as their fathers also spoke against the Lord, Numbers 21:5: "our soul is nauseated with this exceedingly light food." But this quarrel of theirs is suppressed by the Lord; hence he says "Jesus therefore said to them," etc. Here he first sets down the power of the eating of this food; second he manifests it, at the words "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life." Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets down the necessity of eating the flesh; second its usefulness, at the words "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life"; third he adds its truth, at the words "for my flesh is truly food." Jesus therefore said, "Amen, amen I say to you: unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you," as if he were saying: you consider it impossible and unfitting that you should eat my flesh; but it is not only not impossible, but is even very necessary, to such an extent that unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you shall not have — that is, you shall not be able to have — in you life, namely spiritual life. For just as bodily food is so necessary for bodily life that without it life cannot be, Lamentations 1:11: "they have given all their precious things for food"; and Psalm 103:15: "bread may strengthen man's heart" — so spiritual food is necessary for spiritual life, to such a degree that without it spiritual life cannot be sustained; Deuteronomy 8:3: "man does not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God." It should be noted, however, that this statement can be referred either to spiritual eating or to sacramental eating. But if it be referred to spiritual eating, the statement admits of no doubt. For he eats the flesh of Christ and drinks his blood spiritually who becomes a participant in ecclesiastical unity, which comes about through charity; Romans 12:5: "you are all one body in Christ." He, therefore, who does not eat in this way is outside the Church, and consequently outside charity; therefore he does not have life in himself; 1 John 3:14: "he who does not love abides in death." But if it be referred to sacramental eating, what is said involves a doubt; for above, in chapter 3:5, it is said: "unless one be reborn of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of heaven." But just as that statement was set forth, so is this one: "unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man," etc. Since, therefore, Baptism is a sacrament of necessity, it seems that the Eucharist is too. But this indeed the Greeks grant, and hence they give the Eucharist even to baptized infants; and in this they have on their side the rite of Dionysius, who says that the reception of any sacrament whatsoever ought to be consummated in the communion of the Eucharist, which is the consummation of all the sacraments. But this is true in the case of adults, not, however, in the case of infants: since in one receiving the Eucharist actual reverence and devotion are required, which those who do not have the use of free judgment — such as infants and the insane — cannot have; and therefore it should in no way be given to them. It must therefore be said that the sacrament of Baptism is necessary for all, such that it be really received, since without it no one is regenerated unto life; and therefore it must be had either in fact or in desire, in respect of those who are prevented; for if contempt in anyone excludes the Baptism of water, neither the baptism of desire nor the baptism of blood profits him unto eternal life. The sacrament of the Eucharist, however, is of necessity only in respect of adults, so that it be received either in fact or in desire according to the institutions of the Church. But according to this a further doubt arises: because by these words of the Lord, not only the eating of the body but also the partaking of the blood is of the necessity of salvation, especially since a perfect refection of food is not without drink. Since, therefore, the custom of some Churches is that the priest alone communicates of the blood, while the others communicate only of the body, this seems to be contrary to this statement. I answer that it must be said that, according to the ancient custom of the Church, all, just as they communicated of the body, so also communicated of the blood; which is even still observed in certain Churches, where also the ministers of the altar continually communicate both of the body and of the blood. But on account of the danger of spilling, it is observed in some Churches that the priest alone communicates of the blood, and the rest of the body. Nor is this, however, against the statement of the Lord, because he who communicates of the body communicates also of the blood, since under either species the whole Christ is contained, even as regards body and blood. But under the species of bread the body of Christ is contained by force of the conversion, and the blood by natural concomitance; while under the species of wine the blood of Christ is contained by force of the conversion, and the body by natural concomitance. Thus, then, appears the necessity of partaking of this spiritual food. Its usefulness is shown when he says, "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life," and first as to the spirit or soul; second as to the body, at the words "and I will raise him up on the last day." The usefulness of this eating, then, is great, because it gives eternal life; hence he says, "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life." For this spiritual food is indeed like bodily food in this, that without it spiritual life cannot be, just as bodily life cannot be without bodily food, as was said above. But it has more than bodily food, because it causes a life that does not fail in the one who partakes of it, which bodily food does not effect: for it is not the case that whoever partakes of it shall live forever; for it can happen, as Augustine says, that through old age or disease, or some mishap, very many who have partaken of it should die. But he who partakes of this food and drink of the body and blood of the Lord has eternal life; and therefore it is compared to the tree of life; Proverbs 3:8 (18 in some numberings): "it is a tree of life to those who lay hold on her"; hence it is called the bread of life; Ecclesiasticus 15:3: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding." And therefore he says "eternal life": and this, because he who eats this bread has in himself Christ, who is true God and eternal life, as it is said in 1 John, at the end, 20. But he has eternal life who eats and drinks, as is said, not only sacramentally but also spiritually. He, however, eats and drinks sacramentally who receives the sacrament itself; but spiritually, he who attains to the reality of the sacrament; which reality is twofold: one both contained and signified, which is Christ entire, who is contained under the species of bread and wine; the other reality is signified but not contained, and this is the mystical body of Christ, which is in the predestined, the called, and the justified. Thus, then, one eats the flesh and drinks the blood spiritually in relation to Christ contained and signified, who is joined to him through faith and charity, so that he is transformed into him and is made his member: for this food is not converted into him who partakes of it, but converts the one eating into itself, according to Augustine, when he says: "I am the food of grown men: grow, and you shall eat me; nor shall you change me into yourself, but you shall be changed into me." And therefore it is a food capable of making a man divine, and of inebriating him with divinity. Likewise, in relation to the mystical body which is only signified, if one becomes a participant in ecclesiastical unity. He, therefore, who eats in this way "has eternal life." And concerning the first, in relation to Christ, this is already sufficiently evident. Likewise, in relation to the mystical body, he will of necessity have eternal life, if he perseveres. For the unity of the Church comes about through the Holy Spirit, Ephesians 4:4: "one spirit and one body," which is "the pledge of our eternal inheritance," as is said in Ephesians 1:14. There is, then, great usefulness in this food, because it gives eternal life to the soul; but it is also great because it gives eternal life to the body as well. And therefore he adds "and I will raise him up on the last day." For as has been said, he who eats and drinks spiritually becomes a participant of the Holy Spirit, through whom we are united to Christ by the union of faith and charity, and through whom we are made members of the Church. Now it is the Holy Spirit who causes us to merit the resurrection; Romans 8:11 (cited as Rom. IV, 24 in the text, but the sense follows): "he who raised up Jesus Christ our Lord from the dead shall also raise up our mortal bodies, because of his Spirit that dwells in us." And therefore the Lord says that him who eats and drinks he will raise up unto glory, not unto condemnation: because this resurrection would not profit him. And indeed quite fittingly is an effect of this kind attributed to the sacrament of the Eucharist, because, as Augustine says, and as was said above, the Word raises up souls, but the Word made flesh gives life to bodies. Now in this sacrament there is not only the Word according to his divinity, but also according to the truth of his flesh; and therefore it is a cause not only of the resurrection of souls, but also of bodies; 1 Corinthians 15:21: "by man came death, and by man the resurrection of the dead." The usefulness of this eating is therefore evident. Its truth, however, is shown when he says, "for my flesh is truly food." For someone might believe that the things said of the flesh and blood were an enigma and a parable; and therefore the Lord, excluding this, says "my flesh is truly food"; as if he were saying: do not understand that I am speaking figuratively; but according to truth my flesh is contained in the food of the faithful, and my blood is truly contained in the sacrament of the altar; Matthew 26:26: "this is my body... and this is my blood of the new testament." Or otherwise, according to Chrysostom: because food and drink are taken for the refreshment of man. Now in man there are two parts; the principal part, which is the soul, and the secondary part, which is the body. Now that which man is, he is through the soul, not through the body: that, therefore, is truly the food of man which is the food of the soul; and this is what the Lord says, "for my flesh is truly food": because it is food not only of the body, but also of the soul. And likewise the blood. Psalm 22:2 (23:2 in some numberings): "he brought me up over the water of refreshment, he converted my soul." As if he were saying: this refreshment is ordered especially to the soul. Or otherwise, according to Augustine: that is truly said to be a certain thing which produces its effect; now the effect of food is that it satisfies: that, therefore, which truly produces satiety is truly food and drink. Now this the flesh and blood of Christ do, which lead to the state of glory, where there is neither hunger nor thirst: Apocalypse 7:16: "they shall neither hunger nor thirst any more"; and therefore he says "my flesh is truly food, and my blood is truly drink." "He who eats," etc. Here the Lord proves the power of the spiritual food set down above, namely that it gives eternal life: and he uses an argument of this kind. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood is joined to me; but he who is joined to me has eternal life: therefore he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life. According to this, then, he does three things. First he sets down the major premise; second the minor, and proves it, at the words "as the living Father has sent me, and I live because of the Father"; third he infers the conclusion, at the words "this is the bread which came down from heaven." It should be known, then, as to the first, that if what he says, "he who eats my flesh," etc., be referred to flesh and blood mystically, there is no doubt in the statement. For, as has been said, he eats spiritually, in relation to the reality signified alone, who is incorporated into the mystical body through the union of faith and charity: and charity causes God to be in man, and conversely; 1 John 4:16: "he who abides in charity abides in God, and God in him." And this is what the Holy Spirit accomplishes; hence in the same place, verse 13: "in this we know that we abide in God, and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit." But if it be referred to sacramental partaking, then whoever eats the flesh and drinks the blood abides in God: because, as Augustine says, there is a certain manner of eating that flesh and drinking that blood, by which he who eats and drinks abides in Christ, and Christ in him. But this is he who eats the body of Christ and drinks his blood not merely sacramentally, but in reality. There is also another manner, by which those who eat do not abide in Christ, nor Christ in them; this is the case with those who approach it with a feigned heart: for the sacrament has no effect in one who is feigned. For one is feigned when what is signified outwardly does not correspond to what is within. Now in the sacrament of the Eucharist there is indeed signified outwardly that Christ is incorporated in him who receives it, and he himself in Christ. He, therefore, who does not have in his heart the desire of this union, nor strives to remove every impediment to it, is feigned. And therefore Christ does not abide in him, nor he in Christ. Here he sets down the minor premise: namely, that he who is joined to Christ has life; and he introduces this by way of the manifestation of a certain likeness, which is as follows. The Son, on account of the unity which he has with the Father, receives life from the Father: therefore he who is united to Christ receives life from Christ; and this is what he means when he says, "as the living Father has sent me, and I live because of the Father." These words, indeed, can be expounded of Christ in two ways, namely according to the human nature, and according to the divine. For if they be expounded of Christ the Son of God, then the word "as" imports a likeness of Christ to the creature as regards something, but not as regards everything, but as regards this, that he has being from another. For this is common to Christ the Son of God and to the creature, that they are from another: but as regards another point there is dissimilarity. For the Son has something proper to himself, namely that he is from the Father in such a way that he nevertheless receives the whole fullness of the divine nature, to such an extent that whatever is natural to the Father is also natural to the Son. The creature, however, receives some particular perfection and nature; above, in chapter 5:26: "as the Father has life in himself, so has he given to the Son also to have life in himself." And this he shows, because he does not say: "as I eat the Father, and I live because of the Father," when he is speaking of his procession from the Father — just as he said, "he who eats me, he also shall live because of me," when he speaks of the participation of his body and blood, by which we are made better: for eating denotes a certain participation. But Christ says that he lives because of the Father, not indeed as one eaten, but as one who begets, without any detriment to equality. If, however, it be expounded of Christ the man, then as regards something the word "as" imports a likeness between Christ the man and us: namely in this, that just as Christ the man receives spiritual life through union with God, so also we receive spiritual life in the communion of the sacrament. But nevertheless there is dissimilarity: because Christ the man received life through the union of the Word, to whom he is united in person; but we are united to Christ through the sacrament of faith. And therefore he says two things: "sent me" and "the Father." If, then, it be referred to the Son of God, he then says "I live because of the Father": because the Father himself is living. But if it be referred to the Son of man, then he says "I live because of the Father," because "he sent me": that is, he caused me to be incarnate: for the mission of the Son of God is his incarnation; Galatians 4:4: "God sent his Son, made of a woman, made under the law." Through this, then, according to Hilary, the error of Arius is excluded; for if we live because of Christ, since we have something of his nature, as he himself says, "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life"; therefore Christ also lives because of the Father, because he has in himself the nature of the Father: not, however, a part of it, since it is simple and indivisible; therefore he has the whole nature of the Father. The Son, therefore, lives because of the Father, since his birth brought upon him no alien and different nature. Consequently, when he says, "this is the bread which came down from heaven," he sets down two conclusions: for they had been quarreling about two things, namely about the origin of the spiritual food, and about its power. The first conclusion, then, is about the origin; the second is about the power; and this he principally intends, at the words "he who eats this bread shall live forever." It should be known, as to the first, that the Jews had been troubled, because he had said: "I am the living bread which came down from heaven," and therefore, against them, he again concludes this from what he says, "I live because of the Father," when he says "this is the bread." For to come down from heaven is to have one's origin from heaven; but the Son has his origin from heaven, because he lives because of the Father: therefore Christ is he who came down from heaven. And therefore he says, "this is the bread which came down from heaven" — that is, from the paternal life — and this as regards the divinity; or he also came down as regards the body: inasmuch, namely, as its formative power, which was the Holy Spirit, was from heaven, as a heavenly power. Hence those who eat this bread do not die, in the way that our fathers died, who ate manna which was not from heaven; nor was it living bread, as was said above. But how those who ate the manna died is manifest from what has been said before. The second conclusion, concerning the power of the bread, is set down when he says, "he who eats this bread shall live forever": which follows from what he said, "he who eats my flesh." For he who eats this bread abides in me, and I in him; but I am eternal life: therefore he who eats this bread, as he ought, shall live forever. The place, moreover, where Jesus said this was in the synagogue, in which Christ was teaching in Capharnaum. For wishing to draw the multitude, he taught in the temple and in the synagogue, so that, out of many, at least some might profit; Psalm 39:10 (40:9): "I have declared your justice in the great church (assembly)."”

“The bread which I will give, is my flesh for the life of the world. [2] In most Greek copies we read, is my flesh which I will give for the life of the world. Christ here promised what he afterwards instituted, and gave at his last supper. He promiseth to give his body and blood to be eaten; the same body (though the manner be different) which he would give on the cross for the redemption of the world. The Jews of Capharnaum were presently scandalized. How (said they) can this man give us his flesh to eat? But notwithstanding their murmuring, and the offence which his words had given, even to many of his disciples, he was so far from revoking, or expounding what he had said of any figurative or metaphorical sense, that he confirmed the same truth in the clearest and strongest terms. Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat, &c. And again, (ver. 56.) For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. I cannot omit taking notice of what St. Chrysostom and St. Cyril, in their commentaries on this place, have left us on these words, How can this man do this? These words which call in question the almighty and incomprehensible power of God, which hinder them, says St. Chrysostom, from believing all other mysteries and miracles: they might as well have said: How could he with five loaves feed five thousand men? This question, How can he do this? Is a question of infidels and unbelievers. St. Cyril says that How, or, How can he do this? cannot, without folly, be applied to God. 2ndly, he calls it a question of blasphemy. 3rdly, a Jewish word, for which these Capharnaites deserved the severest punishments. 4thly, He confutes them by the saying of the prophet Isaias, (lv. 9.) that God’s thoughts and ways are as much above those of men, as the heavens are above the earth. But if these Capharnaites, who knew not who Jesus was, were justly blamed for their incredulous, foolish, blasphemous, Jewish saying, how can he give us his flesh to eat? much more blameable are those Christians, who, against the words of the Scripture, against the unanimous consent and authority of all Christian Churches in all parts of the world, refuse to believe his real presence, and have nothing to say, but with the obstinate Capharnaites, how can this be done? Their answers are the same, or no better, when they tell us that the real presence contradicts their senses, their reason, that they know it to be false. We may also observe, with divers interpreters, that if Christians are not to believe that Jesus Christ is one and the same God with the eternal Father, and that he is truly and really present in the holy sacrament of the Eucharist, it will be hard to deny but that Christ himself led men into these errors, which is blasphemy. For it is evident, and past all dispute, that the Jews murmured, complained, and understood that Christ several times made himself God, and equal to the Father of all. 2ndly, When in this chapter, he told them he would give them his flesh to eat, &c. they were shocked to the highest degree: they cried out, this could not be, that these words and this speech was hard and harsh, and on this very account many that had been his disciples till that time, withdrew themselves from him, and left him and his doctrine. Was it not then at least high time to set his complaining hearers right, to prevent the blasphemous and idolatrous opinions of the following ages, nay even of all Christian Churches, by telling his disciples at least, that he was only a nominal God, in a metaphorical and improper sense; that he spoke only of his body being present in a figurative and metaphorical sense in the holy Eucharist? If we are deceived, who was it that deceived us but Christ himself, who so often repeated the same points of our belief? His apostles must be esteemed no less guilty in affirming the very same, both as to Christ’s divinity, and his real presence in the holy sacrament, as hereafter will appear. (Witham) — Compare the words here spoken with those he delivered at his last supper, and you will see that what he promises here was then fulfilled: “this is my body given for you.” Hence, the holy Fathers have always explained this chapter of St. John, as spoken of the blessed sacrament. See the concluding reflexions, below.”

“Above, the Lord repressed the murmuring of the Jews, which had arisen from the origin of the spiritual food; here he represses their quarreling, which was among them concerning the eating of this food. And first he sets down their quarrel; second the Lord suppresses it, at the words "Jesus therefore said to them," etc.; third the Evangelist designates the place, at the words "these things he said in the synagogue, teaching in Capharnaum." Concerning the first, it should be known that the Evangelist introduces the quarrel of the Jews by way of a conclusion, when he says "the Jews therefore quarreled," etc. And indeed quite fittingly: for, according to Augustine, the Lord had spoken to them of the food of unity, by which those who are refreshed are made of one mind, according to that word of Psalm 67:4 (Vulgate numbering): "let the just feast, and rejoice in the sight of God, and be delighted with gladness," and there follows, according to another reading: "who makes those of one mind to dwell in the house." Because, therefore, the Jews had not partaken of the food of concord, they therefore quarreled with one another; Isaiah 58:4: "behold, you fast unto strife and contention." Now from the fact that they quarreled with one another they showed themselves to be carnal; 1 Corinthians 3:3: "since there is among you envying and contention, are you not carnal?" And therefore they understood these words of the Lord in a carnal manner; namely, that the flesh of Christ would be eaten as carnal food; hence they say, "how can this man give us his flesh to eat?" As if they were saying: this is impossible, just as their fathers also spoke against the Lord, Numbers 21:5: "our soul is nauseated with this exceedingly light food." But this quarrel of theirs is suppressed by the Lord; hence he says "Jesus therefore said to them," etc. Here he first sets down the power of the eating of this food; second he manifests it, at the words "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life." Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets down the necessity of eating the flesh; second its usefulness, at the words "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life"; third he adds its truth, at the words "for my flesh is truly food." Jesus therefore said, "Amen, amen I say to you: unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you," as if he were saying: you consider it impossible and unfitting that you should eat my flesh; but it is not only not impossible, but is even very necessary, to such an extent that unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you shall not have — that is, you shall not be able to have — in you life, namely spiritual life. For just as bodily food is so necessary for bodily life that without it life cannot be, Lamentations 1:11: "they have given all their precious things for food"; and Psalm 103:15: "bread may strengthen man's heart" — so spiritual food is necessary for spiritual life, to such a degree that without it spiritual life cannot be sustained; Deuteronomy 8:3: "man does not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God." It should be noted, however, that this statement can be referred either to spiritual eating or to sacramental eating. But if it be referred to spiritual eating, the statement admits of no doubt. For he eats the flesh of Christ and drinks his blood spiritually who becomes a participant in ecclesiastical unity, which comes about through charity; Romans 12:5: "you are all one body in Christ." He, therefore, who does not eat in this way is outside the Church, and consequently outside charity; therefore he does not have life in himself; 1 John 3:14: "he who does not love abides in death." But if it be referred to sacramental eating, what is said involves a doubt; for above, in chapter 3:5, it is said: "unless one be reborn of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of heaven." But just as that statement was set forth, so is this one: "unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man," etc. Since, therefore, Baptism is a sacrament of necessity, it seems that the Eucharist is too. But this indeed the Greeks grant, and hence they give the Eucharist even to baptized infants; and in this they have on their side the rite of Dionysius, who says that the reception of any sacrament whatsoever ought to be consummated in the communion of the Eucharist, which is the consummation of all the sacraments. But this is true in the case of adults, not, however, in the case of infants: since in one receiving the Eucharist actual reverence and devotion are required, which those who do not have the use of free judgment — such as infants and the insane — cannot have; and therefore it should in no way be given to them. It must therefore be said that the sacrament of Baptism is necessary for all, such that it be really received, since without it no one is regenerated unto life; and therefore it must be had either in fact or in desire, in respect of those who are prevented; for if contempt in anyone excludes the Baptism of water, neither the baptism of desire nor the baptism of blood profits him unto eternal life. The sacrament of the Eucharist, however, is of necessity only in respect of adults, so that it be received either in fact or in desire according to the institutions of the Church. But according to this a further doubt arises: because by these words of the Lord, not only the eating of the body but also the partaking of the blood is of the necessity of salvation, especially since a perfect refection of food is not without drink. Since, therefore, the custom of some Churches is that the priest alone communicates of the blood, while the others communicate only of the body, this seems to be contrary to this statement. I answer that it must be said that, according to the ancient custom of the Church, all, just as they communicated of the body, so also communicated of the blood; which is even still observed in certain Churches, where also the ministers of the altar continually communicate both of the body and of the blood. But on account of the danger of spilling, it is observed in some Churches that the priest alone communicates of the blood, and the rest of the body. Nor is this, however, against the statement of the Lord, because he who communicates of the body communicates also of the blood, since under either species the whole Christ is contained, even as regards body and blood. But under the species of bread the body of Christ is contained by force of the conversion, and the blood by natural concomitance; while under the species of wine the blood of Christ is contained by force of the conversion, and the body by natural concomitance. Thus, then, appears the necessity of partaking of this spiritual food. Its usefulness is shown when he says, "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life," and first as to the spirit or soul; second as to the body, at the words "and I will raise him up on the last day." The usefulness of this eating, then, is great, because it gives eternal life; hence he says, "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life." For this spiritual food is indeed like bodily food in this, that without it spiritual life cannot be, just as bodily life cannot be without bodily food, as was said above. But it has more than bodily food, because it causes a life that does not fail in the one who partakes of it, which bodily food does not effect: for it is not the case that whoever partakes of it shall live forever; for it can happen, as Augustine says, that through old age or disease, or some mishap, very many who have partaken of it should die. But he who partakes of this food and drink of the body and blood of the Lord has eternal life; and therefore it is compared to the tree of life; Proverbs 3:8 (18 in some numberings): "it is a tree of life to those who lay hold on her"; hence it is called the bread of life; Ecclesiasticus 15:3: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding." And therefore he says "eternal life": and this, because he who eats this bread has in himself Christ, who is true God and eternal life, as it is said in 1 John, at the end, 20. But he has eternal life who eats and drinks, as is said, not only sacramentally but also spiritually. He, however, eats and drinks sacramentally who receives the sacrament itself; but spiritually, he who attains to the reality of the sacrament; which reality is twofold: one both contained and signified, which is Christ entire, who is contained under the species of bread and wine; the other reality is signified but not contained, and this is the mystical body of Christ, which is in the predestined, the called, and the justified. Thus, then, one eats the flesh and drinks the blood spiritually in relation to Christ contained and signified, who is joined to him through faith and charity, so that he is transformed into him and is made his member: for this food is not converted into him who partakes of it, but converts the one eating into itself, according to Augustine, when he says: "I am the food of grown men: grow, and you shall eat me; nor shall you change me into yourself, but you shall be changed into me." And therefore it is a food capable of making a man divine, and of inebriating him with divinity. Likewise, in relation to the mystical body which is only signified, if one becomes a participant in ecclesiastical unity. He, therefore, who eats in this way "has eternal life." And concerning the first, in relation to Christ, this is already sufficiently evident. Likewise, in relation to the mystical body, he will of necessity have eternal life, if he perseveres. For the unity of the Church comes about through the Holy Spirit, Ephesians 4:4: "one spirit and one body," which is "the pledge of our eternal inheritance," as is said in Ephesians 1:14. There is, then, great usefulness in this food, because it gives eternal life to the soul; but it is also great because it gives eternal life to the body as well. And therefore he adds "and I will raise him up on the last day." For as has been said, he who eats and drinks spiritually becomes a participant of the Holy Spirit, through whom we are united to Christ by the union of faith and charity, and through whom we are made members of the Church. Now it is the Holy Spirit who causes us to merit the resurrection; Romans 8:11 (cited as Rom. IV, 24 in the text, but the sense follows): "he who raised up Jesus Christ our Lord from the dead shall also raise up our mortal bodies, because of his Spirit that dwells in us." And therefore the Lord says that him who eats and drinks he will raise up unto glory, not unto condemnation: because this resurrection would not profit him. And indeed quite fittingly is an effect of this kind attributed to the sacrament of the Eucharist, because, as Augustine says, and as was said above, the Word raises up souls, but the Word made flesh gives life to bodies. Now in this sacrament there is not only the Word according to his divinity, but also according to the truth of his flesh; and therefore it is a cause not only of the resurrection of souls, but also of bodies; 1 Corinthians 15:21: "by man came death, and by man the resurrection of the dead." The usefulness of this eating is therefore evident. Its truth, however, is shown when he says, "for my flesh is truly food." For someone might believe that the things said of the flesh and blood were an enigma and a parable; and therefore the Lord, excluding this, says "my flesh is truly food"; as if he were saying: do not understand that I am speaking figuratively; but according to truth my flesh is contained in the food of the faithful, and my blood is truly contained in the sacrament of the altar; Matthew 26:26: "this is my body... and this is my blood of the new testament." Or otherwise, according to Chrysostom: because food and drink are taken for the refreshment of man. Now in man there are two parts; the principal part, which is the soul, and the secondary part, which is the body. Now that which man is, he is through the soul, not through the body: that, therefore, is truly the food of man which is the food of the soul; and this is what the Lord says, "for my flesh is truly food": because it is food not only of the body, but also of the soul. And likewise the blood. Psalm 22:2 (23:2 in some numberings): "he brought me up over the water of refreshment, he converted my soul." As if he were saying: this refreshment is ordered especially to the soul. Or otherwise, according to Augustine: that is truly said to be a certain thing which produces its effect; now the effect of food is that it satisfies: that, therefore, which truly produces satiety is truly food and drink. Now this the flesh and blood of Christ do, which lead to the state of glory, where there is neither hunger nor thirst: Apocalypse 7:16: "they shall neither hunger nor thirst any more"; and therefore he says "my flesh is truly food, and my blood is truly drink." "He who eats," etc. Here the Lord proves the power of the spiritual food set down above, namely that it gives eternal life: and he uses an argument of this kind. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood is joined to me; but he who is joined to me has eternal life: therefore he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life. According to this, then, he does three things. First he sets down the major premise; second the minor, and proves it, at the words "as the living Father has sent me, and I live because of the Father"; third he infers the conclusion, at the words "this is the bread which came down from heaven." It should be known, then, as to the first, that if what he says, "he who eats my flesh," etc., be referred to flesh and blood mystically, there is no doubt in the statement. For, as has been said, he eats spiritually, in relation to the reality signified alone, who is incorporated into the mystical body through the union of faith and charity: and charity causes God to be in man, and conversely; 1 John 4:16: "he who abides in charity abides in God, and God in him." And this is what the Holy Spirit accomplishes; hence in the same place, verse 13: "in this we know that we abide in God, and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit." But if it be referred to sacramental partaking, then whoever eats the flesh and drinks the blood abides in God: because, as Augustine says, there is a certain manner of eating that flesh and drinking that blood, by which he who eats and drinks abides in Christ, and Christ in him. But this is he who eats the body of Christ and drinks his blood not merely sacramentally, but in reality. There is also another manner, by which those who eat do not abide in Christ, nor Christ in them; this is the case with those who approach it with a feigned heart: for the sacrament has no effect in one who is feigned. For one is feigned when what is signified outwardly does not correspond to what is within. Now in the sacrament of the Eucharist there is indeed signified outwardly that Christ is incorporated in him who receives it, and he himself in Christ. He, therefore, who does not have in his heart the desire of this union, nor strives to remove every impediment to it, is feigned. And therefore Christ does not abide in him, nor he in Christ. Here he sets down the minor premise: namely, that he who is joined to Christ has life; and he introduces this by way of the manifestation of a certain likeness, which is as follows. The Son, on account of the unity which he has with the Father, receives life from the Father: therefore he who is united to Christ receives life from Christ; and this is what he means when he says, "as the living Father has sent me, and I live because of the Father." These words, indeed, can be expounded of Christ in two ways, namely according to the human nature, and according to the divine. For if they be expounded of Christ the Son of God, then the word "as" imports a likeness of Christ to the creature as regards something, but not as regards everything, but as regards this, that he has being from another. For this is common to Christ the Son of God and to the creature, that they are from another: but as regards another point there is dissimilarity. For the Son has something proper to himself, namely that he is from the Father in such a way that he nevertheless receives the whole fullness of the divine nature, to such an extent that whatever is natural to the Father is also natural to the Son. The creature, however, receives some particular perfection and nature; above, in chapter 5:26: "as the Father has life in himself, so has he given to the Son also to have life in himself." And this he shows, because he does not say: "as I eat the Father, and I live because of the Father," when he is speaking of his procession from the Father — just as he said, "he who eats me, he also shall live because of me," when he speaks of the participation of his body and blood, by which we are made better: for eating denotes a certain participation. But Christ says that he lives because of the Father, not indeed as one eaten, but as one who begets, without any detriment to equality. If, however, it be expounded of Christ the man, then as regards something the word "as" imports a likeness between Christ the man and us: namely in this, that just as Christ the man receives spiritual life through union with God, so also we receive spiritual life in the communion of the sacrament. But nevertheless there is dissimilarity: because Christ the man received life through the union of the Word, to whom he is united in person; but we are united to Christ through the sacrament of faith. And therefore he says two things: "sent me" and "the Father." If, then, it be referred to the Son of God, he then says "I live because of the Father": because the Father himself is living. But if it be referred to the Son of man, then he says "I live because of the Father," because "he sent me": that is, he caused me to be incarnate: for the mission of the Son of God is his incarnation; Galatians 4:4: "God sent his Son, made of a woman, made under the law." Through this, then, according to Hilary, the error of Arius is excluded; for if we live because of Christ, since we have something of his nature, as he himself says, "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life"; therefore Christ also lives because of the Father, because he has in himself the nature of the Father: not, however, a part of it, since it is simple and indivisible; therefore he has the whole nature of the Father. The Son, therefore, lives because of the Father, since his birth brought upon him no alien and different nature. Consequently, when he says, "this is the bread which came down from heaven," he sets down two conclusions: for they had been quarreling about two things, namely about the origin of the spiritual food, and about its power. The first conclusion, then, is about the origin; the second is about the power; and this he principally intends, at the words "he who eats this bread shall live forever." It should be known, as to the first, that the Jews had been troubled, because he had said: "I am the living bread which came down from heaven," and therefore, against them, he again concludes this from what he says, "I live because of the Father," when he says "this is the bread." For to come down from heaven is to have one's origin from heaven; but the Son has his origin from heaven, because he lives because of the Father: therefore Christ is he who came down from heaven. And therefore he says, "this is the bread which came down from heaven" — that is, from the paternal life — and this as regards the divinity; or he also came down as regards the body: inasmuch, namely, as its formative power, which was the Holy Spirit, was from heaven, as a heavenly power. Hence those who eat this bread do not die, in the way that our fathers died, who ate manna which was not from heaven; nor was it living bread, as was said above. But how those who ate the manna died is manifest from what has been said before. The second conclusion, concerning the power of the bread, is set down when he says, "he who eats this bread shall live forever": which follows from what he said, "he who eats my flesh." For he who eats this bread abides in me, and I in him; but I am eternal life: therefore he who eats this bread, as he ought, shall live forever. The place, moreover, where Jesus said this was in the synagogue, in which Christ was teaching in Capharnaum. For wishing to draw the multitude, he taught in the temple and in the synagogue, so that, out of many, at least some might profit; Psalm 39:10 (40:9): "I have declared your justice in the great church (assembly)."”

“For my flesh is meat indeed,.... Not in a corporeal, but in a spiritual sense; and the same is said of his blood: and my blood is drink indeed, &c. that is, they are both "truly" meat and drink, as the Vulgate Latin, Syriac, and Ethiopic versions render it; or are "true" meat and drink, as the Arabic version: in opposition to what was typical meat and drink; as the manna in the wilderness, the water out of the rock, the flesh and wine at the passover, the meat and drink offerings under the law, or any other meats and drinks under that dispensation; and which, though not when Christ said these words, yet now are abolished, being unprofitable, and not to be fed upon. Moreover, these phrases may denote the reality, substance, and solidity of that spiritual food believers have in Christ, in opposition to the imaginary food of sensual sinners, who feed on ashes and bread of deceit; and to that of self-righteous persons, who spend their labour and money for, and live upon that which is not bread, even upon their works of righteousness; and to the superficial tastes of hypocrites and formal professors; and to the charge of enthusiasm; and even to the outward elements of bread, and wine, in the Lord's supper, since instituted; and as it may be attended upon by persons destitute of the grace of God. And these words may also be expressive of the virtue, efficacy, and excellency of this food, it being soul quickening, nourishing, strengthening, satisfying, and delightful food, as well as spiritual and savoury; not to carnal persons, or outward professors, but to new born babes, and true believers; and which, by them, may be had, and to the full, and that in due season, even every day, and is what will abide for ever.”

“Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man - Unless ye be made partakers of the blessings about to be purchased by my blood, passion, and violent death, ye cannot be saved. As a man must eat bread and flesh, in order to be nourished by them, so a man must receive the grace and Spirit of Christ, in order to his salvation. As food in a rich man's store does not nourish the poor man that needs it, unless it be given him, and he receive it into his stomach, so the whole fountain of mercy existing in the bosom of God, and uncommunicated, does not save a soul: he who is saved by it must be made a partaker of it. Our Lord's meaning appears to be, that, unless they were made partakers of the grace of that atonement which he was about to make by his death, they could not possibly be saved. Bishop Pearce justly observes that the ideas of eating and drinking are here borrowed to express partaking of, and sharing in. Thus spiritual happiness on earth, and even in heaven, is expressed by eating and drinking; instances of which may be seen, Mat 8:11; Mat 26:29; Luk 14:15; Luk 22:30; and Rev 2:17. Those who were made partakers of the Holy Spirit are said by St. Paul, Co1 12:13, to be made to drink into (or of) one Spirit. This, indeed, was a very common mode of expression among the Jews.”

“Except ye eat the flesh . . . and drink the blood . . . no life, &c.--The harshest word He had yet uttered in their ears. They asked how it was possible to eat His flesh. He answers, with great solemnity, "It is indispensable." Yet even here a thoughtful hearer might find something to temper the harshness. He says they must not only "eat His flesh" but "drink His blood," which could not but suggest the idea of His death--implied in the separation of one's flesh from his blood. And as He had already hinted that it was to be something very different from a natural death, saying, "My flesh I will give for the life of the world" (Joh 6:51), it must have been pretty plain to candid hearers that He meant something above the gross idea which the bare terms expressed. And farther, when He added that they "had no life in them unless they thus ate and drank," it was impossible they should think He meant that the temporal life they were then living was dependent on their eating and drinking, in this gross sense, His flesh and blood. Yet the whole statement was certainly confounding, and beyond doubt was meant to be so. Our Lord had told them that in spite of all they had "seen" in Him, they "did not believe" (Joh 6:36). For their conviction therefore he does not here lay Himself out; but having the ear not only of them but of the more candid and thoughtful in the crowded synagogue, and the miracle of the loaves having led up to the most exalted of all views of His Person and Office, He takes advantage of their very difficulties and objections to announce, for all time, those most profound truths which are here expressed, regardless of the disgust of the unteachable, and the prejudices even of the most sincere, which His language would seem only designed to deepen. The truth really conveyed here is no other than that expressed in Joh 6:51, though in more emphatic terms--that He Himself, in the virtue of His sacrificial death, is the spiritual and eternal life of men; and that unless men voluntarily appropriate to themselves this death, in its sacrificial virtue, so as to become the very life and nourishment of their inner man, they have no spiritual and eternal life at all. Not as if His death were the only thing of value, but it is what gives all else in Christ's Incarnate Person, Life, and Office, their whole value to us sinners.”

“Above, the Lord repressed the murmuring of the Jews, which had arisen from the origin of the spiritual food; here he represses their quarreling, which was among them concerning the eating of this food. And first he sets down their quarrel; second the Lord suppresses it, at the words "Jesus therefore said to them," etc.; third the Evangelist designates the place, at the words "these things he said in the synagogue, teaching in Capharnaum." Concerning the first, it should be known that the Evangelist introduces the quarrel of the Jews by way of a conclusion, when he says "the Jews therefore quarreled," etc. And indeed quite fittingly: for, according to Augustine, the Lord had spoken to them of the food of unity, by which those who are refreshed are made of one mind, according to that word of Psalm 67:4 (Vulgate numbering): "let the just feast, and rejoice in the sight of God, and be delighted with gladness," and there follows, according to another reading: "who makes those of one mind to dwell in the house." Because, therefore, the Jews had not partaken of the food of concord, they therefore quarreled with one another; Isaiah 58:4: "behold, you fast unto strife and contention." Now from the fact that they quarreled with one another they showed themselves to be carnal; 1 Corinthians 3:3: "since there is among you envying and contention, are you not carnal?" And therefore they understood these words of the Lord in a carnal manner; namely, that the flesh of Christ would be eaten as carnal food; hence they say, "how can this man give us his flesh to eat?" As if they were saying: this is impossible, just as their fathers also spoke against the Lord, Numbers 21:5: "our soul is nauseated with this exceedingly light food." But this quarrel of theirs is suppressed by the Lord; hence he says "Jesus therefore said to them," etc. Here he first sets down the power of the eating of this food; second he manifests it, at the words "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life." Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets down the necessity of eating the flesh; second its usefulness, at the words "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life"; third he adds its truth, at the words "for my flesh is truly food." Jesus therefore said, "Amen, amen I say to you: unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you," as if he were saying: you consider it impossible and unfitting that you should eat my flesh; but it is not only not impossible, but is even very necessary, to such an extent that unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you shall not have — that is, you shall not be able to have — in you life, namely spiritual life. For just as bodily food is so necessary for bodily life that without it life cannot be, Lamentations 1:11: "they have given all their precious things for food"; and Psalm 103:15: "bread may strengthen man's heart" — so spiritual food is necessary for spiritual life, to such a degree that without it spiritual life cannot be sustained; Deuteronomy 8:3: "man does not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God." It should be noted, however, that this statement can be referred either to spiritual eating or to sacramental eating. But if it be referred to spiritual eating, the statement admits of no doubt. For he eats the flesh of Christ and drinks his blood spiritually who becomes a participant in ecclesiastical unity, which comes about through charity; Romans 12:5: "you are all one body in Christ." He, therefore, who does not eat in this way is outside the Church, and consequently outside charity; therefore he does not have life in himself; 1 John 3:14: "he who does not love abides in death." But if it be referred to sacramental eating, what is said involves a doubt; for above, in chapter 3:5, it is said: "unless one be reborn of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of heaven." But just as that statement was set forth, so is this one: "unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man," etc. Since, therefore, Baptism is a sacrament of necessity, it seems that the Eucharist is too. But this indeed the Greeks grant, and hence they give the Eucharist even to baptized infants; and in this they have on their side the rite of Dionysius, who says that the reception of any sacrament whatsoever ought to be consummated in the communion of the Eucharist, which is the consummation of all the sacraments. But this is true in the case of adults, not, however, in the case of infants: since in one receiving the Eucharist actual reverence and devotion are required, which those who do not have the use of free judgment — such as infants and the insane — cannot have; and therefore it should in no way be given to them. It must therefore be said that the sacrament of Baptism is necessary for all, such that it be really received, since without it no one is regenerated unto life; and therefore it must be had either in fact or in desire, in respect of those who are prevented; for if contempt in anyone excludes the Baptism of water, neither the baptism of desire nor the baptism of blood profits him unto eternal life. The sacrament of the Eucharist, however, is of necessity only in respect of adults, so that it be received either in fact or in desire according to the institutions of the Church. But according to this a further doubt arises: because by these words of the Lord, not only the eating of the body but also the partaking of the blood is of the necessity of salvation, especially since a perfect refection of food is not without drink. Since, therefore, the custom of some Churches is that the priest alone communicates of the blood, while the others communicate only of the body, this seems to be contrary to this statement. I answer that it must be said that, according to the ancient custom of the Church, all, just as they communicated of the body, so also communicated of the blood; which is even still observed in certain Churches, where also the ministers of the altar continually communicate both of the body and of the blood. But on account of the danger of spilling, it is observed in some Churches that the priest alone communicates of the blood, and the rest of the body. Nor is this, however, against the statement of the Lord, because he who communicates of the body communicates also of the blood, since under either species the whole Christ is contained, even as regards body and blood. But under the species of bread the body of Christ is contained by force of the conversion, and the blood by natural concomitance; while under the species of wine the blood of Christ is contained by force of the conversion, and the body by natural concomitance. Thus, then, appears the necessity of partaking of this spiritual food. Its usefulness is shown when he says, "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life," and first as to the spirit or soul; second as to the body, at the words "and I will raise him up on the last day." The usefulness of this eating, then, is great, because it gives eternal life; hence he says, "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life." For this spiritual food is indeed like bodily food in this, that without it spiritual life cannot be, just as bodily life cannot be without bodily food, as was said above. But it has more than bodily food, because it causes a life that does not fail in the one who partakes of it, which bodily food does not effect: for it is not the case that whoever partakes of it shall live forever; for it can happen, as Augustine says, that through old age or disease, or some mishap, very many who have partaken of it should die. But he who partakes of this food and drink of the body and blood of the Lord has eternal life; and therefore it is compared to the tree of life; Proverbs 3:8 (18 in some numberings): "it is a tree of life to those who lay hold on her"; hence it is called the bread of life; Ecclesiasticus 15:3: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding." And therefore he says "eternal life": and this, because he who eats this bread has in himself Christ, who is true God and eternal life, as it is said in 1 John, at the end, 20. But he has eternal life who eats and drinks, as is said, not only sacramentally but also spiritually. He, however, eats and drinks sacramentally who receives the sacrament itself; but spiritually, he who attains to the reality of the sacrament; which reality is twofold: one both contained and signified, which is Christ entire, who is contained under the species of bread and wine; the other reality is signified but not contained, and this is the mystical body of Christ, which is in the predestined, the called, and the justified. Thus, then, one eats the flesh and drinks the blood spiritually in relation to Christ contained and signified, who is joined to him through faith and charity, so that he is transformed into him and is made his member: for this food is not converted into him who partakes of it, but converts the one eating into itself, according to Augustine, when he says: "I am the food of grown men: grow, and you shall eat me; nor shall you change me into yourself, but you shall be changed into me." And therefore it is a food capable of making a man divine, and of inebriating him with divinity. Likewise, in relation to the mystical body which is only signified, if one becomes a participant in ecclesiastical unity. He, therefore, who eats in this way "has eternal life." And concerning the first, in relation to Christ, this is already sufficiently evident. Likewise, in relation to the mystical body, he will of necessity have eternal life, if he perseveres. For the unity of the Church comes about through the Holy Spirit, Ephesians 4:4: "one spirit and one body," which is "the pledge of our eternal inheritance," as is said in Ephesians 1:14. There is, then, great usefulness in this food, because it gives eternal life to the soul; but it is also great because it gives eternal life to the body as well. And therefore he adds "and I will raise him up on the last day." For as has been said, he who eats and drinks spiritually becomes a participant of the Holy Spirit, through whom we are united to Christ by the union of faith and charity, and through whom we are made members of the Church. Now it is the Holy Spirit who causes us to merit the resurrection; Romans 8:11 (cited as Rom. IV, 24 in the text, but the sense follows): "he who raised up Jesus Christ our Lord from the dead shall also raise up our mortal bodies, because of his Spirit that dwells in us." And therefore the Lord says that him who eats and drinks he will raise up unto glory, not unto condemnation: because this resurrection would not profit him. And indeed quite fittingly is an effect of this kind attributed to the sacrament of the Eucharist, because, as Augustine says, and as was said above, the Word raises up souls, but the Word made flesh gives life to bodies. Now in this sacrament there is not only the Word according to his divinity, but also according to the truth of his flesh; and therefore it is a cause not only of the resurrection of souls, but also of bodies; 1 Corinthians 15:21: "by man came death, and by man the resurrection of the dead." The usefulness of this eating is therefore evident. Its truth, however, is shown when he says, "for my flesh is truly food." For someone might believe that the things said of the flesh and blood were an enigma and a parable; and therefore the Lord, excluding this, says "my flesh is truly food"; as if he were saying: do not understand that I am speaking figuratively; but according to truth my flesh is contained in the food of the faithful, and my blood is truly contained in the sacrament of the altar; Matthew 26:26: "this is my body... and this is my blood of the new testament." Or otherwise, according to Chrysostom: because food and drink are taken for the refreshment of man. Now in man there are two parts; the principal part, which is the soul, and the secondary part, which is the body. Now that which man is, he is through the soul, not through the body: that, therefore, is truly the food of man which is the food of the soul; and this is what the Lord says, "for my flesh is truly food": because it is food not only of the body, but also of the soul. And likewise the blood. Psalm 22:2 (23:2 in some numberings): "he brought me up over the water of refreshment, he converted my soul." As if he were saying: this refreshment is ordered especially to the soul. Or otherwise, according to Augustine: that is truly said to be a certain thing which produces its effect; now the effect of food is that it satisfies: that, therefore, which truly produces satiety is truly food and drink. Now this the flesh and blood of Christ do, which lead to the state of glory, where there is neither hunger nor thirst: Apocalypse 7:16: "they shall neither hunger nor thirst any more"; and therefore he says "my flesh is truly food, and my blood is truly drink." "He who eats," etc. Here the Lord proves the power of the spiritual food set down above, namely that it gives eternal life: and he uses an argument of this kind. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood is joined to me; but he who is joined to me has eternal life: therefore he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life. According to this, then, he does three things. First he sets down the major premise; second the minor, and proves it, at the words "as the living Father has sent me, and I live because of the Father"; third he infers the conclusion, at the words "this is the bread which came down from heaven." It should be known, then, as to the first, that if what he says, "he who eats my flesh," etc., be referred to flesh and blood mystically, there is no doubt in the statement. For, as has been said, he eats spiritually, in relation to the reality signified alone, who is incorporated into the mystical body through the union of faith and charity: and charity causes God to be in man, and conversely; 1 John 4:16: "he who abides in charity abides in God, and God in him." And this is what the Holy Spirit accomplishes; hence in the same place, verse 13: "in this we know that we abide in God, and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit." But if it be referred to sacramental partaking, then whoever eats the flesh and drinks the blood abides in God: because, as Augustine says, there is a certain manner of eating that flesh and drinking that blood, by which he who eats and drinks abides in Christ, and Christ in him. But this is he who eats the body of Christ and drinks his blood not merely sacramentally, but in reality. There is also another manner, by which those who eat do not abide in Christ, nor Christ in them; this is the case with those who approach it with a feigned heart: for the sacrament has no effect in one who is feigned. For one is feigned when what is signified outwardly does not correspond to what is within. Now in the sacrament of the Eucharist there is indeed signified outwardly that Christ is incorporated in him who receives it, and he himself in Christ. He, therefore, who does not have in his heart the desire of this union, nor strives to remove every impediment to it, is feigned. And therefore Christ does not abide in him, nor he in Christ. Here he sets down the minor premise: namely, that he who is joined to Christ has life; and he introduces this by way of the manifestation of a certain likeness, which is as follows. The Son, on account of the unity which he has with the Father, receives life from the Father: therefore he who is united to Christ receives life from Christ; and this is what he means when he says, "as the living Father has sent me, and I live because of the Father." These words, indeed, can be expounded of Christ in two ways, namely according to the human nature, and according to the divine. For if they be expounded of Christ the Son of God, then the word "as" imports a likeness of Christ to the creature as regards something, but not as regards everything, but as regards this, that he has being from another. For this is common to Christ the Son of God and to the creature, that they are from another: but as regards another point there is dissimilarity. For the Son has something proper to himself, namely that he is from the Father in such a way that he nevertheless receives the whole fullness of the divine nature, to such an extent that whatever is natural to the Father is also natural to the Son. The creature, however, receives some particular perfection and nature; above, in chapter 5:26: "as the Father has life in himself, so has he given to the Son also to have life in himself." And this he shows, because he does not say: "as I eat the Father, and I live because of the Father," when he is speaking of his procession from the Father — just as he said, "he who eats me, he also shall live because of me," when he speaks of the participation of his body and blood, by which we are made better: for eating denotes a certain participation. But Christ says that he lives because of the Father, not indeed as one eaten, but as one who begets, without any detriment to equality. If, however, it be expounded of Christ the man, then as regards something the word "as" imports a likeness between Christ the man and us: namely in this, that just as Christ the man receives spiritual life through union with God, so also we receive spiritual life in the communion of the sacrament. But nevertheless there is dissimilarity: because Christ the man received life through the union of the Word, to whom he is united in person; but we are united to Christ through the sacrament of faith. And therefore he says two things: "sent me" and "the Father." If, then, it be referred to the Son of God, he then says "I live because of the Father": because the Father himself is living. But if it be referred to the Son of man, then he says "I live because of the Father," because "he sent me": that is, he caused me to be incarnate: for the mission of the Son of God is his incarnation; Galatians 4:4: "God sent his Son, made of a woman, made under the law." Through this, then, according to Hilary, the error of Arius is excluded; for if we live because of Christ, since we have something of his nature, as he himself says, "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life"; therefore Christ also lives because of the Father, because he has in himself the nature of the Father: not, however, a part of it, since it is simple and indivisible; therefore he has the whole nature of the Father. The Son, therefore, lives because of the Father, since his birth brought upon him no alien and different nature. Consequently, when he says, "this is the bread which came down from heaven," he sets down two conclusions: for they had been quarreling about two things, namely about the origin of the spiritual food, and about its power. The first conclusion, then, is about the origin; the second is about the power; and this he principally intends, at the words "he who eats this bread shall live forever." It should be known, as to the first, that the Jews had been troubled, because he had said: "I am the living bread which came down from heaven," and therefore, against them, he again concludes this from what he says, "I live because of the Father," when he says "this is the bread." For to come down from heaven is to have one's origin from heaven; but the Son has his origin from heaven, because he lives because of the Father: therefore Christ is he who came down from heaven. And therefore he says, "this is the bread which came down from heaven" — that is, from the paternal life — and this as regards the divinity; or he also came down as regards the body: inasmuch, namely, as its formative power, which was the Holy Spirit, was from heaven, as a heavenly power. Hence those who eat this bread do not die, in the way that our fathers died, who ate manna which was not from heaven; nor was it living bread, as was said above. But how those who ate the manna died is manifest from what has been said before. The second conclusion, concerning the power of the bread, is set down when he says, "he who eats this bread shall live forever": which follows from what he said, "he who eats my flesh." For he who eats this bread abides in me, and I in him; but I am eternal life: therefore he who eats this bread, as he ought, shall live forever. The place, moreover, where Jesus said this was in the synagogue, in which Christ was teaching in Capharnaum. For wishing to draw the multitude, he taught in the temple and in the synagogue, so that, out of many, at least some might profit; Psalm 39:10 (40:9): "I have declared your justice in the great church (assembly)."”

“He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood,.... In the sense above given; See Gill on Joh 6:53; dwelleth in me, and I in him. There is a mutual indwelling of Christ, and believers; Christ is the habitation, or dwelling place of his people: there is a secret dwelling in Christ; so the elect of God dwelt in the heart, and in the hands, and arms of Christ from everlasting; and as members in their head in election grace; and representatively in him, as the Mediator of the covenant; and they secretly and safely dwelt in him, when all mankind fell in Adam; and when he was on the cross, in the grave, and now he is in heaven; all which is owing to his own love, his Father's gift, and to secret union to him. But there is an open dwelling in him in time, which is here meant: God's elect, as in their natural state, are without Christ, and lie open to the law and justice of God; the Spirit of God convinces them of this state, and directs them to flee to Christ, as a city of refuge; when they find him a stronghold, a place of defence, and a proper dwelling for them, where they resolve to abide, and do abide; and where they dwell safely, peaceably, comfortably, and pleasantly; and from which dwelling place they will never be turned out. Likewise, the saints are the habitation or dwelling place of Christ; he dwells not in their heads and to tongues, but in their hearts, and by faith; which is here expressed, by eating his flesh, and drinking his blood; and which, though it is not the cause of Christ's dwelling here, yet is the means or instrument by which men receive him into their hearts, and retain him, and have communion with him; for he dwells in believers, not in such sense as he dwells in the world, by his omnipresence, and power; or in the human nature, by hypostatical union to it; but by his Spirit, and by faith, which is an instance of wonderful condescending grace, and is owing to union to him, and is expressive of communion with him, and is what will continue for ever.”

“Above, the Lord repressed the murmuring of the Jews, which had arisen from the origin of the spiritual food; here he represses their quarreling, which was among them concerning the eating of this food. And first he sets down their quarrel; second the Lord suppresses it, at the words "Jesus therefore said to them," etc.; third the Evangelist designates the place, at the words "these things he said in the synagogue, teaching in Capharnaum." Concerning the first, it should be known that the Evangelist introduces the quarrel of the Jews by way of a conclusion, when he says "the Jews therefore quarreled," etc. And indeed quite fittingly: for, according to Augustine, the Lord had spoken to them of the food of unity, by which those who are refreshed are made of one mind, according to that word of Psalm 67:4 (Vulgate numbering): "let the just feast, and rejoice in the sight of God, and be delighted with gladness," and there follows, according to another reading: "who makes those of one mind to dwell in the house." Because, therefore, the Jews had not partaken of the food of concord, they therefore quarreled with one another; Isaiah 58:4: "behold, you fast unto strife and contention." Now from the fact that they quarreled with one another they showed themselves to be carnal; 1 Corinthians 3:3: "since there is among you envying and contention, are you not carnal?" And therefore they understood these words of the Lord in a carnal manner; namely, that the flesh of Christ would be eaten as carnal food; hence they say, "how can this man give us his flesh to eat?" As if they were saying: this is impossible, just as their fathers also spoke against the Lord, Numbers 21:5: "our soul is nauseated with this exceedingly light food." But this quarrel of theirs is suppressed by the Lord; hence he says "Jesus therefore said to them," etc. Here he first sets down the power of the eating of this food; second he manifests it, at the words "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life." Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets down the necessity of eating the flesh; second its usefulness, at the words "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life"; third he adds its truth, at the words "for my flesh is truly food." Jesus therefore said, "Amen, amen I say to you: unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you," as if he were saying: you consider it impossible and unfitting that you should eat my flesh; but it is not only not impossible, but is even very necessary, to such an extent that unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you shall not have — that is, you shall not be able to have — in you life, namely spiritual life. For just as bodily food is so necessary for bodily life that without it life cannot be, Lamentations 1:11: "they have given all their precious things for food"; and Psalm 103:15: "bread may strengthen man's heart" — so spiritual food is necessary for spiritual life, to such a degree that without it spiritual life cannot be sustained; Deuteronomy 8:3: "man does not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God." It should be noted, however, that this statement can be referred either to spiritual eating or to sacramental eating. But if it be referred to spiritual eating, the statement admits of no doubt. For he eats the flesh of Christ and drinks his blood spiritually who becomes a participant in ecclesiastical unity, which comes about through charity; Romans 12:5: "you are all one body in Christ." He, therefore, who does not eat in this way is outside the Church, and consequently outside charity; therefore he does not have life in himself; 1 John 3:14: "he who does not love abides in death." But if it be referred to sacramental eating, what is said involves a doubt; for above, in chapter 3:5, it is said: "unless one be reborn of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of heaven." But just as that statement was set forth, so is this one: "unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man," etc. Since, therefore, Baptism is a sacrament of necessity, it seems that the Eucharist is too. But this indeed the Greeks grant, and hence they give the Eucharist even to baptized infants; and in this they have on their side the rite of Dionysius, who says that the reception of any sacrament whatsoever ought to be consummated in the communion of the Eucharist, which is the consummation of all the sacraments. But this is true in the case of adults, not, however, in the case of infants: since in one receiving the Eucharist actual reverence and devotion are required, which those who do not have the use of free judgment — such as infants and the insane — cannot have; and therefore it should in no way be given to them. It must therefore be said that the sacrament of Baptism is necessary for all, such that it be really received, since without it no one is regenerated unto life; and therefore it must be had either in fact or in desire, in respect of those who are prevented; for if contempt in anyone excludes the Baptism of water, neither the baptism of desire nor the baptism of blood profits him unto eternal life. The sacrament of the Eucharist, however, is of necessity only in respect of adults, so that it be received either in fact or in desire according to the institutions of the Church. But according to this a further doubt arises: because by these words of the Lord, not only the eating of the body but also the partaking of the blood is of the necessity of salvation, especially since a perfect refection of food is not without drink. Since, therefore, the custom of some Churches is that the priest alone communicates of the blood, while the others communicate only of the body, this seems to be contrary to this statement. I answer that it must be said that, according to the ancient custom of the Church, all, just as they communicated of the body, so also communicated of the blood; which is even still observed in certain Churches, where also the ministers of the altar continually communicate both of the body and of the blood. But on account of the danger of spilling, it is observed in some Churches that the priest alone communicates of the blood, and the rest of the body. Nor is this, however, against the statement of the Lord, because he who communicates of the body communicates also of the blood, since under either species the whole Christ is contained, even as regards body and blood. But under the species of bread the body of Christ is contained by force of the conversion, and the blood by natural concomitance; while under the species of wine the blood of Christ is contained by force of the conversion, and the body by natural concomitance. Thus, then, appears the necessity of partaking of this spiritual food. Its usefulness is shown when he says, "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life," and first as to the spirit or soul; second as to the body, at the words "and I will raise him up on the last day." The usefulness of this eating, then, is great, because it gives eternal life; hence he says, "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life." For this spiritual food is indeed like bodily food in this, that without it spiritual life cannot be, just as bodily life cannot be without bodily food, as was said above. But it has more than bodily food, because it causes a life that does not fail in the one who partakes of it, which bodily food does not effect: for it is not the case that whoever partakes of it shall live forever; for it can happen, as Augustine says, that through old age or disease, or some mishap, very many who have partaken of it should die. But he who partakes of this food and drink of the body and blood of the Lord has eternal life; and therefore it is compared to the tree of life; Proverbs 3:8 (18 in some numberings): "it is a tree of life to those who lay hold on her"; hence it is called the bread of life; Ecclesiasticus 15:3: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding." And therefore he says "eternal life": and this, because he who eats this bread has in himself Christ, who is true God and eternal life, as it is said in 1 John, at the end, 20. But he has eternal life who eats and drinks, as is said, not only sacramentally but also spiritually. He, however, eats and drinks sacramentally who receives the sacrament itself; but spiritually, he who attains to the reality of the sacrament; which reality is twofold: one both contained and signified, which is Christ entire, who is contained under the species of bread and wine; the other reality is signified but not contained, and this is the mystical body of Christ, which is in the predestined, the called, and the justified. Thus, then, one eats the flesh and drinks the blood spiritually in relation to Christ contained and signified, who is joined to him through faith and charity, so that he is transformed into him and is made his member: for this food is not converted into him who partakes of it, but converts the one eating into itself, according to Augustine, when he says: "I am the food of grown men: grow, and you shall eat me; nor shall you change me into yourself, but you shall be changed into me." And therefore it is a food capable of making a man divine, and of inebriating him with divinity. Likewise, in relation to the mystical body which is only signified, if one becomes a participant in ecclesiastical unity. He, therefore, who eats in this way "has eternal life." And concerning the first, in relation to Christ, this is already sufficiently evident. Likewise, in relation to the mystical body, he will of necessity have eternal life, if he perseveres. For the unity of the Church comes about through the Holy Spirit, Ephesians 4:4: "one spirit and one body," which is "the pledge of our eternal inheritance," as is said in Ephesians 1:14. There is, then, great usefulness in this food, because it gives eternal life to the soul; but it is also great because it gives eternal life to the body as well. And therefore he adds "and I will raise him up on the last day." For as has been said, he who eats and drinks spiritually becomes a participant of the Holy Spirit, through whom we are united to Christ by the union of faith and charity, and through whom we are made members of the Church. Now it is the Holy Spirit who causes us to merit the resurrection; Romans 8:11 (cited as Rom. IV, 24 in the text, but the sense follows): "he who raised up Jesus Christ our Lord from the dead shall also raise up our mortal bodies, because of his Spirit that dwells in us." And therefore the Lord says that him who eats and drinks he will raise up unto glory, not unto condemnation: because this resurrection would not profit him. And indeed quite fittingly is an effect of this kind attributed to the sacrament of the Eucharist, because, as Augustine says, and as was said above, the Word raises up souls, but the Word made flesh gives life to bodies. Now in this sacrament there is not only the Word according to his divinity, but also according to the truth of his flesh; and therefore it is a cause not only of the resurrection of souls, but also of bodies; 1 Corinthians 15:21: "by man came death, and by man the resurrection of the dead." The usefulness of this eating is therefore evident. Its truth, however, is shown when he says, "for my flesh is truly food." For someone might believe that the things said of the flesh and blood were an enigma and a parable; and therefore the Lord, excluding this, says "my flesh is truly food"; as if he were saying: do not understand that I am speaking figuratively; but according to truth my flesh is contained in the food of the faithful, and my blood is truly contained in the sacrament of the altar; Matthew 26:26: "this is my body... and this is my blood of the new testament." Or otherwise, according to Chrysostom: because food and drink are taken for the refreshment of man. Now in man there are two parts; the principal part, which is the soul, and the secondary part, which is the body. Now that which man is, he is through the soul, not through the body: that, therefore, is truly the food of man which is the food of the soul; and this is what the Lord says, "for my flesh is truly food": because it is food not only of the body, but also of the soul. And likewise the blood. Psalm 22:2 (23:2 in some numberings): "he brought me up over the water of refreshment, he converted my soul." As if he were saying: this refreshment is ordered especially to the soul. Or otherwise, according to Augustine: that is truly said to be a certain thing which produces its effect; now the effect of food is that it satisfies: that, therefore, which truly produces satiety is truly food and drink. Now this the flesh and blood of Christ do, which lead to the state of glory, where there is neither hunger nor thirst: Apocalypse 7:16: "they shall neither hunger nor thirst any more"; and therefore he says "my flesh is truly food, and my blood is truly drink." "He who eats," etc. Here the Lord proves the power of the spiritual food set down above, namely that it gives eternal life: and he uses an argument of this kind. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood is joined to me; but he who is joined to me has eternal life: therefore he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life. According to this, then, he does three things. First he sets down the major premise; second the minor, and proves it, at the words "as the living Father has sent me, and I live because of the Father"; third he infers the conclusion, at the words "this is the bread which came down from heaven." It should be known, then, as to the first, that if what he says, "he who eats my flesh," etc., be referred to flesh and blood mystically, there is no doubt in the statement. For, as has been said, he eats spiritually, in relation to the reality signified alone, who is incorporated into the mystical body through the union of faith and charity: and charity causes God to be in man, and conversely; 1 John 4:16: "he who abides in charity abides in God, and God in him." And this is what the Holy Spirit accomplishes; hence in the same place, verse 13: "in this we know that we abide in God, and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit." But if it be referred to sacramental partaking, then whoever eats the flesh and drinks the blood abides in God: because, as Augustine says, there is a certain manner of eating that flesh and drinking that blood, by which he who eats and drinks abides in Christ, and Christ in him. But this is he who eats the body of Christ and drinks his blood not merely sacramentally, but in reality. There is also another manner, by which those who eat do not abide in Christ, nor Christ in them; this is the case with those who approach it with a feigned heart: for the sacrament has no effect in one who is feigned. For one is feigned when what is signified outwardly does not correspond to what is within. Now in the sacrament of the Eucharist there is indeed signified outwardly that Christ is incorporated in him who receives it, and he himself in Christ. He, therefore, who does not have in his heart the desire of this union, nor strives to remove every impediment to it, is feigned. And therefore Christ does not abide in him, nor he in Christ. Here he sets down the minor premise: namely, that he who is joined to Christ has life; and he introduces this by way of the manifestation of a certain likeness, which is as follows. The Son, on account of the unity which he has with the Father, receives life from the Father: therefore he who is united to Christ receives life from Christ; and this is what he means when he says, "as the living Father has sent me, and I live because of the Father." These words, indeed, can be expounded of Christ in two ways, namely according to the human nature, and according to the divine. For if they be expounded of Christ the Son of God, then the word "as" imports a likeness of Christ to the creature as regards something, but not as regards everything, but as regards this, that he has being from another. For this is common to Christ the Son of God and to the creature, that they are from another: but as regards another point there is dissimilarity. For the Son has something proper to himself, namely that he is from the Father in such a way that he nevertheless receives the whole fullness of the divine nature, to such an extent that whatever is natural to the Father is also natural to the Son. The creature, however, receives some particular perfection and nature; above, in chapter 5:26: "as the Father has life in himself, so has he given to the Son also to have life in himself." And this he shows, because he does not say: "as I eat the Father, and I live because of the Father," when he is speaking of his procession from the Father — just as he said, "he who eats me, he also shall live because of me," when he speaks of the participation of his body and blood, by which we are made better: for eating denotes a certain participation. But Christ says that he lives because of the Father, not indeed as one eaten, but as one who begets, without any detriment to equality. If, however, it be expounded of Christ the man, then as regards something the word "as" imports a likeness between Christ the man and us: namely in this, that just as Christ the man receives spiritual life through union with God, so also we receive spiritual life in the communion of the sacrament. But nevertheless there is dissimilarity: because Christ the man received life through the union of the Word, to whom he is united in person; but we are united to Christ through the sacrament of faith. And therefore he says two things: "sent me" and "the Father." If, then, it be referred to the Son of God, he then says "I live because of the Father": because the Father himself is living. But if it be referred to the Son of man, then he says "I live because of the Father," because "he sent me": that is, he caused me to be incarnate: for the mission of the Son of God is his incarnation; Galatians 4:4: "God sent his Son, made of a woman, made under the law." Through this, then, according to Hilary, the error of Arius is excluded; for if we live because of Christ, since we have something of his nature, as he himself says, "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life"; therefore Christ also lives because of the Father, because he has in himself the nature of the Father: not, however, a part of it, since it is simple and indivisible; therefore he has the whole nature of the Father. The Son, therefore, lives because of the Father, since his birth brought upon him no alien and different nature. Consequently, when he says, "this is the bread which came down from heaven," he sets down two conclusions: for they had been quarreling about two things, namely about the origin of the spiritual food, and about its power. The first conclusion, then, is about the origin; the second is about the power; and this he principally intends, at the words "he who eats this bread shall live forever." It should be known, as to the first, that the Jews had been troubled, because he had said: "I am the living bread which came down from heaven," and therefore, against them, he again concludes this from what he says, "I live because of the Father," when he says "this is the bread." For to come down from heaven is to have one's origin from heaven; but the Son has his origin from heaven, because he lives because of the Father: therefore Christ is he who came down from heaven. And therefore he says, "this is the bread which came down from heaven" — that is, from the paternal life — and this as regards the divinity; or he also came down as regards the body: inasmuch, namely, as its formative power, which was the Holy Spirit, was from heaven, as a heavenly power. Hence those who eat this bread do not die, in the way that our fathers died, who ate manna which was not from heaven; nor was it living bread, as was said above. But how those who ate the manna died is manifest from what has been said before. The second conclusion, concerning the power of the bread, is set down when he says, "he who eats this bread shall live forever": which follows from what he said, "he who eats my flesh." For he who eats this bread abides in me, and I in him; but I am eternal life: therefore he who eats this bread, as he ought, shall live forever. The place, moreover, where Jesus said this was in the synagogue, in which Christ was teaching in Capharnaum. For wishing to draw the multitude, he taught in the temple and in the synagogue, so that, out of many, at least some might profit; Psalm 39:10 (40:9): "I have declared your justice in the great church (assembly)."”

“As the living Father hath sent me,.... Into the world, to be the Saviour of it; not by local motion, but by assumption of human nature; and not against his will, or as having superiority over him; but by joint consent and agreement: the first person in the Godhead is here styled, "the living Father"; not because he is the Father of spirits, of angels, and the souls of men; and the Father of all men by creation, and of saints by adoption; and the Father, or author of all mercies, spiritual and temporal; but because he is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ; and this character is peculiar to him: he is indeed the living God, and has life in himself, and is the fountain of life to others; but not in distinction from, and to the exclusion of the Son, or Spirit; but then none but he is the living Father, who ever did, and ever will, live as the Father of Christ: and I live by the Father; which is to be understood of Christ, not as God, but as Mediator, and as man. As Mediator he was set up by his Father, as the head of life to the elect; and was intrusted by him with a fulness of life for them; and was sent to open the way of life unto them, and bestow it on them. As man, he had his human life from God, and was preserved and upheld in it by him; and he laid it down at his command, and at his death committed his soul or spirit to him; and which was restored unto him, and is continued with him. The Vulgate Latin, and all the Oriental versions, read, "for the Father", or "because of him"; and may design either that near union and conjunction of Christ with him, by virtue of which they live the same life; or else his living to the glory and honour of his Father, as he did, and does: so he that eateth me; in a spiritual sense, by faith. The phrase of eating the Messiah was a familiar one, and well known to the Jews; though these Capernaites cavilled at it, and called it an hard saying. "Says Rab, the Israelites shall "eat" the years of the Messiah: (the gloss on it is, the fulness which the Israelites shall have in those days:) says R. Joseph, it is certainly so; but who shall "eat him?" shall Chellek and Billek (two judges in Sodom) , "eat him?" contrary to the words of R. Hillell, who says, Israel shall have no Messiah, for "they ate him" in the days of Hezekiah (y);'' that is, they enjoyed him then; for he thought that Hezekiah was the Messiah; but that was the doctor's mistake. The Messiah now was, and to be enjoyed and eaten by faith in a spiritual sense, and everyone that does so, even he shall live by me: such have their life from Christ; he is their food, on which they lived; and by him they are continued, upheld, and preserved in their spiritual life, and are by him brought to the life of glory: or they live "for", or "because of" him, as the above versions render it; they derive their life from him, and because he lives, they live also; and they live to his glory, and will do so to all eternity. (y) T. Bab. Sanhedrin, fol. 98. 2. & 99. 1.”

“Above, the Lord repressed the murmuring of the Jews, which had arisen from the origin of the spiritual food; here he represses their quarreling, which was among them concerning the eating of this food. And first he sets down their quarrel; second the Lord suppresses it, at the words "Jesus therefore said to them," etc.; third the Evangelist designates the place, at the words "these things he said in the synagogue, teaching in Capharnaum." Concerning the first, it should be known that the Evangelist introduces the quarrel of the Jews by way of a conclusion, when he says "the Jews therefore quarreled," etc. And indeed quite fittingly: for, according to Augustine, the Lord had spoken to them of the food of unity, by which those who are refreshed are made of one mind, according to that word of Psalm 67:4 (Vulgate numbering): "let the just feast, and rejoice in the sight of God, and be delighted with gladness," and there follows, according to another reading: "who makes those of one mind to dwell in the house." Because, therefore, the Jews had not partaken of the food of concord, they therefore quarreled with one another; Isaiah 58:4: "behold, you fast unto strife and contention." Now from the fact that they quarreled with one another they showed themselves to be carnal; 1 Corinthians 3:3: "since there is among you envying and contention, are you not carnal?" And therefore they understood these words of the Lord in a carnal manner; namely, that the flesh of Christ would be eaten as carnal food; hence they say, "how can this man give us his flesh to eat?" As if they were saying: this is impossible, just as their fathers also spoke against the Lord, Numbers 21:5: "our soul is nauseated with this exceedingly light food." But this quarrel of theirs is suppressed by the Lord; hence he says "Jesus therefore said to them," etc. Here he first sets down the power of the eating of this food; second he manifests it, at the words "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life." Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets down the necessity of eating the flesh; second its usefulness, at the words "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life"; third he adds its truth, at the words "for my flesh is truly food." Jesus therefore said, "Amen, amen I say to you: unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you," as if he were saying: you consider it impossible and unfitting that you should eat my flesh; but it is not only not impossible, but is even very necessary, to such an extent that unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you shall not have — that is, you shall not be able to have — in you life, namely spiritual life. For just as bodily food is so necessary for bodily life that without it life cannot be, Lamentations 1:11: "they have given all their precious things for food"; and Psalm 103:15: "bread may strengthen man's heart" — so spiritual food is necessary for spiritual life, to such a degree that without it spiritual life cannot be sustained; Deuteronomy 8:3: "man does not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God." It should be noted, however, that this statement can be referred either to spiritual eating or to sacramental eating. But if it be referred to spiritual eating, the statement admits of no doubt. For he eats the flesh of Christ and drinks his blood spiritually who becomes a participant in ecclesiastical unity, which comes about through charity; Romans 12:5: "you are all one body in Christ." He, therefore, who does not eat in this way is outside the Church, and consequently outside charity; therefore he does not have life in himself; 1 John 3:14: "he who does not love abides in death." But if it be referred to sacramental eating, what is said involves a doubt; for above, in chapter 3:5, it is said: "unless one be reborn of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of heaven." But just as that statement was set forth, so is this one: "unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man," etc. Since, therefore, Baptism is a sacrament of necessity, it seems that the Eucharist is too. But this indeed the Greeks grant, and hence they give the Eucharist even to baptized infants; and in this they have on their side the rite of Dionysius, who says that the reception of any sacrament whatsoever ought to be consummated in the communion of the Eucharist, which is the consummation of all the sacraments. But this is true in the case of adults, not, however, in the case of infants: since in one receiving the Eucharist actual reverence and devotion are required, which those who do not have the use of free judgment — such as infants and the insane — cannot have; and therefore it should in no way be given to them. It must therefore be said that the sacrament of Baptism is necessary for all, such that it be really received, since without it no one is regenerated unto life; and therefore it must be had either in fact or in desire, in respect of those who are prevented; for if contempt in anyone excludes the Baptism of water, neither the baptism of desire nor the baptism of blood profits him unto eternal life. The sacrament of the Eucharist, however, is of necessity only in respect of adults, so that it be received either in fact or in desire according to the institutions of the Church. But according to this a further doubt arises: because by these words of the Lord, not only the eating of the body but also the partaking of the blood is of the necessity of salvation, especially since a perfect refection of food is not without drink. Since, therefore, the custom of some Churches is that the priest alone communicates of the blood, while the others communicate only of the body, this seems to be contrary to this statement. I answer that it must be said that, according to the ancient custom of the Church, all, just as they communicated of the body, so also communicated of the blood; which is even still observed in certain Churches, where also the ministers of the altar continually communicate both of the body and of the blood. But on account of the danger of spilling, it is observed in some Churches that the priest alone communicates of the blood, and the rest of the body. Nor is this, however, against the statement of the Lord, because he who communicates of the body communicates also of the blood, since under either species the whole Christ is contained, even as regards body and blood. But under the species of bread the body of Christ is contained by force of the conversion, and the blood by natural concomitance; while under the species of wine the blood of Christ is contained by force of the conversion, and the body by natural concomitance. Thus, then, appears the necessity of partaking of this spiritual food. Its usefulness is shown when he says, "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life," and first as to the spirit or soul; second as to the body, at the words "and I will raise him up on the last day." The usefulness of this eating, then, is great, because it gives eternal life; hence he says, "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life." For this spiritual food is indeed like bodily food in this, that without it spiritual life cannot be, just as bodily life cannot be without bodily food, as was said above. But it has more than bodily food, because it causes a life that does not fail in the one who partakes of it, which bodily food does not effect: for it is not the case that whoever partakes of it shall live forever; for it can happen, as Augustine says, that through old age or disease, or some mishap, very many who have partaken of it should die. But he who partakes of this food and drink of the body and blood of the Lord has eternal life; and therefore it is compared to the tree of life; Proverbs 3:8 (18 in some numberings): "it is a tree of life to those who lay hold on her"; hence it is called the bread of life; Ecclesiasticus 15:3: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding." And therefore he says "eternal life": and this, because he who eats this bread has in himself Christ, who is true God and eternal life, as it is said in 1 John, at the end, 20. But he has eternal life who eats and drinks, as is said, not only sacramentally but also spiritually. He, however, eats and drinks sacramentally who receives the sacrament itself; but spiritually, he who attains to the reality of the sacrament; which reality is twofold: one both contained and signified, which is Christ entire, who is contained under the species of bread and wine; the other reality is signified but not contained, and this is the mystical body of Christ, which is in the predestined, the called, and the justified. Thus, then, one eats the flesh and drinks the blood spiritually in relation to Christ contained and signified, who is joined to him through faith and charity, so that he is transformed into him and is made his member: for this food is not converted into him who partakes of it, but converts the one eating into itself, according to Augustine, when he says: "I am the food of grown men: grow, and you shall eat me; nor shall you change me into yourself, but you shall be changed into me." And therefore it is a food capable of making a man divine, and of inebriating him with divinity. Likewise, in relation to the mystical body which is only signified, if one becomes a participant in ecclesiastical unity. He, therefore, who eats in this way "has eternal life." And concerning the first, in relation to Christ, this is already sufficiently evident. Likewise, in relation to the mystical body, he will of necessity have eternal life, if he perseveres. For the unity of the Church comes about through the Holy Spirit, Ephesians 4:4: "one spirit and one body," which is "the pledge of our eternal inheritance," as is said in Ephesians 1:14. There is, then, great usefulness in this food, because it gives eternal life to the soul; but it is also great because it gives eternal life to the body as well. And therefore he adds "and I will raise him up on the last day." For as has been said, he who eats and drinks spiritually becomes a participant of the Holy Spirit, through whom we are united to Christ by the union of faith and charity, and through whom we are made members of the Church. Now it is the Holy Spirit who causes us to merit the resurrection; Romans 8:11 (cited as Rom. IV, 24 in the text, but the sense follows): "he who raised up Jesus Christ our Lord from the dead shall also raise up our mortal bodies, because of his Spirit that dwells in us." And therefore the Lord says that him who eats and drinks he will raise up unto glory, not unto condemnation: because this resurrection would not profit him. And indeed quite fittingly is an effect of this kind attributed to the sacrament of the Eucharist, because, as Augustine says, and as was said above, the Word raises up souls, but the Word made flesh gives life to bodies. Now in this sacrament there is not only the Word according to his divinity, but also according to the truth of his flesh; and therefore it is a cause not only of the resurrection of souls, but also of bodies; 1 Corinthians 15:21: "by man came death, and by man the resurrection of the dead." The usefulness of this eating is therefore evident. Its truth, however, is shown when he says, "for my flesh is truly food." For someone might believe that the things said of the flesh and blood were an enigma and a parable; and therefore the Lord, excluding this, says "my flesh is truly food"; as if he were saying: do not understand that I am speaking figuratively; but according to truth my flesh is contained in the food of the faithful, and my blood is truly contained in the sacrament of the altar; Matthew 26:26: "this is my body... and this is my blood of the new testament." Or otherwise, according to Chrysostom: because food and drink are taken for the refreshment of man. Now in man there are two parts; the principal part, which is the soul, and the secondary part, which is the body. Now that which man is, he is through the soul, not through the body: that, therefore, is truly the food of man which is the food of the soul; and this is what the Lord says, "for my flesh is truly food": because it is food not only of the body, but also of the soul. And likewise the blood. Psalm 22:2 (23:2 in some numberings): "he brought me up over the water of refreshment, he converted my soul." As if he were saying: this refreshment is ordered especially to the soul. Or otherwise, according to Augustine: that is truly said to be a certain thing which produces its effect; now the effect of food is that it satisfies: that, therefore, which truly produces satiety is truly food and drink. Now this the flesh and blood of Christ do, which lead to the state of glory, where there is neither hunger nor thirst: Apocalypse 7:16: "they shall neither hunger nor thirst any more"; and therefore he says "my flesh is truly food, and my blood is truly drink." "He who eats," etc. Here the Lord proves the power of the spiritual food set down above, namely that it gives eternal life: and he uses an argument of this kind. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood is joined to me; but he who is joined to me has eternal life: therefore he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life. According to this, then, he does three things. First he sets down the major premise; second the minor, and proves it, at the words "as the living Father has sent me, and I live because of the Father"; third he infers the conclusion, at the words "this is the bread which came down from heaven." It should be known, then, as to the first, that if what he says, "he who eats my flesh," etc., be referred to flesh and blood mystically, there is no doubt in the statement. For, as has been said, he eats spiritually, in relation to the reality signified alone, who is incorporated into the mystical body through the union of faith and charity: and charity causes God to be in man, and conversely; 1 John 4:16: "he who abides in charity abides in God, and God in him." And this is what the Holy Spirit accomplishes; hence in the same place, verse 13: "in this we know that we abide in God, and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit." But if it be referred to sacramental partaking, then whoever eats the flesh and drinks the blood abides in God: because, as Augustine says, there is a certain manner of eating that flesh and drinking that blood, by which he who eats and drinks abides in Christ, and Christ in him. But this is he who eats the body of Christ and drinks his blood not merely sacramentally, but in reality. There is also another manner, by which those who eat do not abide in Christ, nor Christ in them; this is the case with those who approach it with a feigned heart: for the sacrament has no effect in one who is feigned. For one is feigned when what is signified outwardly does not correspond to what is within. Now in the sacrament of the Eucharist there is indeed signified outwardly that Christ is incorporated in him who receives it, and he himself in Christ. He, therefore, who does not have in his heart the desire of this union, nor strives to remove every impediment to it, is feigned. And therefore Christ does not abide in him, nor he in Christ. Here he sets down the minor premise: namely, that he who is joined to Christ has life; and he introduces this by way of the manifestation of a certain likeness, which is as follows. The Son, on account of the unity which he has with the Father, receives life from the Father: therefore he who is united to Christ receives life from Christ; and this is what he means when he says, "as the living Father has sent me, and I live because of the Father." These words, indeed, can be expounded of Christ in two ways, namely according to the human nature, and according to the divine. For if they be expounded of Christ the Son of God, then the word "as" imports a likeness of Christ to the creature as regards something, but not as regards everything, but as regards this, that he has being from another. For this is common to Christ the Son of God and to the creature, that they are from another: but as regards another point there is dissimilarity. For the Son has something proper to himself, namely that he is from the Father in such a way that he nevertheless receives the whole fullness of the divine nature, to such an extent that whatever is natural to the Father is also natural to the Son. The creature, however, receives some particular perfection and nature; above, in chapter 5:26: "as the Father has life in himself, so has he given to the Son also to have life in himself." And this he shows, because he does not say: "as I eat the Father, and I live because of the Father," when he is speaking of his procession from the Father — just as he said, "he who eats me, he also shall live because of me," when he speaks of the participation of his body and blood, by which we are made better: for eating denotes a certain participation. But Christ says that he lives because of the Father, not indeed as one eaten, but as one who begets, without any detriment to equality. If, however, it be expounded of Christ the man, then as regards something the word "as" imports a likeness between Christ the man and us: namely in this, that just as Christ the man receives spiritual life through union with God, so also we receive spiritual life in the communion of the sacrament. But nevertheless there is dissimilarity: because Christ the man received life through the union of the Word, to whom he is united in person; but we are united to Christ through the sacrament of faith. And therefore he says two things: "sent me" and "the Father." If, then, it be referred to the Son of God, he then says "I live because of the Father": because the Father himself is living. But if it be referred to the Son of man, then he says "I live because of the Father," because "he sent me": that is, he caused me to be incarnate: for the mission of the Son of God is his incarnation; Galatians 4:4: "God sent his Son, made of a woman, made under the law." Through this, then, according to Hilary, the error of Arius is excluded; for if we live because of Christ, since we have something of his nature, as he himself says, "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life"; therefore Christ also lives because of the Father, because he has in himself the nature of the Father: not, however, a part of it, since it is simple and indivisible; therefore he has the whole nature of the Father. The Son, therefore, lives because of the Father, since his birth brought upon him no alien and different nature. Consequently, when he says, "this is the bread which came down from heaven," he sets down two conclusions: for they had been quarreling about two things, namely about the origin of the spiritual food, and about its power. The first conclusion, then, is about the origin; the second is about the power; and this he principally intends, at the words "he who eats this bread shall live forever." It should be known, as to the first, that the Jews had been troubled, because he had said: "I am the living bread which came down from heaven," and therefore, against them, he again concludes this from what he says, "I live because of the Father," when he says "this is the bread." For to come down from heaven is to have one's origin from heaven; but the Son has his origin from heaven, because he lives because of the Father: therefore Christ is he who came down from heaven. And therefore he says, "this is the bread which came down from heaven" — that is, from the paternal life — and this as regards the divinity; or he also came down as regards the body: inasmuch, namely, as its formative power, which was the Holy Spirit, was from heaven, as a heavenly power. Hence those who eat this bread do not die, in the way that our fathers died, who ate manna which was not from heaven; nor was it living bread, as was said above. But how those who ate the manna died is manifest from what has been said before. The second conclusion, concerning the power of the bread, is set down when he says, "he who eats this bread shall live forever": which follows from what he said, "he who eats my flesh." For he who eats this bread abides in me, and I in him; but I am eternal life: therefore he who eats this bread, as he ought, shall live forever. The place, moreover, where Jesus said this was in the synagogue, in which Christ was teaching in Capharnaum. For wishing to draw the multitude, he taught in the temple and in the synagogue, so that, out of many, at least some might profit; Psalm 39:10 (40:9): "I have declared your justice in the great church (assembly)."”

“Above, the Lord repressed the murmuring of the Jews, which had arisen from the origin of the spiritual food; here he represses their quarreling, which was among them concerning the eating of this food. And first he sets down their quarrel; second the Lord suppresses it, at the words "Jesus therefore said to them," etc.; third the Evangelist designates the place, at the words "these things he said in the synagogue, teaching in Capharnaum." Concerning the first, it should be known that the Evangelist introduces the quarrel of the Jews by way of a conclusion, when he says "the Jews therefore quarreled," etc. And indeed quite fittingly: for, according to Augustine, the Lord had spoken to them of the food of unity, by which those who are refreshed are made of one mind, according to that word of Psalm 67:4 (Vulgate numbering): "let the just feast, and rejoice in the sight of God, and be delighted with gladness," and there follows, according to another reading: "who makes those of one mind to dwell in the house." Because, therefore, the Jews had not partaken of the food of concord, they therefore quarreled with one another; Isaiah 58:4: "behold, you fast unto strife and contention." Now from the fact that they quarreled with one another they showed themselves to be carnal; 1 Corinthians 3:3: "since there is among you envying and contention, are you not carnal?" And therefore they understood these words of the Lord in a carnal manner; namely, that the flesh of Christ would be eaten as carnal food; hence they say, "how can this man give us his flesh to eat?" As if they were saying: this is impossible, just as their fathers also spoke against the Lord, Numbers 21:5: "our soul is nauseated with this exceedingly light food." But this quarrel of theirs is suppressed by the Lord; hence he says "Jesus therefore said to them," etc. Here he first sets down the power of the eating of this food; second he manifests it, at the words "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life." Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets down the necessity of eating the flesh; second its usefulness, at the words "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life"; third he adds its truth, at the words "for my flesh is truly food." Jesus therefore said, "Amen, amen I say to you: unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you," as if he were saying: you consider it impossible and unfitting that you should eat my flesh; but it is not only not impossible, but is even very necessary, to such an extent that unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you shall not have — that is, you shall not be able to have — in you life, namely spiritual life. For just as bodily food is so necessary for bodily life that without it life cannot be, Lamentations 1:11: "they have given all their precious things for food"; and Psalm 103:15: "bread may strengthen man's heart" — so spiritual food is necessary for spiritual life, to such a degree that without it spiritual life cannot be sustained; Deuteronomy 8:3: "man does not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God." It should be noted, however, that this statement can be referred either to spiritual eating or to sacramental eating. But if it be referred to spiritual eating, the statement admits of no doubt. For he eats the flesh of Christ and drinks his blood spiritually who becomes a participant in ecclesiastical unity, which comes about through charity; Romans 12:5: "you are all one body in Christ." He, therefore, who does not eat in this way is outside the Church, and consequently outside charity; therefore he does not have life in himself; 1 John 3:14: "he who does not love abides in death." But if it be referred to sacramental eating, what is said involves a doubt; for above, in chapter 3:5, it is said: "unless one be reborn of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of heaven." But just as that statement was set forth, so is this one: "unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man," etc. Since, therefore, Baptism is a sacrament of necessity, it seems that the Eucharist is too. But this indeed the Greeks grant, and hence they give the Eucharist even to baptized infants; and in this they have on their side the rite of Dionysius, who says that the reception of any sacrament whatsoever ought to be consummated in the communion of the Eucharist, which is the consummation of all the sacraments. But this is true in the case of adults, not, however, in the case of infants: since in one receiving the Eucharist actual reverence and devotion are required, which those who do not have the use of free judgment — such as infants and the insane — cannot have; and therefore it should in no way be given to them. It must therefore be said that the sacrament of Baptism is necessary for all, such that it be really received, since without it no one is regenerated unto life; and therefore it must be had either in fact or in desire, in respect of those who are prevented; for if contempt in anyone excludes the Baptism of water, neither the baptism of desire nor the baptism of blood profits him unto eternal life. The sacrament of the Eucharist, however, is of necessity only in respect of adults, so that it be received either in fact or in desire according to the institutions of the Church. But according to this a further doubt arises: because by these words of the Lord, not only the eating of the body but also the partaking of the blood is of the necessity of salvation, especially since a perfect refection of food is not without drink. Since, therefore, the custom of some Churches is that the priest alone communicates of the blood, while the others communicate only of the body, this seems to be contrary to this statement. I answer that it must be said that, according to the ancient custom of the Church, all, just as they communicated of the body, so also communicated of the blood; which is even still observed in certain Churches, where also the ministers of the altar continually communicate both of the body and of the blood. But on account of the danger of spilling, it is observed in some Churches that the priest alone communicates of the blood, and the rest of the body. Nor is this, however, against the statement of the Lord, because he who communicates of the body communicates also of the blood, since under either species the whole Christ is contained, even as regards body and blood. But under the species of bread the body of Christ is contained by force of the conversion, and the blood by natural concomitance; while under the species of wine the blood of Christ is contained by force of the conversion, and the body by natural concomitance. Thus, then, appears the necessity of partaking of this spiritual food. Its usefulness is shown when he says, "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life," and first as to the spirit or soul; second as to the body, at the words "and I will raise him up on the last day." The usefulness of this eating, then, is great, because it gives eternal life; hence he says, "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life." For this spiritual food is indeed like bodily food in this, that without it spiritual life cannot be, just as bodily life cannot be without bodily food, as was said above. But it has more than bodily food, because it causes a life that does not fail in the one who partakes of it, which bodily food does not effect: for it is not the case that whoever partakes of it shall live forever; for it can happen, as Augustine says, that through old age or disease, or some mishap, very many who have partaken of it should die. But he who partakes of this food and drink of the body and blood of the Lord has eternal life; and therefore it is compared to the tree of life; Proverbs 3:8 (18 in some numberings): "it is a tree of life to those who lay hold on her"; hence it is called the bread of life; Ecclesiasticus 15:3: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding." And therefore he says "eternal life": and this, because he who eats this bread has in himself Christ, who is true God and eternal life, as it is said in 1 John, at the end, 20. But he has eternal life who eats and drinks, as is said, not only sacramentally but also spiritually. He, however, eats and drinks sacramentally who receives the sacrament itself; but spiritually, he who attains to the reality of the sacrament; which reality is twofold: one both contained and signified, which is Christ entire, who is contained under the species of bread and wine; the other reality is signified but not contained, and this is the mystical body of Christ, which is in the predestined, the called, and the justified. Thus, then, one eats the flesh and drinks the blood spiritually in relation to Christ contained and signified, who is joined to him through faith and charity, so that he is transformed into him and is made his member: for this food is not converted into him who partakes of it, but converts the one eating into itself, according to Augustine, when he says: "I am the food of grown men: grow, and you shall eat me; nor shall you change me into yourself, but you shall be changed into me." And therefore it is a food capable of making a man divine, and of inebriating him with divinity. Likewise, in relation to the mystical body which is only signified, if one becomes a participant in ecclesiastical unity. He, therefore, who eats in this way "has eternal life." And concerning the first, in relation to Christ, this is already sufficiently evident. Likewise, in relation to the mystical body, he will of necessity have eternal life, if he perseveres. For the unity of the Church comes about through the Holy Spirit, Ephesians 4:4: "one spirit and one body," which is "the pledge of our eternal inheritance," as is said in Ephesians 1:14. There is, then, great usefulness in this food, because it gives eternal life to the soul; but it is also great because it gives eternal life to the body as well. And therefore he adds "and I will raise him up on the last day." For as has been said, he who eats and drinks spiritually becomes a participant of the Holy Spirit, through whom we are united to Christ by the union of faith and charity, and through whom we are made members of the Church. Now it is the Holy Spirit who causes us to merit the resurrection; Romans 8:11 (cited as Rom. IV, 24 in the text, but the sense follows): "he who raised up Jesus Christ our Lord from the dead shall also raise up our mortal bodies, because of his Spirit that dwells in us." And therefore the Lord says that him who eats and drinks he will raise up unto glory, not unto condemnation: because this resurrection would not profit him. And indeed quite fittingly is an effect of this kind attributed to the sacrament of the Eucharist, because, as Augustine says, and as was said above, the Word raises up souls, but the Word made flesh gives life to bodies. Now in this sacrament there is not only the Word according to his divinity, but also according to the truth of his flesh; and therefore it is a cause not only of the resurrection of souls, but also of bodies; 1 Corinthians 15:21: "by man came death, and by man the resurrection of the dead." The usefulness of this eating is therefore evident. Its truth, however, is shown when he says, "for my flesh is truly food." For someone might believe that the things said of the flesh and blood were an enigma and a parable; and therefore the Lord, excluding this, says "my flesh is truly food"; as if he were saying: do not understand that I am speaking figuratively; but according to truth my flesh is contained in the food of the faithful, and my blood is truly contained in the sacrament of the altar; Matthew 26:26: "this is my body... and this is my blood of the new testament." Or otherwise, according to Chrysostom: because food and drink are taken for the refreshment of man. Now in man there are two parts; the principal part, which is the soul, and the secondary part, which is the body. Now that which man is, he is through the soul, not through the body: that, therefore, is truly the food of man which is the food of the soul; and this is what the Lord says, "for my flesh is truly food": because it is food not only of the body, but also of the soul. And likewise the blood. Psalm 22:2 (23:2 in some numberings): "he brought me up over the water of refreshment, he converted my soul." As if he were saying: this refreshment is ordered especially to the soul. Or otherwise, according to Augustine: that is truly said to be a certain thing which produces its effect; now the effect of food is that it satisfies: that, therefore, which truly produces satiety is truly food and drink. Now this the flesh and blood of Christ do, which lead to the state of glory, where there is neither hunger nor thirst: Apocalypse 7:16: "they shall neither hunger nor thirst any more"; and therefore he says "my flesh is truly food, and my blood is truly drink." "He who eats," etc. Here the Lord proves the power of the spiritual food set down above, namely that it gives eternal life: and he uses an argument of this kind. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood is joined to me; but he who is joined to me has eternal life: therefore he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life. According to this, then, he does three things. First he sets down the major premise; second the minor, and proves it, at the words "as the living Father has sent me, and I live because of the Father"; third he infers the conclusion, at the words "this is the bread which came down from heaven." It should be known, then, as to the first, that if what he says, "he who eats my flesh," etc., be referred to flesh and blood mystically, there is no doubt in the statement. For, as has been said, he eats spiritually, in relation to the reality signified alone, who is incorporated into the mystical body through the union of faith and charity: and charity causes God to be in man, and conversely; 1 John 4:16: "he who abides in charity abides in God, and God in him." And this is what the Holy Spirit accomplishes; hence in the same place, verse 13: "in this we know that we abide in God, and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit." But if it be referred to sacramental partaking, then whoever eats the flesh and drinks the blood abides in God: because, as Augustine says, there is a certain manner of eating that flesh and drinking that blood, by which he who eats and drinks abides in Christ, and Christ in him. But this is he who eats the body of Christ and drinks his blood not merely sacramentally, but in reality. There is also another manner, by which those who eat do not abide in Christ, nor Christ in them; this is the case with those who approach it with a feigned heart: for the sacrament has no effect in one who is feigned. For one is feigned when what is signified outwardly does not correspond to what is within. Now in the sacrament of the Eucharist there is indeed signified outwardly that Christ is incorporated in him who receives it, and he himself in Christ. He, therefore, who does not have in his heart the desire of this union, nor strives to remove every impediment to it, is feigned. And therefore Christ does not abide in him, nor he in Christ. Here he sets down the minor premise: namely, that he who is joined to Christ has life; and he introduces this by way of the manifestation of a certain likeness, which is as follows. The Son, on account of the unity which he has with the Father, receives life from the Father: therefore he who is united to Christ receives life from Christ; and this is what he means when he says, "as the living Father has sent me, and I live because of the Father." These words, indeed, can be expounded of Christ in two ways, namely according to the human nature, and according to the divine. For if they be expounded of Christ the Son of God, then the word "as" imports a likeness of Christ to the creature as regards something, but not as regards everything, but as regards this, that he has being from another. For this is common to Christ the Son of God and to the creature, that they are from another: but as regards another point there is dissimilarity. For the Son has something proper to himself, namely that he is from the Father in such a way that he nevertheless receives the whole fullness of the divine nature, to such an extent that whatever is natural to the Father is also natural to the Son. The creature, however, receives some particular perfection and nature; above, in chapter 5:26: "as the Father has life in himself, so has he given to the Son also to have life in himself." And this he shows, because he does not say: "as I eat the Father, and I live because of the Father," when he is speaking of his procession from the Father — just as he said, "he who eats me, he also shall live because of me," when he speaks of the participation of his body and blood, by which we are made better: for eating denotes a certain participation. But Christ says that he lives because of the Father, not indeed as one eaten, but as one who begets, without any detriment to equality. If, however, it be expounded of Christ the man, then as regards something the word "as" imports a likeness between Christ the man and us: namely in this, that just as Christ the man receives spiritual life through union with God, so also we receive spiritual life in the communion of the sacrament. But nevertheless there is dissimilarity: because Christ the man received life through the union of the Word, to whom he is united in person; but we are united to Christ through the sacrament of faith. And therefore he says two things: "sent me" and "the Father." If, then, it be referred to the Son of God, he then says "I live because of the Father": because the Father himself is living. But if it be referred to the Son of man, then he says "I live because of the Father," because "he sent me": that is, he caused me to be incarnate: for the mission of the Son of God is his incarnation; Galatians 4:4: "God sent his Son, made of a woman, made under the law." Through this, then, according to Hilary, the error of Arius is excluded; for if we live because of Christ, since we have something of his nature, as he himself says, "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life"; therefore Christ also lives because of the Father, because he has in himself the nature of the Father: not, however, a part of it, since it is simple and indivisible; therefore he has the whole nature of the Father. The Son, therefore, lives because of the Father, since his birth brought upon him no alien and different nature. Consequently, when he says, "this is the bread which came down from heaven," he sets down two conclusions: for they had been quarreling about two things, namely about the origin of the spiritual food, and about its power. The first conclusion, then, is about the origin; the second is about the power; and this he principally intends, at the words "he who eats this bread shall live forever." It should be known, as to the first, that the Jews had been troubled, because he had said: "I am the living bread which came down from heaven," and therefore, against them, he again concludes this from what he says, "I live because of the Father," when he says "this is the bread." For to come down from heaven is to have one's origin from heaven; but the Son has his origin from heaven, because he lives because of the Father: therefore Christ is he who came down from heaven. And therefore he says, "this is the bread which came down from heaven" — that is, from the paternal life — and this as regards the divinity; or he also came down as regards the body: inasmuch, namely, as its formative power, which was the Holy Spirit, was from heaven, as a heavenly power. Hence those who eat this bread do not die, in the way that our fathers died, who ate manna which was not from heaven; nor was it living bread, as was said above. But how those who ate the manna died is manifest from what has been said before. The second conclusion, concerning the power of the bread, is set down when he says, "he who eats this bread shall live forever": which follows from what he said, "he who eats my flesh." For he who eats this bread abides in me, and I in him; but I am eternal life: therefore he who eats this bread, as he ought, shall live forever. The place, moreover, where Jesus said this was in the synagogue, in which Christ was teaching in Capharnaum. For wishing to draw the multitude, he taught in the temple and in the synagogue, so that, out of many, at least some might profit; Psalm 39:10 (40:9): "I have declared your justice in the great church (assembly)."”

“Above, the Lord repressed the murmuring of the Jews, which had arisen from the origin of the spiritual food; here he represses their quarreling, which was among them concerning the eating of this food. And first he sets down their quarrel; second the Lord suppresses it, at the words "Jesus therefore said to them," etc.; third the Evangelist designates the place, at the words "these things he said in the synagogue, teaching in Capharnaum." Concerning the first, it should be known that the Evangelist introduces the quarrel of the Jews by way of a conclusion, when he says "the Jews therefore quarreled," etc. And indeed quite fittingly: for, according to Augustine, the Lord had spoken to them of the food of unity, by which those who are refreshed are made of one mind, according to that word of Psalm 67:4 (Vulgate numbering): "let the just feast, and rejoice in the sight of God, and be delighted with gladness," and there follows, according to another reading: "who makes those of one mind to dwell in the house." Because, therefore, the Jews had not partaken of the food of concord, they therefore quarreled with one another; Isaiah 58:4: "behold, you fast unto strife and contention." Now from the fact that they quarreled with one another they showed themselves to be carnal; 1 Corinthians 3:3: "since there is among you envying and contention, are you not carnal?" And therefore they understood these words of the Lord in a carnal manner; namely, that the flesh of Christ would be eaten as carnal food; hence they say, "how can this man give us his flesh to eat?" As if they were saying: this is impossible, just as their fathers also spoke against the Lord, Numbers 21:5: "our soul is nauseated with this exceedingly light food." But this quarrel of theirs is suppressed by the Lord; hence he says "Jesus therefore said to them," etc. Here he first sets down the power of the eating of this food; second he manifests it, at the words "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life." Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets down the necessity of eating the flesh; second its usefulness, at the words "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life"; third he adds its truth, at the words "for my flesh is truly food." Jesus therefore said, "Amen, amen I say to you: unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you," as if he were saying: you consider it impossible and unfitting that you should eat my flesh; but it is not only not impossible, but is even very necessary, to such an extent that unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you shall not have — that is, you shall not be able to have — in you life, namely spiritual life. For just as bodily food is so necessary for bodily life that without it life cannot be, Lamentations 1:11: "they have given all their precious things for food"; and Psalm 103:15: "bread may strengthen man's heart" — so spiritual food is necessary for spiritual life, to such a degree that without it spiritual life cannot be sustained; Deuteronomy 8:3: "man does not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God." It should be noted, however, that this statement can be referred either to spiritual eating or to sacramental eating. But if it be referred to spiritual eating, the statement admits of no doubt. For he eats the flesh of Christ and drinks his blood spiritually who becomes a participant in ecclesiastical unity, which comes about through charity; Romans 12:5: "you are all one body in Christ." He, therefore, who does not eat in this way is outside the Church, and consequently outside charity; therefore he does not have life in himself; 1 John 3:14: "he who does not love abides in death." But if it be referred to sacramental eating, what is said involves a doubt; for above, in chapter 3:5, it is said: "unless one be reborn of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of heaven." But just as that statement was set forth, so is this one: "unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man," etc. Since, therefore, Baptism is a sacrament of necessity, it seems that the Eucharist is too. But this indeed the Greeks grant, and hence they give the Eucharist even to baptized infants; and in this they have on their side the rite of Dionysius, who says that the reception of any sacrament whatsoever ought to be consummated in the communion of the Eucharist, which is the consummation of all the sacraments. But this is true in the case of adults, not, however, in the case of infants: since in one receiving the Eucharist actual reverence and devotion are required, which those who do not have the use of free judgment — such as infants and the insane — cannot have; and therefore it should in no way be given to them. It must therefore be said that the sacrament of Baptism is necessary for all, such that it be really received, since without it no one is regenerated unto life; and therefore it must be had either in fact or in desire, in respect of those who are prevented; for if contempt in anyone excludes the Baptism of water, neither the baptism of desire nor the baptism of blood profits him unto eternal life. The sacrament of the Eucharist, however, is of necessity only in respect of adults, so that it be received either in fact or in desire according to the institutions of the Church. But according to this a further doubt arises: because by these words of the Lord, not only the eating of the body but also the partaking of the blood is of the necessity of salvation, especially since a perfect refection of food is not without drink. Since, therefore, the custom of some Churches is that the priest alone communicates of the blood, while the others communicate only of the body, this seems to be contrary to this statement. I answer that it must be said that, according to the ancient custom of the Church, all, just as they communicated of the body, so also communicated of the blood; which is even still observed in certain Churches, where also the ministers of the altar continually communicate both of the body and of the blood. But on account of the danger of spilling, it is observed in some Churches that the priest alone communicates of the blood, and the rest of the body. Nor is this, however, against the statement of the Lord, because he who communicates of the body communicates also of the blood, since under either species the whole Christ is contained, even as regards body and blood. But under the species of bread the body of Christ is contained by force of the conversion, and the blood by natural concomitance; while under the species of wine the blood of Christ is contained by force of the conversion, and the body by natural concomitance. Thus, then, appears the necessity of partaking of this spiritual food. Its usefulness is shown when he says, "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life," and first as to the spirit or soul; second as to the body, at the words "and I will raise him up on the last day." The usefulness of this eating, then, is great, because it gives eternal life; hence he says, "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life." For this spiritual food is indeed like bodily food in this, that without it spiritual life cannot be, just as bodily life cannot be without bodily food, as was said above. But it has more than bodily food, because it causes a life that does not fail in the one who partakes of it, which bodily food does not effect: for it is not the case that whoever partakes of it shall live forever; for it can happen, as Augustine says, that through old age or disease, or some mishap, very many who have partaken of it should die. But he who partakes of this food and drink of the body and blood of the Lord has eternal life; and therefore it is compared to the tree of life; Proverbs 3:8 (18 in some numberings): "it is a tree of life to those who lay hold on her"; hence it is called the bread of life; Ecclesiasticus 15:3: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding." And therefore he says "eternal life": and this, because he who eats this bread has in himself Christ, who is true God and eternal life, as it is said in 1 John, at the end, 20. But he has eternal life who eats and drinks, as is said, not only sacramentally but also spiritually. He, however, eats and drinks sacramentally who receives the sacrament itself; but spiritually, he who attains to the reality of the sacrament; which reality is twofold: one both contained and signified, which is Christ entire, who is contained under the species of bread and wine; the other reality is signified but not contained, and this is the mystical body of Christ, which is in the predestined, the called, and the justified. Thus, then, one eats the flesh and drinks the blood spiritually in relation to Christ contained and signified, who is joined to him through faith and charity, so that he is transformed into him and is made his member: for this food is not converted into him who partakes of it, but converts the one eating into itself, according to Augustine, when he says: "I am the food of grown men: grow, and you shall eat me; nor shall you change me into yourself, but you shall be changed into me." And therefore it is a food capable of making a man divine, and of inebriating him with divinity. Likewise, in relation to the mystical body which is only signified, if one becomes a participant in ecclesiastical unity. He, therefore, who eats in this way "has eternal life." And concerning the first, in relation to Christ, this is already sufficiently evident. Likewise, in relation to the mystical body, he will of necessity have eternal life, if he perseveres. For the unity of the Church comes about through the Holy Spirit, Ephesians 4:4: "one spirit and one body," which is "the pledge of our eternal inheritance," as is said in Ephesians 1:14. There is, then, great usefulness in this food, because it gives eternal life to the soul; but it is also great because it gives eternal life to the body as well. And therefore he adds "and I will raise him up on the last day." For as has been said, he who eats and drinks spiritually becomes a participant of the Holy Spirit, through whom we are united to Christ by the union of faith and charity, and through whom we are made members of the Church. Now it is the Holy Spirit who causes us to merit the resurrection; Romans 8:11 (cited as Rom. IV, 24 in the text, but the sense follows): "he who raised up Jesus Christ our Lord from the dead shall also raise up our mortal bodies, because of his Spirit that dwells in us." And therefore the Lord says that him who eats and drinks he will raise up unto glory, not unto condemnation: because this resurrection would not profit him. And indeed quite fittingly is an effect of this kind attributed to the sacrament of the Eucharist, because, as Augustine says, and as was said above, the Word raises up souls, but the Word made flesh gives life to bodies. Now in this sacrament there is not only the Word according to his divinity, but also according to the truth of his flesh; and therefore it is a cause not only of the resurrection of souls, but also of bodies; 1 Corinthians 15:21: "by man came death, and by man the resurrection of the dead." The usefulness of this eating is therefore evident. Its truth, however, is shown when he says, "for my flesh is truly food." For someone might believe that the things said of the flesh and blood were an enigma and a parable; and therefore the Lord, excluding this, says "my flesh is truly food"; as if he were saying: do not understand that I am speaking figuratively; but according to truth my flesh is contained in the food of the faithful, and my blood is truly contained in the sacrament of the altar; Matthew 26:26: "this is my body... and this is my blood of the new testament." Or otherwise, according to Chrysostom: because food and drink are taken for the refreshment of man. Now in man there are two parts; the principal part, which is the soul, and the secondary part, which is the body. Now that which man is, he is through the soul, not through the body: that, therefore, is truly the food of man which is the food of the soul; and this is what the Lord says, "for my flesh is truly food": because it is food not only of the body, but also of the soul. And likewise the blood. Psalm 22:2 (23:2 in some numberings): "he brought me up over the water of refreshment, he converted my soul." As if he were saying: this refreshment is ordered especially to the soul. Or otherwise, according to Augustine: that is truly said to be a certain thing which produces its effect; now the effect of food is that it satisfies: that, therefore, which truly produces satiety is truly food and drink. Now this the flesh and blood of Christ do, which lead to the state of glory, where there is neither hunger nor thirst: Apocalypse 7:16: "they shall neither hunger nor thirst any more"; and therefore he says "my flesh is truly food, and my blood is truly drink." "He who eats," etc. Here the Lord proves the power of the spiritual food set down above, namely that it gives eternal life: and he uses an argument of this kind. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood is joined to me; but he who is joined to me has eternal life: therefore he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life. According to this, then, he does three things. First he sets down the major premise; second the minor, and proves it, at the words "as the living Father has sent me, and I live because of the Father"; third he infers the conclusion, at the words "this is the bread which came down from heaven." It should be known, then, as to the first, that if what he says, "he who eats my flesh," etc., be referred to flesh and blood mystically, there is no doubt in the statement. For, as has been said, he eats spiritually, in relation to the reality signified alone, who is incorporated into the mystical body through the union of faith and charity: and charity causes God to be in man, and conversely; 1 John 4:16: "he who abides in charity abides in God, and God in him." And this is what the Holy Spirit accomplishes; hence in the same place, verse 13: "in this we know that we abide in God, and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit." But if it be referred to sacramental partaking, then whoever eats the flesh and drinks the blood abides in God: because, as Augustine says, there is a certain manner of eating that flesh and drinking that blood, by which he who eats and drinks abides in Christ, and Christ in him. But this is he who eats the body of Christ and drinks his blood not merely sacramentally, but in reality. There is also another manner, by which those who eat do not abide in Christ, nor Christ in them; this is the case with those who approach it with a feigned heart: for the sacrament has no effect in one who is feigned. For one is feigned when what is signified outwardly does not correspond to what is within. Now in the sacrament of the Eucharist there is indeed signified outwardly that Christ is incorporated in him who receives it, and he himself in Christ. He, therefore, who does not have in his heart the desire of this union, nor strives to remove every impediment to it, is feigned. And therefore Christ does not abide in him, nor he in Christ. Here he sets down the minor premise: namely, that he who is joined to Christ has life; and he introduces this by way of the manifestation of a certain likeness, which is as follows. The Son, on account of the unity which he has with the Father, receives life from the Father: therefore he who is united to Christ receives life from Christ; and this is what he means when he says, "as the living Father has sent me, and I live because of the Father." These words, indeed, can be expounded of Christ in two ways, namely according to the human nature, and according to the divine. For if they be expounded of Christ the Son of God, then the word "as" imports a likeness of Christ to the creature as regards something, but not as regards everything, but as regards this, that he has being from another. For this is common to Christ the Son of God and to the creature, that they are from another: but as regards another point there is dissimilarity. For the Son has something proper to himself, namely that he is from the Father in such a way that he nevertheless receives the whole fullness of the divine nature, to such an extent that whatever is natural to the Father is also natural to the Son. The creature, however, receives some particular perfection and nature; above, in chapter 5:26: "as the Father has life in himself, so has he given to the Son also to have life in himself." And this he shows, because he does not say: "as I eat the Father, and I live because of the Father," when he is speaking of his procession from the Father — just as he said, "he who eats me, he also shall live because of me," when he speaks of the participation of his body and blood, by which we are made better: for eating denotes a certain participation. But Christ says that he lives because of the Father, not indeed as one eaten, but as one who begets, without any detriment to equality. If, however, it be expounded of Christ the man, then as regards something the word "as" imports a likeness between Christ the man and us: namely in this, that just as Christ the man receives spiritual life through union with God, so also we receive spiritual life in the communion of the sacrament. But nevertheless there is dissimilarity: because Christ the man received life through the union of the Word, to whom he is united in person; but we are united to Christ through the sacrament of faith. And therefore he says two things: "sent me" and "the Father." If, then, it be referred to the Son of God, he then says "I live because of the Father": because the Father himself is living. But if it be referred to the Son of man, then he says "I live because of the Father," because "he sent me": that is, he caused me to be incarnate: for the mission of the Son of God is his incarnation; Galatians 4:4: "God sent his Son, made of a woman, made under the law." Through this, then, according to Hilary, the error of Arius is excluded; for if we live because of Christ, since we have something of his nature, as he himself says, "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life"; therefore Christ also lives because of the Father, because he has in himself the nature of the Father: not, however, a part of it, since it is simple and indivisible; therefore he has the whole nature of the Father. The Son, therefore, lives because of the Father, since his birth brought upon him no alien and different nature. Consequently, when he says, "this is the bread which came down from heaven," he sets down two conclusions: for they had been quarreling about two things, namely about the origin of the spiritual food, and about its power. The first conclusion, then, is about the origin; the second is about the power; and this he principally intends, at the words "he who eats this bread shall live forever." It should be known, as to the first, that the Jews had been troubled, because he had said: "I am the living bread which came down from heaven," and therefore, against them, he again concludes this from what he says, "I live because of the Father," when he says "this is the bread." For to come down from heaven is to have one's origin from heaven; but the Son has his origin from heaven, because he lives because of the Father: therefore Christ is he who came down from heaven. And therefore he says, "this is the bread which came down from heaven" — that is, from the paternal life — and this as regards the divinity; or he also came down as regards the body: inasmuch, namely, as its formative power, which was the Holy Spirit, was from heaven, as a heavenly power. Hence those who eat this bread do not die, in the way that our fathers died, who ate manna which was not from heaven; nor was it living bread, as was said above. But how those who ate the manna died is manifest from what has been said before. The second conclusion, concerning the power of the bread, is set down when he says, "he who eats this bread shall live forever": which follows from what he said, "he who eats my flesh." For he who eats this bread abides in me, and I in him; but I am eternal life: therefore he who eats this bread, as he ought, shall live forever. The place, moreover, where Jesus said this was in the synagogue, in which Christ was teaching in Capharnaum. For wishing to draw the multitude, he taught in the temple and in the synagogue, so that, out of many, at least some might profit; Psalm 39:10 (40:9): "I have declared your justice in the great church (assembly)."”

“Many therefore of his disciples,.... Not of the twelve, nor of the seventy, but of the multitude of the disciples, who followed him from place to place, attended on his ministry, and might be baptized in his name; see Joh 4:1; when they had heard this; that his flesh and blood were truly and really meat and drink, and that none had life in them, or should have eternal life, but such as eat and drink the same: said, this is an hard saying; or it is to be objected to; so "an hard thing", the word here used in the Syriac version, and , "it is to me a hard thing", are phrases used to express an objection in the Talmudic writings, where they are often met with: or it is difficult to be understood and received; so , "an hard saying", or "an hard cause", is a cause difficult to be tried and determined, Exo 18:26, and is used of that which seems incredible and absurd, and is surprising and unaccountable: so it is said (z), that "it happened to a certain woman, that she came before R. Abika: she said to him, I have seen a spot; he said to her, perhaps there is a wound in thee; she answered him, yes, and it is healed; he replied, perhaps it may be opened, and the blood brought out; she answered him, yes; and he pronounced her clean. R. Abika saw his disciples look upon one another; and he said unto them, , "is this an hard saying with you?"'' is it a difficult thing with you? does it seem absurd to you? or are you surprised at it? anything difficult, or which seems irreconcilable, is so called: so the slaying the passover between the two evenings is called by Aben Ezra, in Exo 12:6, , "an hard saying". In like sense the phrase is used here; and the allusion may be to food that is hard of digestion, since Christ had been speaking of himself under the metaphors of bread and meat. As some of the doctrines of Christ are comparable to milk, which is easy of digestion; others are like to strong meat, which belongs to those of full age, and cannot be digested by children, by babes in Christ, and much less be received, ate, and digested, with ease and pleasure, by carnal minds; who therefore say, as these Capernaites did, who can hear it? this saying, or doctrine, concerning eating the flesh, and drinking the blood of Christ; or "him" Christ, who delivered this doctrine: such preaching, and such a preacher, are intolerable; there is no hearing, nor bearing them: hence we afterwards read, that these withdrew from the ministry of Christ, Joh 6:66. (z) Misn. Nidda, c. 8, sect. 3.”

“Above, the Lord repressed the murmuring of the Jews, which had arisen from the origin of the spiritual food; here he represses their quarreling, which was among them concerning the eating of this food. And first he sets down their quarrel; second the Lord suppresses it, at the words "Jesus therefore said to them," etc.; third the Evangelist designates the place, at the words "these things he said in the synagogue, teaching in Capharnaum." Concerning the first, it should be known that the Evangelist introduces the quarrel of the Jews by way of a conclusion, when he says "the Jews therefore quarreled," etc. And indeed quite fittingly: for, according to Augustine, the Lord had spoken to them of the food of unity, by which those who are refreshed are made of one mind, according to that word of Psalm 67:4 (Vulgate numbering): "let the just feast, and rejoice in the sight of God, and be delighted with gladness," and there follows, according to another reading: "who makes those of one mind to dwell in the house." Because, therefore, the Jews had not partaken of the food of concord, they therefore quarreled with one another; Isaiah 58:4: "behold, you fast unto strife and contention." Now from the fact that they quarreled with one another they showed themselves to be carnal; 1 Corinthians 3:3: "since there is among you envying and contention, are you not carnal?" And therefore they understood these words of the Lord in a carnal manner; namely, that the flesh of Christ would be eaten as carnal food; hence they say, "how can this man give us his flesh to eat?" As if they were saying: this is impossible, just as their fathers also spoke against the Lord, Numbers 21:5: "our soul is nauseated with this exceedingly light food." But this quarrel of theirs is suppressed by the Lord; hence he says "Jesus therefore said to them," etc. Here he first sets down the power of the eating of this food; second he manifests it, at the words "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life." Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets down the necessity of eating the flesh; second its usefulness, at the words "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life"; third he adds its truth, at the words "for my flesh is truly food." Jesus therefore said, "Amen, amen I say to you: unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you," as if he were saying: you consider it impossible and unfitting that you should eat my flesh; but it is not only not impossible, but is even very necessary, to such an extent that unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you shall not have — that is, you shall not be able to have — in you life, namely spiritual life. For just as bodily food is so necessary for bodily life that without it life cannot be, Lamentations 1:11: "they have given all their precious things for food"; and Psalm 103:15: "bread may strengthen man's heart" — so spiritual food is necessary for spiritual life, to such a degree that without it spiritual life cannot be sustained; Deuteronomy 8:3: "man does not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God." It should be noted, however, that this statement can be referred either to spiritual eating or to sacramental eating. But if it be referred to spiritual eating, the statement admits of no doubt. For he eats the flesh of Christ and drinks his blood spiritually who becomes a participant in ecclesiastical unity, which comes about through charity; Romans 12:5: "you are all one body in Christ." He, therefore, who does not eat in this way is outside the Church, and consequently outside charity; therefore he does not have life in himself; 1 John 3:14: "he who does not love abides in death." But if it be referred to sacramental eating, what is said involves a doubt; for above, in chapter 3:5, it is said: "unless one be reborn of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of heaven." But just as that statement was set forth, so is this one: "unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man," etc. Since, therefore, Baptism is a sacrament of necessity, it seems that the Eucharist is too. But this indeed the Greeks grant, and hence they give the Eucharist even to baptized infants; and in this they have on their side the rite of Dionysius, who says that the reception of any sacrament whatsoever ought to be consummated in the communion of the Eucharist, which is the consummation of all the sacraments. But this is true in the case of adults, not, however, in the case of infants: since in one receiving the Eucharist actual reverence and devotion are required, which those who do not have the use of free judgment — such as infants and the insane — cannot have; and therefore it should in no way be given to them. It must therefore be said that the sacrament of Baptism is necessary for all, such that it be really received, since without it no one is regenerated unto life; and therefore it must be had either in fact or in desire, in respect of those who are prevented; for if contempt in anyone excludes the Baptism of water, neither the baptism of desire nor the baptism of blood profits him unto eternal life. The sacrament of the Eucharist, however, is of necessity only in respect of adults, so that it be received either in fact or in desire according to the institutions of the Church. But according to this a further doubt arises: because by these words of the Lord, not only the eating of the body but also the partaking of the blood is of the necessity of salvation, especially since a perfect refection of food is not without drink. Since, therefore, the custom of some Churches is that the priest alone communicates of the blood, while the others communicate only of the body, this seems to be contrary to this statement. I answer that it must be said that, according to the ancient custom of the Church, all, just as they communicated of the body, so also communicated of the blood; which is even still observed in certain Churches, where also the ministers of the altar continually communicate both of the body and of the blood. But on account of the danger of spilling, it is observed in some Churches that the priest alone communicates of the blood, and the rest of the body. Nor is this, however, against the statement of the Lord, because he who communicates of the body communicates also of the blood, since under either species the whole Christ is contained, even as regards body and blood. But under the species of bread the body of Christ is contained by force of the conversion, and the blood by natural concomitance; while under the species of wine the blood of Christ is contained by force of the conversion, and the body by natural concomitance. Thus, then, appears the necessity of partaking of this spiritual food. Its usefulness is shown when he says, "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life," and first as to the spirit or soul; second as to the body, at the words "and I will raise him up on the last day." The usefulness of this eating, then, is great, because it gives eternal life; hence he says, "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life." For this spiritual food is indeed like bodily food in this, that without it spiritual life cannot be, just as bodily life cannot be without bodily food, as was said above. But it has more than bodily food, because it causes a life that does not fail in the one who partakes of it, which bodily food does not effect: for it is not the case that whoever partakes of it shall live forever; for it can happen, as Augustine says, that through old age or disease, or some mishap, very many who have partaken of it should die. But he who partakes of this food and drink of the body and blood of the Lord has eternal life; and therefore it is compared to the tree of life; Proverbs 3:8 (18 in some numberings): "it is a tree of life to those who lay hold on her"; hence it is called the bread of life; Ecclesiasticus 15:3: "he fed him with the bread of life and understanding." And therefore he says "eternal life": and this, because he who eats this bread has in himself Christ, who is true God and eternal life, as it is said in 1 John, at the end, 20. But he has eternal life who eats and drinks, as is said, not only sacramentally but also spiritually. He, however, eats and drinks sacramentally who receives the sacrament itself; but spiritually, he who attains to the reality of the sacrament; which reality is twofold: one both contained and signified, which is Christ entire, who is contained under the species of bread and wine; the other reality is signified but not contained, and this is the mystical body of Christ, which is in the predestined, the called, and the justified. Thus, then, one eats the flesh and drinks the blood spiritually in relation to Christ contained and signified, who is joined to him through faith and charity, so that he is transformed into him and is made his member: for this food is not converted into him who partakes of it, but converts the one eating into itself, according to Augustine, when he says: "I am the food of grown men: grow, and you shall eat me; nor shall you change me into yourself, but you shall be changed into me." And therefore it is a food capable of making a man divine, and of inebriating him with divinity. Likewise, in relation to the mystical body which is only signified, if one becomes a participant in ecclesiastical unity. He, therefore, who eats in this way "has eternal life." And concerning the first, in relation to Christ, this is already sufficiently evident. Likewise, in relation to the mystical body, he will of necessity have eternal life, if he perseveres. For the unity of the Church comes about through the Holy Spirit, Ephesians 4:4: "one spirit and one body," which is "the pledge of our eternal inheritance," as is said in Ephesians 1:14. There is, then, great usefulness in this food, because it gives eternal life to the soul; but it is also great because it gives eternal life to the body as well. And therefore he adds "and I will raise him up on the last day." For as has been said, he who eats and drinks spiritually becomes a participant of the Holy Spirit, through whom we are united to Christ by the union of faith and charity, and through whom we are made members of the Church. Now it is the Holy Spirit who causes us to merit the resurrection; Romans 8:11 (cited as Rom. IV, 24 in the text, but the sense follows): "he who raised up Jesus Christ our Lord from the dead shall also raise up our mortal bodies, because of his Spirit that dwells in us." And therefore the Lord says that him who eats and drinks he will raise up unto glory, not unto condemnation: because this resurrection would not profit him. And indeed quite fittingly is an effect of this kind attributed to the sacrament of the Eucharist, because, as Augustine says, and as was said above, the Word raises up souls, but the Word made flesh gives life to bodies. Now in this sacrament there is not only the Word according to his divinity, but also according to the truth of his flesh; and therefore it is a cause not only of the resurrection of souls, but also of bodies; 1 Corinthians 15:21: "by man came death, and by man the resurrection of the dead." The usefulness of this eating is therefore evident. Its truth, however, is shown when he says, "for my flesh is truly food." For someone might believe that the things said of the flesh and blood were an enigma and a parable; and therefore the Lord, excluding this, says "my flesh is truly food"; as if he were saying: do not understand that I am speaking figuratively; but according to truth my flesh is contained in the food of the faithful, and my blood is truly contained in the sacrament of the altar; Matthew 26:26: "this is my body... and this is my blood of the new testament." Or otherwise, according to Chrysostom: because food and drink are taken for the refreshment of man. Now in man there are two parts; the principal part, which is the soul, and the secondary part, which is the body. Now that which man is, he is through the soul, not through the body: that, therefore, is truly the food of man which is the food of the soul; and this is what the Lord says, "for my flesh is truly food": because it is food not only of the body, but also of the soul. And likewise the blood. Psalm 22:2 (23:2 in some numberings): "he brought me up over the water of refreshment, he converted my soul." As if he were saying: this refreshment is ordered especially to the soul. Or otherwise, according to Augustine: that is truly said to be a certain thing which produces its effect; now the effect of food is that it satisfies: that, therefore, which truly produces satiety is truly food and drink. Now this the flesh and blood of Christ do, which lead to the state of glory, where there is neither hunger nor thirst: Apocalypse 7:16: "they shall neither hunger nor thirst any more"; and therefore he says "my flesh is truly food, and my blood is truly drink." "He who eats," etc. Here the Lord proves the power of the spiritual food set down above, namely that it gives eternal life: and he uses an argument of this kind. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood is joined to me; but he who is joined to me has eternal life: therefore he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life. According to this, then, he does three things. First he sets down the major premise; second the minor, and proves it, at the words "as the living Father has sent me, and I live because of the Father"; third he infers the conclusion, at the words "this is the bread which came down from heaven." It should be known, then, as to the first, that if what he says, "he who eats my flesh," etc., be referred to flesh and blood mystically, there is no doubt in the statement. For, as has been said, he eats spiritually, in relation to the reality signified alone, who is incorporated into the mystical body through the union of faith and charity: and charity causes God to be in man, and conversely; 1 John 4:16: "he who abides in charity abides in God, and God in him." And this is what the Holy Spirit accomplishes; hence in the same place, verse 13: "in this we know that we abide in God, and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit." But if it be referred to sacramental partaking, then whoever eats the flesh and drinks the blood abides in God: because, as Augustine says, there is a certain manner of eating that flesh and drinking that blood, by which he who eats and drinks abides in Christ, and Christ in him. But this is he who eats the body of Christ and drinks his blood not merely sacramentally, but in reality. There is also another manner, by which those who eat do not abide in Christ, nor Christ in them; this is the case with those who approach it with a feigned heart: for the sacrament has no effect in one who is feigned. For one is feigned when what is signified outwardly does not correspond to what is within. Now in the sacrament of the Eucharist there is indeed signified outwardly that Christ is incorporated in him who receives it, and he himself in Christ. He, therefore, who does not have in his heart the desire of this union, nor strives to remove every impediment to it, is feigned. And therefore Christ does not abide in him, nor he in Christ. Here he sets down the minor premise: namely, that he who is joined to Christ has life; and he introduces this by way of the manifestation of a certain likeness, which is as follows. The Son, on account of the unity which he has with the Father, receives life from the Father: therefore he who is united to Christ receives life from Christ; and this is what he means when he says, "as the living Father has sent me, and I live because of the Father." These words, indeed, can be expounded of Christ in two ways, namely according to the human nature, and according to the divine. For if they be expounded of Christ the Son of God, then the word "as" imports a likeness of Christ to the creature as regards something, but not as regards everything, but as regards this, that he has being from another. For this is common to Christ the Son of God and to the creature, that they are from another: but as regards another point there is dissimilarity. For the Son has something proper to himself, namely that he is from the Father in such a way that he nevertheless receives the whole fullness of the divine nature, to such an extent that whatever is natural to the Father is also natural to the Son. The creature, however, receives some particular perfection and nature; above, in chapter 5:26: "as the Father has life in himself, so has he given to the Son also to have life in himself." And this he shows, because he does not say: "as I eat the Father, and I live because of the Father," when he is speaking of his procession from the Father — just as he said, "he who eats me, he also shall live because of me," when he speaks of the participation of his body and blood, by which we are made better: for eating denotes a certain participation. But Christ says that he lives because of the Father, not indeed as one eaten, but as one who begets, without any detriment to equality. If, however, it be expounded of Christ the man, then as regards something the word "as" imports a likeness between Christ the man and us: namely in this, that just as Christ the man receives spiritual life through union with God, so also we receive spiritual life in the communion of the sacrament. But nevertheless there is dissimilarity: because Christ the man received life through the union of the Word, to whom he is united in person; but we are united to Christ through the sacrament of faith. And therefore he says two things: "sent me" and "the Father." If, then, it be referred to the Son of God, he then says "I live because of the Father": because the Father himself is living. But if it be referred to the Son of man, then he says "I live because of the Father," because "he sent me": that is, he caused me to be incarnate: for the mission of the Son of God is his incarnation; Galatians 4:4: "God sent his Son, made of a woman, made under the law." Through this, then, according to Hilary, the error of Arius is excluded; for if we live because of Christ, since we have something of his nature, as he himself says, "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life"; therefore Christ also lives because of the Father, because he has in himself the nature of the Father: not, however, a part of it, since it is simple and indivisible; therefore he has the whole nature of the Father. The Son, therefore, lives because of the Father, since his birth brought upon him no alien and different nature. Consequently, when he says, "this is the bread which came down from heaven," he sets down two conclusions: for they had been quarreling about two things, namely about the origin of the spiritual food, and about its power. The first conclusion, then, is about the origin; the second is about the power; and this he principally intends, at the words "he who eats this bread shall live forever." It should be known, as to the first, that the Jews had been troubled, because he had said: "I am the living bread which came down from heaven," and therefore, against them, he again concludes this from what he says, "I live because of the Father," when he says "this is the bread." For to come down from heaven is to have one's origin from heaven; but the Son has his origin from heaven, because he lives because of the Father: therefore Christ is he who came down from heaven. And therefore he says, "this is the bread which came down from heaven" — that is, from the paternal life — and this as regards the divinity; or he also came down as regards the body: inasmuch, namely, as its formative power, which was the Holy Spirit, was from heaven, as a heavenly power. Hence those who eat this bread do not die, in the way that our fathers died, who ate manna which was not from heaven; nor was it living bread, as was said above. But how those who ate the manna died is manifest from what has been said before. The second conclusion, concerning the power of the bread, is set down when he says, "he who eats this bread shall live forever": which follows from what he said, "he who eats my flesh." For he who eats this bread abides in me, and I in him; but I am eternal life: therefore he who eats this bread, as he ought, shall live forever. The place, moreover, where Jesus said this was in the synagogue, in which Christ was teaching in Capharnaum. For wishing to draw the multitude, he taught in the temple and in the synagogue, so that, out of many, at least some might profit; Psalm 39:10 (40:9): "I have declared your justice in the great church (assembly)."”

“After he had quelled the wrangling of the Jews, and their murmuring, the Lord next allays the scandal of the disciples, and first the scandal of the departing disciples is treated; second, the devotion of those who remain is examined, at the place, "Jesus therefore said to the twelve." Concerning the first he does three things. First, the scandal of the disciples is set forth; second, the kindness of Christ in repressing it, at the place, "But Jesus knowing," etc.; third, the obstinacy and unbelief of those departing is set forth, at the place, "After this many of his disciples went back." It must be known, then, concerning the first, that there were many among the people of the Jews who clung to Christ, believing in him, and followed him, yet not having left all things, as the twelve had; and all of these were called disciples. And of these he says that many, namely among the people, who believed in him, hearing the things he had said above, said: "This saying is hard." Of these it is said in Luke 8:13: "They believe for a while, and in time of temptation they fall away." Now it says many, because, as it is said in Ecclesiastes 1:15, "the number of fools is infinite." And Matthew 20:16: "Many are called, but few are chosen." These, then, said: "This saying is hard." A thing is called hard which is not easily divided, and which offers resistance. A saying, then, is hard either because it resists the intellect, or because it resists the will—namely, when we cannot grasp it with the intellect, or it does not please the will; and in both ways this saying was hard for these men. Hard indeed to the intellect, because it exceeded the weakness of their understanding; for since they were carnal, they could not grasp what he said, that he would give them his own flesh to eat. But hard to the will, because he said many things about the power of his divinity. And although these men believed him as they would a prophet, they did not yet believe him to be God; and therefore it seemed to them that he was speaking things greater than himself. 2 Corinthians 10:10: "His letters are weighty." Ecclesiasticus 6:21: "Wisdom is exceedingly harsh to unlearned men." And therefore it follows: "Who can hear him?" They say this to excuse themselves. For since they had given themselves to him, they ought to have heard him; but because he was not teaching them pleasing things, they wished to seek some occasion for withdrawing; Proverbs 18:2: "A fool receiveth not the words of prudence, unless you say the things that are turning in his heart." Next, when he says, "But Jesus, knowing within himself that his disciples murmured at this, said to them: Doth this scandalize you?" the kindness of Christ in allaying the scandal is set forth, and first he declares and makes manifest the scandal; second he removes the cause of the scandal, at the place, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?"; third he indicates the cause itself, at the place, "But there are some of you that do not believe." Now he declares the scandal, because they had said secretly, "This saying is hard," so as not to be heard by him. But he who by the power of his divinity knew what they were saying makes this manifest; and this is what is meant by "But Jesus, knowing within himself"—that is, what they were saying within themselves—namely, that his disciples murmured at this (above, John 2:25: "He needed not that any should give testimony of man, for he knew what was in man"; Psalm 7:10: "God searcheth hearts and reins"); he said to them: "Doth this scandalize you?" As if to say: you ought not to be scandalized at this. Or it can be read as a concession, as if to say: I know that you are scandalized at this; Isaiah 8:4: "He shall be"—namely to those believing in Christ—"for a sanctification indeed; but for a stone of stumbling to the two houses of Israel," that is, to the murmuring disciples and to the crowds. But since teachers ought to avoid scandalizing their hearers, why does the Lord set forth such teachings to them, that they should be scandalized and depart? I answer. It must be said that the necessity of the teaching required that the Lord set forth such things to them. For they had pressed upon him for bodily food, whereas he had come in order to lead them to a desire for spiritual food; and therefore it was necessary that he should set forth to them the teaching concerning spiritual food. Nor, however, was their scandal caused by any fault in Christ's teaching, but by their own unbelief. For if they did not understand the Lord's words on account of their carnality, they could have questioned the Lord, as the apostles did on other occasions. But this, according to Augustine, the Lord permitted by way of dispensation, so that he might furnish to those who teach well a cause of patience and consolation against those who speak ill of their words, since even disciples presumed to detract from the words of Christ. Next, when he says, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?" he removes the occasion of scandal, which occasion was, as Chrysostom says, both concerning the person of the speaker and concerning the words spoken; and therefore he first removes the occasion of scandal as regards the person of the speaker, and second as regards the words spoken, at the place, "It is the spirit that quickeneth." Now the occasion of these men's scandal was that they had heard the Lord speak divine things of himself; hence, because they believed him to be the son of Joseph, they were scandalized by what he said of himself. And therefore, removing this occasion, God shows them his divinity more openly; hence he says: you are troubled at the things I have said concerning myself—"if then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before"—supply: what will you say? As if to say: you will never be able to deny that I have descended from heaven, that I am the giver or teacher of eternal life. He did something similar with Nathanael: for when Nathanael said, "Thou art the king of Israel," he wished to raise him to a more perfect knowledge; hence he said to him: "Thou shalt see greater things than these." And therefore he makes manifest to these men something greater that would come to pass concerning himself, saying, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?" Now he ascended into heaven with the disciples watching, as it is said in Acts 1:9. If then he ascended to where he had been before, then he had been in heaven before; above, John 3:13: "No man hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended from heaven." But observe that although the person of the Son of God and the Son of man in Christ is the same, yet because the nature is other, something belongs to him by reason of his humanity—namely, to ascend—which does not belong to him by reason of his divinity, according to which he has nowhere to ascend to, since he is eternally at the highest summit of all things, namely in the Father; but according to his humanity it belongs to him to ascend to where he was before, namely in heaven, where he was not according to human nature; which is against the error of Valentinus, who said that Christ brought a heavenly body. Thus, then, to where he had been before according to his divinity, he ascended, with the apostles watching, and by his own power, according to his humanity; below, John 16:28: "I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world; again I leave the world, and I go to the Father." But, according to Augustine, these words are introduced in another way: for he says that these men were scandalized at the Lord's saying that he would give them his flesh to eat, which they understood carnally, as though they were to eat it according to the letter, like the flesh of animals, and were scandalized. And removing this understanding, he says, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend," with his body whole, "to where he was before"—supply: will you then say that I was going to give you my flesh to eat as you eat the flesh of animals? Next, when he says, "It is the spirit that quickeneth," he removes the occasion of scandal on the part of the words spoken, and, according to Chrysostom, he first distinguishes a twofold understanding of these words; second he shows which of the two befits the words themselves, at the place, "The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life." It must be known, then, as to the first, that the words of Christ can be understood according to a twofold sense, namely according to the spiritual and according to the bodily. And therefore he says, "It is the spirit that quickeneth," that is, if you understand the words which I have said according to the spirit, that is according to the spiritual sense, they will give life; "the flesh profiteth nothing," that is, if you understand them according to the fleshly sense, they profit you nothing—indeed they harm you; because, as it is said in Romans 8:13, "If you live according to the flesh, you shall die." Now the Lord's words about eating his flesh are understood carnally when they are taken according to how the words sound outwardly, and as the nature of flesh has it; and it was in this way that they understood them, as has been said. But the Lord was saying that he would give himself to them as spiritual food—not that the true flesh of Christ is not in the sacrament of the altar, but because it is eaten in a certain spiritual and divine manner. Thus, then, the fitting sense of the words spoken is not carnal, but spiritual. Hence he adds, "The words that I have spoken to you"—namely, concerning the eating of my flesh—"are spirit and life"; that is, they have a spiritual sense, and, understood in this way, they give life. Nor is it a wonder that they have a spiritual sense, since they are from the Holy Spirit; 1 Corinthians 14:2: "It is the spirit that speaketh mysteries." And therefore the mysteries of Christ give life; Psalm 118:93: "Thy justifications I will never forget: for by them thou hast given me life." But according to Augustine it is expounded otherwise: for what he said, "the flesh profiteth nothing," is understood of the flesh of Christ. For it is manifest that the flesh of Christ, as joined to the Word and the Spirit, profits greatly in every way; otherwise the Word would have been made flesh in vain, the Father would have manifested him in the flesh in vain, as it is said in 1 Timothy chapter 4. And therefore it must be said that the flesh of Christ, considered in itself, profits nothing, and has no profitable effect, except as any other flesh. For if it be separated in the understanding from the divinity and the Holy Spirit, it has no other power than any other flesh; but if the spirit and the divinity come to it, it profits many, because it makes those who receive it remain in Christ: for it is the spirit of charity through which man remains in God; 1 John 4:13: "In this we know that we abide in him, and he in us: because he hath given us of his spirit." And therefore the Lord says: this effect, namely of eternal life which I promise you, you ought not to attribute to the flesh considered in itself, because the flesh so considered profits nothing; but if you attribute it to the spirit, and to the divinity joined to the flesh, then it confers eternal life; Galatians 5:25: "If we live in the spirit, let us also walk in the spirit." And therefore he adds, "The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life"; that is, they are to be referred to the spirit joined to the flesh; and understood in this way, they are life, namely of the soul. For just as the body lives a bodily life through the bodily spirit, so too the soul lives a spiritual life through the Holy Spirit; Psalm 103:30: "Thou shalt send forth thy spirit, and they shall be created." Next, when he says, "But there are some of you that do not believe," he shows the cause of the scandal, which was their unbelief, as if to say: the cause of your scandal is not the hardness of the saying which I have spoken to you, but your unbelief. And therefore he first shows their unbelief; second he excludes a false opinion; third he makes manifest the cause of their unbelief. The Lord shows their unbelief indeed when he says, "There are some of you that do not believe." He did not say "who do not understand," but, what is more, he intimates the cause why they do not understand: for they did not understand for this reason, that they did not believe; Isaiah 7:9, according to another reading: "Unless you believe, you shall not understand." And he said "some," so as to except the disciples; 2 Thessalonians 3:2: "All men have not faith"; Romans 10:16: "All do not obey the gospel"; Psalm 105:25: "They believed not his words." The Evangelist excludes a false suspicion when he adds, "For Jesus knew," as if to say: Jesus did not say, "There are some of you that do not believe," as though this had newly become known to him; but because he knew from the beginning—namely of the world—who they were that believed, and who it was that would betray him; Hebrews 4:13: "All things are naked and open to his eyes"; and Ecclesiasticus 23:29: "All things were known to the Lord God before they were created." Now the Lord next assigns the cause of their unbelief, which arises from the withdrawal of the grace that draws; hence he was saying, "Therefore did I say to you," as if to say: therefore it was necessary that I should say the foregoing things to you, because no one can come to me—namely, by faith—unless it has been given him by my Father. From which it follows, according to Augustine, that even the very act of believing is given to us by God. But why it is not given to all has been shown above, in the same place where the Lord said almost the same words. He repeats them here, however, for two reasons: to show that his receiving them into the faith was more for their benefit and advantage than for Christ's; Philippians 1:29: "To you it is given ... that you should believe in him"; as if to say: it is your own good that you believe; and therefore Augustine says: it is indeed a great thing to believe; rejoice that you have believed. Second, to show that he is not the son of Joseph, as they supposed, but of God: for it is God the Father who draws men to the Son, as appears from what has gone before. Next, when he says, "After this many of his disciples went back," the obstinacy of these disciples is set forth. For although the Lord had reproved them, and had removed the cause of the scandal, so far as it lay on his part, nevertheless they persevered in unbelief; and therefore it says that many of his disciples went back. He did not say "they departed," but "they went back"—from the faith which they had according to power, and, cut off from the body of Christ, they lost life, because perhaps they had not even been in the body, as Augustine says. For there are some who simply go back: namely, those who follow the Devil, to whom it was said, Matthew 4:10: "Get thee behind me, Satan." And of certain women it is said, 1 Timothy 5:15: "Some are already turned aside after Satan." Peter does not go back in this way, but after Christ; Matthew 16:23: "Go behind me, Satan." But these men went back after Satan. Hence it follows, "and after this they walked no more with him"—namely although it is required of us that we walk with Jesus; Micah 6:8: "I will show thee, O man, what is good," and it follows, "to walk carefully with thy God." Next, when it is added, "Jesus therefore said to the twelve: Will you also go away?" the Lord examines the disciples who remained; and first the examination of the disciples is set forth by Christ's question; second the devotion of those remaining is added, by Peter's answer, at the place, "Simon Peter therefore answered him"; third Peter's answer is corrected, at the place, "Jesus answered them." Now the Lord examines the twelve who had remained, whether they wished to persist; and therefore he said to the twelve—namely, the apostles: "Will you also go away?" And this for two reasons. First, lest, because these had remained while the others departed, they should ascribe this to their own righteousness and grow proud, thinking that they had done Christ a favor by not abandoning him; and therefore, by showing that he did not need their following, he holds and confirms them the more. Job 35:7: "And if thou do justly, what shalt thou give him, or what shall he receive of thy hand?" Second, because it sometimes happens that someone has the will to depart from another, and yet is held back by shame; and therefore, not wishing them to be constrained by shame to remain with him (since to serve unwillingly is the same as not to serve at all), he removes even the shame and the necessity of remaining, placing it in their own judgment whether they wished to remain or to depart, because "God loveth a cheerful giver," as it is said in 2 Corinthians 9:7. There follows the devotion of those who remained, by Peter's answer: for he, a lover of his brethren, a preserver of friendship, and bearing a special affection toward Christ, answers on behalf of the whole company, saying: "Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life. And we have believed." Here he does three things. First, he extols Christ's excellence; second, he commends his teaching; and third, he professes his faith. He extols his excellence indeed when he says, "Lord, to whom shall we go?" As if to say: you are driving us away from you; give us another better than you, to whom we may go. But certainly "there is none like unto thee among the strong, O Lord": Exodus 15:11, and Psalm 88:7: "Who is like to God?" And therefore we will not leave you; Psalm 138:7: "Whither shall I go from thy spirit?" And, according to Chrysostom, Peter's word is greatly indicative of friendship: for by now Christ was more honorable to them than fathers and mothers. But he commends his teaching when he says, "Thou hast the words of eternal life." Now Moses had the words of God, and likewise the prophets, but rarely the words of eternal life; but you promise eternal life—what greater thing, then, do we seek? Above: "he that believeth in me hath life everlasting"; and above, John 3:39: "he that believeth in the Son of God hath life everlasting." But he professes his faith when he adds, "And we have believed and have known that thou art the Christ, the Son of God." For in our faith two things must chiefly be believed, namely the mystery of the Trinity and of the Incarnation; and these two things Peter here confesses. The mystery of the Trinity indeed, when he says, "Thou art the Son of God." For in saying that he is the Son of God, he makes mention of the person of the Father and of the Son, and at the same time also of the Holy Spirit, who is the love of the Father and the Son, and the bond of both. But the mystery of the Incarnation, when he says, "Thou art the Christ"; for "Christ" in Greek is called "anointed" in Latin—namely with the invisible oil of the Holy Spirit; but not according to the divine nature, because one who is anointed with the Holy Spirit is made better by that very anointing, but according as he is God, Christ is not made better; therefore he is anointed according as he is man. Now he says "we have believed and have known," because to believe comes before to know; and therefore if we wished to know before believing, we would not know, nor would we be able to believe, as Augustine says. Isaiah 7:9, according to another reading: "Unless you believe, you shall not understand." Now the Lord corrects Peter's answer when he says, "Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?" And first the Lord's answer is set forth; second the Evangelist's explanation, at the place, "Now he meant Judas." Because Peter had been generous in his answer, including all of them, saying thus, "And we have believed, and have known that thou art the Christ, the Son of God," by which it seemed that all would attain to eternal life, therefore the Lord excepted Judas from the company of believers. But this indeed was a commendable confidence in Peter, that he suspected no evil of a companion; but in the Lord it is a wisdom to be admired, that he saw hidden things. And therefore he says, "Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?" Not by nature, but by imitation of diabolical malice. Wisdom 2:24: "By the envy of the devil, death came into the world: and they follow him that are of his side"; below, John 13:27: "After the morsel, Satan entered into him," namely because he was made conformed to his malice. But if Christ chose Judas, and he became evil, it seems that he erred in his choosing. To this it is answered, first, according to Chrysostom, that this is not said of the election of predestination, but of election to some office, and to a state of present righteousness, to which someone is sometimes chosen not according to what is future, but according to what he presently is in fact; because by this kind of election free will is not taken away, nor is the possibility of sinning removed; hence it is said, 1 Corinthians 10:12: "He that thinketh himself to stand, let him take heed lest he fall." Thus, then, the Lord chose Judas not as one who was then evil, yet the possibility of sinning was not taken from him by this election. Second, it is answered, according to Augustine, that the Lord chose Judas though evil; and because it belongs to the good to use evil for good, although he knew him to be evil, God made good use of his evil, in that he endured being betrayed by him in order to redeem us. Or it must be said that the choosing of the twelve apostles is not here referred to the persons, but to the number; as if to say: I chose in you the number twelve. For this number is fittingly consecrated to those who were to preach the faith of the Holy Trinity through the four corners of the world; and this number indeed did not perish, because in the place of the perishing traitor Matthias was put in his stead. Or, according to Ambrose, he chose Judas though evil for this reason, that he might console our weakness, if it should ever happen to us to be betrayed by friends, since we read that the Lord and Master was betrayed by a disciple. But it is asked here why, when the Lord says, "One of you is a devil," the disciples say nothing; and afterward, when he says, below John 13:21, "One of you shall betray me," they said, "Is it I, Lord?" I answer that it must be said that the reason for this is that here the Lord spoke generally, saying that one of them was a devil, which can be referred to any kind of malice whatsoever, and therefore they were not moved; but there, hearing of so great a deed—namely, the betrayal of their Master—they were not able to contain themselves. Or it must be said to this, that when the Lord spoke these words, each of them had confidence in his own strength, and therefore they did not fear for themselves. But when they heard Peter told, "Get behind me, Satan," they were terrified, and thought more meanly of themselves; and therefore, wavering, they said: "Is it I, Lord?" Now this answer, which the Lord had made obscurely, the Evangelist explains, saying, "Now he meant Judas," as the outcome of the event proved, as is evident below, in chapter 13.”

“We have here an account of the effects of Christ's discourse. Some were offended and others edified by it; some driven from him and others brought nearer to him. I. To some it was a savour of death unto death; not only to the Jews, who were professed enemies to him and his doctrine, but even to many of his disciples, such as were disciples at large, who were his frequent hearers, and followed him in public; a mixed multitude, like those among Israel, that began all the discontents. Now here we have, 1. Their murmurings at the doctrine they heard (Joh 6:60): This is a hard saying, who can hear it? (1.) They do not like it themselves: "What stuff is this? Eat the flesh, and drink the blood, of the Son of man! If it is to be understood figuratively, it is not intelligible; if literally, not practicable. What! must we turn cannibals? Can we not be religious, but we must be barbarous?" Si Christiani adorant quod comedunt (said Averroes), sit anima mea cum philosophis - If Christians adore what they eat, my mind shall continue with the philosophers. Now, when they found it a hard saying, if they had humbly begged of Christ to have declared unto them this parable, he would have opened it, and their understandings too; for the meek will he teach his way. But they were not willing to have Christ's sayings explained to them, because they would not lose this pretence for rejecting them - that they were hard sayings. (2.) They think it impossible that any one else should like it: "Who can hear it? Surely none can." Thus the scoffers at religion are ready to undertake that all the intelligent part of mankind concur with them. They conclude with great assurance that no man of sense will admit the doctrine of Christ, nor any man of spirit submit to his laws. Because they cannot bear to be so tutored, so tied up, themselves, they think none else can: Who can hear it? Thanks be to God, thousands have heard these sayings of Christ, and have found them not only easy, but pleasant, as their necessary food. 2. Christ's animadversions upon their murmurings. (1.) He well enough knew their murmurings, Joh 6:61. Their cavils were secret in their own breasts, or whispered among themselves in a corner. But, [1.] Christ knew them; he saw them, he heard them. Note, Christ takes notice not only of the bold and open defiances that are done to his name and glory by daring sinners, but of the secret slights that are put upon his doctrine by carnal professors; he knows that which the fool saith in his heart, and cannot for shame speak out; he observes how his doctrine is resented by those to whom it is preached; who rejoice in it, and who murmur at it; who are reconciled to it, and bow before it, and who quarrel with it, and rebel against it, though ever so secretly. [2.] He knew it in himself, not by any information given him, nor any external indication of the thing, but by his own divine omniscience. He knew it not as the prophets, by a divine revelation made to him (that which the prophets desired to know was sometimes hid from them, as Kg2 4:27), but by a divine knowledge in him. He is that essential Word that discerns the thoughts of the heart, Heb 4:12, Heb 4:13. Thoughts are words to Christ; we should therefore take heed not only what we say and do, but what we think. (2.) He well enough knew how to answer them: "Doth this offend you? Is this a stumbling-block to you?" See how people by their own wilful mistakes create offences to themselves: they take offence where there is none given, and even make it where there is nothing to make it of. Note, We may justly wonder that so much offence should be taken at the doctrine of Christ for so little cause. Christ speaks of it here with wonder: "Doth this offend you?" Now, in answer to those who condemned his doctrine as intricate and obscure (Si non vis intelligi, debes negligi - If you are unwilling to be understood, you ought to be neglected), [1.] He gives them a hint of his ascension into heaven, as that which would give an irresistible evidence of the truth of his doctrine (Joh 6:62): What and if you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? And what then? First, "If I should tell you of that, surely it would much more offend you, and you would think my pretensions too high indeed. If this be so hard a saying that you cannot hear it, how will you digest it when I tell you of my returning to heaven, whence I came down?" See Joh 3:12. Those who stumble at smaller difficulties should consider how they will get over greater. Secondly, "When you see the Son of man ascend, this will much more offend you, for then my body will be less capable of being eaten by you in that gross sense wherein you now understand it;" so Dr. Whitby. Or, Thirdly, "When you see that, or hear it from those that shall see it, surely then you will be satisfied. You think I take too much upon me when I say, I came down from heaven, for it was with this that you quarrelled (Joh 6:42); but will you think so when you see me return to heaven?" If he ascended, certainly he descended, Eph 4:9, Eph 4:10. Christ did often refer himself thus to subsequent proofs, as Joh 1:50, Joh 1:51; Joh 2:14; Mat 12:40; Mat 26:64. Let us wait awhile, till the mystery of God shall be finished, and then we shall see that there was no reason to be offended at any of Christ's sayings. [2.] He gives them a general key to this and all such parabolical discourses, teaching them that they are to be understood spiritually, and not after a corporal and carnal manner: It is the spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing, Joh 6:63. As it is in the natural body, the animal spirits quicken and enliven it, and without these the most nourishing food would profit nothing (what would the body be the better for bread, if it were not quickened and animated by the spirit), so it is with the soul. First, The bare participation of ordinances, unless the Spirit of God work with them, and quicken the soul by them, profits nothing; the word and ordinances, if the Spirit works with them, are as food to a living man, if not, they are as food to a dead man. Even the flesh of Christ, the sacrifice for sin, will avail us nothing unless the blessed Spirit quicken our souls thereby, and enforce the powerful influences of his death upon us, till we by his grace are planted together in the likeness of it. Secondly, The doctrine of eating Christ's flesh and drinking his blood, if it be understood literally, profits nothing, but rather leads us into mistakes and prejudices; but the spiritual sense or meaning of it quickens the soul, makes it alive and lively; for so it follows: The words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. To eat the flesh of Christ! this is a hard saying, but to believe that Christ died for me, to derive from that doctrine strength and comfort in my approaches to God, my oppositions to sin and preparations for a future state, this is the spirit and life of that saying, and, construing it thus, it is an excellent saying. The reason why men dislike Christ's sayings if because they mistake them. The literal sense of a parable does us no good, we are never the wiser for it, but the spiritual meaning is instructive. Thirdly, The flesh profits nothing - those that are in the flesh (so some understand it), that are under the power of a carnal mind, profit not by Christ's discourses; but the Spirit quickeneth - those that have the Spirit, that are spiritual, are quickened and enlivened by them; for they are received ad modum recipientis - so as to correspond with the state of the receiver's mind. They found fault with Christ's sayings, whereas the fault was in themselves; it is only to sensual minds that spiritual things are senseless and sapless, spiritual minds relish them; see Co1 2:14, Co1 2:15. [3.] He gives them an intimation of his knowledge of them, and that he had expected no better from them, though they called themselves his disciples, Joh 6:64, Joh 6:65. Now was fulfilled that of the prophet, speaking of Christ and his doctrine (Isa 53:1), Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed? Both these Christ here takes notice of. First, They did not believe his report: "There are some of you who said you would leave all to follow me who yet believe not;" and this was the reason why the word preached did not profit them, because it was not mixed with faith, Heb 4:2. They did not believe him to be the Messiah, else they would have acquiesced in the doctrine he preached, and not have quarrelled with it, though there were some things in it dark, and hard to be understood. Oportet discentum credere - Young beginners in learning must take things upon their teacher's word. Note, 1. Among those who are nominal Christians, there are many who are real infidels. 2. The unbelief of hypocrites, before it discovers itself to the world, is naked and open before the eyes of Christ. He knew from the beginning who they were of the multitudes that followed him that believed, and who of the twelve should betray him; he knew from the beginning of their acquaintance with him, and attendance on him, when they were in the hottest pang of their zeal, who were sincere, as Nathanael (Joh 1:47), and who were not. Before they distinguished themselves by an overt act, he could infallibly distinguish who believed and who did not, whose love was counterfeit and whose cordial. We may gather hence, (1.) That the apostasy of those who have long made a plausible profession of religion is a certain proof of their constant hypocrisy, and that from the beginning they believed not, but is not a proof of the possibility of the total and final apostasy of any true believers: such revolts are not to be called the fall of real saints, but the discovery of pretended ones; see Jo1 2:19. Stella cadens non stella fuit - The star that falls never was a star. (2.) That it is Christ's prerogative to know the heart; he knows who they are that believe not, but dissemble in their profession, and yet continues them room in his church, the use of his ordinances, and the credit of his name, and does not discover them in this world, unless they by their own wickedness discover themselves; because such is the constitution of his visible church, and the discovering day is yet to come. But, if we pretend to judge men's hearts, we step into Christ's throne, and anticipate his judgment. We are often deceived in men, and see cause to change our sentiments of them; but this we are sure of, that Christ knows all men, and his judgment is according to truth. Secondly, The reason why they did not believe his report was because the arm of the Lord was not revealed to them (Joh 6:65): Therefore said I unto you that no man can come to me, except it be given unto him of my Father; referring to Joh 6:44. Christ therefore could not but know who believed and who did not, because faith is the gift and work of God, and all his Father's gifts and works could not but be known to him, for they all passed through his hands. There he had said that none could come to him, except the Father draw him; here he saith, except it be given him of my Father, which shows that God draws souls by giving them grace and strength, and a heart to come, without which, such is the moral impotency of man, in his fallen state, that he cannot come. 3. We have here their final apostasy from Christ hereupon: From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him, Joh 6:66. When we admit into our minds hard thoughts of the word and works of Christ, and conceive a secret dislike, and are willing to hear insinuations tending to their reproach, we are then entering into temptation; it is as the letting forth of water; it is looking back, which, if infinite mercy prevent not, will end in drawing back; therefore Obsta principiis - Take heed of the beginnings of apostasy. (1.) See here the backsliding of these disciples. Many of them went back to their houses, and families, and callings, which they had left for a time to follow him; went back, one to his farm and another to his merchandise; went back, as Orpah did, to their people, and to their gods, Rut 1:15. They had entered themselves in Christ's school, but they went back, did not only play truant for once, but took leave of him and his doctrine for ever. Note, The apostasy of Christ's disciples from him, though really a strange thing, yet has been such a common thing that we need not be surprised at it. Here were many that went back. It is often so; when some backslide many backslide with them; the disease is infectious. (2.) The occasion of this backsliding: From that time, from the time that Christ preached this comfortable doctrine, that he is the bread of life, and that those who by faith feed upon him shall live by him (which, one would think, should have engaged them to cleave more closely to him) - from that time they withdrew. Note, The corrupt and wicked heart of man often makes that an occasion of offence which is indeed matter of the greatest comfort. Christ foresaw that they would thus take offence at what he said, and yet he said it. That which is the undoubted word and truth of Christ must be faithfully delivered, whoever may be offended at it. Men's humours must be captivated to God's word, and not God's word accommodated to men's humours. (3.) The degree of their apostasy: They walked no more with him, returned no more to him and attended no more upon his ministry. It is hard for those who have been once enlightened, and have tasted the good word of God, if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance, Heb 6:4-6. II. This discourse was to others a savour of life unto life. Many went back, but, thanks be to God, all did not; even then the twelve stuck to him. Though the faith of some be overthrown, yet the foundation of God stands sure. Observe here, 1. The affectionate question which Christ put to the twelve (Joh 6:67): Will you also go away? He saith nothing to those who went back. If the unbelieving depart, let them depart; it was no great loss of those whom he never had; lightly come, lightly go; but he takes this occasion to speak to the twelve, to confirm them, and by trying their stedfastness the more to fix them: Will you also go away? (1.) "It is at your choice whether you will or no; if you will forsake me, now is the time, when so many do: it is an hour of temptation; if you will go back, go now." Note, Christ will detain none with him against their wills; his soldiers are volunteers, not pressed men. The twelve had now had time enough to try how they liked Christ and his doctrine, and that none of them might afterwards say that they were trepanned into discipleship, and if it were to do again they would not do it, he here allows them a power of revocation, and leaves them at their liberty; as Jos 24:15; Rut 1:15. (2.) "It is at your peril if you do go away." If there was any secret inclination in the heart of any of them to depart from him, he stops it with this awakening question, "Wilt you also go away? Think not that you hang at as loose an end as they did, and may go away as easily as they could. They have not been so intimate with me as you have been, nor received so many favours from me; they are gone, but will you also go? Remember your character, and say, Whatever others do, we will never go away. Should such a man as I flee?" Neh 6:11. Note, The nearer we have been to Christ and the longer we have been with him, the more engagements we have laid ourselves under to him, the greater will be our sin if we desert him. (3.) "I have reason to think you will not. Will you go away? No, I have faster hold of you than so; I hope better things of you (Heb 6:9), for you are they that have continued with me," Luk 22:28. When the apostasy of some is a grief to the Lord Jesus, the constancy of others is so much the more his honour, and he is pleased with it accordingly. Christ and believers know one another too well to part upon every displeasure. 2. The believing reply which Peter, in the name of the rest, made to this question, Joh 6:68, Joh 6:69. Christ put the question to them, as Joshua put Israel to their choice whom they would serve, with design to draw out from them a promise to adhere to him, and it had the like effect. Nay, but we will serve the Lord, Peter was upon all occasions the mouth of the rest, not so much because he had more of his Master's ear than they, but because he had more tongue of his own; and what he said was sometimes approved and sometimes reprimanded (Mat 16:17, Mat 16:23) - the common lot of those who are swift to speak. This here was well said, admirably well; and probably he said it by the direction, and with the express assent, of his fellow-disciples; at least he knew their mind, and spoke the sense of them all, and did not except Judas, for we must hope the best. (1.) Here is a good resolution to adhere to Christ, and so expressed as to intimate that they would not entertain the least thought of leaving him: "Lord, to whom shall we go? It were folly to go from thee, unless we knew where to better ourselves; no, Lord, we like our choice too well to change." Note, Those who leave Christ would do well to consider to whom they will go, and whether they can expect to find rest and peace any where but in him. See Psa 73:27, Psa 73:28; Hos 2:9. "Whither shall we go? Shall we make our court to the world? It will certainly deceive us. Shall we return to sin? It will certainly destroy us. Shall we leave the fountain of living waters for broken cisterns?" The disciples resolve to continue their pursuit of life and happiness, and will have a guide to it, and will adhere to Christ as their guide, for they can never have a better. "Shall we go to the heathen philosophers, and become their disciples? They are become vain in their imaginations, and, professing themselves to be wise in other things, are become fools in religion. Shall we go to the scribes and Pharisees, and sit at their feet? What good can they do us who have made void the commandments of God by their traditions? Shall we go to Moses? He will send us back again to thee. Therefore, if ever we find the way to happiness, it must be in following thee." Note, Christ's holy religion appears to great advantage when it is compared with other institutions, for then it will be seen how far it excels them all. Let those who find fault with this religion find a better before they quit it. A divine teacher we must have; can we find a better than Christ? A divine revelation we cannot be without; if the scripture be not such a one, where else may we look for it? (2.) Here is a good reason for this resolution. It was not the inconsiderate resolve of a blind affection, but the result of mature deliberation. The disciples were resolved never to go away from Christ, [1.] Because of the advantage they promised themselves by him: Thou hast the words of eternal life. They themselves did not fully understand Christ's discourse, for as yet the doctrine of the cross was a riddle to them; but in the general they were satisfied that he had the words of eternal life, that is, First, That the word of his doctrine showed the way to eternal life, set it before us, and directed us what to do, that we might inherit it. Secondly, That the word of his determination must confer eternal life. His having the words of eternal life is the same with his having power to give eternal life to as many as were given him, Joh 17:2. He had in the foregoing discourse assured eternal life to his followers; these disciples fastened upon this plain saying, and therefore resolved to stick to him, when the others overlooked this, and fastened upon the hard sayings, and therefore forsook him. Though we cannot account for every mystery, every obscurity, in Christ's doctrine, yet we know, in the general, that it is the word of eternal life, and therefore must live and die by it; for if we forsake Christ we forsake our own mercies. [2.] Because of the assurance they had concerning him (Joh 6:69): We believe, and are sure, that thou art that Christ. if he be the promised Messiah, he must bring in an everlasting righteousness (Dan 9:24), and therefore has the words of eternal life, for righteousness reigns to eternal life, Rom 5:21. observe, First, The doctrine they believed: that this Jesus was the Messiah promised to the fathers and expected by them, and that he was not a mere man, but the Son of the living God, the same to whom God had said, Thou art my Son, Psa 2:7. In times of temptation to apostasy it is good to have recourse to our first principles, and stick to them; and, if we faithfully abide by that which is past dispute, we shall be the better able both to find and to keep the truth in matters of doubtful disputation. Secondly, The degree of their faith: it rose up to a full assurance: We are sure. We have known it by experience; this is the best knowledge. We should take occasion from others' wavering to be so much the more established, especially in that which is the present truth. When we have so strong a faith in the gospel of Christ as boldly to venture our souls upon it, knowing whom we have believed, then, and not till then, we shall be willing to venture every thing else for it. 3. The melancholy remark which our Lord Jesus made upon this reply of Peter's (Joh 6:70, Joh 6:71): Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil? And the evangelist tells us whom he meant: he spoke of Judas Iscariot. Peter had undertaken for them all that they would be faithful to their Master. Now Christ does not condemn his charity (it is always good to hope the best), but he tacitly corrects his confidence. We must not be too sure concerning any. God knows those that are his; we do not. Observe here, (1.) Hypocrites and betrayers of Christ are no better than devils. Judas not only had a devil, but he was a devil. One of you is a false accuser; so diabolos sometimes signifies (Ti2 3:3); and it is probable that Judas, when he sold his Master to the chief priests, represented him to them as a bad man, to justify himself in what he did. But I rather take it as we read it: He is a devil, a devil incarnate, a fallen apostle, as the devil a fallen angel. He is Satan, an adversary, an enemy to Christ. He is Abaddon, and Apollyon, a son of perdition. He was of his father the devil, did his lusts, was in his interests, as Cain, Jo1 3:12. Those whose bodies were possessed by the devil are never called devils (demoniacs, but not devils); but Judas, into whose heart Satan entered, and filled it, is called a devil. (2.) Many that are seeming saints are real devils. Judas had as fair an outside as many of the apostles; his venom was, like that of the serpent, covered with a fine skin. He cast out devils, and appeared an enemy to the devil's kingdom, and yet was himself a devil all the while. Not only he will be one shortly, but he is one now. It is strange, and to be wondered at; Christ speaks of it with wonder: Have not I? It is sad, and to be lamented, that ever Christianity should be made a cloak to diabolism. (3.) The disguises of hypocrites, however they may deceive men, and put a cheat upon them, cannot deceive Christ, for his piercing eye sees through them. He can call those devils that call themselves Christians, like the prophet's greeting to Jeroboam's wife, when she came to him in masquerade (Kg1 14:6): Come in, thou wife of Jeroboam. Christ's divine sight, far better than any double sight, can see spirits. (4.) There are those who are chosen by Christ to special services who yet prove false to him: I have chosen you to the apostleship, for it is expressly said that Judas was not chosen to eternal life (Joh 13:18), and yet one of you is a devil. Note, Advancement to places of honour and trust in the church is no certain evidence of saving grace. We have prophesied in thy name. (5.) In the most select societies on this side heaven it is no new thing to meet with those that are corrupt. Of the twelve that were chosen to an intimate conversation with an incarnate Deity, as great an honour and privilege as ever men were chosen to, one was an incarnate devil. The historian lays an emphasis upon this, that Judas was one of the twelve that were so dignified and distinguished. Let us not reject and unchurch the twelve because one of them is a devil, nor say that they are all cheats and hypocrites because one of them was so; let those that are so bear the blame, and not those who, while they are undiscovered, incorporate with them. There is a society within the veil into which no unclean thing shall enter, a church of first-born, in which are no false brethren.”

“After he had quelled the wrangling of the Jews, and their murmuring, the Lord next allays the scandal of the disciples, and first the scandal of the departing disciples is treated; second, the devotion of those who remain is examined, at the place, "Jesus therefore said to the twelve." Concerning the first he does three things. First, the scandal of the disciples is set forth; second, the kindness of Christ in repressing it, at the place, "But Jesus knowing," etc.; third, the obstinacy and unbelief of those departing is set forth, at the place, "After this many of his disciples went back." It must be known, then, concerning the first, that there were many among the people of the Jews who clung to Christ, believing in him, and followed him, yet not having left all things, as the twelve had; and all of these were called disciples. And of these he says that many, namely among the people, who believed in him, hearing the things he had said above, said: "This saying is hard." Of these it is said in Luke 8:13: "They believe for a while, and in time of temptation they fall away." Now it says many, because, as it is said in Ecclesiastes 1:15, "the number of fools is infinite." And Matthew 20:16: "Many are called, but few are chosen." These, then, said: "This saying is hard." A thing is called hard which is not easily divided, and which offers resistance. A saying, then, is hard either because it resists the intellect, or because it resists the will—namely, when we cannot grasp it with the intellect, or it does not please the will; and in both ways this saying was hard for these men. Hard indeed to the intellect, because it exceeded the weakness of their understanding; for since they were carnal, they could not grasp what he said, that he would give them his own flesh to eat. But hard to the will, because he said many things about the power of his divinity. And although these men believed him as they would a prophet, they did not yet believe him to be God; and therefore it seemed to them that he was speaking things greater than himself. 2 Corinthians 10:10: "His letters are weighty." Ecclesiasticus 6:21: "Wisdom is exceedingly harsh to unlearned men." And therefore it follows: "Who can hear him?" They say this to excuse themselves. For since they had given themselves to him, they ought to have heard him; but because he was not teaching them pleasing things, they wished to seek some occasion for withdrawing; Proverbs 18:2: "A fool receiveth not the words of prudence, unless you say the things that are turning in his heart." Next, when he says, "But Jesus, knowing within himself that his disciples murmured at this, said to them: Doth this scandalize you?" the kindness of Christ in allaying the scandal is set forth, and first he declares and makes manifest the scandal; second he removes the cause of the scandal, at the place, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?"; third he indicates the cause itself, at the place, "But there are some of you that do not believe." Now he declares the scandal, because they had said secretly, "This saying is hard," so as not to be heard by him. But he who by the power of his divinity knew what they were saying makes this manifest; and this is what is meant by "But Jesus, knowing within himself"—that is, what they were saying within themselves—namely, that his disciples murmured at this (above, John 2:25: "He needed not that any should give testimony of man, for he knew what was in man"; Psalm 7:10: "God searcheth hearts and reins"); he said to them: "Doth this scandalize you?" As if to say: you ought not to be scandalized at this. Or it can be read as a concession, as if to say: I know that you are scandalized at this; Isaiah 8:4: "He shall be"—namely to those believing in Christ—"for a sanctification indeed; but for a stone of stumbling to the two houses of Israel," that is, to the murmuring disciples and to the crowds. But since teachers ought to avoid scandalizing their hearers, why does the Lord set forth such teachings to them, that they should be scandalized and depart? I answer. It must be said that the necessity of the teaching required that the Lord set forth such things to them. For they had pressed upon him for bodily food, whereas he had come in order to lead them to a desire for spiritual food; and therefore it was necessary that he should set forth to them the teaching concerning spiritual food. Nor, however, was their scandal caused by any fault in Christ's teaching, but by their own unbelief. For if they did not understand the Lord's words on account of their carnality, they could have questioned the Lord, as the apostles did on other occasions. But this, according to Augustine, the Lord permitted by way of dispensation, so that he might furnish to those who teach well a cause of patience and consolation against those who speak ill of their words, since even disciples presumed to detract from the words of Christ. Next, when he says, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?" he removes the occasion of scandal, which occasion was, as Chrysostom says, both concerning the person of the speaker and concerning the words spoken; and therefore he first removes the occasion of scandal as regards the person of the speaker, and second as regards the words spoken, at the place, "It is the spirit that quickeneth." Now the occasion of these men's scandal was that they had heard the Lord speak divine things of himself; hence, because they believed him to be the son of Joseph, they were scandalized by what he said of himself. And therefore, removing this occasion, God shows them his divinity more openly; hence he says: you are troubled at the things I have said concerning myself—"if then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before"—supply: what will you say? As if to say: you will never be able to deny that I have descended from heaven, that I am the giver or teacher of eternal life. He did something similar with Nathanael: for when Nathanael said, "Thou art the king of Israel," he wished to raise him to a more perfect knowledge; hence he said to him: "Thou shalt see greater things than these." And therefore he makes manifest to these men something greater that would come to pass concerning himself, saying, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?" Now he ascended into heaven with the disciples watching, as it is said in Acts 1:9. If then he ascended to where he had been before, then he had been in heaven before; above, John 3:13: "No man hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended from heaven." But observe that although the person of the Son of God and the Son of man in Christ is the same, yet because the nature is other, something belongs to him by reason of his humanity—namely, to ascend—which does not belong to him by reason of his divinity, according to which he has nowhere to ascend to, since he is eternally at the highest summit of all things, namely in the Father; but according to his humanity it belongs to him to ascend to where he was before, namely in heaven, where he was not according to human nature; which is against the error of Valentinus, who said that Christ brought a heavenly body. Thus, then, to where he had been before according to his divinity, he ascended, with the apostles watching, and by his own power, according to his humanity; below, John 16:28: "I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world; again I leave the world, and I go to the Father." But, according to Augustine, these words are introduced in another way: for he says that these men were scandalized at the Lord's saying that he would give them his flesh to eat, which they understood carnally, as though they were to eat it according to the letter, like the flesh of animals, and were scandalized. And removing this understanding, he says, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend," with his body whole, "to where he was before"—supply: will you then say that I was going to give you my flesh to eat as you eat the flesh of animals? Next, when he says, "It is the spirit that quickeneth," he removes the occasion of scandal on the part of the words spoken, and, according to Chrysostom, he first distinguishes a twofold understanding of these words; second he shows which of the two befits the words themselves, at the place, "The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life." It must be known, then, as to the first, that the words of Christ can be understood according to a twofold sense, namely according to the spiritual and according to the bodily. And therefore he says, "It is the spirit that quickeneth," that is, if you understand the words which I have said according to the spirit, that is according to the spiritual sense, they will give life; "the flesh profiteth nothing," that is, if you understand them according to the fleshly sense, they profit you nothing—indeed they harm you; because, as it is said in Romans 8:13, "If you live according to the flesh, you shall die." Now the Lord's words about eating his flesh are understood carnally when they are taken according to how the words sound outwardly, and as the nature of flesh has it; and it was in this way that they understood them, as has been said. But the Lord was saying that he would give himself to them as spiritual food—not that the true flesh of Christ is not in the sacrament of the altar, but because it is eaten in a certain spiritual and divine manner. Thus, then, the fitting sense of the words spoken is not carnal, but spiritual. Hence he adds, "The words that I have spoken to you"—namely, concerning the eating of my flesh—"are spirit and life"; that is, they have a spiritual sense, and, understood in this way, they give life. Nor is it a wonder that they have a spiritual sense, since they are from the Holy Spirit; 1 Corinthians 14:2: "It is the spirit that speaketh mysteries." And therefore the mysteries of Christ give life; Psalm 118:93: "Thy justifications I will never forget: for by them thou hast given me life." But according to Augustine it is expounded otherwise: for what he said, "the flesh profiteth nothing," is understood of the flesh of Christ. For it is manifest that the flesh of Christ, as joined to the Word and the Spirit, profits greatly in every way; otherwise the Word would have been made flesh in vain, the Father would have manifested him in the flesh in vain, as it is said in 1 Timothy chapter 4. And therefore it must be said that the flesh of Christ, considered in itself, profits nothing, and has no profitable effect, except as any other flesh. For if it be separated in the understanding from the divinity and the Holy Spirit, it has no other power than any other flesh; but if the spirit and the divinity come to it, it profits many, because it makes those who receive it remain in Christ: for it is the spirit of charity through which man remains in God; 1 John 4:13: "In this we know that we abide in him, and he in us: because he hath given us of his spirit." And therefore the Lord says: this effect, namely of eternal life which I promise you, you ought not to attribute to the flesh considered in itself, because the flesh so considered profits nothing; but if you attribute it to the spirit, and to the divinity joined to the flesh, then it confers eternal life; Galatians 5:25: "If we live in the spirit, let us also walk in the spirit." And therefore he adds, "The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life"; that is, they are to be referred to the spirit joined to the flesh; and understood in this way, they are life, namely of the soul. For just as the body lives a bodily life through the bodily spirit, so too the soul lives a spiritual life through the Holy Spirit; Psalm 103:30: "Thou shalt send forth thy spirit, and they shall be created." Next, when he says, "But there are some of you that do not believe," he shows the cause of the scandal, which was their unbelief, as if to say: the cause of your scandal is not the hardness of the saying which I have spoken to you, but your unbelief. And therefore he first shows their unbelief; second he excludes a false opinion; third he makes manifest the cause of their unbelief. The Lord shows their unbelief indeed when he says, "There are some of you that do not believe." He did not say "who do not understand," but, what is more, he intimates the cause why they do not understand: for they did not understand for this reason, that they did not believe; Isaiah 7:9, according to another reading: "Unless you believe, you shall not understand." And he said "some," so as to except the disciples; 2 Thessalonians 3:2: "All men have not faith"; Romans 10:16: "All do not obey the gospel"; Psalm 105:25: "They believed not his words." The Evangelist excludes a false suspicion when he adds, "For Jesus knew," as if to say: Jesus did not say, "There are some of you that do not believe," as though this had newly become known to him; but because he knew from the beginning—namely of the world—who they were that believed, and who it was that would betray him; Hebrews 4:13: "All things are naked and open to his eyes"; and Ecclesiasticus 23:29: "All things were known to the Lord God before they were created." Now the Lord next assigns the cause of their unbelief, which arises from the withdrawal of the grace that draws; hence he was saying, "Therefore did I say to you," as if to say: therefore it was necessary that I should say the foregoing things to you, because no one can come to me—namely, by faith—unless it has been given him by my Father. From which it follows, according to Augustine, that even the very act of believing is given to us by God. But why it is not given to all has been shown above, in the same place where the Lord said almost the same words. He repeats them here, however, for two reasons: to show that his receiving them into the faith was more for their benefit and advantage than for Christ's; Philippians 1:29: "To you it is given ... that you should believe in him"; as if to say: it is your own good that you believe; and therefore Augustine says: it is indeed a great thing to believe; rejoice that you have believed. Second, to show that he is not the son of Joseph, as they supposed, but of God: for it is God the Father who draws men to the Son, as appears from what has gone before. Next, when he says, "After this many of his disciples went back," the obstinacy of these disciples is set forth. For although the Lord had reproved them, and had removed the cause of the scandal, so far as it lay on his part, nevertheless they persevered in unbelief; and therefore it says that many of his disciples went back. He did not say "they departed," but "they went back"—from the faith which they had according to power, and, cut off from the body of Christ, they lost life, because perhaps they had not even been in the body, as Augustine says. For there are some who simply go back: namely, those who follow the Devil, to whom it was said, Matthew 4:10: "Get thee behind me, Satan." And of certain women it is said, 1 Timothy 5:15: "Some are already turned aside after Satan." Peter does not go back in this way, but after Christ; Matthew 16:23: "Go behind me, Satan." But these men went back after Satan. Hence it follows, "and after this they walked no more with him"—namely although it is required of us that we walk with Jesus; Micah 6:8: "I will show thee, O man, what is good," and it follows, "to walk carefully with thy God." Next, when it is added, "Jesus therefore said to the twelve: Will you also go away?" the Lord examines the disciples who remained; and first the examination of the disciples is set forth by Christ's question; second the devotion of those remaining is added, by Peter's answer, at the place, "Simon Peter therefore answered him"; third Peter's answer is corrected, at the place, "Jesus answered them." Now the Lord examines the twelve who had remained, whether they wished to persist; and therefore he said to the twelve—namely, the apostles: "Will you also go away?" And this for two reasons. First, lest, because these had remained while the others departed, they should ascribe this to their own righteousness and grow proud, thinking that they had done Christ a favor by not abandoning him; and therefore, by showing that he did not need their following, he holds and confirms them the more. Job 35:7: "And if thou do justly, what shalt thou give him, or what shall he receive of thy hand?" Second, because it sometimes happens that someone has the will to depart from another, and yet is held back by shame; and therefore, not wishing them to be constrained by shame to remain with him (since to serve unwillingly is the same as not to serve at all), he removes even the shame and the necessity of remaining, placing it in their own judgment whether they wished to remain or to depart, because "God loveth a cheerful giver," as it is said in 2 Corinthians 9:7. There follows the devotion of those who remained, by Peter's answer: for he, a lover of his brethren, a preserver of friendship, and bearing a special affection toward Christ, answers on behalf of the whole company, saying: "Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life. And we have believed." Here he does three things. First, he extols Christ's excellence; second, he commends his teaching; and third, he professes his faith. He extols his excellence indeed when he says, "Lord, to whom shall we go?" As if to say: you are driving us away from you; give us another better than you, to whom we may go. But certainly "there is none like unto thee among the strong, O Lord": Exodus 15:11, and Psalm 88:7: "Who is like to God?" And therefore we will not leave you; Psalm 138:7: "Whither shall I go from thy spirit?" And, according to Chrysostom, Peter's word is greatly indicative of friendship: for by now Christ was more honorable to them than fathers and mothers. But he commends his teaching when he says, "Thou hast the words of eternal life." Now Moses had the words of God, and likewise the prophets, but rarely the words of eternal life; but you promise eternal life—what greater thing, then, do we seek? Above: "he that believeth in me hath life everlasting"; and above, John 3:39: "he that believeth in the Son of God hath life everlasting." But he professes his faith when he adds, "And we have believed and have known that thou art the Christ, the Son of God." For in our faith two things must chiefly be believed, namely the mystery of the Trinity and of the Incarnation; and these two things Peter here confesses. The mystery of the Trinity indeed, when he says, "Thou art the Son of God." For in saying that he is the Son of God, he makes mention of the person of the Father and of the Son, and at the same time also of the Holy Spirit, who is the love of the Father and the Son, and the bond of both. But the mystery of the Incarnation, when he says, "Thou art the Christ"; for "Christ" in Greek is called "anointed" in Latin—namely with the invisible oil of the Holy Spirit; but not according to the divine nature, because one who is anointed with the Holy Spirit is made better by that very anointing, but according as he is God, Christ is not made better; therefore he is anointed according as he is man. Now he says "we have believed and have known," because to believe comes before to know; and therefore if we wished to know before believing, we would not know, nor would we be able to believe, as Augustine says. Isaiah 7:9, according to another reading: "Unless you believe, you shall not understand." Now the Lord corrects Peter's answer when he says, "Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?" And first the Lord's answer is set forth; second the Evangelist's explanation, at the place, "Now he meant Judas." Because Peter had been generous in his answer, including all of them, saying thus, "And we have believed, and have known that thou art the Christ, the Son of God," by which it seemed that all would attain to eternal life, therefore the Lord excepted Judas from the company of believers. But this indeed was a commendable confidence in Peter, that he suspected no evil of a companion; but in the Lord it is a wisdom to be admired, that he saw hidden things. And therefore he says, "Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?" Not by nature, but by imitation of diabolical malice. Wisdom 2:24: "By the envy of the devil, death came into the world: and they follow him that are of his side"; below, John 13:27: "After the morsel, Satan entered into him," namely because he was made conformed to his malice. But if Christ chose Judas, and he became evil, it seems that he erred in his choosing. To this it is answered, first, according to Chrysostom, that this is not said of the election of predestination, but of election to some office, and to a state of present righteousness, to which someone is sometimes chosen not according to what is future, but according to what he presently is in fact; because by this kind of election free will is not taken away, nor is the possibility of sinning removed; hence it is said, 1 Corinthians 10:12: "He that thinketh himself to stand, let him take heed lest he fall." Thus, then, the Lord chose Judas not as one who was then evil, yet the possibility of sinning was not taken from him by this election. Second, it is answered, according to Augustine, that the Lord chose Judas though evil; and because it belongs to the good to use evil for good, although he knew him to be evil, God made good use of his evil, in that he endured being betrayed by him in order to redeem us. Or it must be said that the choosing of the twelve apostles is not here referred to the persons, but to the number; as if to say: I chose in you the number twelve. For this number is fittingly consecrated to those who were to preach the faith of the Holy Trinity through the four corners of the world; and this number indeed did not perish, because in the place of the perishing traitor Matthias was put in his stead. Or, according to Ambrose, he chose Judas though evil for this reason, that he might console our weakness, if it should ever happen to us to be betrayed by friends, since we read that the Lord and Master was betrayed by a disciple. But it is asked here why, when the Lord says, "One of you is a devil," the disciples say nothing; and afterward, when he says, below John 13:21, "One of you shall betray me," they said, "Is it I, Lord?" I answer that it must be said that the reason for this is that here the Lord spoke generally, saying that one of them was a devil, which can be referred to any kind of malice whatsoever, and therefore they were not moved; but there, hearing of so great a deed—namely, the betrayal of their Master—they were not able to contain themselves. Or it must be said to this, that when the Lord spoke these words, each of them had confidence in his own strength, and therefore they did not fear for themselves. But when they heard Peter told, "Get behind me, Satan," they were terrified, and thought more meanly of themselves; and therefore, wavering, they said: "Is it I, Lord?" Now this answer, which the Lord had made obscurely, the Evangelist explains, saying, "Now he meant Judas," as the outcome of the event proved, as is evident below, in chapter 13.”

“It is the Spirit that quickeneth,.... It is the spirit of man that quickens him; or which being breathed into him, he becomes a living soul; for the body, without the spirit, is dead; it is a lifeless lump: and it is the Spirit of God that quickens dead sinners, by entering into them as the spirit of life, and causing them to live: and it is spiritual eating, or eating the flesh, and drinking the blood of Christ in a spiritual sense, which quickens, refreshes, and comforts the minds of believers; it is that by, and on which they live, and by which their spiritual strength is renewed: unless, by spirit, is meant the divine nature of Christ, by which he was quickened and raised from the dead, and ascended up into heaven, and was declared to be the Son of God with power: the flesh profiteth nothing; the human nature of Christ, though profitable, as in union with the Son of God, to be given for the life of his people, and to be an offering, and a sacrifice for their sins, yet not as alone, or as abstracted from the divine nature; nor would his flesh and blood, corporeally eaten, could, or should it be done, be of any avail to eternal life; nor is any other flesh, literally understood, profitable of itself for life; for man lives not by bread, or meat, or flesh alone, but by the word and blessing of God upon it, and along with it; nor flesh, in a figurative sense, as creature acts and performances, self-righteousness, obedience to the ceremonial law, carnal descent, and birth privileges: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life; the doctrines which Christ had then been delivering concerning himself, his flesh and blood, being spiritually understood, are the means of quickening souls. The Gospel, and the truths of it, which are the wholesome words of our Lord Jesus Christ, are the means of conveying the Spirit of God, as a spirit of illumination and sanctification, into the hearts of men, and of quickening sinners dead in trespasses and sins: the Gospel is the Spirit that giveth life, and is the savour of life unto life, when it comes not in word only, or in the bare ministry of it, but with the energy of the Holy Ghost, and the power of divine grace.”

“After he had quelled the wrangling of the Jews, and their murmuring, the Lord next allays the scandal of the disciples, and first the scandal of the departing disciples is treated; second, the devotion of those who remain is examined, at the place, "Jesus therefore said to the twelve." Concerning the first he does three things. First, the scandal of the disciples is set forth; second, the kindness of Christ in repressing it, at the place, "But Jesus knowing," etc.; third, the obstinacy and unbelief of those departing is set forth, at the place, "After this many of his disciples went back." It must be known, then, concerning the first, that there were many among the people of the Jews who clung to Christ, believing in him, and followed him, yet not having left all things, as the twelve had; and all of these were called disciples. And of these he says that many, namely among the people, who believed in him, hearing the things he had said above, said: "This saying is hard." Of these it is said in Luke 8:13: "They believe for a while, and in time of temptation they fall away." Now it says many, because, as it is said in Ecclesiastes 1:15, "the number of fools is infinite." And Matthew 20:16: "Many are called, but few are chosen." These, then, said: "This saying is hard." A thing is called hard which is not easily divided, and which offers resistance. A saying, then, is hard either because it resists the intellect, or because it resists the will—namely, when we cannot grasp it with the intellect, or it does not please the will; and in both ways this saying was hard for these men. Hard indeed to the intellect, because it exceeded the weakness of their understanding; for since they were carnal, they could not grasp what he said, that he would give them his own flesh to eat. But hard to the will, because he said many things about the power of his divinity. And although these men believed him as they would a prophet, they did not yet believe him to be God; and therefore it seemed to them that he was speaking things greater than himself. 2 Corinthians 10:10: "His letters are weighty." Ecclesiasticus 6:21: "Wisdom is exceedingly harsh to unlearned men." And therefore it follows: "Who can hear him?" They say this to excuse themselves. For since they had given themselves to him, they ought to have heard him; but because he was not teaching them pleasing things, they wished to seek some occasion for withdrawing; Proverbs 18:2: "A fool receiveth not the words of prudence, unless you say the things that are turning in his heart." Next, when he says, "But Jesus, knowing within himself that his disciples murmured at this, said to them: Doth this scandalize you?" the kindness of Christ in allaying the scandal is set forth, and first he declares and makes manifest the scandal; second he removes the cause of the scandal, at the place, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?"; third he indicates the cause itself, at the place, "But there are some of you that do not believe." Now he declares the scandal, because they had said secretly, "This saying is hard," so as not to be heard by him. But he who by the power of his divinity knew what they were saying makes this manifest; and this is what is meant by "But Jesus, knowing within himself"—that is, what they were saying within themselves—namely, that his disciples murmured at this (above, John 2:25: "He needed not that any should give testimony of man, for he knew what was in man"; Psalm 7:10: "God searcheth hearts and reins"); he said to them: "Doth this scandalize you?" As if to say: you ought not to be scandalized at this. Or it can be read as a concession, as if to say: I know that you are scandalized at this; Isaiah 8:4: "He shall be"—namely to those believing in Christ—"for a sanctification indeed; but for a stone of stumbling to the two houses of Israel," that is, to the murmuring disciples and to the crowds. But since teachers ought to avoid scandalizing their hearers, why does the Lord set forth such teachings to them, that they should be scandalized and depart? I answer. It must be said that the necessity of the teaching required that the Lord set forth such things to them. For they had pressed upon him for bodily food, whereas he had come in order to lead them to a desire for spiritual food; and therefore it was necessary that he should set forth to them the teaching concerning spiritual food. Nor, however, was their scandal caused by any fault in Christ's teaching, but by their own unbelief. For if they did not understand the Lord's words on account of their carnality, they could have questioned the Lord, as the apostles did on other occasions. But this, according to Augustine, the Lord permitted by way of dispensation, so that he might furnish to those who teach well a cause of patience and consolation against those who speak ill of their words, since even disciples presumed to detract from the words of Christ. Next, when he says, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?" he removes the occasion of scandal, which occasion was, as Chrysostom says, both concerning the person of the speaker and concerning the words spoken; and therefore he first removes the occasion of scandal as regards the person of the speaker, and second as regards the words spoken, at the place, "It is the spirit that quickeneth." Now the occasion of these men's scandal was that they had heard the Lord speak divine things of himself; hence, because they believed him to be the son of Joseph, they were scandalized by what he said of himself. And therefore, removing this occasion, God shows them his divinity more openly; hence he says: you are troubled at the things I have said concerning myself—"if then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before"—supply: what will you say? As if to say: you will never be able to deny that I have descended from heaven, that I am the giver or teacher of eternal life. He did something similar with Nathanael: for when Nathanael said, "Thou art the king of Israel," he wished to raise him to a more perfect knowledge; hence he said to him: "Thou shalt see greater things than these." And therefore he makes manifest to these men something greater that would come to pass concerning himself, saying, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?" Now he ascended into heaven with the disciples watching, as it is said in Acts 1:9. If then he ascended to where he had been before, then he had been in heaven before; above, John 3:13: "No man hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended from heaven." But observe that although the person of the Son of God and the Son of man in Christ is the same, yet because the nature is other, something belongs to him by reason of his humanity—namely, to ascend—which does not belong to him by reason of his divinity, according to which he has nowhere to ascend to, since he is eternally at the highest summit of all things, namely in the Father; but according to his humanity it belongs to him to ascend to where he was before, namely in heaven, where he was not according to human nature; which is against the error of Valentinus, who said that Christ brought a heavenly body. Thus, then, to where he had been before according to his divinity, he ascended, with the apostles watching, and by his own power, according to his humanity; below, John 16:28: "I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world; again I leave the world, and I go to the Father." But, according to Augustine, these words are introduced in another way: for he says that these men were scandalized at the Lord's saying that he would give them his flesh to eat, which they understood carnally, as though they were to eat it according to the letter, like the flesh of animals, and were scandalized. And removing this understanding, he says, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend," with his body whole, "to where he was before"—supply: will you then say that I was going to give you my flesh to eat as you eat the flesh of animals? Next, when he says, "It is the spirit that quickeneth," he removes the occasion of scandal on the part of the words spoken, and, according to Chrysostom, he first distinguishes a twofold understanding of these words; second he shows which of the two befits the words themselves, at the place, "The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life." It must be known, then, as to the first, that the words of Christ can be understood according to a twofold sense, namely according to the spiritual and according to the bodily. And therefore he says, "It is the spirit that quickeneth," that is, if you understand the words which I have said according to the spirit, that is according to the spiritual sense, they will give life; "the flesh profiteth nothing," that is, if you understand them according to the fleshly sense, they profit you nothing—indeed they harm you; because, as it is said in Romans 8:13, "If you live according to the flesh, you shall die." Now the Lord's words about eating his flesh are understood carnally when they are taken according to how the words sound outwardly, and as the nature of flesh has it; and it was in this way that they understood them, as has been said. But the Lord was saying that he would give himself to them as spiritual food—not that the true flesh of Christ is not in the sacrament of the altar, but because it is eaten in a certain spiritual and divine manner. Thus, then, the fitting sense of the words spoken is not carnal, but spiritual. Hence he adds, "The words that I have spoken to you"—namely, concerning the eating of my flesh—"are spirit and life"; that is, they have a spiritual sense, and, understood in this way, they give life. Nor is it a wonder that they have a spiritual sense, since they are from the Holy Spirit; 1 Corinthians 14:2: "It is the spirit that speaketh mysteries." And therefore the mysteries of Christ give life; Psalm 118:93: "Thy justifications I will never forget: for by them thou hast given me life." But according to Augustine it is expounded otherwise: for what he said, "the flesh profiteth nothing," is understood of the flesh of Christ. For it is manifest that the flesh of Christ, as joined to the Word and the Spirit, profits greatly in every way; otherwise the Word would have been made flesh in vain, the Father would have manifested him in the flesh in vain, as it is said in 1 Timothy chapter 4. And therefore it must be said that the flesh of Christ, considered in itself, profits nothing, and has no profitable effect, except as any other flesh. For if it be separated in the understanding from the divinity and the Holy Spirit, it has no other power than any other flesh; but if the spirit and the divinity come to it, it profits many, because it makes those who receive it remain in Christ: for it is the spirit of charity through which man remains in God; 1 John 4:13: "In this we know that we abide in him, and he in us: because he hath given us of his spirit." And therefore the Lord says: this effect, namely of eternal life which I promise you, you ought not to attribute to the flesh considered in itself, because the flesh so considered profits nothing; but if you attribute it to the spirit, and to the divinity joined to the flesh, then it confers eternal life; Galatians 5:25: "If we live in the spirit, let us also walk in the spirit." And therefore he adds, "The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life"; that is, they are to be referred to the spirit joined to the flesh; and understood in this way, they are life, namely of the soul. For just as the body lives a bodily life through the bodily spirit, so too the soul lives a spiritual life through the Holy Spirit; Psalm 103:30: "Thou shalt send forth thy spirit, and they shall be created." Next, when he says, "But there are some of you that do not believe," he shows the cause of the scandal, which was their unbelief, as if to say: the cause of your scandal is not the hardness of the saying which I have spoken to you, but your unbelief. And therefore he first shows their unbelief; second he excludes a false opinion; third he makes manifest the cause of their unbelief. The Lord shows their unbelief indeed when he says, "There are some of you that do not believe." He did not say "who do not understand," but, what is more, he intimates the cause why they do not understand: for they did not understand for this reason, that they did not believe; Isaiah 7:9, according to another reading: "Unless you believe, you shall not understand." And he said "some," so as to except the disciples; 2 Thessalonians 3:2: "All men have not faith"; Romans 10:16: "All do not obey the gospel"; Psalm 105:25: "They believed not his words." The Evangelist excludes a false suspicion when he adds, "For Jesus knew," as if to say: Jesus did not say, "There are some of you that do not believe," as though this had newly become known to him; but because he knew from the beginning—namely of the world—who they were that believed, and who it was that would betray him; Hebrews 4:13: "All things are naked and open to his eyes"; and Ecclesiasticus 23:29: "All things were known to the Lord God before they were created." Now the Lord next assigns the cause of their unbelief, which arises from the withdrawal of the grace that draws; hence he was saying, "Therefore did I say to you," as if to say: therefore it was necessary that I should say the foregoing things to you, because no one can come to me—namely, by faith—unless it has been given him by my Father. From which it follows, according to Augustine, that even the very act of believing is given to us by God. But why it is not given to all has been shown above, in the same place where the Lord said almost the same words. He repeats them here, however, for two reasons: to show that his receiving them into the faith was more for their benefit and advantage than for Christ's; Philippians 1:29: "To you it is given ... that you should believe in him"; as if to say: it is your own good that you believe; and therefore Augustine says: it is indeed a great thing to believe; rejoice that you have believed. Second, to show that he is not the son of Joseph, as they supposed, but of God: for it is God the Father who draws men to the Son, as appears from what has gone before. Next, when he says, "After this many of his disciples went back," the obstinacy of these disciples is set forth. For although the Lord had reproved them, and had removed the cause of the scandal, so far as it lay on his part, nevertheless they persevered in unbelief; and therefore it says that many of his disciples went back. He did not say "they departed," but "they went back"—from the faith which they had according to power, and, cut off from the body of Christ, they lost life, because perhaps they had not even been in the body, as Augustine says. For there are some who simply go back: namely, those who follow the Devil, to whom it was said, Matthew 4:10: "Get thee behind me, Satan." And of certain women it is said, 1 Timothy 5:15: "Some are already turned aside after Satan." Peter does not go back in this way, but after Christ; Matthew 16:23: "Go behind me, Satan." But these men went back after Satan. Hence it follows, "and after this they walked no more with him"—namely although it is required of us that we walk with Jesus; Micah 6:8: "I will show thee, O man, what is good," and it follows, "to walk carefully with thy God." Next, when it is added, "Jesus therefore said to the twelve: Will you also go away?" the Lord examines the disciples who remained; and first the examination of the disciples is set forth by Christ's question; second the devotion of those remaining is added, by Peter's answer, at the place, "Simon Peter therefore answered him"; third Peter's answer is corrected, at the place, "Jesus answered them." Now the Lord examines the twelve who had remained, whether they wished to persist; and therefore he said to the twelve—namely, the apostles: "Will you also go away?" And this for two reasons. First, lest, because these had remained while the others departed, they should ascribe this to their own righteousness and grow proud, thinking that they had done Christ a favor by not abandoning him; and therefore, by showing that he did not need their following, he holds and confirms them the more. Job 35:7: "And if thou do justly, what shalt thou give him, or what shall he receive of thy hand?" Second, because it sometimes happens that someone has the will to depart from another, and yet is held back by shame; and therefore, not wishing them to be constrained by shame to remain with him (since to serve unwillingly is the same as not to serve at all), he removes even the shame and the necessity of remaining, placing it in their own judgment whether they wished to remain or to depart, because "God loveth a cheerful giver," as it is said in 2 Corinthians 9:7. There follows the devotion of those who remained, by Peter's answer: for he, a lover of his brethren, a preserver of friendship, and bearing a special affection toward Christ, answers on behalf of the whole company, saying: "Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life. And we have believed." Here he does three things. First, he extols Christ's excellence; second, he commends his teaching; and third, he professes his faith. He extols his excellence indeed when he says, "Lord, to whom shall we go?" As if to say: you are driving us away from you; give us another better than you, to whom we may go. But certainly "there is none like unto thee among the strong, O Lord": Exodus 15:11, and Psalm 88:7: "Who is like to God?" And therefore we will not leave you; Psalm 138:7: "Whither shall I go from thy spirit?" And, according to Chrysostom, Peter's word is greatly indicative of friendship: for by now Christ was more honorable to them than fathers and mothers. But he commends his teaching when he says, "Thou hast the words of eternal life." Now Moses had the words of God, and likewise the prophets, but rarely the words of eternal life; but you promise eternal life—what greater thing, then, do we seek? Above: "he that believeth in me hath life everlasting"; and above, John 3:39: "he that believeth in the Son of God hath life everlasting." But he professes his faith when he adds, "And we have believed and have known that thou art the Christ, the Son of God." For in our faith two things must chiefly be believed, namely the mystery of the Trinity and of the Incarnation; and these two things Peter here confesses. The mystery of the Trinity indeed, when he says, "Thou art the Son of God." For in saying that he is the Son of God, he makes mention of the person of the Father and of the Son, and at the same time also of the Holy Spirit, who is the love of the Father and the Son, and the bond of both. But the mystery of the Incarnation, when he says, "Thou art the Christ"; for "Christ" in Greek is called "anointed" in Latin—namely with the invisible oil of the Holy Spirit; but not according to the divine nature, because one who is anointed with the Holy Spirit is made better by that very anointing, but according as he is God, Christ is not made better; therefore he is anointed according as he is man. Now he says "we have believed and have known," because to believe comes before to know; and therefore if we wished to know before believing, we would not know, nor would we be able to believe, as Augustine says. Isaiah 7:9, according to another reading: "Unless you believe, you shall not understand." Now the Lord corrects Peter's answer when he says, "Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?" And first the Lord's answer is set forth; second the Evangelist's explanation, at the place, "Now he meant Judas." Because Peter had been generous in his answer, including all of them, saying thus, "And we have believed, and have known that thou art the Christ, the Son of God," by which it seemed that all would attain to eternal life, therefore the Lord excepted Judas from the company of believers. But this indeed was a commendable confidence in Peter, that he suspected no evil of a companion; but in the Lord it is a wisdom to be admired, that he saw hidden things. And therefore he says, "Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?" Not by nature, but by imitation of diabolical malice. Wisdom 2:24: "By the envy of the devil, death came into the world: and they follow him that are of his side"; below, John 13:27: "After the morsel, Satan entered into him," namely because he was made conformed to his malice. But if Christ chose Judas, and he became evil, it seems that he erred in his choosing. To this it is answered, first, according to Chrysostom, that this is not said of the election of predestination, but of election to some office, and to a state of present righteousness, to which someone is sometimes chosen not according to what is future, but according to what he presently is in fact; because by this kind of election free will is not taken away, nor is the possibility of sinning removed; hence it is said, 1 Corinthians 10:12: "He that thinketh himself to stand, let him take heed lest he fall." Thus, then, the Lord chose Judas not as one who was then evil, yet the possibility of sinning was not taken from him by this election. Second, it is answered, according to Augustine, that the Lord chose Judas though evil; and because it belongs to the good to use evil for good, although he knew him to be evil, God made good use of his evil, in that he endured being betrayed by him in order to redeem us. Or it must be said that the choosing of the twelve apostles is not here referred to the persons, but to the number; as if to say: I chose in you the number twelve. For this number is fittingly consecrated to those who were to preach the faith of the Holy Trinity through the four corners of the world; and this number indeed did not perish, because in the place of the perishing traitor Matthias was put in his stead. Or, according to Ambrose, he chose Judas though evil for this reason, that he might console our weakness, if it should ever happen to us to be betrayed by friends, since we read that the Lord and Master was betrayed by a disciple. But it is asked here why, when the Lord says, "One of you is a devil," the disciples say nothing; and afterward, when he says, below John 13:21, "One of you shall betray me," they said, "Is it I, Lord?" I answer that it must be said that the reason for this is that here the Lord spoke generally, saying that one of them was a devil, which can be referred to any kind of malice whatsoever, and therefore they were not moved; but there, hearing of so great a deed—namely, the betrayal of their Master—they were not able to contain themselves. Or it must be said to this, that when the Lord spoke these words, each of them had confidence in his own strength, and therefore they did not fear for themselves. But when they heard Peter told, "Get behind me, Satan," they were terrified, and thought more meanly of themselves; and therefore, wavering, they said: "Is it I, Lord?" Now this answer, which the Lord had made obscurely, the Evangelist explains, saying, "Now he meant Judas," as the outcome of the event proved, as is evident below, in chapter 13.”

“But there are some of you that believe not,.... Notwithstanding the ministry they sat under, and the words they heard; for though they professed to believe in Jesus, as the Messiah, yet they did not truly believe in him; their faith was not a living faith, or of a spiritual kind, but a mere historical and temporary one, and was feigned and hypocritical: for Jesus knew from the beginning; of his ministry, and of their profession of him, being God omniscient, and the searcher of hearts: who they were that believed not; i.e. in him, as the Arabic version reads: notwithstanding their following him, and professing to believe in him, and the great outward respect and esteem they showed to him, he could see through all those masks they put on, and knew they had no true faith of him in them; and the same knowledge he has of every professor of his name: he knows whether their faith is of the right kind or not; whether they have obtained the like precious faith with God's elect; or whether their profession is only a verbal one. In some copies it is read, "who they were that believed"; who were true believers, as well as who were hypocrites. And who should betray him: he not only knew how it was with the multitude of the disciples that professed love to him, and faith in him; but he also particularly knew the case of the twelve apostles, and that one of them should betray him, and who he was. This was determined in the decrees of God, and was foretold in the prophecies of the Old Testament, and was predicted by Christ; and the person was pointed at by him before it was done.”

“After he had quelled the wrangling of the Jews, and their murmuring, the Lord next allays the scandal of the disciples, and first the scandal of the departing disciples is treated; second, the devotion of those who remain is examined, at the place, "Jesus therefore said to the twelve." Concerning the first he does three things. First, the scandal of the disciples is set forth; second, the kindness of Christ in repressing it, at the place, "But Jesus knowing," etc.; third, the obstinacy and unbelief of those departing is set forth, at the place, "After this many of his disciples went back." It must be known, then, concerning the first, that there were many among the people of the Jews who clung to Christ, believing in him, and followed him, yet not having left all things, as the twelve had; and all of these were called disciples. And of these he says that many, namely among the people, who believed in him, hearing the things he had said above, said: "This saying is hard." Of these it is said in Luke 8:13: "They believe for a while, and in time of temptation they fall away." Now it says many, because, as it is said in Ecclesiastes 1:15, "the number of fools is infinite." And Matthew 20:16: "Many are called, but few are chosen." These, then, said: "This saying is hard." A thing is called hard which is not easily divided, and which offers resistance. A saying, then, is hard either because it resists the intellect, or because it resists the will—namely, when we cannot grasp it with the intellect, or it does not please the will; and in both ways this saying was hard for these men. Hard indeed to the intellect, because it exceeded the weakness of their understanding; for since they were carnal, they could not grasp what he said, that he would give them his own flesh to eat. But hard to the will, because he said many things about the power of his divinity. And although these men believed him as they would a prophet, they did not yet believe him to be God; and therefore it seemed to them that he was speaking things greater than himself. 2 Corinthians 10:10: "His letters are weighty." Ecclesiasticus 6:21: "Wisdom is exceedingly harsh to unlearned men." And therefore it follows: "Who can hear him?" They say this to excuse themselves. For since they had given themselves to him, they ought to have heard him; but because he was not teaching them pleasing things, they wished to seek some occasion for withdrawing; Proverbs 18:2: "A fool receiveth not the words of prudence, unless you say the things that are turning in his heart." Next, when he says, "But Jesus, knowing within himself that his disciples murmured at this, said to them: Doth this scandalize you?" the kindness of Christ in allaying the scandal is set forth, and first he declares and makes manifest the scandal; second he removes the cause of the scandal, at the place, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?"; third he indicates the cause itself, at the place, "But there are some of you that do not believe." Now he declares the scandal, because they had said secretly, "This saying is hard," so as not to be heard by him. But he who by the power of his divinity knew what they were saying makes this manifest; and this is what is meant by "But Jesus, knowing within himself"—that is, what they were saying within themselves—namely, that his disciples murmured at this (above, John 2:25: "He needed not that any should give testimony of man, for he knew what was in man"; Psalm 7:10: "God searcheth hearts and reins"); he said to them: "Doth this scandalize you?" As if to say: you ought not to be scandalized at this. Or it can be read as a concession, as if to say: I know that you are scandalized at this; Isaiah 8:4: "He shall be"—namely to those believing in Christ—"for a sanctification indeed; but for a stone of stumbling to the two houses of Israel," that is, to the murmuring disciples and to the crowds. But since teachers ought to avoid scandalizing their hearers, why does the Lord set forth such teachings to them, that they should be scandalized and depart? I answer. It must be said that the necessity of the teaching required that the Lord set forth such things to them. For they had pressed upon him for bodily food, whereas he had come in order to lead them to a desire for spiritual food; and therefore it was necessary that he should set forth to them the teaching concerning spiritual food. Nor, however, was their scandal caused by any fault in Christ's teaching, but by their own unbelief. For if they did not understand the Lord's words on account of their carnality, they could have questioned the Lord, as the apostles did on other occasions. But this, according to Augustine, the Lord permitted by way of dispensation, so that he might furnish to those who teach well a cause of patience and consolation against those who speak ill of their words, since even disciples presumed to detract from the words of Christ. Next, when he says, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?" he removes the occasion of scandal, which occasion was, as Chrysostom says, both concerning the person of the speaker and concerning the words spoken; and therefore he first removes the occasion of scandal as regards the person of the speaker, and second as regards the words spoken, at the place, "It is the spirit that quickeneth." Now the occasion of these men's scandal was that they had heard the Lord speak divine things of himself; hence, because they believed him to be the son of Joseph, they were scandalized by what he said of himself. And therefore, removing this occasion, God shows them his divinity more openly; hence he says: you are troubled at the things I have said concerning myself—"if then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before"—supply: what will you say? As if to say: you will never be able to deny that I have descended from heaven, that I am the giver or teacher of eternal life. He did something similar with Nathanael: for when Nathanael said, "Thou art the king of Israel," he wished to raise him to a more perfect knowledge; hence he said to him: "Thou shalt see greater things than these." And therefore he makes manifest to these men something greater that would come to pass concerning himself, saying, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?" Now he ascended into heaven with the disciples watching, as it is said in Acts 1:9. If then he ascended to where he had been before, then he had been in heaven before; above, John 3:13: "No man hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended from heaven." But observe that although the person of the Son of God and the Son of man in Christ is the same, yet because the nature is other, something belongs to him by reason of his humanity—namely, to ascend—which does not belong to him by reason of his divinity, according to which he has nowhere to ascend to, since he is eternally at the highest summit of all things, namely in the Father; but according to his humanity it belongs to him to ascend to where he was before, namely in heaven, where he was not according to human nature; which is against the error of Valentinus, who said that Christ brought a heavenly body. Thus, then, to where he had been before according to his divinity, he ascended, with the apostles watching, and by his own power, according to his humanity; below, John 16:28: "I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world; again I leave the world, and I go to the Father." But, according to Augustine, these words are introduced in another way: for he says that these men were scandalized at the Lord's saying that he would give them his flesh to eat, which they understood carnally, as though they were to eat it according to the letter, like the flesh of animals, and were scandalized. And removing this understanding, he says, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend," with his body whole, "to where he was before"—supply: will you then say that I was going to give you my flesh to eat as you eat the flesh of animals? Next, when he says, "It is the spirit that quickeneth," he removes the occasion of scandal on the part of the words spoken, and, according to Chrysostom, he first distinguishes a twofold understanding of these words; second he shows which of the two befits the words themselves, at the place, "The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life." It must be known, then, as to the first, that the words of Christ can be understood according to a twofold sense, namely according to the spiritual and according to the bodily. And therefore he says, "It is the spirit that quickeneth," that is, if you understand the words which I have said according to the spirit, that is according to the spiritual sense, they will give life; "the flesh profiteth nothing," that is, if you understand them according to the fleshly sense, they profit you nothing—indeed they harm you; because, as it is said in Romans 8:13, "If you live according to the flesh, you shall die." Now the Lord's words about eating his flesh are understood carnally when they are taken according to how the words sound outwardly, and as the nature of flesh has it; and it was in this way that they understood them, as has been said. But the Lord was saying that he would give himself to them as spiritual food—not that the true flesh of Christ is not in the sacrament of the altar, but because it is eaten in a certain spiritual and divine manner. Thus, then, the fitting sense of the words spoken is not carnal, but spiritual. Hence he adds, "The words that I have spoken to you"—namely, concerning the eating of my flesh—"are spirit and life"; that is, they have a spiritual sense, and, understood in this way, they give life. Nor is it a wonder that they have a spiritual sense, since they are from the Holy Spirit; 1 Corinthians 14:2: "It is the spirit that speaketh mysteries." And therefore the mysteries of Christ give life; Psalm 118:93: "Thy justifications I will never forget: for by them thou hast given me life." But according to Augustine it is expounded otherwise: for what he said, "the flesh profiteth nothing," is understood of the flesh of Christ. For it is manifest that the flesh of Christ, as joined to the Word and the Spirit, profits greatly in every way; otherwise the Word would have been made flesh in vain, the Father would have manifested him in the flesh in vain, as it is said in 1 Timothy chapter 4. And therefore it must be said that the flesh of Christ, considered in itself, profits nothing, and has no profitable effect, except as any other flesh. For if it be separated in the understanding from the divinity and the Holy Spirit, it has no other power than any other flesh; but if the spirit and the divinity come to it, it profits many, because it makes those who receive it remain in Christ: for it is the spirit of charity through which man remains in God; 1 John 4:13: "In this we know that we abide in him, and he in us: because he hath given us of his spirit." And therefore the Lord says: this effect, namely of eternal life which I promise you, you ought not to attribute to the flesh considered in itself, because the flesh so considered profits nothing; but if you attribute it to the spirit, and to the divinity joined to the flesh, then it confers eternal life; Galatians 5:25: "If we live in the spirit, let us also walk in the spirit." And therefore he adds, "The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life"; that is, they are to be referred to the spirit joined to the flesh; and understood in this way, they are life, namely of the soul. For just as the body lives a bodily life through the bodily spirit, so too the soul lives a spiritual life through the Holy Spirit; Psalm 103:30: "Thou shalt send forth thy spirit, and they shall be created." Next, when he says, "But there are some of you that do not believe," he shows the cause of the scandal, which was their unbelief, as if to say: the cause of your scandal is not the hardness of the saying which I have spoken to you, but your unbelief. And therefore he first shows their unbelief; second he excludes a false opinion; third he makes manifest the cause of their unbelief. The Lord shows their unbelief indeed when he says, "There are some of you that do not believe." He did not say "who do not understand," but, what is more, he intimates the cause why they do not understand: for they did not understand for this reason, that they did not believe; Isaiah 7:9, according to another reading: "Unless you believe, you shall not understand." And he said "some," so as to except the disciples; 2 Thessalonians 3:2: "All men have not faith"; Romans 10:16: "All do not obey the gospel"; Psalm 105:25: "They believed not his words." The Evangelist excludes a false suspicion when he adds, "For Jesus knew," as if to say: Jesus did not say, "There are some of you that do not believe," as though this had newly become known to him; but because he knew from the beginning—namely of the world—who they were that believed, and who it was that would betray him; Hebrews 4:13: "All things are naked and open to his eyes"; and Ecclesiasticus 23:29: "All things were known to the Lord God before they were created." Now the Lord next assigns the cause of their unbelief, which arises from the withdrawal of the grace that draws; hence he was saying, "Therefore did I say to you," as if to say: therefore it was necessary that I should say the foregoing things to you, because no one can come to me—namely, by faith—unless it has been given him by my Father. From which it follows, according to Augustine, that even the very act of believing is given to us by God. But why it is not given to all has been shown above, in the same place where the Lord said almost the same words. He repeats them here, however, for two reasons: to show that his receiving them into the faith was more for their benefit and advantage than for Christ's; Philippians 1:29: "To you it is given ... that you should believe in him"; as if to say: it is your own good that you believe; and therefore Augustine says: it is indeed a great thing to believe; rejoice that you have believed. Second, to show that he is not the son of Joseph, as they supposed, but of God: for it is God the Father who draws men to the Son, as appears from what has gone before. Next, when he says, "After this many of his disciples went back," the obstinacy of these disciples is set forth. For although the Lord had reproved them, and had removed the cause of the scandal, so far as it lay on his part, nevertheless they persevered in unbelief; and therefore it says that many of his disciples went back. He did not say "they departed," but "they went back"—from the faith which they had according to power, and, cut off from the body of Christ, they lost life, because perhaps they had not even been in the body, as Augustine says. For there are some who simply go back: namely, those who follow the Devil, to whom it was said, Matthew 4:10: "Get thee behind me, Satan." And of certain women it is said, 1 Timothy 5:15: "Some are already turned aside after Satan." Peter does not go back in this way, but after Christ; Matthew 16:23: "Go behind me, Satan." But these men went back after Satan. Hence it follows, "and after this they walked no more with him"—namely although it is required of us that we walk with Jesus; Micah 6:8: "I will show thee, O man, what is good," and it follows, "to walk carefully with thy God." Next, when it is added, "Jesus therefore said to the twelve: Will you also go away?" the Lord examines the disciples who remained; and first the examination of the disciples is set forth by Christ's question; second the devotion of those remaining is added, by Peter's answer, at the place, "Simon Peter therefore answered him"; third Peter's answer is corrected, at the place, "Jesus answered them." Now the Lord examines the twelve who had remained, whether they wished to persist; and therefore he said to the twelve—namely, the apostles: "Will you also go away?" And this for two reasons. First, lest, because these had remained while the others departed, they should ascribe this to their own righteousness and grow proud, thinking that they had done Christ a favor by not abandoning him; and therefore, by showing that he did not need their following, he holds and confirms them the more. Job 35:7: "And if thou do justly, what shalt thou give him, or what shall he receive of thy hand?" Second, because it sometimes happens that someone has the will to depart from another, and yet is held back by shame; and therefore, not wishing them to be constrained by shame to remain with him (since to serve unwillingly is the same as not to serve at all), he removes even the shame and the necessity of remaining, placing it in their own judgment whether they wished to remain or to depart, because "God loveth a cheerful giver," as it is said in 2 Corinthians 9:7. There follows the devotion of those who remained, by Peter's answer: for he, a lover of his brethren, a preserver of friendship, and bearing a special affection toward Christ, answers on behalf of the whole company, saying: "Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life. And we have believed." Here he does three things. First, he extols Christ's excellence; second, he commends his teaching; and third, he professes his faith. He extols his excellence indeed when he says, "Lord, to whom shall we go?" As if to say: you are driving us away from you; give us another better than you, to whom we may go. But certainly "there is none like unto thee among the strong, O Lord": Exodus 15:11, and Psalm 88:7: "Who is like to God?" And therefore we will not leave you; Psalm 138:7: "Whither shall I go from thy spirit?" And, according to Chrysostom, Peter's word is greatly indicative of friendship: for by now Christ was more honorable to them than fathers and mothers. But he commends his teaching when he says, "Thou hast the words of eternal life." Now Moses had the words of God, and likewise the prophets, but rarely the words of eternal life; but you promise eternal life—what greater thing, then, do we seek? Above: "he that believeth in me hath life everlasting"; and above, John 3:39: "he that believeth in the Son of God hath life everlasting." But he professes his faith when he adds, "And we have believed and have known that thou art the Christ, the Son of God." For in our faith two things must chiefly be believed, namely the mystery of the Trinity and of the Incarnation; and these two things Peter here confesses. The mystery of the Trinity indeed, when he says, "Thou art the Son of God." For in saying that he is the Son of God, he makes mention of the person of the Father and of the Son, and at the same time also of the Holy Spirit, who is the love of the Father and the Son, and the bond of both. But the mystery of the Incarnation, when he says, "Thou art the Christ"; for "Christ" in Greek is called "anointed" in Latin—namely with the invisible oil of the Holy Spirit; but not according to the divine nature, because one who is anointed with the Holy Spirit is made better by that very anointing, but according as he is God, Christ is not made better; therefore he is anointed according as he is man. Now he says "we have believed and have known," because to believe comes before to know; and therefore if we wished to know before believing, we would not know, nor would we be able to believe, as Augustine says. Isaiah 7:9, according to another reading: "Unless you believe, you shall not understand." Now the Lord corrects Peter's answer when he says, "Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?" And first the Lord's answer is set forth; second the Evangelist's explanation, at the place, "Now he meant Judas." Because Peter had been generous in his answer, including all of them, saying thus, "And we have believed, and have known that thou art the Christ, the Son of God," by which it seemed that all would attain to eternal life, therefore the Lord excepted Judas from the company of believers. But this indeed was a commendable confidence in Peter, that he suspected no evil of a companion; but in the Lord it is a wisdom to be admired, that he saw hidden things. And therefore he says, "Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?" Not by nature, but by imitation of diabolical malice. Wisdom 2:24: "By the envy of the devil, death came into the world: and they follow him that are of his side"; below, John 13:27: "After the morsel, Satan entered into him," namely because he was made conformed to his malice. But if Christ chose Judas, and he became evil, it seems that he erred in his choosing. To this it is answered, first, according to Chrysostom, that this is not said of the election of predestination, but of election to some office, and to a state of present righteousness, to which someone is sometimes chosen not according to what is future, but according to what he presently is in fact; because by this kind of election free will is not taken away, nor is the possibility of sinning removed; hence it is said, 1 Corinthians 10:12: "He that thinketh himself to stand, let him take heed lest he fall." Thus, then, the Lord chose Judas not as one who was then evil, yet the possibility of sinning was not taken from him by this election. Second, it is answered, according to Augustine, that the Lord chose Judas though evil; and because it belongs to the good to use evil for good, although he knew him to be evil, God made good use of his evil, in that he endured being betrayed by him in order to redeem us. Or it must be said that the choosing of the twelve apostles is not here referred to the persons, but to the number; as if to say: I chose in you the number twelve. For this number is fittingly consecrated to those who were to preach the faith of the Holy Trinity through the four corners of the world; and this number indeed did not perish, because in the place of the perishing traitor Matthias was put in his stead. Or, according to Ambrose, he chose Judas though evil for this reason, that he might console our weakness, if it should ever happen to us to be betrayed by friends, since we read that the Lord and Master was betrayed by a disciple. But it is asked here why, when the Lord says, "One of you is a devil," the disciples say nothing; and afterward, when he says, below John 13:21, "One of you shall betray me," they said, "Is it I, Lord?" I answer that it must be said that the reason for this is that here the Lord spoke generally, saying that one of them was a devil, which can be referred to any kind of malice whatsoever, and therefore they were not moved; but there, hearing of so great a deed—namely, the betrayal of their Master—they were not able to contain themselves. Or it must be said to this, that when the Lord spoke these words, each of them had confidence in his own strength, and therefore they did not fear for themselves. But when they heard Peter told, "Get behind me, Satan," they were terrified, and thought more meanly of themselves; and therefore, wavering, they said: "Is it I, Lord?" Now this answer, which the Lord had made obscurely, the Evangelist explains, saying, "Now he meant Judas," as the outcome of the event proved, as is evident below, in chapter 13.”

“It is the spirit that quickeneth - It is the spiritual sense only of my words that is to be attended to, and through which life is to be attained, Co2 3:6. Such only as eat and drink what I have mentioned, in a spiritual sense, are to expect eternal life. The flesh profiteth nothing - If ye could even eat my flesh and drink my blood, this would not avail for your salvation. These words contain a caution that the hearers should not understand his words in the strict literal sense, as if his body were really Bread, and as if his flesh and blood were really to be eaten and drank. The words that I speak - Or, I have spoken. Instead of λαλω, I speak, I read λελαληκα, I have spoken, on the authority of BCDKLT, thirteen others; the Syriac, all the Arabic, all the Persic, Coptic, Ethiopic, Gothic, Slavonic, Vulgate, all the Itala; Origen, Eusebius, Athanasius, Basil, Cyril, Chrysostom, Tertullian, Ambrosias, Augustin, Gaudentius, and Vigilius Taps. This is an important reading, and plainly shows that our Lord's words here do not refer to any new point of doctrine which he was then inculcating, but to what he had spoken concerning his being the living bread, and concerning the eating of his flesh, and drinking of his blood, in the preceding verses. Are spirit, and they are life - As my words are to be spiritually understood, so the life they promise is of a spiritual nature: see Bishop Pearce.”

“After he had quelled the wrangling of the Jews, and their murmuring, the Lord next allays the scandal of the disciples, and first the scandal of the departing disciples is treated; second, the devotion of those who remain is examined, at the place, "Jesus therefore said to the twelve." Concerning the first he does three things. First, the scandal of the disciples is set forth; second, the kindness of Christ in repressing it, at the place, "But Jesus knowing," etc.; third, the obstinacy and unbelief of those departing is set forth, at the place, "After this many of his disciples went back." It must be known, then, concerning the first, that there were many among the people of the Jews who clung to Christ, believing in him, and followed him, yet not having left all things, as the twelve had; and all of these were called disciples. And of these he says that many, namely among the people, who believed in him, hearing the things he had said above, said: "This saying is hard." Of these it is said in Luke 8:13: "They believe for a while, and in time of temptation they fall away." Now it says many, because, as it is said in Ecclesiastes 1:15, "the number of fools is infinite." And Matthew 20:16: "Many are called, but few are chosen." These, then, said: "This saying is hard." A thing is called hard which is not easily divided, and which offers resistance. A saying, then, is hard either because it resists the intellect, or because it resists the will—namely, when we cannot grasp it with the intellect, or it does not please the will; and in both ways this saying was hard for these men. Hard indeed to the intellect, because it exceeded the weakness of their understanding; for since they were carnal, they could not grasp what he said, that he would give them his own flesh to eat. But hard to the will, because he said many things about the power of his divinity. And although these men believed him as they would a prophet, they did not yet believe him to be God; and therefore it seemed to them that he was speaking things greater than himself. 2 Corinthians 10:10: "His letters are weighty." Ecclesiasticus 6:21: "Wisdom is exceedingly harsh to unlearned men." And therefore it follows: "Who can hear him?" They say this to excuse themselves. For since they had given themselves to him, they ought to have heard him; but because he was not teaching them pleasing things, they wished to seek some occasion for withdrawing; Proverbs 18:2: "A fool receiveth not the words of prudence, unless you say the things that are turning in his heart." Next, when he says, "But Jesus, knowing within himself that his disciples murmured at this, said to them: Doth this scandalize you?" the kindness of Christ in allaying the scandal is set forth, and first he declares and makes manifest the scandal; second he removes the cause of the scandal, at the place, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?"; third he indicates the cause itself, at the place, "But there are some of you that do not believe." Now he declares the scandal, because they had said secretly, "This saying is hard," so as not to be heard by him. But he who by the power of his divinity knew what they were saying makes this manifest; and this is what is meant by "But Jesus, knowing within himself"—that is, what they were saying within themselves—namely, that his disciples murmured at this (above, John 2:25: "He needed not that any should give testimony of man, for he knew what was in man"; Psalm 7:10: "God searcheth hearts and reins"); he said to them: "Doth this scandalize you?" As if to say: you ought not to be scandalized at this. Or it can be read as a concession, as if to say: I know that you are scandalized at this; Isaiah 8:4: "He shall be"—namely to those believing in Christ—"for a sanctification indeed; but for a stone of stumbling to the two houses of Israel," that is, to the murmuring disciples and to the crowds. But since teachers ought to avoid scandalizing their hearers, why does the Lord set forth such teachings to them, that they should be scandalized and depart? I answer. It must be said that the necessity of the teaching required that the Lord set forth such things to them. For they had pressed upon him for bodily food, whereas he had come in order to lead them to a desire for spiritual food; and therefore it was necessary that he should set forth to them the teaching concerning spiritual food. Nor, however, was their scandal caused by any fault in Christ's teaching, but by their own unbelief. For if they did not understand the Lord's words on account of their carnality, they could have questioned the Lord, as the apostles did on other occasions. But this, according to Augustine, the Lord permitted by way of dispensation, so that he might furnish to those who teach well a cause of patience and consolation against those who speak ill of their words, since even disciples presumed to detract from the words of Christ. Next, when he says, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?" he removes the occasion of scandal, which occasion was, as Chrysostom says, both concerning the person of the speaker and concerning the words spoken; and therefore he first removes the occasion of scandal as regards the person of the speaker, and second as regards the words spoken, at the place, "It is the spirit that quickeneth." Now the occasion of these men's scandal was that they had heard the Lord speak divine things of himself; hence, because they believed him to be the son of Joseph, they were scandalized by what he said of himself. And therefore, removing this occasion, God shows them his divinity more openly; hence he says: you are troubled at the things I have said concerning myself—"if then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before"—supply: what will you say? As if to say: you will never be able to deny that I have descended from heaven, that I am the giver or teacher of eternal life. He did something similar with Nathanael: for when Nathanael said, "Thou art the king of Israel," he wished to raise him to a more perfect knowledge; hence he said to him: "Thou shalt see greater things than these." And therefore he makes manifest to these men something greater that would come to pass concerning himself, saying, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?" Now he ascended into heaven with the disciples watching, as it is said in Acts 1:9. If then he ascended to where he had been before, then he had been in heaven before; above, John 3:13: "No man hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended from heaven." But observe that although the person of the Son of God and the Son of man in Christ is the same, yet because the nature is other, something belongs to him by reason of his humanity—namely, to ascend—which does not belong to him by reason of his divinity, according to which he has nowhere to ascend to, since he is eternally at the highest summit of all things, namely in the Father; but according to his humanity it belongs to him to ascend to where he was before, namely in heaven, where he was not according to human nature; which is against the error of Valentinus, who said that Christ brought a heavenly body. Thus, then, to where he had been before according to his divinity, he ascended, with the apostles watching, and by his own power, according to his humanity; below, John 16:28: "I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world; again I leave the world, and I go to the Father." But, according to Augustine, these words are introduced in another way: for he says that these men were scandalized at the Lord's saying that he would give them his flesh to eat, which they understood carnally, as though they were to eat it according to the letter, like the flesh of animals, and were scandalized. And removing this understanding, he says, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend," with his body whole, "to where he was before"—supply: will you then say that I was going to give you my flesh to eat as you eat the flesh of animals? Next, when he says, "It is the spirit that quickeneth," he removes the occasion of scandal on the part of the words spoken, and, according to Chrysostom, he first distinguishes a twofold understanding of these words; second he shows which of the two befits the words themselves, at the place, "The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life." It must be known, then, as to the first, that the words of Christ can be understood according to a twofold sense, namely according to the spiritual and according to the bodily. And therefore he says, "It is the spirit that quickeneth," that is, if you understand the words which I have said according to the spirit, that is according to the spiritual sense, they will give life; "the flesh profiteth nothing," that is, if you understand them according to the fleshly sense, they profit you nothing—indeed they harm you; because, as it is said in Romans 8:13, "If you live according to the flesh, you shall die." Now the Lord's words about eating his flesh are understood carnally when they are taken according to how the words sound outwardly, and as the nature of flesh has it; and it was in this way that they understood them, as has been said. But the Lord was saying that he would give himself to them as spiritual food—not that the true flesh of Christ is not in the sacrament of the altar, but because it is eaten in a certain spiritual and divine manner. Thus, then, the fitting sense of the words spoken is not carnal, but spiritual. Hence he adds, "The words that I have spoken to you"—namely, concerning the eating of my flesh—"are spirit and life"; that is, they have a spiritual sense, and, understood in this way, they give life. Nor is it a wonder that they have a spiritual sense, since they are from the Holy Spirit; 1 Corinthians 14:2: "It is the spirit that speaketh mysteries." And therefore the mysteries of Christ give life; Psalm 118:93: "Thy justifications I will never forget: for by them thou hast given me life." But according to Augustine it is expounded otherwise: for what he said, "the flesh profiteth nothing," is understood of the flesh of Christ. For it is manifest that the flesh of Christ, as joined to the Word and the Spirit, profits greatly in every way; otherwise the Word would have been made flesh in vain, the Father would have manifested him in the flesh in vain, as it is said in 1 Timothy chapter 4. And therefore it must be said that the flesh of Christ, considered in itself, profits nothing, and has no profitable effect, except as any other flesh. For if it be separated in the understanding from the divinity and the Holy Spirit, it has no other power than any other flesh; but if the spirit and the divinity come to it, it profits many, because it makes those who receive it remain in Christ: for it is the spirit of charity through which man remains in God; 1 John 4:13: "In this we know that we abide in him, and he in us: because he hath given us of his spirit." And therefore the Lord says: this effect, namely of eternal life which I promise you, you ought not to attribute to the flesh considered in itself, because the flesh so considered profits nothing; but if you attribute it to the spirit, and to the divinity joined to the flesh, then it confers eternal life; Galatians 5:25: "If we live in the spirit, let us also walk in the spirit." And therefore he adds, "The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life"; that is, they are to be referred to the spirit joined to the flesh; and understood in this way, they are life, namely of the soul. For just as the body lives a bodily life through the bodily spirit, so too the soul lives a spiritual life through the Holy Spirit; Psalm 103:30: "Thou shalt send forth thy spirit, and they shall be created." Next, when he says, "But there are some of you that do not believe," he shows the cause of the scandal, which was their unbelief, as if to say: the cause of your scandal is not the hardness of the saying which I have spoken to you, but your unbelief. And therefore he first shows their unbelief; second he excludes a false opinion; third he makes manifest the cause of their unbelief. The Lord shows their unbelief indeed when he says, "There are some of you that do not believe." He did not say "who do not understand," but, what is more, he intimates the cause why they do not understand: for they did not understand for this reason, that they did not believe; Isaiah 7:9, according to another reading: "Unless you believe, you shall not understand." And he said "some," so as to except the disciples; 2 Thessalonians 3:2: "All men have not faith"; Romans 10:16: "All do not obey the gospel"; Psalm 105:25: "They believed not his words." The Evangelist excludes a false suspicion when he adds, "For Jesus knew," as if to say: Jesus did not say, "There are some of you that do not believe," as though this had newly become known to him; but because he knew from the beginning—namely of the world—who they were that believed, and who it was that would betray him; Hebrews 4:13: "All things are naked and open to his eyes"; and Ecclesiasticus 23:29: "All things were known to the Lord God before they were created." Now the Lord next assigns the cause of their unbelief, which arises from the withdrawal of the grace that draws; hence he was saying, "Therefore did I say to you," as if to say: therefore it was necessary that I should say the foregoing things to you, because no one can come to me—namely, by faith—unless it has been given him by my Father. From which it follows, according to Augustine, that even the very act of believing is given to us by God. But why it is not given to all has been shown above, in the same place where the Lord said almost the same words. He repeats them here, however, for two reasons: to show that his receiving them into the faith was more for their benefit and advantage than for Christ's; Philippians 1:29: "To you it is given ... that you should believe in him"; as if to say: it is your own good that you believe; and therefore Augustine says: it is indeed a great thing to believe; rejoice that you have believed. Second, to show that he is not the son of Joseph, as they supposed, but of God: for it is God the Father who draws men to the Son, as appears from what has gone before. Next, when he says, "After this many of his disciples went back," the obstinacy of these disciples is set forth. For although the Lord had reproved them, and had removed the cause of the scandal, so far as it lay on his part, nevertheless they persevered in unbelief; and therefore it says that many of his disciples went back. He did not say "they departed," but "they went back"—from the faith which they had according to power, and, cut off from the body of Christ, they lost life, because perhaps they had not even been in the body, as Augustine says. For there are some who simply go back: namely, those who follow the Devil, to whom it was said, Matthew 4:10: "Get thee behind me, Satan." And of certain women it is said, 1 Timothy 5:15: "Some are already turned aside after Satan." Peter does not go back in this way, but after Christ; Matthew 16:23: "Go behind me, Satan." But these men went back after Satan. Hence it follows, "and after this they walked no more with him"—namely although it is required of us that we walk with Jesus; Micah 6:8: "I will show thee, O man, what is good," and it follows, "to walk carefully with thy God." Next, when it is added, "Jesus therefore said to the twelve: Will you also go away?" the Lord examines the disciples who remained; and first the examination of the disciples is set forth by Christ's question; second the devotion of those remaining is added, by Peter's answer, at the place, "Simon Peter therefore answered him"; third Peter's answer is corrected, at the place, "Jesus answered them." Now the Lord examines the twelve who had remained, whether they wished to persist; and therefore he said to the twelve—namely, the apostles: "Will you also go away?" And this for two reasons. First, lest, because these had remained while the others departed, they should ascribe this to their own righteousness and grow proud, thinking that they had done Christ a favor by not abandoning him; and therefore, by showing that he did not need their following, he holds and confirms them the more. Job 35:7: "And if thou do justly, what shalt thou give him, or what shall he receive of thy hand?" Second, because it sometimes happens that someone has the will to depart from another, and yet is held back by shame; and therefore, not wishing them to be constrained by shame to remain with him (since to serve unwillingly is the same as not to serve at all), he removes even the shame and the necessity of remaining, placing it in their own judgment whether they wished to remain or to depart, because "God loveth a cheerful giver," as it is said in 2 Corinthians 9:7. There follows the devotion of those who remained, by Peter's answer: for he, a lover of his brethren, a preserver of friendship, and bearing a special affection toward Christ, answers on behalf of the whole company, saying: "Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life. And we have believed." Here he does three things. First, he extols Christ's excellence; second, he commends his teaching; and third, he professes his faith. He extols his excellence indeed when he says, "Lord, to whom shall we go?" As if to say: you are driving us away from you; give us another better than you, to whom we may go. But certainly "there is none like unto thee among the strong, O Lord": Exodus 15:11, and Psalm 88:7: "Who is like to God?" And therefore we will not leave you; Psalm 138:7: "Whither shall I go from thy spirit?" And, according to Chrysostom, Peter's word is greatly indicative of friendship: for by now Christ was more honorable to them than fathers and mothers. But he commends his teaching when he says, "Thou hast the words of eternal life." Now Moses had the words of God, and likewise the prophets, but rarely the words of eternal life; but you promise eternal life—what greater thing, then, do we seek? Above: "he that believeth in me hath life everlasting"; and above, John 3:39: "he that believeth in the Son of God hath life everlasting." But he professes his faith when he adds, "And we have believed and have known that thou art the Christ, the Son of God." For in our faith two things must chiefly be believed, namely the mystery of the Trinity and of the Incarnation; and these two things Peter here confesses. The mystery of the Trinity indeed, when he says, "Thou art the Son of God." For in saying that he is the Son of God, he makes mention of the person of the Father and of the Son, and at the same time also of the Holy Spirit, who is the love of the Father and the Son, and the bond of both. But the mystery of the Incarnation, when he says, "Thou art the Christ"; for "Christ" in Greek is called "anointed" in Latin—namely with the invisible oil of the Holy Spirit; but not according to the divine nature, because one who is anointed with the Holy Spirit is made better by that very anointing, but according as he is God, Christ is not made better; therefore he is anointed according as he is man. Now he says "we have believed and have known," because to believe comes before to know; and therefore if we wished to know before believing, we would not know, nor would we be able to believe, as Augustine says. Isaiah 7:9, according to another reading: "Unless you believe, you shall not understand." Now the Lord corrects Peter's answer when he says, "Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?" And first the Lord's answer is set forth; second the Evangelist's explanation, at the place, "Now he meant Judas." Because Peter had been generous in his answer, including all of them, saying thus, "And we have believed, and have known that thou art the Christ, the Son of God," by which it seemed that all would attain to eternal life, therefore the Lord excepted Judas from the company of believers. But this indeed was a commendable confidence in Peter, that he suspected no evil of a companion; but in the Lord it is a wisdom to be admired, that he saw hidden things. And therefore he says, "Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?" Not by nature, but by imitation of diabolical malice. Wisdom 2:24: "By the envy of the devil, death came into the world: and they follow him that are of his side"; below, John 13:27: "After the morsel, Satan entered into him," namely because he was made conformed to his malice. But if Christ chose Judas, and he became evil, it seems that he erred in his choosing. To this it is answered, first, according to Chrysostom, that this is not said of the election of predestination, but of election to some office, and to a state of present righteousness, to which someone is sometimes chosen not according to what is future, but according to what he presently is in fact; because by this kind of election free will is not taken away, nor is the possibility of sinning removed; hence it is said, 1 Corinthians 10:12: "He that thinketh himself to stand, let him take heed lest he fall." Thus, then, the Lord chose Judas not as one who was then evil, yet the possibility of sinning was not taken from him by this election. Second, it is answered, according to Augustine, that the Lord chose Judas though evil; and because it belongs to the good to use evil for good, although he knew him to be evil, God made good use of his evil, in that he endured being betrayed by him in order to redeem us. Or it must be said that the choosing of the twelve apostles is not here referred to the persons, but to the number; as if to say: I chose in you the number twelve. For this number is fittingly consecrated to those who were to preach the faith of the Holy Trinity through the four corners of the world; and this number indeed did not perish, because in the place of the perishing traitor Matthias was put in his stead. Or, according to Ambrose, he chose Judas though evil for this reason, that he might console our weakness, if it should ever happen to us to be betrayed by friends, since we read that the Lord and Master was betrayed by a disciple. But it is asked here why, when the Lord says, "One of you is a devil," the disciples say nothing; and afterward, when he says, below John 13:21, "One of you shall betray me," they said, "Is it I, Lord?" I answer that it must be said that the reason for this is that here the Lord spoke generally, saying that one of them was a devil, which can be referred to any kind of malice whatsoever, and therefore they were not moved; but there, hearing of so great a deed—namely, the betrayal of their Master—they were not able to contain themselves. Or it must be said to this, that when the Lord spoke these words, each of them had confidence in his own strength, and therefore they did not fear for themselves. But when they heard Peter told, "Get behind me, Satan," they were terrified, and thought more meanly of themselves; and therefore, wavering, they said: "Is it I, Lord?" Now this answer, which the Lord had made obscurely, the Evangelist explains, saying, "Now he meant Judas," as the outcome of the event proved, as is evident below, in chapter 13.”

“From that time many of his disciples went back,.... Not any of the twelve apostles, for they are distinguished from these in the next verse; nor any of the seventy disciples, for their names were written in heaven, and could not apostatize totally and finally, as these did; but some of the multitude of the disciples, who followed Christ, heard him, and professed to believe in him, and were baptized in his name, but were not true disciples, only nominal ones: they had never heard and learned of the Father, otherwise they would have known what it was to come to Christ, as the Father's gift, and under the drawings of his grace; and would not have been offended at the words of our Lord, just now spoken by him, concerning that sort of coming to him: but from the time he spoke those words; "because of this word", as the Syriac, Arabic, and Persic versions render it; they withdrew themselves from his ministry, they dropped their profession of faith in him, and relinquished him as a Saviour and Redeemer: for finding that he would not be made king, nor set up for a temporal redeemer; and talking of himself as the bread of life, and of coming to him, in a sense they did not understand; they turned their backs on him; and as the words may be literally read, "returned to the things that were behind"; to the world, and to their old companions, to Satan and their own hearts lusts; like the dog to its vomit, and the swine to its wallowing in the mire: their true picture is drawn, in the parable of the unclean spirit going out of the man, and returning, Mat 12:43. And they returned to their quondam teachers, the Scribes and Pharisees, and to the law of works, and to seek for righteousness by it; setting up their own righteousness, and not submitting to the righteousness of Christ; and thus to look back and draw back, is a sad case indeed: and walked no more with him; never returned to him more, or went with him from place to place as before: never more attended on his ministry, or had any intimacy and fellowship with him: and so it commonly is with apostates from the profession of Christ; they seldom or ever return, or are recovered; it is difficult, if not impossible, which is sometimes the case, to renew them again to repentance.”

“The flesh profiteth nothing. Dead flesh, separated from the spirit, in the gross manner they supposed they were to eat his flesh, would profit nothing. Neither doth man’s flesh, that is to say, man’s natural and carnal apprehension, (which refuses to be subject to the spirit, and words of Christ) profit any thing. But it would be the height of blasphemy, to say the living flesh of Christ (which we receive in the blessed sacrament, with his spirit, that is, with his soul and divinity) profiteth nothing. For if Christ’s flesh had profited us nothing, he would never have taken flesh for us, nor died in the flesh for us. — Are spirit and life. By proposing to you a heavenly sacrament, in which you shall receive, in a wonderful manner, spirit, grace and life. These words sufficiently correct the gross and carnal imagination of these Capharnaites, that he meant to give them his body and blood to eat in a visible and bloody manner, as flesh, says St. Augustine, is sold in the market, and in the shambles; [3] but they do not imply a figurative or metaphorical presence only. The manner of Christ’s presence is spiritual and under the outward appearances of bread and wine; but yet he is there truly and really present, by a change of the substance of bread and wine into the substance of his body and blood, which truly and really become our spiritual food, and are truly and really received in the holy sacrament. — The flesh [4] of itself profiteth nothing, not even the flesh of our Saviour Christ, were it not united to the divine person of Christ. But we must take care how we understand these words spoken by our Saviour: for it is certain, says St. Augustine, that the word made flesh, is the cause of all our happiness. (Witham) — When I promise you life if you eat my flesh, I do not wish you to understand this of that gross and carnal manner, of cutting my members in pieces: such ideas are far from my mind: the flesh profiteth nothing. In the Scriptures, the word flesh is often put for the carnal manner of understanding any thing. If you wish to enter into the spirit of my words, raise your hearts to a more elevated and spiritual way of understanding them. (Calmet) — The reader may consult Des Mahis, p. 165, a convert from Protestantism, and who has proved the Catholic doctrine on the Eucharist in the most satisfactory manner, from the written word. Where he shows that Jesus Christ, speaking of his own body, never says the flesh, but my flesh: the former mode of expression is used to signify, as we have observed above, a carnal manner of understanding any thing.”

“After he had quelled the wrangling of the Jews, and their murmuring, the Lord next allays the scandal of the disciples, and first the scandal of the departing disciples is treated; second, the devotion of those who remain is examined, at the place, "Jesus therefore said to the twelve." Concerning the first he does three things. First, the scandal of the disciples is set forth; second, the kindness of Christ in repressing it, at the place, "But Jesus knowing," etc.; third, the obstinacy and unbelief of those departing is set forth, at the place, "After this many of his disciples went back." It must be known, then, concerning the first, that there were many among the people of the Jews who clung to Christ, believing in him, and followed him, yet not having left all things, as the twelve had; and all of these were called disciples. And of these he says that many, namely among the people, who believed in him, hearing the things he had said above, said: "This saying is hard." Of these it is said in Luke 8:13: "They believe for a while, and in time of temptation they fall away." Now it says many, because, as it is said in Ecclesiastes 1:15, "the number of fools is infinite." And Matthew 20:16: "Many are called, but few are chosen." These, then, said: "This saying is hard." A thing is called hard which is not easily divided, and which offers resistance. A saying, then, is hard either because it resists the intellect, or because it resists the will—namely, when we cannot grasp it with the intellect, or it does not please the will; and in both ways this saying was hard for these men. Hard indeed to the intellect, because it exceeded the weakness of their understanding; for since they were carnal, they could not grasp what he said, that he would give them his own flesh to eat. But hard to the will, because he said many things about the power of his divinity. And although these men believed him as they would a prophet, they did not yet believe him to be God; and therefore it seemed to them that he was speaking things greater than himself. 2 Corinthians 10:10: "His letters are weighty." Ecclesiasticus 6:21: "Wisdom is exceedingly harsh to unlearned men." And therefore it follows: "Who can hear him?" They say this to excuse themselves. For since they had given themselves to him, they ought to have heard him; but because he was not teaching them pleasing things, they wished to seek some occasion for withdrawing; Proverbs 18:2: "A fool receiveth not the words of prudence, unless you say the things that are turning in his heart." Next, when he says, "But Jesus, knowing within himself that his disciples murmured at this, said to them: Doth this scandalize you?" the kindness of Christ in allaying the scandal is set forth, and first he declares and makes manifest the scandal; second he removes the cause of the scandal, at the place, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?"; third he indicates the cause itself, at the place, "But there are some of you that do not believe." Now he declares the scandal, because they had said secretly, "This saying is hard," so as not to be heard by him. But he who by the power of his divinity knew what they were saying makes this manifest; and this is what is meant by "But Jesus, knowing within himself"—that is, what they were saying within themselves—namely, that his disciples murmured at this (above, John 2:25: "He needed not that any should give testimony of man, for he knew what was in man"; Psalm 7:10: "God searcheth hearts and reins"); he said to them: "Doth this scandalize you?" As if to say: you ought not to be scandalized at this. Or it can be read as a concession, as if to say: I know that you are scandalized at this; Isaiah 8:4: "He shall be"—namely to those believing in Christ—"for a sanctification indeed; but for a stone of stumbling to the two houses of Israel," that is, to the murmuring disciples and to the crowds. But since teachers ought to avoid scandalizing their hearers, why does the Lord set forth such teachings to them, that they should be scandalized and depart? I answer. It must be said that the necessity of the teaching required that the Lord set forth such things to them. For they had pressed upon him for bodily food, whereas he had come in order to lead them to a desire for spiritual food; and therefore it was necessary that he should set forth to them the teaching concerning spiritual food. Nor, however, was their scandal caused by any fault in Christ's teaching, but by their own unbelief. For if they did not understand the Lord's words on account of their carnality, they could have questioned the Lord, as the apostles did on other occasions. But this, according to Augustine, the Lord permitted by way of dispensation, so that he might furnish to those who teach well a cause of patience and consolation against those who speak ill of their words, since even disciples presumed to detract from the words of Christ. Next, when he says, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?" he removes the occasion of scandal, which occasion was, as Chrysostom says, both concerning the person of the speaker and concerning the words spoken; and therefore he first removes the occasion of scandal as regards the person of the speaker, and second as regards the words spoken, at the place, "It is the spirit that quickeneth." Now the occasion of these men's scandal was that they had heard the Lord speak divine things of himself; hence, because they believed him to be the son of Joseph, they were scandalized by what he said of himself. And therefore, removing this occasion, God shows them his divinity more openly; hence he says: you are troubled at the things I have said concerning myself—"if then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before"—supply: what will you say? As if to say: you will never be able to deny that I have descended from heaven, that I am the giver or teacher of eternal life. He did something similar with Nathanael: for when Nathanael said, "Thou art the king of Israel," he wished to raise him to a more perfect knowledge; hence he said to him: "Thou shalt see greater things than these." And therefore he makes manifest to these men something greater that would come to pass concerning himself, saying, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?" Now he ascended into heaven with the disciples watching, as it is said in Acts 1:9. If then he ascended to where he had been before, then he had been in heaven before; above, John 3:13: "No man hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended from heaven." But observe that although the person of the Son of God and the Son of man in Christ is the same, yet because the nature is other, something belongs to him by reason of his humanity—namely, to ascend—which does not belong to him by reason of his divinity, according to which he has nowhere to ascend to, since he is eternally at the highest summit of all things, namely in the Father; but according to his humanity it belongs to him to ascend to where he was before, namely in heaven, where he was not according to human nature; which is against the error of Valentinus, who said that Christ brought a heavenly body. Thus, then, to where he had been before according to his divinity, he ascended, with the apostles watching, and by his own power, according to his humanity; below, John 16:28: "I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world; again I leave the world, and I go to the Father." But, according to Augustine, these words are introduced in another way: for he says that these men were scandalized at the Lord's saying that he would give them his flesh to eat, which they understood carnally, as though they were to eat it according to the letter, like the flesh of animals, and were scandalized. And removing this understanding, he says, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend," with his body whole, "to where he was before"—supply: will you then say that I was going to give you my flesh to eat as you eat the flesh of animals? Next, when he says, "It is the spirit that quickeneth," he removes the occasion of scandal on the part of the words spoken, and, according to Chrysostom, he first distinguishes a twofold understanding of these words; second he shows which of the two befits the words themselves, at the place, "The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life." It must be known, then, as to the first, that the words of Christ can be understood according to a twofold sense, namely according to the spiritual and according to the bodily. And therefore he says, "It is the spirit that quickeneth," that is, if you understand the words which I have said according to the spirit, that is according to the spiritual sense, they will give life; "the flesh profiteth nothing," that is, if you understand them according to the fleshly sense, they profit you nothing—indeed they harm you; because, as it is said in Romans 8:13, "If you live according to the flesh, you shall die." Now the Lord's words about eating his flesh are understood carnally when they are taken according to how the words sound outwardly, and as the nature of flesh has it; and it was in this way that they understood them, as has been said. But the Lord was saying that he would give himself to them as spiritual food—not that the true flesh of Christ is not in the sacrament of the altar, but because it is eaten in a certain spiritual and divine manner. Thus, then, the fitting sense of the words spoken is not carnal, but spiritual. Hence he adds, "The words that I have spoken to you"—namely, concerning the eating of my flesh—"are spirit and life"; that is, they have a spiritual sense, and, understood in this way, they give life. Nor is it a wonder that they have a spiritual sense, since they are from the Holy Spirit; 1 Corinthians 14:2: "It is the spirit that speaketh mysteries." And therefore the mysteries of Christ give life; Psalm 118:93: "Thy justifications I will never forget: for by them thou hast given me life." But according to Augustine it is expounded otherwise: for what he said, "the flesh profiteth nothing," is understood of the flesh of Christ. For it is manifest that the flesh of Christ, as joined to the Word and the Spirit, profits greatly in every way; otherwise the Word would have been made flesh in vain, the Father would have manifested him in the flesh in vain, as it is said in 1 Timothy chapter 4. And therefore it must be said that the flesh of Christ, considered in itself, profits nothing, and has no profitable effect, except as any other flesh. For if it be separated in the understanding from the divinity and the Holy Spirit, it has no other power than any other flesh; but if the spirit and the divinity come to it, it profits many, because it makes those who receive it remain in Christ: for it is the spirit of charity through which man remains in God; 1 John 4:13: "In this we know that we abide in him, and he in us: because he hath given us of his spirit." And therefore the Lord says: this effect, namely of eternal life which I promise you, you ought not to attribute to the flesh considered in itself, because the flesh so considered profits nothing; but if you attribute it to the spirit, and to the divinity joined to the flesh, then it confers eternal life; Galatians 5:25: "If we live in the spirit, let us also walk in the spirit." And therefore he adds, "The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life"; that is, they are to be referred to the spirit joined to the flesh; and understood in this way, they are life, namely of the soul. For just as the body lives a bodily life through the bodily spirit, so too the soul lives a spiritual life through the Holy Spirit; Psalm 103:30: "Thou shalt send forth thy spirit, and they shall be created." Next, when he says, "But there are some of you that do not believe," he shows the cause of the scandal, which was their unbelief, as if to say: the cause of your scandal is not the hardness of the saying which I have spoken to you, but your unbelief. And therefore he first shows their unbelief; second he excludes a false opinion; third he makes manifest the cause of their unbelief. The Lord shows their unbelief indeed when he says, "There are some of you that do not believe." He did not say "who do not understand," but, what is more, he intimates the cause why they do not understand: for they did not understand for this reason, that they did not believe; Isaiah 7:9, according to another reading: "Unless you believe, you shall not understand." And he said "some," so as to except the disciples; 2 Thessalonians 3:2: "All men have not faith"; Romans 10:16: "All do not obey the gospel"; Psalm 105:25: "They believed not his words." The Evangelist excludes a false suspicion when he adds, "For Jesus knew," as if to say: Jesus did not say, "There are some of you that do not believe," as though this had newly become known to him; but because he knew from the beginning—namely of the world—who they were that believed, and who it was that would betray him; Hebrews 4:13: "All things are naked and open to his eyes"; and Ecclesiasticus 23:29: "All things were known to the Lord God before they were created." Now the Lord next assigns the cause of their unbelief, which arises from the withdrawal of the grace that draws; hence he was saying, "Therefore did I say to you," as if to say: therefore it was necessary that I should say the foregoing things to you, because no one can come to me—namely, by faith—unless it has been given him by my Father. From which it follows, according to Augustine, that even the very act of believing is given to us by God. But why it is not given to all has been shown above, in the same place where the Lord said almost the same words. He repeats them here, however, for two reasons: to show that his receiving them into the faith was more for their benefit and advantage than for Christ's; Philippians 1:29: "To you it is given ... that you should believe in him"; as if to say: it is your own good that you believe; and therefore Augustine says: it is indeed a great thing to believe; rejoice that you have believed. Second, to show that he is not the son of Joseph, as they supposed, but of God: for it is God the Father who draws men to the Son, as appears from what has gone before. Next, when he says, "After this many of his disciples went back," the obstinacy of these disciples is set forth. For although the Lord had reproved them, and had removed the cause of the scandal, so far as it lay on his part, nevertheless they persevered in unbelief; and therefore it says that many of his disciples went back. He did not say "they departed," but "they went back"—from the faith which they had according to power, and, cut off from the body of Christ, they lost life, because perhaps they had not even been in the body, as Augustine says. For there are some who simply go back: namely, those who follow the Devil, to whom it was said, Matthew 4:10: "Get thee behind me, Satan." And of certain women it is said, 1 Timothy 5:15: "Some are already turned aside after Satan." Peter does not go back in this way, but after Christ; Matthew 16:23: "Go behind me, Satan." But these men went back after Satan. Hence it follows, "and after this they walked no more with him"—namely although it is required of us that we walk with Jesus; Micah 6:8: "I will show thee, O man, what is good," and it follows, "to walk carefully with thy God." Next, when it is added, "Jesus therefore said to the twelve: Will you also go away?" the Lord examines the disciples who remained; and first the examination of the disciples is set forth by Christ's question; second the devotion of those remaining is added, by Peter's answer, at the place, "Simon Peter therefore answered him"; third Peter's answer is corrected, at the place, "Jesus answered them." Now the Lord examines the twelve who had remained, whether they wished to persist; and therefore he said to the twelve—namely, the apostles: "Will you also go away?" And this for two reasons. First, lest, because these had remained while the others departed, they should ascribe this to their own righteousness and grow proud, thinking that they had done Christ a favor by not abandoning him; and therefore, by showing that he did not need their following, he holds and confirms them the more. Job 35:7: "And if thou do justly, what shalt thou give him, or what shall he receive of thy hand?" Second, because it sometimes happens that someone has the will to depart from another, and yet is held back by shame; and therefore, not wishing them to be constrained by shame to remain with him (since to serve unwillingly is the same as not to serve at all), he removes even the shame and the necessity of remaining, placing it in their own judgment whether they wished to remain or to depart, because "God loveth a cheerful giver," as it is said in 2 Corinthians 9:7. There follows the devotion of those who remained, by Peter's answer: for he, a lover of his brethren, a preserver of friendship, and bearing a special affection toward Christ, answers on behalf of the whole company, saying: "Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life. And we have believed." Here he does three things. First, he extols Christ's excellence; second, he commends his teaching; and third, he professes his faith. He extols his excellence indeed when he says, "Lord, to whom shall we go?" As if to say: you are driving us away from you; give us another better than you, to whom we may go. But certainly "there is none like unto thee among the strong, O Lord": Exodus 15:11, and Psalm 88:7: "Who is like to God?" And therefore we will not leave you; Psalm 138:7: "Whither shall I go from thy spirit?" And, according to Chrysostom, Peter's word is greatly indicative of friendship: for by now Christ was more honorable to them than fathers and mothers. But he commends his teaching when he says, "Thou hast the words of eternal life." Now Moses had the words of God, and likewise the prophets, but rarely the words of eternal life; but you promise eternal life—what greater thing, then, do we seek? Above: "he that believeth in me hath life everlasting"; and above, John 3:39: "he that believeth in the Son of God hath life everlasting." But he professes his faith when he adds, "And we have believed and have known that thou art the Christ, the Son of God." For in our faith two things must chiefly be believed, namely the mystery of the Trinity and of the Incarnation; and these two things Peter here confesses. The mystery of the Trinity indeed, when he says, "Thou art the Son of God." For in saying that he is the Son of God, he makes mention of the person of the Father and of the Son, and at the same time also of the Holy Spirit, who is the love of the Father and the Son, and the bond of both. But the mystery of the Incarnation, when he says, "Thou art the Christ"; for "Christ" in Greek is called "anointed" in Latin—namely with the invisible oil of the Holy Spirit; but not according to the divine nature, because one who is anointed with the Holy Spirit is made better by that very anointing, but according as he is God, Christ is not made better; therefore he is anointed according as he is man. Now he says "we have believed and have known," because to believe comes before to know; and therefore if we wished to know before believing, we would not know, nor would we be able to believe, as Augustine says. Isaiah 7:9, according to another reading: "Unless you believe, you shall not understand." Now the Lord corrects Peter's answer when he says, "Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?" And first the Lord's answer is set forth; second the Evangelist's explanation, at the place, "Now he meant Judas." Because Peter had been generous in his answer, including all of them, saying thus, "And we have believed, and have known that thou art the Christ, the Son of God," by which it seemed that all would attain to eternal life, therefore the Lord excepted Judas from the company of believers. But this indeed was a commendable confidence in Peter, that he suspected no evil of a companion; but in the Lord it is a wisdom to be admired, that he saw hidden things. And therefore he says, "Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?" Not by nature, but by imitation of diabolical malice. Wisdom 2:24: "By the envy of the devil, death came into the world: and they follow him that are of his side"; below, John 13:27: "After the morsel, Satan entered into him," namely because he was made conformed to his malice. But if Christ chose Judas, and he became evil, it seems that he erred in his choosing. To this it is answered, first, according to Chrysostom, that this is not said of the election of predestination, but of election to some office, and to a state of present righteousness, to which someone is sometimes chosen not according to what is future, but according to what he presently is in fact; because by this kind of election free will is not taken away, nor is the possibility of sinning removed; hence it is said, 1 Corinthians 10:12: "He that thinketh himself to stand, let him take heed lest he fall." Thus, then, the Lord chose Judas not as one who was then evil, yet the possibility of sinning was not taken from him by this election. Second, it is answered, according to Augustine, that the Lord chose Judas though evil; and because it belongs to the good to use evil for good, although he knew him to be evil, God made good use of his evil, in that he endured being betrayed by him in order to redeem us. Or it must be said that the choosing of the twelve apostles is not here referred to the persons, but to the number; as if to say: I chose in you the number twelve. For this number is fittingly consecrated to those who were to preach the faith of the Holy Trinity through the four corners of the world; and this number indeed did not perish, because in the place of the perishing traitor Matthias was put in his stead. Or, according to Ambrose, he chose Judas though evil for this reason, that he might console our weakness, if it should ever happen to us to be betrayed by friends, since we read that the Lord and Master was betrayed by a disciple. But it is asked here why, when the Lord says, "One of you is a devil," the disciples say nothing; and afterward, when he says, below John 13:21, "One of you shall betray me," they said, "Is it I, Lord?" I answer that it must be said that the reason for this is that here the Lord spoke generally, saying that one of them was a devil, which can be referred to any kind of malice whatsoever, and therefore they were not moved; but there, hearing of so great a deed—namely, the betrayal of their Master—they were not able to contain themselves. Or it must be said to this, that when the Lord spoke these words, each of them had confidence in his own strength, and therefore they did not fear for themselves. But when they heard Peter told, "Get behind me, Satan," they were terrified, and thought more meanly of themselves; and therefore, wavering, they said: "Is it I, Lord?" Now this answer, which the Lord had made obscurely, the Evangelist explains, saying, "Now he meant Judas," as the outcome of the event proved, as is evident below, in chapter 13.”

“Then said Jesus unto the twelve,.... "To his own twelve", as the Persic version reads; that is, to his twelve apostles, whom he had chosen to that office: Christ takes no notice of those that went away from him, he showed no concern about them; he knew what they were, that the truth of grace was not in them, and that they did not belong to him, and therefore was not uneasy about their departure; but turns himself to his apostles, whom he dearly loved, and in a very tender manner thus said to them, will ye also go away? this he said, not as ignorant of what they were, or of what they would do in this case; he knew full well their faith in him, their love to him, and esteem of him, and close attachment to him, at least in eleven of then; nor did he say this, as having any fears or jealousies concerning them, by observing any thing in their countenances or gestures, which looked like a departure from him; but it was said out of a tender regard and strong affection for them: and it is as if he should have said, as for these men that have walked with me for some time, and have now turned their backs upon me, it gives me no concern; but should you, my dear friends and companions, go also, it would give me, as man, real pain and great uneasiness: or he might say this to show, that as they were not pressed into his service, but willingly followed him, and became his disciples, being made a willing people by him, in the day of his power on them; so they willingly continued with him, and abode by him; as also to strengthen their faith in him, and cause them the more to cleave to him, with full purpose of heart, when others left him; as well as to draw out from them expressions of their regard for him, and faith in him, which end was answered.”

“After he had quelled the wrangling of the Jews, and their murmuring, the Lord next allays the scandal of the disciples, and first the scandal of the departing disciples is treated; second, the devotion of those who remain is examined, at the place, "Jesus therefore said to the twelve." Concerning the first he does three things. First, the scandal of the disciples is set forth; second, the kindness of Christ in repressing it, at the place, "But Jesus knowing," etc.; third, the obstinacy and unbelief of those departing is set forth, at the place, "After this many of his disciples went back." It must be known, then, concerning the first, that there were many among the people of the Jews who clung to Christ, believing in him, and followed him, yet not having left all things, as the twelve had; and all of these were called disciples. And of these he says that many, namely among the people, who believed in him, hearing the things he had said above, said: "This saying is hard." Of these it is said in Luke 8:13: "They believe for a while, and in time of temptation they fall away." Now it says many, because, as it is said in Ecclesiastes 1:15, "the number of fools is infinite." And Matthew 20:16: "Many are called, but few are chosen." These, then, said: "This saying is hard." A thing is called hard which is not easily divided, and which offers resistance. A saying, then, is hard either because it resists the intellect, or because it resists the will—namely, when we cannot grasp it with the intellect, or it does not please the will; and in both ways this saying was hard for these men. Hard indeed to the intellect, because it exceeded the weakness of their understanding; for since they were carnal, they could not grasp what he said, that he would give them his own flesh to eat. But hard to the will, because he said many things about the power of his divinity. And although these men believed him as they would a prophet, they did not yet believe him to be God; and therefore it seemed to them that he was speaking things greater than himself. 2 Corinthians 10:10: "His letters are weighty." Ecclesiasticus 6:21: "Wisdom is exceedingly harsh to unlearned men." And therefore it follows: "Who can hear him?" They say this to excuse themselves. For since they had given themselves to him, they ought to have heard him; but because he was not teaching them pleasing things, they wished to seek some occasion for withdrawing; Proverbs 18:2: "A fool receiveth not the words of prudence, unless you say the things that are turning in his heart." Next, when he says, "But Jesus, knowing within himself that his disciples murmured at this, said to them: Doth this scandalize you?" the kindness of Christ in allaying the scandal is set forth, and first he declares and makes manifest the scandal; second he removes the cause of the scandal, at the place, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?"; third he indicates the cause itself, at the place, "But there are some of you that do not believe." Now he declares the scandal, because they had said secretly, "This saying is hard," so as not to be heard by him. But he who by the power of his divinity knew what they were saying makes this manifest; and this is what is meant by "But Jesus, knowing within himself"—that is, what they were saying within themselves—namely, that his disciples murmured at this (above, John 2:25: "He needed not that any should give testimony of man, for he knew what was in man"; Psalm 7:10: "God searcheth hearts and reins"); he said to them: "Doth this scandalize you?" As if to say: you ought not to be scandalized at this. Or it can be read as a concession, as if to say: I know that you are scandalized at this; Isaiah 8:4: "He shall be"—namely to those believing in Christ—"for a sanctification indeed; but for a stone of stumbling to the two houses of Israel," that is, to the murmuring disciples and to the crowds. But since teachers ought to avoid scandalizing their hearers, why does the Lord set forth such teachings to them, that they should be scandalized and depart? I answer. It must be said that the necessity of the teaching required that the Lord set forth such things to them. For they had pressed upon him for bodily food, whereas he had come in order to lead them to a desire for spiritual food; and therefore it was necessary that he should set forth to them the teaching concerning spiritual food. Nor, however, was their scandal caused by any fault in Christ's teaching, but by their own unbelief. For if they did not understand the Lord's words on account of their carnality, they could have questioned the Lord, as the apostles did on other occasions. But this, according to Augustine, the Lord permitted by way of dispensation, so that he might furnish to those who teach well a cause of patience and consolation against those who speak ill of their words, since even disciples presumed to detract from the words of Christ. Next, when he says, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?" he removes the occasion of scandal, which occasion was, as Chrysostom says, both concerning the person of the speaker and concerning the words spoken; and therefore he first removes the occasion of scandal as regards the person of the speaker, and second as regards the words spoken, at the place, "It is the spirit that quickeneth." Now the occasion of these men's scandal was that they had heard the Lord speak divine things of himself; hence, because they believed him to be the son of Joseph, they were scandalized by what he said of himself. And therefore, removing this occasion, God shows them his divinity more openly; hence he says: you are troubled at the things I have said concerning myself—"if then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before"—supply: what will you say? As if to say: you will never be able to deny that I have descended from heaven, that I am the giver or teacher of eternal life. He did something similar with Nathanael: for when Nathanael said, "Thou art the king of Israel," he wished to raise him to a more perfect knowledge; hence he said to him: "Thou shalt see greater things than these." And therefore he makes manifest to these men something greater that would come to pass concerning himself, saying, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?" Now he ascended into heaven with the disciples watching, as it is said in Acts 1:9. If then he ascended to where he had been before, then he had been in heaven before; above, John 3:13: "No man hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended from heaven." But observe that although the person of the Son of God and the Son of man in Christ is the same, yet because the nature is other, something belongs to him by reason of his humanity—namely, to ascend—which does not belong to him by reason of his divinity, according to which he has nowhere to ascend to, since he is eternally at the highest summit of all things, namely in the Father; but according to his humanity it belongs to him to ascend to where he was before, namely in heaven, where he was not according to human nature; which is against the error of Valentinus, who said that Christ brought a heavenly body. Thus, then, to where he had been before according to his divinity, he ascended, with the apostles watching, and by his own power, according to his humanity; below, John 16:28: "I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world; again I leave the world, and I go to the Father." But, according to Augustine, these words are introduced in another way: for he says that these men were scandalized at the Lord's saying that he would give them his flesh to eat, which they understood carnally, as though they were to eat it according to the letter, like the flesh of animals, and were scandalized. And removing this understanding, he says, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend," with his body whole, "to where he was before"—supply: will you then say that I was going to give you my flesh to eat as you eat the flesh of animals? Next, when he says, "It is the spirit that quickeneth," he removes the occasion of scandal on the part of the words spoken, and, according to Chrysostom, he first distinguishes a twofold understanding of these words; second he shows which of the two befits the words themselves, at the place, "The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life." It must be known, then, as to the first, that the words of Christ can be understood according to a twofold sense, namely according to the spiritual and according to the bodily. And therefore he says, "It is the spirit that quickeneth," that is, if you understand the words which I have said according to the spirit, that is according to the spiritual sense, they will give life; "the flesh profiteth nothing," that is, if you understand them according to the fleshly sense, they profit you nothing—indeed they harm you; because, as it is said in Romans 8:13, "If you live according to the flesh, you shall die." Now the Lord's words about eating his flesh are understood carnally when they are taken according to how the words sound outwardly, and as the nature of flesh has it; and it was in this way that they understood them, as has been said. But the Lord was saying that he would give himself to them as spiritual food—not that the true flesh of Christ is not in the sacrament of the altar, but because it is eaten in a certain spiritual and divine manner. Thus, then, the fitting sense of the words spoken is not carnal, but spiritual. Hence he adds, "The words that I have spoken to you"—namely, concerning the eating of my flesh—"are spirit and life"; that is, they have a spiritual sense, and, understood in this way, they give life. Nor is it a wonder that they have a spiritual sense, since they are from the Holy Spirit; 1 Corinthians 14:2: "It is the spirit that speaketh mysteries." And therefore the mysteries of Christ give life; Psalm 118:93: "Thy justifications I will never forget: for by them thou hast given me life." But according to Augustine it is expounded otherwise: for what he said, "the flesh profiteth nothing," is understood of the flesh of Christ. For it is manifest that the flesh of Christ, as joined to the Word and the Spirit, profits greatly in every way; otherwise the Word would have been made flesh in vain, the Father would have manifested him in the flesh in vain, as it is said in 1 Timothy chapter 4. And therefore it must be said that the flesh of Christ, considered in itself, profits nothing, and has no profitable effect, except as any other flesh. For if it be separated in the understanding from the divinity and the Holy Spirit, it has no other power than any other flesh; but if the spirit and the divinity come to it, it profits many, because it makes those who receive it remain in Christ: for it is the spirit of charity through which man remains in God; 1 John 4:13: "In this we know that we abide in him, and he in us: because he hath given us of his spirit." And therefore the Lord says: this effect, namely of eternal life which I promise you, you ought not to attribute to the flesh considered in itself, because the flesh so considered profits nothing; but if you attribute it to the spirit, and to the divinity joined to the flesh, then it confers eternal life; Galatians 5:25: "If we live in the spirit, let us also walk in the spirit." And therefore he adds, "The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life"; that is, they are to be referred to the spirit joined to the flesh; and understood in this way, they are life, namely of the soul. For just as the body lives a bodily life through the bodily spirit, so too the soul lives a spiritual life through the Holy Spirit; Psalm 103:30: "Thou shalt send forth thy spirit, and they shall be created." Next, when he says, "But there are some of you that do not believe," he shows the cause of the scandal, which was their unbelief, as if to say: the cause of your scandal is not the hardness of the saying which I have spoken to you, but your unbelief. And therefore he first shows their unbelief; second he excludes a false opinion; third he makes manifest the cause of their unbelief. The Lord shows their unbelief indeed when he says, "There are some of you that do not believe." He did not say "who do not understand," but, what is more, he intimates the cause why they do not understand: for they did not understand for this reason, that they did not believe; Isaiah 7:9, according to another reading: "Unless you believe, you shall not understand." And he said "some," so as to except the disciples; 2 Thessalonians 3:2: "All men have not faith"; Romans 10:16: "All do not obey the gospel"; Psalm 105:25: "They believed not his words." The Evangelist excludes a false suspicion when he adds, "For Jesus knew," as if to say: Jesus did not say, "There are some of you that do not believe," as though this had newly become known to him; but because he knew from the beginning—namely of the world—who they were that believed, and who it was that would betray him; Hebrews 4:13: "All things are naked and open to his eyes"; and Ecclesiasticus 23:29: "All things were known to the Lord God before they were created." Now the Lord next assigns the cause of their unbelief, which arises from the withdrawal of the grace that draws; hence he was saying, "Therefore did I say to you," as if to say: therefore it was necessary that I should say the foregoing things to you, because no one can come to me—namely, by faith—unless it has been given him by my Father. From which it follows, according to Augustine, that even the very act of believing is given to us by God. But why it is not given to all has been shown above, in the same place where the Lord said almost the same words. He repeats them here, however, for two reasons: to show that his receiving them into the faith was more for their benefit and advantage than for Christ's; Philippians 1:29: "To you it is given ... that you should believe in him"; as if to say: it is your own good that you believe; and therefore Augustine says: it is indeed a great thing to believe; rejoice that you have believed. Second, to show that he is not the son of Joseph, as they supposed, but of God: for it is God the Father who draws men to the Son, as appears from what has gone before. Next, when he says, "After this many of his disciples went back," the obstinacy of these disciples is set forth. For although the Lord had reproved them, and had removed the cause of the scandal, so far as it lay on his part, nevertheless they persevered in unbelief; and therefore it says that many of his disciples went back. He did not say "they departed," but "they went back"—from the faith which they had according to power, and, cut off from the body of Christ, they lost life, because perhaps they had not even been in the body, as Augustine says. For there are some who simply go back: namely, those who follow the Devil, to whom it was said, Matthew 4:10: "Get thee behind me, Satan." And of certain women it is said, 1 Timothy 5:15: "Some are already turned aside after Satan." Peter does not go back in this way, but after Christ; Matthew 16:23: "Go behind me, Satan." But these men went back after Satan. Hence it follows, "and after this they walked no more with him"—namely although it is required of us that we walk with Jesus; Micah 6:8: "I will show thee, O man, what is good," and it follows, "to walk carefully with thy God." Next, when it is added, "Jesus therefore said to the twelve: Will you also go away?" the Lord examines the disciples who remained; and first the examination of the disciples is set forth by Christ's question; second the devotion of those remaining is added, by Peter's answer, at the place, "Simon Peter therefore answered him"; third Peter's answer is corrected, at the place, "Jesus answered them." Now the Lord examines the twelve who had remained, whether they wished to persist; and therefore he said to the twelve—namely, the apostles: "Will you also go away?" And this for two reasons. First, lest, because these had remained while the others departed, they should ascribe this to their own righteousness and grow proud, thinking that they had done Christ a favor by not abandoning him; and therefore, by showing that he did not need their following, he holds and confirms them the more. Job 35:7: "And if thou do justly, what shalt thou give him, or what shall he receive of thy hand?" Second, because it sometimes happens that someone has the will to depart from another, and yet is held back by shame; and therefore, not wishing them to be constrained by shame to remain with him (since to serve unwillingly is the same as not to serve at all), he removes even the shame and the necessity of remaining, placing it in their own judgment whether they wished to remain or to depart, because "God loveth a cheerful giver," as it is said in 2 Corinthians 9:7. There follows the devotion of those who remained, by Peter's answer: for he, a lover of his brethren, a preserver of friendship, and bearing a special affection toward Christ, answers on behalf of the whole company, saying: "Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life. And we have believed." Here he does three things. First, he extols Christ's excellence; second, he commends his teaching; and third, he professes his faith. He extols his excellence indeed when he says, "Lord, to whom shall we go?" As if to say: you are driving us away from you; give us another better than you, to whom we may go. But certainly "there is none like unto thee among the strong, O Lord": Exodus 15:11, and Psalm 88:7: "Who is like to God?" And therefore we will not leave you; Psalm 138:7: "Whither shall I go from thy spirit?" And, according to Chrysostom, Peter's word is greatly indicative of friendship: for by now Christ was more honorable to them than fathers and mothers. But he commends his teaching when he says, "Thou hast the words of eternal life." Now Moses had the words of God, and likewise the prophets, but rarely the words of eternal life; but you promise eternal life—what greater thing, then, do we seek? Above: "he that believeth in me hath life everlasting"; and above, John 3:39: "he that believeth in the Son of God hath life everlasting." But he professes his faith when he adds, "And we have believed and have known that thou art the Christ, the Son of God." For in our faith two things must chiefly be believed, namely the mystery of the Trinity and of the Incarnation; and these two things Peter here confesses. The mystery of the Trinity indeed, when he says, "Thou art the Son of God." For in saying that he is the Son of God, he makes mention of the person of the Father and of the Son, and at the same time also of the Holy Spirit, who is the love of the Father and the Son, and the bond of both. But the mystery of the Incarnation, when he says, "Thou art the Christ"; for "Christ" in Greek is called "anointed" in Latin—namely with the invisible oil of the Holy Spirit; but not according to the divine nature, because one who is anointed with the Holy Spirit is made better by that very anointing, but according as he is God, Christ is not made better; therefore he is anointed according as he is man. Now he says "we have believed and have known," because to believe comes before to know; and therefore if we wished to know before believing, we would not know, nor would we be able to believe, as Augustine says. Isaiah 7:9, according to another reading: "Unless you believe, you shall not understand." Now the Lord corrects Peter's answer when he says, "Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?" And first the Lord's answer is set forth; second the Evangelist's explanation, at the place, "Now he meant Judas." Because Peter had been generous in his answer, including all of them, saying thus, "And we have believed, and have known that thou art the Christ, the Son of God," by which it seemed that all would attain to eternal life, therefore the Lord excepted Judas from the company of believers. But this indeed was a commendable confidence in Peter, that he suspected no evil of a companion; but in the Lord it is a wisdom to be admired, that he saw hidden things. And therefore he says, "Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?" Not by nature, but by imitation of diabolical malice. Wisdom 2:24: "By the envy of the devil, death came into the world: and they follow him that are of his side"; below, John 13:27: "After the morsel, Satan entered into him," namely because he was made conformed to his malice. But if Christ chose Judas, and he became evil, it seems that he erred in his choosing. To this it is answered, first, according to Chrysostom, that this is not said of the election of predestination, but of election to some office, and to a state of present righteousness, to which someone is sometimes chosen not according to what is future, but according to what he presently is in fact; because by this kind of election free will is not taken away, nor is the possibility of sinning removed; hence it is said, 1 Corinthians 10:12: "He that thinketh himself to stand, let him take heed lest he fall." Thus, then, the Lord chose Judas not as one who was then evil, yet the possibility of sinning was not taken from him by this election. Second, it is answered, according to Augustine, that the Lord chose Judas though evil; and because it belongs to the good to use evil for good, although he knew him to be evil, God made good use of his evil, in that he endured being betrayed by him in order to redeem us. Or it must be said that the choosing of the twelve apostles is not here referred to the persons, but to the number; as if to say: I chose in you the number twelve. For this number is fittingly consecrated to those who were to preach the faith of the Holy Trinity through the four corners of the world; and this number indeed did not perish, because in the place of the perishing traitor Matthias was put in his stead. Or, according to Ambrose, he chose Judas though evil for this reason, that he might console our weakness, if it should ever happen to us to be betrayed by friends, since we read that the Lord and Master was betrayed by a disciple. But it is asked here why, when the Lord says, "One of you is a devil," the disciples say nothing; and afterward, when he says, below John 13:21, "One of you shall betray me," they said, "Is it I, Lord?" I answer that it must be said that the reason for this is that here the Lord spoke generally, saying that one of them was a devil, which can be referred to any kind of malice whatsoever, and therefore they were not moved; but there, hearing of so great a deed—namely, the betrayal of their Master—they were not able to contain themselves. Or it must be said to this, that when the Lord spoke these words, each of them had confidence in his own strength, and therefore they did not fear for themselves. But when they heard Peter told, "Get behind me, Satan," they were terrified, and thought more meanly of themselves; and therefore, wavering, they said: "Is it I, Lord?" Now this answer, which the Lord had made obscurely, the Evangelist explains, saying, "Now he meant Judas," as the outcome of the event proved, as is evident below, in chapter 13.”

“Then Simon Peter answered him,.... Who was strong in the faith of Christ, and full of zeal for him, and love to him; and who was the mouth of the apostles, and always forward to speak out of the abundance and sincerity of his heart, in their name; believing, that they all of them, for he had now no suspicion of Judas, no more than of the rest, had the same faith in Christ, love to him, and esteem of him, as he himself had; wherefore out of a good opinion of them, and love to Christ, he thus addressed him: Lord; or "my Lord"; as the Syriac version renders it; which was either a title of respect, and the same with "Sir" with us; or else, as acknowledging the dominion and authority of Christ, as Lord of all, and especially of the saints, and as claiming his interest in him; and which carries in it a reason, why he should abide by him: to whom shall we go? as a teacher, whose ministry we can attend upon, to greater profit and advantage? not to the Scribes and Pharisees, whose leaven, or doctrine, Christ had bid them beware of; who taught for doctrines the commandments of men, and were blind leaders of the blind; nor to John the Baptist, who had declared he was not the Messiah; but had pointed him out to them in his person, as the son of God; and in his office as the Lamb of God, that takes away the sins of men; and perhaps, he might not be now living; and if he was, he would have encouraged them not to follow him, but abide with their master; so that there was no other, that was "better", as Nonnus expresses it, that they could go unto; and therefore it would be folly and madness in them to leave him: and as it was with Peter and the rest of the disciples, so it is with all sensible sinners, and true believers, who see there is no other to go to for life and salvation, but Christ; not to the law of Moses, which accuses, curses, and condemns, and by which there is neither life nor righteousness; nor to any creature, or creature performance, for there is a curse on him that trusts in man, and makes flesh his arm; nor to their own righteousness, which is impure and imperfect, and cannot justify before God, nor answer for them in a time to come; nor to their tears of repentance, which will not satisfy the law, atone for sins, or wash them away; nor to carnal descent, birth privileges, a religious education, sobriety, and civility, to trust to which, is to have confidence in the flesh, which will be of no avail; nor to ceremonial services, or moral duties, or even evangelical ordinances, neither of which can take away sin. There is no other Saviour, but Christ, to look to; no other Mediator between God and man, to make use of; no other physician of value, for diseased and sin sick souls to apply unto; no other fountain but his blood, for polluted souls to wash in, and be cleansed; no other city of refuge, or strong hold, for souls sensible of danger, to flee unto and be safe; no other to come to as the bread of life, where hungry souls may be fed; no other place of rest, for those that are weary and heavy laden; nor is there any other, where there is plenty of all grace, and security from every enemy, as in him: and therefore, to whom can they have recourse, but unto him? and that for the following reason, thou hast the words of eternal life: meaning, either the promises of eternal life, which were made before the world began, and were put into Christ's hands, for his people, and are yea and amen in him; or the doctrines of eternal life; for so the Gospel, and the truths of it, are called, Act 5:20; and that because the Gospel brings life and immortality to light, gives an account of eternal life; of the nature of it, that it is a glorious life, a life free from all the sorrows of the present one; a life of pleasure, and of perfect knowledge and holiness, and which will last for ever: and because it points out the way to it, that it is not by the works of the law, but by the grace of God; that it is his free gift, through Christ; and that Christ is the way, the truth, and the life, or the true way to eternal life: and because it is a means of quickening dead sinners, and of reviving true believers, and of nourishing them up unto everlasting life: or this phrase may design the power and authority which Christ has, to dispose of, and dispense eternal life; for he has the firing itself in his hands, and a power to give it to as many as the father has given him; and to them he does give it: and each of these senses carry in them a reason why souls should go to Christ, and to him only, for life and salvation.”

“After he had quelled the wrangling of the Jews, and their murmuring, the Lord next allays the scandal of the disciples, and first the scandal of the departing disciples is treated; second, the devotion of those who remain is examined, at the place, "Jesus therefore said to the twelve." Concerning the first he does three things. First, the scandal of the disciples is set forth; second, the kindness of Christ in repressing it, at the place, "But Jesus knowing," etc.; third, the obstinacy and unbelief of those departing is set forth, at the place, "After this many of his disciples went back." It must be known, then, concerning the first, that there were many among the people of the Jews who clung to Christ, believing in him, and followed him, yet not having left all things, as the twelve had; and all of these were called disciples. And of these he says that many, namely among the people, who believed in him, hearing the things he had said above, said: "This saying is hard." Of these it is said in Luke 8:13: "They believe for a while, and in time of temptation they fall away." Now it says many, because, as it is said in Ecclesiastes 1:15, "the number of fools is infinite." And Matthew 20:16: "Many are called, but few are chosen." These, then, said: "This saying is hard." A thing is called hard which is not easily divided, and which offers resistance. A saying, then, is hard either because it resists the intellect, or because it resists the will—namely, when we cannot grasp it with the intellect, or it does not please the will; and in both ways this saying was hard for these men. Hard indeed to the intellect, because it exceeded the weakness of their understanding; for since they were carnal, they could not grasp what he said, that he would give them his own flesh to eat. But hard to the will, because he said many things about the power of his divinity. And although these men believed him as they would a prophet, they did not yet believe him to be God; and therefore it seemed to them that he was speaking things greater than himself. 2 Corinthians 10:10: "His letters are weighty." Ecclesiasticus 6:21: "Wisdom is exceedingly harsh to unlearned men." And therefore it follows: "Who can hear him?" They say this to excuse themselves. For since they had given themselves to him, they ought to have heard him; but because he was not teaching them pleasing things, they wished to seek some occasion for withdrawing; Proverbs 18:2: "A fool receiveth not the words of prudence, unless you say the things that are turning in his heart." Next, when he says, "But Jesus, knowing within himself that his disciples murmured at this, said to them: Doth this scandalize you?" the kindness of Christ in allaying the scandal is set forth, and first he declares and makes manifest the scandal; second he removes the cause of the scandal, at the place, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?"; third he indicates the cause itself, at the place, "But there are some of you that do not believe." Now he declares the scandal, because they had said secretly, "This saying is hard," so as not to be heard by him. But he who by the power of his divinity knew what they were saying makes this manifest; and this is what is meant by "But Jesus, knowing within himself"—that is, what they were saying within themselves—namely, that his disciples murmured at this (above, John 2:25: "He needed not that any should give testimony of man, for he knew what was in man"; Psalm 7:10: "God searcheth hearts and reins"); he said to them: "Doth this scandalize you?" As if to say: you ought not to be scandalized at this. Or it can be read as a concession, as if to say: I know that you are scandalized at this; Isaiah 8:4: "He shall be"—namely to those believing in Christ—"for a sanctification indeed; but for a stone of stumbling to the two houses of Israel," that is, to the murmuring disciples and to the crowds. But since teachers ought to avoid scandalizing their hearers, why does the Lord set forth such teachings to them, that they should be scandalized and depart? I answer. It must be said that the necessity of the teaching required that the Lord set forth such things to them. For they had pressed upon him for bodily food, whereas he had come in order to lead them to a desire for spiritual food; and therefore it was necessary that he should set forth to them the teaching concerning spiritual food. Nor, however, was their scandal caused by any fault in Christ's teaching, but by their own unbelief. For if they did not understand the Lord's words on account of their carnality, they could have questioned the Lord, as the apostles did on other occasions. But this, according to Augustine, the Lord permitted by way of dispensation, so that he might furnish to those who teach well a cause of patience and consolation against those who speak ill of their words, since even disciples presumed to detract from the words of Christ. Next, when he says, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?" he removes the occasion of scandal, which occasion was, as Chrysostom says, both concerning the person of the speaker and concerning the words spoken; and therefore he first removes the occasion of scandal as regards the person of the speaker, and second as regards the words spoken, at the place, "It is the spirit that quickeneth." Now the occasion of these men's scandal was that they had heard the Lord speak divine things of himself; hence, because they believed him to be the son of Joseph, they were scandalized by what he said of himself. And therefore, removing this occasion, God shows them his divinity more openly; hence he says: you are troubled at the things I have said concerning myself—"if then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before"—supply: what will you say? As if to say: you will never be able to deny that I have descended from heaven, that I am the giver or teacher of eternal life. He did something similar with Nathanael: for when Nathanael said, "Thou art the king of Israel," he wished to raise him to a more perfect knowledge; hence he said to him: "Thou shalt see greater things than these." And therefore he makes manifest to these men something greater that would come to pass concerning himself, saying, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?" Now he ascended into heaven with the disciples watching, as it is said in Acts 1:9. If then he ascended to where he had been before, then he had been in heaven before; above, John 3:13: "No man hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended from heaven." But observe that although the person of the Son of God and the Son of man in Christ is the same, yet because the nature is other, something belongs to him by reason of his humanity—namely, to ascend—which does not belong to him by reason of his divinity, according to which he has nowhere to ascend to, since he is eternally at the highest summit of all things, namely in the Father; but according to his humanity it belongs to him to ascend to where he was before, namely in heaven, where he was not according to human nature; which is against the error of Valentinus, who said that Christ brought a heavenly body. Thus, then, to where he had been before according to his divinity, he ascended, with the apostles watching, and by his own power, according to his humanity; below, John 16:28: "I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world; again I leave the world, and I go to the Father." But, according to Augustine, these words are introduced in another way: for he says that these men were scandalized at the Lord's saying that he would give them his flesh to eat, which they understood carnally, as though they were to eat it according to the letter, like the flesh of animals, and were scandalized. And removing this understanding, he says, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend," with his body whole, "to where he was before"—supply: will you then say that I was going to give you my flesh to eat as you eat the flesh of animals? Next, when he says, "It is the spirit that quickeneth," he removes the occasion of scandal on the part of the words spoken, and, according to Chrysostom, he first distinguishes a twofold understanding of these words; second he shows which of the two befits the words themselves, at the place, "The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life." It must be known, then, as to the first, that the words of Christ can be understood according to a twofold sense, namely according to the spiritual and according to the bodily. And therefore he says, "It is the spirit that quickeneth," that is, if you understand the words which I have said according to the spirit, that is according to the spiritual sense, they will give life; "the flesh profiteth nothing," that is, if you understand them according to the fleshly sense, they profit you nothing—indeed they harm you; because, as it is said in Romans 8:13, "If you live according to the flesh, you shall die." Now the Lord's words about eating his flesh are understood carnally when they are taken according to how the words sound outwardly, and as the nature of flesh has it; and it was in this way that they understood them, as has been said. But the Lord was saying that he would give himself to them as spiritual food—not that the true flesh of Christ is not in the sacrament of the altar, but because it is eaten in a certain spiritual and divine manner. Thus, then, the fitting sense of the words spoken is not carnal, but spiritual. Hence he adds, "The words that I have spoken to you"—namely, concerning the eating of my flesh—"are spirit and life"; that is, they have a spiritual sense, and, understood in this way, they give life. Nor is it a wonder that they have a spiritual sense, since they are from the Holy Spirit; 1 Corinthians 14:2: "It is the spirit that speaketh mysteries." And therefore the mysteries of Christ give life; Psalm 118:93: "Thy justifications I will never forget: for by them thou hast given me life." But according to Augustine it is expounded otherwise: for what he said, "the flesh profiteth nothing," is understood of the flesh of Christ. For it is manifest that the flesh of Christ, as joined to the Word and the Spirit, profits greatly in every way; otherwise the Word would have been made flesh in vain, the Father would have manifested him in the flesh in vain, as it is said in 1 Timothy chapter 4. And therefore it must be said that the flesh of Christ, considered in itself, profits nothing, and has no profitable effect, except as any other flesh. For if it be separated in the understanding from the divinity and the Holy Spirit, it has no other power than any other flesh; but if the spirit and the divinity come to it, it profits many, because it makes those who receive it remain in Christ: for it is the spirit of charity through which man remains in God; 1 John 4:13: "In this we know that we abide in him, and he in us: because he hath given us of his spirit." And therefore the Lord says: this effect, namely of eternal life which I promise you, you ought not to attribute to the flesh considered in itself, because the flesh so considered profits nothing; but if you attribute it to the spirit, and to the divinity joined to the flesh, then it confers eternal life; Galatians 5:25: "If we live in the spirit, let us also walk in the spirit." And therefore he adds, "The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life"; that is, they are to be referred to the spirit joined to the flesh; and understood in this way, they are life, namely of the soul. For just as the body lives a bodily life through the bodily spirit, so too the soul lives a spiritual life through the Holy Spirit; Psalm 103:30: "Thou shalt send forth thy spirit, and they shall be created." Next, when he says, "But there are some of you that do not believe," he shows the cause of the scandal, which was their unbelief, as if to say: the cause of your scandal is not the hardness of the saying which I have spoken to you, but your unbelief. And therefore he first shows their unbelief; second he excludes a false opinion; third he makes manifest the cause of their unbelief. The Lord shows their unbelief indeed when he says, "There are some of you that do not believe." He did not say "who do not understand," but, what is more, he intimates the cause why they do not understand: for they did not understand for this reason, that they did not believe; Isaiah 7:9, according to another reading: "Unless you believe, you shall not understand." And he said "some," so as to except the disciples; 2 Thessalonians 3:2: "All men have not faith"; Romans 10:16: "All do not obey the gospel"; Psalm 105:25: "They believed not his words." The Evangelist excludes a false suspicion when he adds, "For Jesus knew," as if to say: Jesus did not say, "There are some of you that do not believe," as though this had newly become known to him; but because he knew from the beginning—namely of the world—who they were that believed, and who it was that would betray him; Hebrews 4:13: "All things are naked and open to his eyes"; and Ecclesiasticus 23:29: "All things were known to the Lord God before they were created." Now the Lord next assigns the cause of their unbelief, which arises from the withdrawal of the grace that draws; hence he was saying, "Therefore did I say to you," as if to say: therefore it was necessary that I should say the foregoing things to you, because no one can come to me—namely, by faith—unless it has been given him by my Father. From which it follows, according to Augustine, that even the very act of believing is given to us by God. But why it is not given to all has been shown above, in the same place where the Lord said almost the same words. He repeats them here, however, for two reasons: to show that his receiving them into the faith was more for their benefit and advantage than for Christ's; Philippians 1:29: "To you it is given ... that you should believe in him"; as if to say: it is your own good that you believe; and therefore Augustine says: it is indeed a great thing to believe; rejoice that you have believed. Second, to show that he is not the son of Joseph, as they supposed, but of God: for it is God the Father who draws men to the Son, as appears from what has gone before. Next, when he says, "After this many of his disciples went back," the obstinacy of these disciples is set forth. For although the Lord had reproved them, and had removed the cause of the scandal, so far as it lay on his part, nevertheless they persevered in unbelief; and therefore it says that many of his disciples went back. He did not say "they departed," but "they went back"—from the faith which they had according to power, and, cut off from the body of Christ, they lost life, because perhaps they had not even been in the body, as Augustine says. For there are some who simply go back: namely, those who follow the Devil, to whom it was said, Matthew 4:10: "Get thee behind me, Satan." And of certain women it is said, 1 Timothy 5:15: "Some are already turned aside after Satan." Peter does not go back in this way, but after Christ; Matthew 16:23: "Go behind me, Satan." But these men went back after Satan. Hence it follows, "and after this they walked no more with him"—namely although it is required of us that we walk with Jesus; Micah 6:8: "I will show thee, O man, what is good," and it follows, "to walk carefully with thy God." Next, when it is added, "Jesus therefore said to the twelve: Will you also go away?" the Lord examines the disciples who remained; and first the examination of the disciples is set forth by Christ's question; second the devotion of those remaining is added, by Peter's answer, at the place, "Simon Peter therefore answered him"; third Peter's answer is corrected, at the place, "Jesus answered them." Now the Lord examines the twelve who had remained, whether they wished to persist; and therefore he said to the twelve—namely, the apostles: "Will you also go away?" And this for two reasons. First, lest, because these had remained while the others departed, they should ascribe this to their own righteousness and grow proud, thinking that they had done Christ a favor by not abandoning him; and therefore, by showing that he did not need their following, he holds and confirms them the more. Job 35:7: "And if thou do justly, what shalt thou give him, or what shall he receive of thy hand?" Second, because it sometimes happens that someone has the will to depart from another, and yet is held back by shame; and therefore, not wishing them to be constrained by shame to remain with him (since to serve unwillingly is the same as not to serve at all), he removes even the shame and the necessity of remaining, placing it in their own judgment whether they wished to remain or to depart, because "God loveth a cheerful giver," as it is said in 2 Corinthians 9:7. There follows the devotion of those who remained, by Peter's answer: for he, a lover of his brethren, a preserver of friendship, and bearing a special affection toward Christ, answers on behalf of the whole company, saying: "Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life. And we have believed." Here he does three things. First, he extols Christ's excellence; second, he commends his teaching; and third, he professes his faith. He extols his excellence indeed when he says, "Lord, to whom shall we go?" As if to say: you are driving us away from you; give us another better than you, to whom we may go. But certainly "there is none like unto thee among the strong, O Lord": Exodus 15:11, and Psalm 88:7: "Who is like to God?" And therefore we will not leave you; Psalm 138:7: "Whither shall I go from thy spirit?" And, according to Chrysostom, Peter's word is greatly indicative of friendship: for by now Christ was more honorable to them than fathers and mothers. But he commends his teaching when he says, "Thou hast the words of eternal life." Now Moses had the words of God, and likewise the prophets, but rarely the words of eternal life; but you promise eternal life—what greater thing, then, do we seek? Above: "he that believeth in me hath life everlasting"; and above, John 3:39: "he that believeth in the Son of God hath life everlasting." But he professes his faith when he adds, "And we have believed and have known that thou art the Christ, the Son of God." For in our faith two things must chiefly be believed, namely the mystery of the Trinity and of the Incarnation; and these two things Peter here confesses. The mystery of the Trinity indeed, when he says, "Thou art the Son of God." For in saying that he is the Son of God, he makes mention of the person of the Father and of the Son, and at the same time also of the Holy Spirit, who is the love of the Father and the Son, and the bond of both. But the mystery of the Incarnation, when he says, "Thou art the Christ"; for "Christ" in Greek is called "anointed" in Latin—namely with the invisible oil of the Holy Spirit; but not according to the divine nature, because one who is anointed with the Holy Spirit is made better by that very anointing, but according as he is God, Christ is not made better; therefore he is anointed according as he is man. Now he says "we have believed and have known," because to believe comes before to know; and therefore if we wished to know before believing, we would not know, nor would we be able to believe, as Augustine says. Isaiah 7:9, according to another reading: "Unless you believe, you shall not understand." Now the Lord corrects Peter's answer when he says, "Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?" And first the Lord's answer is set forth; second the Evangelist's explanation, at the place, "Now he meant Judas." Because Peter had been generous in his answer, including all of them, saying thus, "And we have believed, and have known that thou art the Christ, the Son of God," by which it seemed that all would attain to eternal life, therefore the Lord excepted Judas from the company of believers. But this indeed was a commendable confidence in Peter, that he suspected no evil of a companion; but in the Lord it is a wisdom to be admired, that he saw hidden things. And therefore he says, "Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?" Not by nature, but by imitation of diabolical malice. Wisdom 2:24: "By the envy of the devil, death came into the world: and they follow him that are of his side"; below, John 13:27: "After the morsel, Satan entered into him," namely because he was made conformed to his malice. But if Christ chose Judas, and he became evil, it seems that he erred in his choosing. To this it is answered, first, according to Chrysostom, that this is not said of the election of predestination, but of election to some office, and to a state of present righteousness, to which someone is sometimes chosen not according to what is future, but according to what he presently is in fact; because by this kind of election free will is not taken away, nor is the possibility of sinning removed; hence it is said, 1 Corinthians 10:12: "He that thinketh himself to stand, let him take heed lest he fall." Thus, then, the Lord chose Judas not as one who was then evil, yet the possibility of sinning was not taken from him by this election. Second, it is answered, according to Augustine, that the Lord chose Judas though evil; and because it belongs to the good to use evil for good, although he knew him to be evil, God made good use of his evil, in that he endured being betrayed by him in order to redeem us. Or it must be said that the choosing of the twelve apostles is not here referred to the persons, but to the number; as if to say: I chose in you the number twelve. For this number is fittingly consecrated to those who were to preach the faith of the Holy Trinity through the four corners of the world; and this number indeed did not perish, because in the place of the perishing traitor Matthias was put in his stead. Or, according to Ambrose, he chose Judas though evil for this reason, that he might console our weakness, if it should ever happen to us to be betrayed by friends, since we read that the Lord and Master was betrayed by a disciple. But it is asked here why, when the Lord says, "One of you is a devil," the disciples say nothing; and afterward, when he says, below John 13:21, "One of you shall betray me," they said, "Is it I, Lord?" I answer that it must be said that the reason for this is that here the Lord spoke generally, saying that one of them was a devil, which can be referred to any kind of malice whatsoever, and therefore they were not moved; but there, hearing of so great a deed—namely, the betrayal of their Master—they were not able to contain themselves. Or it must be said to this, that when the Lord spoke these words, each of them had confidence in his own strength, and therefore they did not fear for themselves. But when they heard Peter told, "Get behind me, Satan," they were terrified, and thought more meanly of themselves; and therefore, wavering, they said: "Is it I, Lord?" Now this answer, which the Lord had made obscurely, the Evangelist explains, saying, "Now he meant Judas," as the outcome of the event proved, as is evident below, in chapter 13.”

“And we believe and are sure,.... Or know of a certainty: they believed upon the first call of them by Christ, and their following of him, that he was the true Messiah; and they came to an assurance of it, by the miracles he wrought, and by the doctrines which he taught; their faith, how weak soever it might be at first, rose up to a full assurance of faith, and of understanding; there was a reality and a certainty in it, as there is in all true faith, with respect to the object, though not always with respect to interest in it; which was the case here, as appears by what follows: that thou art that Christ; or Messiah, that was promised by God of old, spoken of by the prophets, and expected by the Jews; that anointed prophet Moses had spoken of, that should arise out of Israel, like unto him that anointed priest, who, according to the oath of God, was to be priest for ever, after the order of Melchizedek; and that anointed King, whom God has set over his holy hill of Zion: the son of the living God; this they knew, and were sure of, both by John's testimony, and by the father's voice from heaven; which three of them heard, at Christ's transfiguration on the mount: God the father is called "the living God"; though the Vulgate Latin version leaves out the word "living"; not to distinguish him from his son; for he also is the living God; and is so called, Heb 3:12, but to distinguish him from the idols of the Gentiles, who have no life nor breath in them: and Christ is called the son of the living God, as he is a divine person, as he is truly God; and to show that he has the same life his father has; being a partaker of the same nature, and divine perfections: and this is another reason why sensible souls will go to Christ, and no other; because he is the Messiah, the Saviour, and Redeemer, and an able one; and because he is God, and there is none else.”

“After he had quelled the wrangling of the Jews, and their murmuring, the Lord next allays the scandal of the disciples, and first the scandal of the departing disciples is treated; second, the devotion of those who remain is examined, at the place, "Jesus therefore said to the twelve." Concerning the first he does three things. First, the scandal of the disciples is set forth; second, the kindness of Christ in repressing it, at the place, "But Jesus knowing," etc.; third, the obstinacy and unbelief of those departing is set forth, at the place, "After this many of his disciples went back." It must be known, then, concerning the first, that there were many among the people of the Jews who clung to Christ, believing in him, and followed him, yet not having left all things, as the twelve had; and all of these were called disciples. And of these he says that many, namely among the people, who believed in him, hearing the things he had said above, said: "This saying is hard." Of these it is said in Luke 8:13: "They believe for a while, and in time of temptation they fall away." Now it says many, because, as it is said in Ecclesiastes 1:15, "the number of fools is infinite." And Matthew 20:16: "Many are called, but few are chosen." These, then, said: "This saying is hard." A thing is called hard which is not easily divided, and which offers resistance. A saying, then, is hard either because it resists the intellect, or because it resists the will—namely, when we cannot grasp it with the intellect, or it does not please the will; and in both ways this saying was hard for these men. Hard indeed to the intellect, because it exceeded the weakness of their understanding; for since they were carnal, they could not grasp what he said, that he would give them his own flesh to eat. But hard to the will, because he said many things about the power of his divinity. And although these men believed him as they would a prophet, they did not yet believe him to be God; and therefore it seemed to them that he was speaking things greater than himself. 2 Corinthians 10:10: "His letters are weighty." Ecclesiasticus 6:21: "Wisdom is exceedingly harsh to unlearned men." And therefore it follows: "Who can hear him?" They say this to excuse themselves. For since they had given themselves to him, they ought to have heard him; but because he was not teaching them pleasing things, they wished to seek some occasion for withdrawing; Proverbs 18:2: "A fool receiveth not the words of prudence, unless you say the things that are turning in his heart." Next, when he says, "But Jesus, knowing within himself that his disciples murmured at this, said to them: Doth this scandalize you?" the kindness of Christ in allaying the scandal is set forth, and first he declares and makes manifest the scandal; second he removes the cause of the scandal, at the place, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?"; third he indicates the cause itself, at the place, "But there are some of you that do not believe." Now he declares the scandal, because they had said secretly, "This saying is hard," so as not to be heard by him. But he who by the power of his divinity knew what they were saying makes this manifest; and this is what is meant by "But Jesus, knowing within himself"—that is, what they were saying within themselves—namely, that his disciples murmured at this (above, John 2:25: "He needed not that any should give testimony of man, for he knew what was in man"; Psalm 7:10: "God searcheth hearts and reins"); he said to them: "Doth this scandalize you?" As if to say: you ought not to be scandalized at this. Or it can be read as a concession, as if to say: I know that you are scandalized at this; Isaiah 8:4: "He shall be"—namely to those believing in Christ—"for a sanctification indeed; but for a stone of stumbling to the two houses of Israel," that is, to the murmuring disciples and to the crowds. But since teachers ought to avoid scandalizing their hearers, why does the Lord set forth such teachings to them, that they should be scandalized and depart? I answer. It must be said that the necessity of the teaching required that the Lord set forth such things to them. For they had pressed upon him for bodily food, whereas he had come in order to lead them to a desire for spiritual food; and therefore it was necessary that he should set forth to them the teaching concerning spiritual food. Nor, however, was their scandal caused by any fault in Christ's teaching, but by their own unbelief. For if they did not understand the Lord's words on account of their carnality, they could have questioned the Lord, as the apostles did on other occasions. But this, according to Augustine, the Lord permitted by way of dispensation, so that he might furnish to those who teach well a cause of patience and consolation against those who speak ill of their words, since even disciples presumed to detract from the words of Christ. Next, when he says, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?" he removes the occasion of scandal, which occasion was, as Chrysostom says, both concerning the person of the speaker and concerning the words spoken; and therefore he first removes the occasion of scandal as regards the person of the speaker, and second as regards the words spoken, at the place, "It is the spirit that quickeneth." Now the occasion of these men's scandal was that they had heard the Lord speak divine things of himself; hence, because they believed him to be the son of Joseph, they were scandalized by what he said of himself. And therefore, removing this occasion, God shows them his divinity more openly; hence he says: you are troubled at the things I have said concerning myself—"if then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before"—supply: what will you say? As if to say: you will never be able to deny that I have descended from heaven, that I am the giver or teacher of eternal life. He did something similar with Nathanael: for when Nathanael said, "Thou art the king of Israel," he wished to raise him to a more perfect knowledge; hence he said to him: "Thou shalt see greater things than these." And therefore he makes manifest to these men something greater that would come to pass concerning himself, saying, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?" Now he ascended into heaven with the disciples watching, as it is said in Acts 1:9. If then he ascended to where he had been before, then he had been in heaven before; above, John 3:13: "No man hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended from heaven." But observe that although the person of the Son of God and the Son of man in Christ is the same, yet because the nature is other, something belongs to him by reason of his humanity—namely, to ascend—which does not belong to him by reason of his divinity, according to which he has nowhere to ascend to, since he is eternally at the highest summit of all things, namely in the Father; but according to his humanity it belongs to him to ascend to where he was before, namely in heaven, where he was not according to human nature; which is against the error of Valentinus, who said that Christ brought a heavenly body. Thus, then, to where he had been before according to his divinity, he ascended, with the apostles watching, and by his own power, according to his humanity; below, John 16:28: "I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world; again I leave the world, and I go to the Father." But, according to Augustine, these words are introduced in another way: for he says that these men were scandalized at the Lord's saying that he would give them his flesh to eat, which they understood carnally, as though they were to eat it according to the letter, like the flesh of animals, and were scandalized. And removing this understanding, he says, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend," with his body whole, "to where he was before"—supply: will you then say that I was going to give you my flesh to eat as you eat the flesh of animals? Next, when he says, "It is the spirit that quickeneth," he removes the occasion of scandal on the part of the words spoken, and, according to Chrysostom, he first distinguishes a twofold understanding of these words; second he shows which of the two befits the words themselves, at the place, "The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life." It must be known, then, as to the first, that the words of Christ can be understood according to a twofold sense, namely according to the spiritual and according to the bodily. And therefore he says, "It is the spirit that quickeneth," that is, if you understand the words which I have said according to the spirit, that is according to the spiritual sense, they will give life; "the flesh profiteth nothing," that is, if you understand them according to the fleshly sense, they profit you nothing—indeed they harm you; because, as it is said in Romans 8:13, "If you live according to the flesh, you shall die." Now the Lord's words about eating his flesh are understood carnally when they are taken according to how the words sound outwardly, and as the nature of flesh has it; and it was in this way that they understood them, as has been said. But the Lord was saying that he would give himself to them as spiritual food—not that the true flesh of Christ is not in the sacrament of the altar, but because it is eaten in a certain spiritual and divine manner. Thus, then, the fitting sense of the words spoken is not carnal, but spiritual. Hence he adds, "The words that I have spoken to you"—namely, concerning the eating of my flesh—"are spirit and life"; that is, they have a spiritual sense, and, understood in this way, they give life. Nor is it a wonder that they have a spiritual sense, since they are from the Holy Spirit; 1 Corinthians 14:2: "It is the spirit that speaketh mysteries." And therefore the mysteries of Christ give life; Psalm 118:93: "Thy justifications I will never forget: for by them thou hast given me life." But according to Augustine it is expounded otherwise: for what he said, "the flesh profiteth nothing," is understood of the flesh of Christ. For it is manifest that the flesh of Christ, as joined to the Word and the Spirit, profits greatly in every way; otherwise the Word would have been made flesh in vain, the Father would have manifested him in the flesh in vain, as it is said in 1 Timothy chapter 4. And therefore it must be said that the flesh of Christ, considered in itself, profits nothing, and has no profitable effect, except as any other flesh. For if it be separated in the understanding from the divinity and the Holy Spirit, it has no other power than any other flesh; but if the spirit and the divinity come to it, it profits many, because it makes those who receive it remain in Christ: for it is the spirit of charity through which man remains in God; 1 John 4:13: "In this we know that we abide in him, and he in us: because he hath given us of his spirit." And therefore the Lord says: this effect, namely of eternal life which I promise you, you ought not to attribute to the flesh considered in itself, because the flesh so considered profits nothing; but if you attribute it to the spirit, and to the divinity joined to the flesh, then it confers eternal life; Galatians 5:25: "If we live in the spirit, let us also walk in the spirit." And therefore he adds, "The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life"; that is, they are to be referred to the spirit joined to the flesh; and understood in this way, they are life, namely of the soul. For just as the body lives a bodily life through the bodily spirit, so too the soul lives a spiritual life through the Holy Spirit; Psalm 103:30: "Thou shalt send forth thy spirit, and they shall be created." Next, when he says, "But there are some of you that do not believe," he shows the cause of the scandal, which was their unbelief, as if to say: the cause of your scandal is not the hardness of the saying which I have spoken to you, but your unbelief. And therefore he first shows their unbelief; second he excludes a false opinion; third he makes manifest the cause of their unbelief. The Lord shows their unbelief indeed when he says, "There are some of you that do not believe." He did not say "who do not understand," but, what is more, he intimates the cause why they do not understand: for they did not understand for this reason, that they did not believe; Isaiah 7:9, according to another reading: "Unless you believe, you shall not understand." And he said "some," so as to except the disciples; 2 Thessalonians 3:2: "All men have not faith"; Romans 10:16: "All do not obey the gospel"; Psalm 105:25: "They believed not his words." The Evangelist excludes a false suspicion when he adds, "For Jesus knew," as if to say: Jesus did not say, "There are some of you that do not believe," as though this had newly become known to him; but because he knew from the beginning—namely of the world—who they were that believed, and who it was that would betray him; Hebrews 4:13: "All things are naked and open to his eyes"; and Ecclesiasticus 23:29: "All things were known to the Lord God before they were created." Now the Lord next assigns the cause of their unbelief, which arises from the withdrawal of the grace that draws; hence he was saying, "Therefore did I say to you," as if to say: therefore it was necessary that I should say the foregoing things to you, because no one can come to me—namely, by faith—unless it has been given him by my Father. From which it follows, according to Augustine, that even the very act of believing is given to us by God. But why it is not given to all has been shown above, in the same place where the Lord said almost the same words. He repeats them here, however, for two reasons: to show that his receiving them into the faith was more for their benefit and advantage than for Christ's; Philippians 1:29: "To you it is given ... that you should believe in him"; as if to say: it is your own good that you believe; and therefore Augustine says: it is indeed a great thing to believe; rejoice that you have believed. Second, to show that he is not the son of Joseph, as they supposed, but of God: for it is God the Father who draws men to the Son, as appears from what has gone before. Next, when he says, "After this many of his disciples went back," the obstinacy of these disciples is set forth. For although the Lord had reproved them, and had removed the cause of the scandal, so far as it lay on his part, nevertheless they persevered in unbelief; and therefore it says that many of his disciples went back. He did not say "they departed," but "they went back"—from the faith which they had according to power, and, cut off from the body of Christ, they lost life, because perhaps they had not even been in the body, as Augustine says. For there are some who simply go back: namely, those who follow the Devil, to whom it was said, Matthew 4:10: "Get thee behind me, Satan." And of certain women it is said, 1 Timothy 5:15: "Some are already turned aside after Satan." Peter does not go back in this way, but after Christ; Matthew 16:23: "Go behind me, Satan." But these men went back after Satan. Hence it follows, "and after this they walked no more with him"—namely although it is required of us that we walk with Jesus; Micah 6:8: "I will show thee, O man, what is good," and it follows, "to walk carefully with thy God." Next, when it is added, "Jesus therefore said to the twelve: Will you also go away?" the Lord examines the disciples who remained; and first the examination of the disciples is set forth by Christ's question; second the devotion of those remaining is added, by Peter's answer, at the place, "Simon Peter therefore answered him"; third Peter's answer is corrected, at the place, "Jesus answered them." Now the Lord examines the twelve who had remained, whether they wished to persist; and therefore he said to the twelve—namely, the apostles: "Will you also go away?" And this for two reasons. First, lest, because these had remained while the others departed, they should ascribe this to their own righteousness and grow proud, thinking that they had done Christ a favor by not abandoning him; and therefore, by showing that he did not need their following, he holds and confirms them the more. Job 35:7: "And if thou do justly, what shalt thou give him, or what shall he receive of thy hand?" Second, because it sometimes happens that someone has the will to depart from another, and yet is held back by shame; and therefore, not wishing them to be constrained by shame to remain with him (since to serve unwillingly is the same as not to serve at all), he removes even the shame and the necessity of remaining, placing it in their own judgment whether they wished to remain or to depart, because "God loveth a cheerful giver," as it is said in 2 Corinthians 9:7. There follows the devotion of those who remained, by Peter's answer: for he, a lover of his brethren, a preserver of friendship, and bearing a special affection toward Christ, answers on behalf of the whole company, saying: "Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life. And we have believed." Here he does three things. First, he extols Christ's excellence; second, he commends his teaching; and third, he professes his faith. He extols his excellence indeed when he says, "Lord, to whom shall we go?" As if to say: you are driving us away from you; give us another better than you, to whom we may go. But certainly "there is none like unto thee among the strong, O Lord": Exodus 15:11, and Psalm 88:7: "Who is like to God?" And therefore we will not leave you; Psalm 138:7: "Whither shall I go from thy spirit?" And, according to Chrysostom, Peter's word is greatly indicative of friendship: for by now Christ was more honorable to them than fathers and mothers. But he commends his teaching when he says, "Thou hast the words of eternal life." Now Moses had the words of God, and likewise the prophets, but rarely the words of eternal life; but you promise eternal life—what greater thing, then, do we seek? Above: "he that believeth in me hath life everlasting"; and above, John 3:39: "he that believeth in the Son of God hath life everlasting." But he professes his faith when he adds, "And we have believed and have known that thou art the Christ, the Son of God." For in our faith two things must chiefly be believed, namely the mystery of the Trinity and of the Incarnation; and these two things Peter here confesses. The mystery of the Trinity indeed, when he says, "Thou art the Son of God." For in saying that he is the Son of God, he makes mention of the person of the Father and of the Son, and at the same time also of the Holy Spirit, who is the love of the Father and the Son, and the bond of both. But the mystery of the Incarnation, when he says, "Thou art the Christ"; for "Christ" in Greek is called "anointed" in Latin—namely with the invisible oil of the Holy Spirit; but not according to the divine nature, because one who is anointed with the Holy Spirit is made better by that very anointing, but according as he is God, Christ is not made better; therefore he is anointed according as he is man. Now he says "we have believed and have known," because to believe comes before to know; and therefore if we wished to know before believing, we would not know, nor would we be able to believe, as Augustine says. Isaiah 7:9, according to another reading: "Unless you believe, you shall not understand." Now the Lord corrects Peter's answer when he says, "Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?" And first the Lord's answer is set forth; second the Evangelist's explanation, at the place, "Now he meant Judas." Because Peter had been generous in his answer, including all of them, saying thus, "And we have believed, and have known that thou art the Christ, the Son of God," by which it seemed that all would attain to eternal life, therefore the Lord excepted Judas from the company of believers. But this indeed was a commendable confidence in Peter, that he suspected no evil of a companion; but in the Lord it is a wisdom to be admired, that he saw hidden things. And therefore he says, "Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?" Not by nature, but by imitation of diabolical malice. Wisdom 2:24: "By the envy of the devil, death came into the world: and they follow him that are of his side"; below, John 13:27: "After the morsel, Satan entered into him," namely because he was made conformed to his malice. But if Christ chose Judas, and he became evil, it seems that he erred in his choosing. To this it is answered, first, according to Chrysostom, that this is not said of the election of predestination, but of election to some office, and to a state of present righteousness, to which someone is sometimes chosen not according to what is future, but according to what he presently is in fact; because by this kind of election free will is not taken away, nor is the possibility of sinning removed; hence it is said, 1 Corinthians 10:12: "He that thinketh himself to stand, let him take heed lest he fall." Thus, then, the Lord chose Judas not as one who was then evil, yet the possibility of sinning was not taken from him by this election. Second, it is answered, according to Augustine, that the Lord chose Judas though evil; and because it belongs to the good to use evil for good, although he knew him to be evil, God made good use of his evil, in that he endured being betrayed by him in order to redeem us. Or it must be said that the choosing of the twelve apostles is not here referred to the persons, but to the number; as if to say: I chose in you the number twelve. For this number is fittingly consecrated to those who were to preach the faith of the Holy Trinity through the four corners of the world; and this number indeed did not perish, because in the place of the perishing traitor Matthias was put in his stead. Or, according to Ambrose, he chose Judas though evil for this reason, that he might console our weakness, if it should ever happen to us to be betrayed by friends, since we read that the Lord and Master was betrayed by a disciple. But it is asked here why, when the Lord says, "One of you is a devil," the disciples say nothing; and afterward, when he says, below John 13:21, "One of you shall betray me," they said, "Is it I, Lord?" I answer that it must be said that the reason for this is that here the Lord spoke generally, saying that one of them was a devil, which can be referred to any kind of malice whatsoever, and therefore they were not moved; but there, hearing of so great a deed—namely, the betrayal of their Master—they were not able to contain themselves. Or it must be said to this, that when the Lord spoke these words, each of them had confidence in his own strength, and therefore they did not fear for themselves. But when they heard Peter told, "Get behind me, Satan," they were terrified, and thought more meanly of themselves; and therefore, wavering, they said: "Is it I, Lord?" Now this answer, which the Lord had made obscurely, the Evangelist explains, saying, "Now he meant Judas," as the outcome of the event proved, as is evident below, in chapter 13.”

“Jesus said to the twelve: Will you also go away? He shews them, says St. Chrysostom, that he stood not in need of them, and so leaves them to their free choice. (Witham) — Jesus Christ remarking in the previous verse that the apostate disciples had left him, to walk no more with him, turning to the twelve, asks them, Will you also go away? The twelve had heard all that passed; they had seen the Jews strive amongst themselves, and the disciples murmur and leave their Master; they understood what he said in the same literal sense; it could, indeed, bear no other meaning; but when Jesus put the above question to them, leaving them to their free choice, whether to follow him, or to withdraw themselves, Simon Peter answered him: “Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life;” and therefore art able to make good thy words, however hard and difficult they may appear to others. — We may here admire not only the excellency of their faith, but the plain, yet noble motive of their faith: they believe, because he is Christ, the Son of God, (or, as it is in the Greek, the Son of the living God ) who is absolutely incapable of deceiving his creatures, and whose power is perfectly equal to perform the promises he here makes them.”

“Then Simon Peter--whose forwardness in this case was noble, and to the wounded spirit of His Lord doubtless very grateful. Lord, to whom, &c.--that is, "We cannot deny that we have been staggered as well as they, and seeing so many go away who, as we thought, might have been retained by teaching a little less hard to take in, our own endurance has been severely tried, nor have we been able to stop short of the question, Shall we follow the rest, and give it up? But when it came to this, our light returned, and our hearts were reassured. For as soon as we thought of going away, there arose upon us that awful question, 'TO WHOM shall we go?' To the lifeless formalism and wretched traditions of the elders? to the gods many and lords many of the heathen around us? or to blank unbelief? Nay, Lord, we are shut up. They have none of that 'ETERNAL LIFE' to offer us whereof Thou hast been discoursing, in words rich and ravishing as well as in words staggering to human wisdom. That life we cannot want; that life we have learnt to crave as a necessity of the deeper nature which Thou hast awakened: 'the words of that eternal life' (the authority to reveal it and the power to confer it). Thou hast: Therefore will we stay with Thee--we must."”

“After he had quelled the wrangling of the Jews, and their murmuring, the Lord next allays the scandal of the disciples, and first the scandal of the departing disciples is treated; second, the devotion of those who remain is examined, at the place, "Jesus therefore said to the twelve." Concerning the first he does three things. First, the scandal of the disciples is set forth; second, the kindness of Christ in repressing it, at the place, "But Jesus knowing," etc.; third, the obstinacy and unbelief of those departing is set forth, at the place, "After this many of his disciples went back." It must be known, then, concerning the first, that there were many among the people of the Jews who clung to Christ, believing in him, and followed him, yet not having left all things, as the twelve had; and all of these were called disciples. And of these he says that many, namely among the people, who believed in him, hearing the things he had said above, said: "This saying is hard." Of these it is said in Luke 8:13: "They believe for a while, and in time of temptation they fall away." Now it says many, because, as it is said in Ecclesiastes 1:15, "the number of fools is infinite." And Matthew 20:16: "Many are called, but few are chosen." These, then, said: "This saying is hard." A thing is called hard which is not easily divided, and which offers resistance. A saying, then, is hard either because it resists the intellect, or because it resists the will—namely, when we cannot grasp it with the intellect, or it does not please the will; and in both ways this saying was hard for these men. Hard indeed to the intellect, because it exceeded the weakness of their understanding; for since they were carnal, they could not grasp what he said, that he would give them his own flesh to eat. But hard to the will, because he said many things about the power of his divinity. And although these men believed him as they would a prophet, they did not yet believe him to be God; and therefore it seemed to them that he was speaking things greater than himself. 2 Corinthians 10:10: "His letters are weighty." Ecclesiasticus 6:21: "Wisdom is exceedingly harsh to unlearned men." And therefore it follows: "Who can hear him?" They say this to excuse themselves. For since they had given themselves to him, they ought to have heard him; but because he was not teaching them pleasing things, they wished to seek some occasion for withdrawing; Proverbs 18:2: "A fool receiveth not the words of prudence, unless you say the things that are turning in his heart." Next, when he says, "But Jesus, knowing within himself that his disciples murmured at this, said to them: Doth this scandalize you?" the kindness of Christ in allaying the scandal is set forth, and first he declares and makes manifest the scandal; second he removes the cause of the scandal, at the place, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?"; third he indicates the cause itself, at the place, "But there are some of you that do not believe." Now he declares the scandal, because they had said secretly, "This saying is hard," so as not to be heard by him. But he who by the power of his divinity knew what they were saying makes this manifest; and this is what is meant by "But Jesus, knowing within himself"—that is, what they were saying within themselves—namely, that his disciples murmured at this (above, John 2:25: "He needed not that any should give testimony of man, for he knew what was in man"; Psalm 7:10: "God searcheth hearts and reins"); he said to them: "Doth this scandalize you?" As if to say: you ought not to be scandalized at this. Or it can be read as a concession, as if to say: I know that you are scandalized at this; Isaiah 8:4: "He shall be"—namely to those believing in Christ—"for a sanctification indeed; but for a stone of stumbling to the two houses of Israel," that is, to the murmuring disciples and to the crowds. But since teachers ought to avoid scandalizing their hearers, why does the Lord set forth such teachings to them, that they should be scandalized and depart? I answer. It must be said that the necessity of the teaching required that the Lord set forth such things to them. For they had pressed upon him for bodily food, whereas he had come in order to lead them to a desire for spiritual food; and therefore it was necessary that he should set forth to them the teaching concerning spiritual food. Nor, however, was their scandal caused by any fault in Christ's teaching, but by their own unbelief. For if they did not understand the Lord's words on account of their carnality, they could have questioned the Lord, as the apostles did on other occasions. But this, according to Augustine, the Lord permitted by way of dispensation, so that he might furnish to those who teach well a cause of patience and consolation against those who speak ill of their words, since even disciples presumed to detract from the words of Christ. Next, when he says, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?" he removes the occasion of scandal, which occasion was, as Chrysostom says, both concerning the person of the speaker and concerning the words spoken; and therefore he first removes the occasion of scandal as regards the person of the speaker, and second as regards the words spoken, at the place, "It is the spirit that quickeneth." Now the occasion of these men's scandal was that they had heard the Lord speak divine things of himself; hence, because they believed him to be the son of Joseph, they were scandalized by what he said of himself. And therefore, removing this occasion, God shows them his divinity more openly; hence he says: you are troubled at the things I have said concerning myself—"if then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before"—supply: what will you say? As if to say: you will never be able to deny that I have descended from heaven, that I am the giver or teacher of eternal life. He did something similar with Nathanael: for when Nathanael said, "Thou art the king of Israel," he wished to raise him to a more perfect knowledge; hence he said to him: "Thou shalt see greater things than these." And therefore he makes manifest to these men something greater that would come to pass concerning himself, saying, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?" Now he ascended into heaven with the disciples watching, as it is said in Acts 1:9. If then he ascended to where he had been before, then he had been in heaven before; above, John 3:13: "No man hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended from heaven." But observe that although the person of the Son of God and the Son of man in Christ is the same, yet because the nature is other, something belongs to him by reason of his humanity—namely, to ascend—which does not belong to him by reason of his divinity, according to which he has nowhere to ascend to, since he is eternally at the highest summit of all things, namely in the Father; but according to his humanity it belongs to him to ascend to where he was before, namely in heaven, where he was not according to human nature; which is against the error of Valentinus, who said that Christ brought a heavenly body. Thus, then, to where he had been before according to his divinity, he ascended, with the apostles watching, and by his own power, according to his humanity; below, John 16:28: "I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world; again I leave the world, and I go to the Father." But, according to Augustine, these words are introduced in another way: for he says that these men were scandalized at the Lord's saying that he would give them his flesh to eat, which they understood carnally, as though they were to eat it according to the letter, like the flesh of animals, and were scandalized. And removing this understanding, he says, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend," with his body whole, "to where he was before"—supply: will you then say that I was going to give you my flesh to eat as you eat the flesh of animals? Next, when he says, "It is the spirit that quickeneth," he removes the occasion of scandal on the part of the words spoken, and, according to Chrysostom, he first distinguishes a twofold understanding of these words; second he shows which of the two befits the words themselves, at the place, "The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life." It must be known, then, as to the first, that the words of Christ can be understood according to a twofold sense, namely according to the spiritual and according to the bodily. And therefore he says, "It is the spirit that quickeneth," that is, if you understand the words which I have said according to the spirit, that is according to the spiritual sense, they will give life; "the flesh profiteth nothing," that is, if you understand them according to the fleshly sense, they profit you nothing—indeed they harm you; because, as it is said in Romans 8:13, "If you live according to the flesh, you shall die." Now the Lord's words about eating his flesh are understood carnally when they are taken according to how the words sound outwardly, and as the nature of flesh has it; and it was in this way that they understood them, as has been said. But the Lord was saying that he would give himself to them as spiritual food—not that the true flesh of Christ is not in the sacrament of the altar, but because it is eaten in a certain spiritual and divine manner. Thus, then, the fitting sense of the words spoken is not carnal, but spiritual. Hence he adds, "The words that I have spoken to you"—namely, concerning the eating of my flesh—"are spirit and life"; that is, they have a spiritual sense, and, understood in this way, they give life. Nor is it a wonder that they have a spiritual sense, since they are from the Holy Spirit; 1 Corinthians 14:2: "It is the spirit that speaketh mysteries." And therefore the mysteries of Christ give life; Psalm 118:93: "Thy justifications I will never forget: for by them thou hast given me life." But according to Augustine it is expounded otherwise: for what he said, "the flesh profiteth nothing," is understood of the flesh of Christ. For it is manifest that the flesh of Christ, as joined to the Word and the Spirit, profits greatly in every way; otherwise the Word would have been made flesh in vain, the Father would have manifested him in the flesh in vain, as it is said in 1 Timothy chapter 4. And therefore it must be said that the flesh of Christ, considered in itself, profits nothing, and has no profitable effect, except as any other flesh. For if it be separated in the understanding from the divinity and the Holy Spirit, it has no other power than any other flesh; but if the spirit and the divinity come to it, it profits many, because it makes those who receive it remain in Christ: for it is the spirit of charity through which man remains in God; 1 John 4:13: "In this we know that we abide in him, and he in us: because he hath given us of his spirit." And therefore the Lord says: this effect, namely of eternal life which I promise you, you ought not to attribute to the flesh considered in itself, because the flesh so considered profits nothing; but if you attribute it to the spirit, and to the divinity joined to the flesh, then it confers eternal life; Galatians 5:25: "If we live in the spirit, let us also walk in the spirit." And therefore he adds, "The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life"; that is, they are to be referred to the spirit joined to the flesh; and understood in this way, they are life, namely of the soul. For just as the body lives a bodily life through the bodily spirit, so too the soul lives a spiritual life through the Holy Spirit; Psalm 103:30: "Thou shalt send forth thy spirit, and they shall be created." Next, when he says, "But there are some of you that do not believe," he shows the cause of the scandal, which was their unbelief, as if to say: the cause of your scandal is not the hardness of the saying which I have spoken to you, but your unbelief. And therefore he first shows their unbelief; second he excludes a false opinion; third he makes manifest the cause of their unbelief. The Lord shows their unbelief indeed when he says, "There are some of you that do not believe." He did not say "who do not understand," but, what is more, he intimates the cause why they do not understand: for they did not understand for this reason, that they did not believe; Isaiah 7:9, according to another reading: "Unless you believe, you shall not understand." And he said "some," so as to except the disciples; 2 Thessalonians 3:2: "All men have not faith"; Romans 10:16: "All do not obey the gospel"; Psalm 105:25: "They believed not his words." The Evangelist excludes a false suspicion when he adds, "For Jesus knew," as if to say: Jesus did not say, "There are some of you that do not believe," as though this had newly become known to him; but because he knew from the beginning—namely of the world—who they were that believed, and who it was that would betray him; Hebrews 4:13: "All things are naked and open to his eyes"; and Ecclesiasticus 23:29: "All things were known to the Lord God before they were created." Now the Lord next assigns the cause of their unbelief, which arises from the withdrawal of the grace that draws; hence he was saying, "Therefore did I say to you," as if to say: therefore it was necessary that I should say the foregoing things to you, because no one can come to me—namely, by faith—unless it has been given him by my Father. From which it follows, according to Augustine, that even the very act of believing is given to us by God. But why it is not given to all has been shown above, in the same place where the Lord said almost the same words. He repeats them here, however, for two reasons: to show that his receiving them into the faith was more for their benefit and advantage than for Christ's; Philippians 1:29: "To you it is given ... that you should believe in him"; as if to say: it is your own good that you believe; and therefore Augustine says: it is indeed a great thing to believe; rejoice that you have believed. Second, to show that he is not the son of Joseph, as they supposed, but of God: for it is God the Father who draws men to the Son, as appears from what has gone before. Next, when he says, "After this many of his disciples went back," the obstinacy of these disciples is set forth. For although the Lord had reproved them, and had removed the cause of the scandal, so far as it lay on his part, nevertheless they persevered in unbelief; and therefore it says that many of his disciples went back. He did not say "they departed," but "they went back"—from the faith which they had according to power, and, cut off from the body of Christ, they lost life, because perhaps they had not even been in the body, as Augustine says. For there are some who simply go back: namely, those who follow the Devil, to whom it was said, Matthew 4:10: "Get thee behind me, Satan." And of certain women it is said, 1 Timothy 5:15: "Some are already turned aside after Satan." Peter does not go back in this way, but after Christ; Matthew 16:23: "Go behind me, Satan." But these men went back after Satan. Hence it follows, "and after this they walked no more with him"—namely although it is required of us that we walk with Jesus; Micah 6:8: "I will show thee, O man, what is good," and it follows, "to walk carefully with thy God." Next, when it is added, "Jesus therefore said to the twelve: Will you also go away?" the Lord examines the disciples who remained; and first the examination of the disciples is set forth by Christ's question; second the devotion of those remaining is added, by Peter's answer, at the place, "Simon Peter therefore answered him"; third Peter's answer is corrected, at the place, "Jesus answered them." Now the Lord examines the twelve who had remained, whether they wished to persist; and therefore he said to the twelve—namely, the apostles: "Will you also go away?" And this for two reasons. First, lest, because these had remained while the others departed, they should ascribe this to their own righteousness and grow proud, thinking that they had done Christ a favor by not abandoning him; and therefore, by showing that he did not need their following, he holds and confirms them the more. Job 35:7: "And if thou do justly, what shalt thou give him, or what shall he receive of thy hand?" Second, because it sometimes happens that someone has the will to depart from another, and yet is held back by shame; and therefore, not wishing them to be constrained by shame to remain with him (since to serve unwillingly is the same as not to serve at all), he removes even the shame and the necessity of remaining, placing it in their own judgment whether they wished to remain or to depart, because "God loveth a cheerful giver," as it is said in 2 Corinthians 9:7. There follows the devotion of those who remained, by Peter's answer: for he, a lover of his brethren, a preserver of friendship, and bearing a special affection toward Christ, answers on behalf of the whole company, saying: "Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life. And we have believed." Here he does three things. First, he extols Christ's excellence; second, he commends his teaching; and third, he professes his faith. He extols his excellence indeed when he says, "Lord, to whom shall we go?" As if to say: you are driving us away from you; give us another better than you, to whom we may go. But certainly "there is none like unto thee among the strong, O Lord": Exodus 15:11, and Psalm 88:7: "Who is like to God?" And therefore we will not leave you; Psalm 138:7: "Whither shall I go from thy spirit?" And, according to Chrysostom, Peter's word is greatly indicative of friendship: for by now Christ was more honorable to them than fathers and mothers. But he commends his teaching when he says, "Thou hast the words of eternal life." Now Moses had the words of God, and likewise the prophets, but rarely the words of eternal life; but you promise eternal life—what greater thing, then, do we seek? Above: "he that believeth in me hath life everlasting"; and above, John 3:39: "he that believeth in the Son of God hath life everlasting." But he professes his faith when he adds, "And we have believed and have known that thou art the Christ, the Son of God." For in our faith two things must chiefly be believed, namely the mystery of the Trinity and of the Incarnation; and these two things Peter here confesses. The mystery of the Trinity indeed, when he says, "Thou art the Son of God." For in saying that he is the Son of God, he makes mention of the person of the Father and of the Son, and at the same time also of the Holy Spirit, who is the love of the Father and the Son, and the bond of both. But the mystery of the Incarnation, when he says, "Thou art the Christ"; for "Christ" in Greek is called "anointed" in Latin—namely with the invisible oil of the Holy Spirit; but not according to the divine nature, because one who is anointed with the Holy Spirit is made better by that very anointing, but according as he is God, Christ is not made better; therefore he is anointed according as he is man. Now he says "we have believed and have known," because to believe comes before to know; and therefore if we wished to know before believing, we would not know, nor would we be able to believe, as Augustine says. Isaiah 7:9, according to another reading: "Unless you believe, you shall not understand." Now the Lord corrects Peter's answer when he says, "Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?" And first the Lord's answer is set forth; second the Evangelist's explanation, at the place, "Now he meant Judas." Because Peter had been generous in his answer, including all of them, saying thus, "And we have believed, and have known that thou art the Christ, the Son of God," by which it seemed that all would attain to eternal life, therefore the Lord excepted Judas from the company of believers. But this indeed was a commendable confidence in Peter, that he suspected no evil of a companion; but in the Lord it is a wisdom to be admired, that he saw hidden things. And therefore he says, "Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?" Not by nature, but by imitation of diabolical malice. Wisdom 2:24: "By the envy of the devil, death came into the world: and they follow him that are of his side"; below, John 13:27: "After the morsel, Satan entered into him," namely because he was made conformed to his malice. But if Christ chose Judas, and he became evil, it seems that he erred in his choosing. To this it is answered, first, according to Chrysostom, that this is not said of the election of predestination, but of election to some office, and to a state of present righteousness, to which someone is sometimes chosen not according to what is future, but according to what he presently is in fact; because by this kind of election free will is not taken away, nor is the possibility of sinning removed; hence it is said, 1 Corinthians 10:12: "He that thinketh himself to stand, let him take heed lest he fall." Thus, then, the Lord chose Judas not as one who was then evil, yet the possibility of sinning was not taken from him by this election. Second, it is answered, according to Augustine, that the Lord chose Judas though evil; and because it belongs to the good to use evil for good, although he knew him to be evil, God made good use of his evil, in that he endured being betrayed by him in order to redeem us. Or it must be said that the choosing of the twelve apostles is not here referred to the persons, but to the number; as if to say: I chose in you the number twelve. For this number is fittingly consecrated to those who were to preach the faith of the Holy Trinity through the four corners of the world; and this number indeed did not perish, because in the place of the perishing traitor Matthias was put in his stead. Or, according to Ambrose, he chose Judas though evil for this reason, that he might console our weakness, if it should ever happen to us to be betrayed by friends, since we read that the Lord and Master was betrayed by a disciple. But it is asked here why, when the Lord says, "One of you is a devil," the disciples say nothing; and afterward, when he says, below John 13:21, "One of you shall betray me," they said, "Is it I, Lord?" I answer that it must be said that the reason for this is that here the Lord spoke generally, saying that one of them was a devil, which can be referred to any kind of malice whatsoever, and therefore they were not moved; but there, hearing of so great a deed—namely, the betrayal of their Master—they were not able to contain themselves. Or it must be said to this, that when the Lord spoke these words, each of them had confidence in his own strength, and therefore they did not fear for themselves. But when they heard Peter told, "Get behind me, Satan," they were terrified, and thought more meanly of themselves; and therefore, wavering, they said: "Is it I, Lord?" Now this answer, which the Lord had made obscurely, the Evangelist explains, saying, "Now he meant Judas," as the outcome of the event proved, as is evident below, in chapter 13.”

“Simon Peter, the chief or head of them, said in the name of the rest: Lord, to whom shall we go? It is only from thee that we hope for salvation. Thou hast the words of eternal life: we have believed, and known, and remain in this belief, that thou art the Christ, the Son of God. (Witham) Concluding reflexions on this chapter. If we take into consideration all the circumstances of this chapter, it will be difficult to conceive how any person can bring their mind to think that there is no connexion between this chapter and the institution of the blessed sacrament. It must proceed, as Dr. Clever, the Protestant Bishop of Bangor, affirms, “from the fear of giving advantage to the doctrine of transubstantiation.” He moreover adds: “whilst the institution is considered as a memorial only, nothing can well be further from being plain.” See his Sermon on the Lord’s Supper. The holy Fathers have unanimously understood these repeated promises of Christ with a reference to the institution. St. Cyprian, of the third age[century], quoting the promises of Christ, the bread which I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world, deduces this conclusion: “Hence it is manifest, that they have this life, who touch his body, and receive the Eucharist.” Qui corpus ejus attingunt. (De Orat. Dom. p. 147.) St. Hilary, of the fourth age[century], quoting Christ’s words, says: “there is no place left to doubt of the truth of Christ’s flesh and blood, de veritate carnis et sanguinis non relictus est ambigendi locus; for now, by the profession of the Lord himself, and according to our belief, it is truly flesh and truly blood.” (De Trin. lib. viii. p. 954-6.) St. Basil, of the fourth century also, citing ver. 53 and 54 of this chapter, says: “about the things that God has spoken there should be no hesitation, nor doubt, but a firm persuasion that all is true and possible, though nature be against it: Kan e phusis machetai . Herein lies the struggle of faith.” (Reg. viii. Moral. t. 2, p. 240.) Again the same saint says: “it is very profitable every day, to partake of the body and blood of Christ, phagein to soma kai piein to aima tou kuriou emon , for he that eateth my flesh. &c. (John vi. 55.) — “We communicate four times in the week; on Sunday, Wednesday, Friday, and Saturday, and on the other days, if there be a commemoration of any saint.” (Ep. xcii. t. 3, p. 186.) — St. Ambrose, of the same age, says: “the manna in the desert was given in figure. You have known things more excellent. For light is preferable to the shadow; truth to the figure; the body of Christ to the manna of heaven. But you may say: I see somewhat else: how do you assert that I shall receive the body of Christ?” He gives this answer: “How much more powerful is the virtue of the divine blessing, than that of nature; because by the former, nature itself is changed? … If the blessing of men (he here instances Moses changing a rod into a serpent, and many other miraculous changes) was powerful enough to change nature, what must we not say of the divine consecration, when the very words of the Lord operate? For that sacrament which you receive, is accomplished by the word of Christ. If the word of Elias could call down fire from heaven, shall not the word of Christ be able to change the outward elements? … The word of Christ could draw out of nothing what was not, shall it not be able to change the things that are into that which they were not? … Was the order of nature followed when Jesus was born of a Virgin? Certainly not. Then why is that order to be looked for here? It was the true flesh of Christ, which was crucified, which was buried; and this is truly the sacrament of his flesh … Our Lord himself proclaims, This is my body.” — If Jesus Christ, during his public ministry, performed so many visible and palpable miracles as we read of in the gospels, was it not to induce us to believe without doubting the truths that escape our senses, and surpass our reason? If we believe the water was changed into wine at the marriage feast of Cana; if we believe that the bread in the hands of Christ and his apostles was not diminished, by being broken and divided among five thousand, why cannot we believe the miracle of the Eucharist on the authority of Christ’s word, “the bread that I will give you, is my flesh? This is my body,” &c. Not one of all the ancient Fathers has ever denied the real presence; not one of them all has ever said, that the body of Jesus Christ is received in figure only.”

“After he had quelled the wrangling of the Jews, and their murmuring, the Lord next allays the scandal of the disciples, and first the scandal of the departing disciples is treated; second, the devotion of those who remain is examined, at the place, "Jesus therefore said to the twelve." Concerning the first he does three things. First, the scandal of the disciples is set forth; second, the kindness of Christ in repressing it, at the place, "But Jesus knowing," etc.; third, the obstinacy and unbelief of those departing is set forth, at the place, "After this many of his disciples went back." It must be known, then, concerning the first, that there were many among the people of the Jews who clung to Christ, believing in him, and followed him, yet not having left all things, as the twelve had; and all of these were called disciples. And of these he says that many, namely among the people, who believed in him, hearing the things he had said above, said: "This saying is hard." Of these it is said in Luke 8:13: "They believe for a while, and in time of temptation they fall away." Now it says many, because, as it is said in Ecclesiastes 1:15, "the number of fools is infinite." And Matthew 20:16: "Many are called, but few are chosen." These, then, said: "This saying is hard." A thing is called hard which is not easily divided, and which offers resistance. A saying, then, is hard either because it resists the intellect, or because it resists the will—namely, when we cannot grasp it with the intellect, or it does not please the will; and in both ways this saying was hard for these men. Hard indeed to the intellect, because it exceeded the weakness of their understanding; for since they were carnal, they could not grasp what he said, that he would give them his own flesh to eat. But hard to the will, because he said many things about the power of his divinity. And although these men believed him as they would a prophet, they did not yet believe him to be God; and therefore it seemed to them that he was speaking things greater than himself. 2 Corinthians 10:10: "His letters are weighty." Ecclesiasticus 6:21: "Wisdom is exceedingly harsh to unlearned men." And therefore it follows: "Who can hear him?" They say this to excuse themselves. For since they had given themselves to him, they ought to have heard him; but because he was not teaching them pleasing things, they wished to seek some occasion for withdrawing; Proverbs 18:2: "A fool receiveth not the words of prudence, unless you say the things that are turning in his heart." Next, when he says, "But Jesus, knowing within himself that his disciples murmured at this, said to them: Doth this scandalize you?" the kindness of Christ in allaying the scandal is set forth, and first he declares and makes manifest the scandal; second he removes the cause of the scandal, at the place, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?"; third he indicates the cause itself, at the place, "But there are some of you that do not believe." Now he declares the scandal, because they had said secretly, "This saying is hard," so as not to be heard by him. But he who by the power of his divinity knew what they were saying makes this manifest; and this is what is meant by "But Jesus, knowing within himself"—that is, what they were saying within themselves—namely, that his disciples murmured at this (above, John 2:25: "He needed not that any should give testimony of man, for he knew what was in man"; Psalm 7:10: "God searcheth hearts and reins"); he said to them: "Doth this scandalize you?" As if to say: you ought not to be scandalized at this. Or it can be read as a concession, as if to say: I know that you are scandalized at this; Isaiah 8:4: "He shall be"—namely to those believing in Christ—"for a sanctification indeed; but for a stone of stumbling to the two houses of Israel," that is, to the murmuring disciples and to the crowds. But since teachers ought to avoid scandalizing their hearers, why does the Lord set forth such teachings to them, that they should be scandalized and depart? I answer. It must be said that the necessity of the teaching required that the Lord set forth such things to them. For they had pressed upon him for bodily food, whereas he had come in order to lead them to a desire for spiritual food; and therefore it was necessary that he should set forth to them the teaching concerning spiritual food. Nor, however, was their scandal caused by any fault in Christ's teaching, but by their own unbelief. For if they did not understand the Lord's words on account of their carnality, they could have questioned the Lord, as the apostles did on other occasions. But this, according to Augustine, the Lord permitted by way of dispensation, so that he might furnish to those who teach well a cause of patience and consolation against those who speak ill of their words, since even disciples presumed to detract from the words of Christ. Next, when he says, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?" he removes the occasion of scandal, which occasion was, as Chrysostom says, both concerning the person of the speaker and concerning the words spoken; and therefore he first removes the occasion of scandal as regards the person of the speaker, and second as regards the words spoken, at the place, "It is the spirit that quickeneth." Now the occasion of these men's scandal was that they had heard the Lord speak divine things of himself; hence, because they believed him to be the son of Joseph, they were scandalized by what he said of himself. And therefore, removing this occasion, God shows them his divinity more openly; hence he says: you are troubled at the things I have said concerning myself—"if then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before"—supply: what will you say? As if to say: you will never be able to deny that I have descended from heaven, that I am the giver or teacher of eternal life. He did something similar with Nathanael: for when Nathanael said, "Thou art the king of Israel," he wished to raise him to a more perfect knowledge; hence he said to him: "Thou shalt see greater things than these." And therefore he makes manifest to these men something greater that would come to pass concerning himself, saying, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?" Now he ascended into heaven with the disciples watching, as it is said in Acts 1:9. If then he ascended to where he had been before, then he had been in heaven before; above, John 3:13: "No man hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended from heaven." But observe that although the person of the Son of God and the Son of man in Christ is the same, yet because the nature is other, something belongs to him by reason of his humanity—namely, to ascend—which does not belong to him by reason of his divinity, according to which he has nowhere to ascend to, since he is eternally at the highest summit of all things, namely in the Father; but according to his humanity it belongs to him to ascend to where he was before, namely in heaven, where he was not according to human nature; which is against the error of Valentinus, who said that Christ brought a heavenly body. Thus, then, to where he had been before according to his divinity, he ascended, with the apostles watching, and by his own power, according to his humanity; below, John 16:28: "I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world; again I leave the world, and I go to the Father." But, according to Augustine, these words are introduced in another way: for he says that these men were scandalized at the Lord's saying that he would give them his flesh to eat, which they understood carnally, as though they were to eat it according to the letter, like the flesh of animals, and were scandalized. And removing this understanding, he says, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend," with his body whole, "to where he was before"—supply: will you then say that I was going to give you my flesh to eat as you eat the flesh of animals? Next, when he says, "It is the spirit that quickeneth," he removes the occasion of scandal on the part of the words spoken, and, according to Chrysostom, he first distinguishes a twofold understanding of these words; second he shows which of the two befits the words themselves, at the place, "The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life." It must be known, then, as to the first, that the words of Christ can be understood according to a twofold sense, namely according to the spiritual and according to the bodily. And therefore he says, "It is the spirit that quickeneth," that is, if you understand the words which I have said according to the spirit, that is according to the spiritual sense, they will give life; "the flesh profiteth nothing," that is, if you understand them according to the fleshly sense, they profit you nothing—indeed they harm you; because, as it is said in Romans 8:13, "If you live according to the flesh, you shall die." Now the Lord's words about eating his flesh are understood carnally when they are taken according to how the words sound outwardly, and as the nature of flesh has it; and it was in this way that they understood them, as has been said. But the Lord was saying that he would give himself to them as spiritual food—not that the true flesh of Christ is not in the sacrament of the altar, but because it is eaten in a certain spiritual and divine manner. Thus, then, the fitting sense of the words spoken is not carnal, but spiritual. Hence he adds, "The words that I have spoken to you"—namely, concerning the eating of my flesh—"are spirit and life"; that is, they have a spiritual sense, and, understood in this way, they give life. Nor is it a wonder that they have a spiritual sense, since they are from the Holy Spirit; 1 Corinthians 14:2: "It is the spirit that speaketh mysteries." And therefore the mysteries of Christ give life; Psalm 118:93: "Thy justifications I will never forget: for by them thou hast given me life." But according to Augustine it is expounded otherwise: for what he said, "the flesh profiteth nothing," is understood of the flesh of Christ. For it is manifest that the flesh of Christ, as joined to the Word and the Spirit, profits greatly in every way; otherwise the Word would have been made flesh in vain, the Father would have manifested him in the flesh in vain, as it is said in 1 Timothy chapter 4. And therefore it must be said that the flesh of Christ, considered in itself, profits nothing, and has no profitable effect, except as any other flesh. For if it be separated in the understanding from the divinity and the Holy Spirit, it has no other power than any other flesh; but if the spirit and the divinity come to it, it profits many, because it makes those who receive it remain in Christ: for it is the spirit of charity through which man remains in God; 1 John 4:13: "In this we know that we abide in him, and he in us: because he hath given us of his spirit." And therefore the Lord says: this effect, namely of eternal life which I promise you, you ought not to attribute to the flesh considered in itself, because the flesh so considered profits nothing; but if you attribute it to the spirit, and to the divinity joined to the flesh, then it confers eternal life; Galatians 5:25: "If we live in the spirit, let us also walk in the spirit." And therefore he adds, "The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life"; that is, they are to be referred to the spirit joined to the flesh; and understood in this way, they are life, namely of the soul. For just as the body lives a bodily life through the bodily spirit, so too the soul lives a spiritual life through the Holy Spirit; Psalm 103:30: "Thou shalt send forth thy spirit, and they shall be created." Next, when he says, "But there are some of you that do not believe," he shows the cause of the scandal, which was their unbelief, as if to say: the cause of your scandal is not the hardness of the saying which I have spoken to you, but your unbelief. And therefore he first shows their unbelief; second he excludes a false opinion; third he makes manifest the cause of their unbelief. The Lord shows their unbelief indeed when he says, "There are some of you that do not believe." He did not say "who do not understand," but, what is more, he intimates the cause why they do not understand: for they did not understand for this reason, that they did not believe; Isaiah 7:9, according to another reading: "Unless you believe, you shall not understand." And he said "some," so as to except the disciples; 2 Thessalonians 3:2: "All men have not faith"; Romans 10:16: "All do not obey the gospel"; Psalm 105:25: "They believed not his words." The Evangelist excludes a false suspicion when he adds, "For Jesus knew," as if to say: Jesus did not say, "There are some of you that do not believe," as though this had newly become known to him; but because he knew from the beginning—namely of the world—who they were that believed, and who it was that would betray him; Hebrews 4:13: "All things are naked and open to his eyes"; and Ecclesiasticus 23:29: "All things were known to the Lord God before they were created." Now the Lord next assigns the cause of their unbelief, which arises from the withdrawal of the grace that draws; hence he was saying, "Therefore did I say to you," as if to say: therefore it was necessary that I should say the foregoing things to you, because no one can come to me—namely, by faith—unless it has been given him by my Father. From which it follows, according to Augustine, that even the very act of believing is given to us by God. But why it is not given to all has been shown above, in the same place where the Lord said almost the same words. He repeats them here, however, for two reasons: to show that his receiving them into the faith was more for their benefit and advantage than for Christ's; Philippians 1:29: "To you it is given ... that you should believe in him"; as if to say: it is your own good that you believe; and therefore Augustine says: it is indeed a great thing to believe; rejoice that you have believed. Second, to show that he is not the son of Joseph, as they supposed, but of God: for it is God the Father who draws men to the Son, as appears from what has gone before. Next, when he says, "After this many of his disciples went back," the obstinacy of these disciples is set forth. For although the Lord had reproved them, and had removed the cause of the scandal, so far as it lay on his part, nevertheless they persevered in unbelief; and therefore it says that many of his disciples went back. He did not say "they departed," but "they went back"—from the faith which they had according to power, and, cut off from the body of Christ, they lost life, because perhaps they had not even been in the body, as Augustine says. For there are some who simply go back: namely, those who follow the Devil, to whom it was said, Matthew 4:10: "Get thee behind me, Satan." And of certain women it is said, 1 Timothy 5:15: "Some are already turned aside after Satan." Peter does not go back in this way, but after Christ; Matthew 16:23: "Go behind me, Satan." But these men went back after Satan. Hence it follows, "and after this they walked no more with him"—namely although it is required of us that we walk with Jesus; Micah 6:8: "I will show thee, O man, what is good," and it follows, "to walk carefully with thy God." Next, when it is added, "Jesus therefore said to the twelve: Will you also go away?" the Lord examines the disciples who remained; and first the examination of the disciples is set forth by Christ's question; second the devotion of those remaining is added, by Peter's answer, at the place, "Simon Peter therefore answered him"; third Peter's answer is corrected, at the place, "Jesus answered them." Now the Lord examines the twelve who had remained, whether they wished to persist; and therefore he said to the twelve—namely, the apostles: "Will you also go away?" And this for two reasons. First, lest, because these had remained while the others departed, they should ascribe this to their own righteousness and grow proud, thinking that they had done Christ a favor by not abandoning him; and therefore, by showing that he did not need their following, he holds and confirms them the more. Job 35:7: "And if thou do justly, what shalt thou give him, or what shall he receive of thy hand?" Second, because it sometimes happens that someone has the will to depart from another, and yet is held back by shame; and therefore, not wishing them to be constrained by shame to remain with him (since to serve unwillingly is the same as not to serve at all), he removes even the shame and the necessity of remaining, placing it in their own judgment whether they wished to remain or to depart, because "God loveth a cheerful giver," as it is said in 2 Corinthians 9:7. There follows the devotion of those who remained, by Peter's answer: for he, a lover of his brethren, a preserver of friendship, and bearing a special affection toward Christ, answers on behalf of the whole company, saying: "Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life. And we have believed." Here he does three things. First, he extols Christ's excellence; second, he commends his teaching; and third, he professes his faith. He extols his excellence indeed when he says, "Lord, to whom shall we go?" As if to say: you are driving us away from you; give us another better than you, to whom we may go. But certainly "there is none like unto thee among the strong, O Lord": Exodus 15:11, and Psalm 88:7: "Who is like to God?" And therefore we will not leave you; Psalm 138:7: "Whither shall I go from thy spirit?" And, according to Chrysostom, Peter's word is greatly indicative of friendship: for by now Christ was more honorable to them than fathers and mothers. But he commends his teaching when he says, "Thou hast the words of eternal life." Now Moses had the words of God, and likewise the prophets, but rarely the words of eternal life; but you promise eternal life—what greater thing, then, do we seek? Above: "he that believeth in me hath life everlasting"; and above, John 3:39: "he that believeth in the Son of God hath life everlasting." But he professes his faith when he adds, "And we have believed and have known that thou art the Christ, the Son of God." For in our faith two things must chiefly be believed, namely the mystery of the Trinity and of the Incarnation; and these two things Peter here confesses. The mystery of the Trinity indeed, when he says, "Thou art the Son of God." For in saying that he is the Son of God, he makes mention of the person of the Father and of the Son, and at the same time also of the Holy Spirit, who is the love of the Father and the Son, and the bond of both. But the mystery of the Incarnation, when he says, "Thou art the Christ"; for "Christ" in Greek is called "anointed" in Latin—namely with the invisible oil of the Holy Spirit; but not according to the divine nature, because one who is anointed with the Holy Spirit is made better by that very anointing, but according as he is God, Christ is not made better; therefore he is anointed according as he is man. Now he says "we have believed and have known," because to believe comes before to know; and therefore if we wished to know before believing, we would not know, nor would we be able to believe, as Augustine says. Isaiah 7:9, according to another reading: "Unless you believe, you shall not understand." Now the Lord corrects Peter's answer when he says, "Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?" And first the Lord's answer is set forth; second the Evangelist's explanation, at the place, "Now he meant Judas." Because Peter had been generous in his answer, including all of them, saying thus, "And we have believed, and have known that thou art the Christ, the Son of God," by which it seemed that all would attain to eternal life, therefore the Lord excepted Judas from the company of believers. But this indeed was a commendable confidence in Peter, that he suspected no evil of a companion; but in the Lord it is a wisdom to be admired, that he saw hidden things. And therefore he says, "Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?" Not by nature, but by imitation of diabolical malice. Wisdom 2:24: "By the envy of the devil, death came into the world: and they follow him that are of his side"; below, John 13:27: "After the morsel, Satan entered into him," namely because he was made conformed to his malice. But if Christ chose Judas, and he became evil, it seems that he erred in his choosing. To this it is answered, first, according to Chrysostom, that this is not said of the election of predestination, but of election to some office, and to a state of present righteousness, to which someone is sometimes chosen not according to what is future, but according to what he presently is in fact; because by this kind of election free will is not taken away, nor is the possibility of sinning removed; hence it is said, 1 Corinthians 10:12: "He that thinketh himself to stand, let him take heed lest he fall." Thus, then, the Lord chose Judas not as one who was then evil, yet the possibility of sinning was not taken from him by this election. Second, it is answered, according to Augustine, that the Lord chose Judas though evil; and because it belongs to the good to use evil for good, although he knew him to be evil, God made good use of his evil, in that he endured being betrayed by him in order to redeem us. Or it must be said that the choosing of the twelve apostles is not here referred to the persons, but to the number; as if to say: I chose in you the number twelve. For this number is fittingly consecrated to those who were to preach the faith of the Holy Trinity through the four corners of the world; and this number indeed did not perish, because in the place of the perishing traitor Matthias was put in his stead. Or, according to Ambrose, he chose Judas though evil for this reason, that he might console our weakness, if it should ever happen to us to be betrayed by friends, since we read that the Lord and Master was betrayed by a disciple. But it is asked here why, when the Lord says, "One of you is a devil," the disciples say nothing; and afterward, when he says, below John 13:21, "One of you shall betray me," they said, "Is it I, Lord?" I answer that it must be said that the reason for this is that here the Lord spoke generally, saying that one of them was a devil, which can be referred to any kind of malice whatsoever, and therefore they were not moved; but there, hearing of so great a deed—namely, the betrayal of their Master—they were not able to contain themselves. Or it must be said to this, that when the Lord spoke these words, each of them had confidence in his own strength, and therefore they did not fear for themselves. But when they heard Peter told, "Get behind me, Satan," they were terrified, and thought more meanly of themselves; and therefore, wavering, they said: "Is it I, Lord?" Now this answer, which the Lord had made obscurely, the Evangelist explains, saying, "Now he meant Judas," as the outcome of the event proved, as is evident below, in chapter 13.”

“After he had quelled the wrangling of the Jews, and their murmuring, the Lord next allays the scandal of the disciples, and first the scandal of the departing disciples is treated; second, the devotion of those who remain is examined, at the place, "Jesus therefore said to the twelve." Concerning the first he does three things. First, the scandal of the disciples is set forth; second, the kindness of Christ in repressing it, at the place, "But Jesus knowing," etc.; third, the obstinacy and unbelief of those departing is set forth, at the place, "After this many of his disciples went back." It must be known, then, concerning the first, that there were many among the people of the Jews who clung to Christ, believing in him, and followed him, yet not having left all things, as the twelve had; and all of these were called disciples. And of these he says that many, namely among the people, who believed in him, hearing the things he had said above, said: "This saying is hard." Of these it is said in Luke 8:13: "They believe for a while, and in time of temptation they fall away." Now it says many, because, as it is said in Ecclesiastes 1:15, "the number of fools is infinite." And Matthew 20:16: "Many are called, but few are chosen." These, then, said: "This saying is hard." A thing is called hard which is not easily divided, and which offers resistance. A saying, then, is hard either because it resists the intellect, or because it resists the will—namely, when we cannot grasp it with the intellect, or it does not please the will; and in both ways this saying was hard for these men. Hard indeed to the intellect, because it exceeded the weakness of their understanding; for since they were carnal, they could not grasp what he said, that he would give them his own flesh to eat. But hard to the will, because he said many things about the power of his divinity. And although these men believed him as they would a prophet, they did not yet believe him to be God; and therefore it seemed to them that he was speaking things greater than himself. 2 Corinthians 10:10: "His letters are weighty." Ecclesiasticus 6:21: "Wisdom is exceedingly harsh to unlearned men." And therefore it follows: "Who can hear him?" They say this to excuse themselves. For since they had given themselves to him, they ought to have heard him; but because he was not teaching them pleasing things, they wished to seek some occasion for withdrawing; Proverbs 18:2: "A fool receiveth not the words of prudence, unless you say the things that are turning in his heart." Next, when he says, "But Jesus, knowing within himself that his disciples murmured at this, said to them: Doth this scandalize you?" the kindness of Christ in allaying the scandal is set forth, and first he declares and makes manifest the scandal; second he removes the cause of the scandal, at the place, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?"; third he indicates the cause itself, at the place, "But there are some of you that do not believe." Now he declares the scandal, because they had said secretly, "This saying is hard," so as not to be heard by him. But he who by the power of his divinity knew what they were saying makes this manifest; and this is what is meant by "But Jesus, knowing within himself"—that is, what they were saying within themselves—namely, that his disciples murmured at this (above, John 2:25: "He needed not that any should give testimony of man, for he knew what was in man"; Psalm 7:10: "God searcheth hearts and reins"); he said to them: "Doth this scandalize you?" As if to say: you ought not to be scandalized at this. Or it can be read as a concession, as if to say: I know that you are scandalized at this; Isaiah 8:4: "He shall be"—namely to those believing in Christ—"for a sanctification indeed; but for a stone of stumbling to the two houses of Israel," that is, to the murmuring disciples and to the crowds. But since teachers ought to avoid scandalizing their hearers, why does the Lord set forth such teachings to them, that they should be scandalized and depart? I answer. It must be said that the necessity of the teaching required that the Lord set forth such things to them. For they had pressed upon him for bodily food, whereas he had come in order to lead them to a desire for spiritual food; and therefore it was necessary that he should set forth to them the teaching concerning spiritual food. Nor, however, was their scandal caused by any fault in Christ's teaching, but by their own unbelief. For if they did not understand the Lord's words on account of their carnality, they could have questioned the Lord, as the apostles did on other occasions. But this, according to Augustine, the Lord permitted by way of dispensation, so that he might furnish to those who teach well a cause of patience and consolation against those who speak ill of their words, since even disciples presumed to detract from the words of Christ. Next, when he says, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?" he removes the occasion of scandal, which occasion was, as Chrysostom says, both concerning the person of the speaker and concerning the words spoken; and therefore he first removes the occasion of scandal as regards the person of the speaker, and second as regards the words spoken, at the place, "It is the spirit that quickeneth." Now the occasion of these men's scandal was that they had heard the Lord speak divine things of himself; hence, because they believed him to be the son of Joseph, they were scandalized by what he said of himself. And therefore, removing this occasion, God shows them his divinity more openly; hence he says: you are troubled at the things I have said concerning myself—"if then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before"—supply: what will you say? As if to say: you will never be able to deny that I have descended from heaven, that I am the giver or teacher of eternal life. He did something similar with Nathanael: for when Nathanael said, "Thou art the king of Israel," he wished to raise him to a more perfect knowledge; hence he said to him: "Thou shalt see greater things than these." And therefore he makes manifest to these men something greater that would come to pass concerning himself, saying, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?" Now he ascended into heaven with the disciples watching, as it is said in Acts 1:9. If then he ascended to where he had been before, then he had been in heaven before; above, John 3:13: "No man hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended from heaven." But observe that although the person of the Son of God and the Son of man in Christ is the same, yet because the nature is other, something belongs to him by reason of his humanity—namely, to ascend—which does not belong to him by reason of his divinity, according to which he has nowhere to ascend to, since he is eternally at the highest summit of all things, namely in the Father; but according to his humanity it belongs to him to ascend to where he was before, namely in heaven, where he was not according to human nature; which is against the error of Valentinus, who said that Christ brought a heavenly body. Thus, then, to where he had been before according to his divinity, he ascended, with the apostles watching, and by his own power, according to his humanity; below, John 16:28: "I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world; again I leave the world, and I go to the Father." But, according to Augustine, these words are introduced in another way: for he says that these men were scandalized at the Lord's saying that he would give them his flesh to eat, which they understood carnally, as though they were to eat it according to the letter, like the flesh of animals, and were scandalized. And removing this understanding, he says, "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend," with his body whole, "to where he was before"—supply: will you then say that I was going to give you my flesh to eat as you eat the flesh of animals? Next, when he says, "It is the spirit that quickeneth," he removes the occasion of scandal on the part of the words spoken, and, according to Chrysostom, he first distinguishes a twofold understanding of these words; second he shows which of the two befits the words themselves, at the place, "The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life." It must be known, then, as to the first, that the words of Christ can be understood according to a twofold sense, namely according to the spiritual and according to the bodily. And therefore he says, "It is the spirit that quickeneth," that is, if you understand the words which I have said according to the spirit, that is according to the spiritual sense, they will give life; "the flesh profiteth nothing," that is, if you understand them according to the fleshly sense, they profit you nothing—indeed they harm you; because, as it is said in Romans 8:13, "If you live according to the flesh, you shall die." Now the Lord's words about eating his flesh are understood carnally when they are taken according to how the words sound outwardly, and as the nature of flesh has it; and it was in this way that they understood them, as has been said. But the Lord was saying that he would give himself to them as spiritual food—not that the true flesh of Christ is not in the sacrament of the altar, but because it is eaten in a certain spiritual and divine manner. Thus, then, the fitting sense of the words spoken is not carnal, but spiritual. Hence he adds, "The words that I have spoken to you"—namely, concerning the eating of my flesh—"are spirit and life"; that is, they have a spiritual sense, and, understood in this way, they give life. Nor is it a wonder that they have a spiritual sense, since they are from the Holy Spirit; 1 Corinthians 14:2: "It is the spirit that speaketh mysteries." And therefore the mysteries of Christ give life; Psalm 118:93: "Thy justifications I will never forget: for by them thou hast given me life." But according to Augustine it is expounded otherwise: for what he said, "the flesh profiteth nothing," is understood of the flesh of Christ. For it is manifest that the flesh of Christ, as joined to the Word and the Spirit, profits greatly in every way; otherwise the Word would have been made flesh in vain, the Father would have manifested him in the flesh in vain, as it is said in 1 Timothy chapter 4. And therefore it must be said that the flesh of Christ, considered in itself, profits nothing, and has no profitable effect, except as any other flesh. For if it be separated in the understanding from the divinity and the Holy Spirit, it has no other power than any other flesh; but if the spirit and the divinity come to it, it profits many, because it makes those who receive it remain in Christ: for it is the spirit of charity through which man remains in God; 1 John 4:13: "In this we know that we abide in him, and he in us: because he hath given us of his spirit." And therefore the Lord says: this effect, namely of eternal life which I promise you, you ought not to attribute to the flesh considered in itself, because the flesh so considered profits nothing; but if you attribute it to the spirit, and to the divinity joined to the flesh, then it confers eternal life; Galatians 5:25: "If we live in the spirit, let us also walk in the spirit." And therefore he adds, "The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life"; that is, they are to be referred to the spirit joined to the flesh; and understood in this way, they are life, namely of the soul. For just as the body lives a bodily life through the bodily spirit, so too the soul lives a spiritual life through the Holy Spirit; Psalm 103:30: "Thou shalt send forth thy spirit, and they shall be created." Next, when he says, "But there are some of you that do not believe," he shows the cause of the scandal, which was their unbelief, as if to say: the cause of your scandal is not the hardness of the saying which I have spoken to you, but your unbelief. And therefore he first shows their unbelief; second he excludes a false opinion; third he makes manifest the cause of their unbelief. The Lord shows their unbelief indeed when he says, "There are some of you that do not believe." He did not say "who do not understand," but, what is more, he intimates the cause why they do not understand: for they did not understand for this reason, that they did not believe; Isaiah 7:9, according to another reading: "Unless you believe, you shall not understand." And he said "some," so as to except the disciples; 2 Thessalonians 3:2: "All men have not faith"; Romans 10:16: "All do not obey the gospel"; Psalm 105:25: "They believed not his words." The Evangelist excludes a false suspicion when he adds, "For Jesus knew," as if to say: Jesus did not say, "There are some of you that do not believe," as though this had newly become known to him; but because he knew from the beginning—namely of the world—who they were that believed, and who it was that would betray him; Hebrews 4:13: "All things are naked and open to his eyes"; and Ecclesiasticus 23:29: "All things were known to the Lord God before they were created." Now the Lord next assigns the cause of their unbelief, which arises from the withdrawal of the grace that draws; hence he was saying, "Therefore did I say to you," as if to say: therefore it was necessary that I should say the foregoing things to you, because no one can come to me—namely, by faith—unless it has been given him by my Father. From which it follows, according to Augustine, that even the very act of believing is given to us by God. But why it is not given to all has been shown above, in the same place where the Lord said almost the same words. He repeats them here, however, for two reasons: to show that his receiving them into the faith was more for their benefit and advantage than for Christ's; Philippians 1:29: "To you it is given ... that you should believe in him"; as if to say: it is your own good that you believe; and therefore Augustine says: it is indeed a great thing to believe; rejoice that you have believed. Second, to show that he is not the son of Joseph, as they supposed, but of God: for it is God the Father who draws men to the Son, as appears from what has gone before. Next, when he says, "After this many of his disciples went back," the obstinacy of these disciples is set forth. For although the Lord had reproved them, and had removed the cause of the scandal, so far as it lay on his part, nevertheless they persevered in unbelief; and therefore it says that many of his disciples went back. He did not say "they departed," but "they went back"—from the faith which they had according to power, and, cut off from the body of Christ, they lost life, because perhaps they had not even been in the body, as Augustine says. For there are some who simply go back: namely, those who follow the Devil, to whom it was said, Matthew 4:10: "Get thee behind me, Satan." And of certain women it is said, 1 Timothy 5:15: "Some are already turned aside after Satan." Peter does not go back in this way, but after Christ; Matthew 16:23: "Go behind me, Satan." But these men went back after Satan. Hence it follows, "and after this they walked no more with him"—namely although it is required of us that we walk with Jesus; Micah 6:8: "I will show thee, O man, what is good," and it follows, "to walk carefully with thy God." Next, when it is added, "Jesus therefore said to the twelve: Will you also go away?" the Lord examines the disciples who remained; and first the examination of the disciples is set forth by Christ's question; second the devotion of those remaining is added, by Peter's answer, at the place, "Simon Peter therefore answered him"; third Peter's answer is corrected, at the place, "Jesus answered them." Now the Lord examines the twelve who had remained, whether they wished to persist; and therefore he said to the twelve—namely, the apostles: "Will you also go away?" And this for two reasons. First, lest, because these had remained while the others departed, they should ascribe this to their own righteousness and grow proud, thinking that they had done Christ a favor by not abandoning him; and therefore, by showing that he did not need their following, he holds and confirms them the more. Job 35:7: "And if thou do justly, what shalt thou give him, or what shall he receive of thy hand?" Second, because it sometimes happens that someone has the will to depart from another, and yet is held back by shame; and therefore, not wishing them to be constrained by shame to remain with him (since to serve unwillingly is the same as not to serve at all), he removes even the shame and the necessity of remaining, placing it in their own judgment whether they wished to remain or to depart, because "God loveth a cheerful giver," as it is said in 2 Corinthians 9:7. There follows the devotion of those who remained, by Peter's answer: for he, a lover of his brethren, a preserver of friendship, and bearing a special affection toward Christ, answers on behalf of the whole company, saying: "Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life. And we have believed." Here he does three things. First, he extols Christ's excellence; second, he commends his teaching; and third, he professes his faith. He extols his excellence indeed when he says, "Lord, to whom shall we go?" As if to say: you are driving us away from you; give us another better than you, to whom we may go. But certainly "there is none like unto thee among the strong, O Lord": Exodus 15:11, and Psalm 88:7: "Who is like to God?" And therefore we will not leave you; Psalm 138:7: "Whither shall I go from thy spirit?" And, according to Chrysostom, Peter's word is greatly indicative of friendship: for by now Christ was more honorable to them than fathers and mothers. But he commends his teaching when he says, "Thou hast the words of eternal life." Now Moses had the words of God, and likewise the prophets, but rarely the words of eternal life; but you promise eternal life—what greater thing, then, do we seek? Above: "he that believeth in me hath life everlasting"; and above, John 3:39: "he that believeth in the Son of God hath life everlasting." But he professes his faith when he adds, "And we have believed and have known that thou art the Christ, the Son of God." For in our faith two things must chiefly be believed, namely the mystery of the Trinity and of the Incarnation; and these two things Peter here confesses. The mystery of the Trinity indeed, when he says, "Thou art the Son of God." For in saying that he is the Son of God, he makes mention of the person of the Father and of the Son, and at the same time also of the Holy Spirit, who is the love of the Father and the Son, and the bond of both. But the mystery of the Incarnation, when he says, "Thou art the Christ"; for "Christ" in Greek is called "anointed" in Latin—namely with the invisible oil of the Holy Spirit; but not according to the divine nature, because one who is anointed with the Holy Spirit is made better by that very anointing, but according as he is God, Christ is not made better; therefore he is anointed according as he is man. Now he says "we have believed and have known," because to believe comes before to know; and therefore if we wished to know before believing, we would not know, nor would we be able to believe, as Augustine says. Isaiah 7:9, according to another reading: "Unless you believe, you shall not understand." Now the Lord corrects Peter's answer when he says, "Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?" And first the Lord's answer is set forth; second the Evangelist's explanation, at the place, "Now he meant Judas." Because Peter had been generous in his answer, including all of them, saying thus, "And we have believed, and have known that thou art the Christ, the Son of God," by which it seemed that all would attain to eternal life, therefore the Lord excepted Judas from the company of believers. But this indeed was a commendable confidence in Peter, that he suspected no evil of a companion; but in the Lord it is a wisdom to be admired, that he saw hidden things. And therefore he says, "Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?" Not by nature, but by imitation of diabolical malice. Wisdom 2:24: "By the envy of the devil, death came into the world: and they follow him that are of his side"; below, John 13:27: "After the morsel, Satan entered into him," namely because he was made conformed to his malice. But if Christ chose Judas, and he became evil, it seems that he erred in his choosing. To this it is answered, first, according to Chrysostom, that this is not said of the election of predestination, but of election to some office, and to a state of present righteousness, to which someone is sometimes chosen not according to what is future, but according to what he presently is in fact; because by this kind of election free will is not taken away, nor is the possibility of sinning removed; hence it is said, 1 Corinthians 10:12: "He that thinketh himself to stand, let him take heed lest he fall." Thus, then, the Lord chose Judas not as one who was then evil, yet the possibility of sinning was not taken from him by this election. Second, it is answered, according to Augustine, that the Lord chose Judas though evil; and because it belongs to the good to use evil for good, although he knew him to be evil, God made good use of his evil, in that he endured being betrayed by him in order to redeem us. Or it must be said that the choosing of the twelve apostles is not here referred to the persons, but to the number; as if to say: I chose in you the number twelve. For this number is fittingly consecrated to those who were to preach the faith of the Holy Trinity through the four corners of the world; and this number indeed did not perish, because in the place of the perishing traitor Matthias was put in his stead. Or, according to Ambrose, he chose Judas though evil for this reason, that he might console our weakness, if it should ever happen to us to be betrayed by friends, since we read that the Lord and Master was betrayed by a disciple. But it is asked here why, when the Lord says, "One of you is a devil," the disciples say nothing; and afterward, when he says, below John 13:21, "One of you shall betray me," they said, "Is it I, Lord?" I answer that it must be said that the reason for this is that here the Lord spoke generally, saying that one of them was a devil, which can be referred to any kind of malice whatsoever, and therefore they were not moved; but there, hearing of so great a deed—namely, the betrayal of their Master—they were not able to contain themselves. Or it must be said to this, that when the Lord spoke these words, each of them had confidence in his own strength, and therefore they did not fear for themselves. But when they heard Peter told, "Get behind me, Satan," they were terrified, and thought more meanly of themselves; and therefore, wavering, they said: "Is it I, Lord?" Now this answer, which the Lord had made obscurely, the Evangelist explains, saying, "Now he meant Judas," as the outcome of the event proved, as is evident below, in chapter 13.”

“He spake of Judas - for he it was that should betray him - Οὑτος γαρ ημελλεν αυτον παραδιδοναι, He who was about to deliver him up. By referring to this matter so often, did not our blessed Lord intend to warn Judas? Was not the evil fully exposed to his view? And who dare say that it was impossible for him to avoid what he had so often been warned against? When the temptation did take place, and his heart, in purpose, had brought forth the sin, might he not have relented, fallen at his injured master's feet, acknowledge his black offense, and implored forgiveness? And surely his most merciful Lord would have freely pardoned him. 1. On the subject of the disciples sailing off without Christ, and the storm that overtook them, it may be necessary to make a few observations, chiefly for the encouragement of the laborers in God's vineyard. It was the duty of the disciples to depart at the commandment of the Lord, though the storm was great, and the wind contrary. It was their duty to tug at the oar, expecting the appearing of their Lord and master. So it is the duty of the ministers of Christ to embark, and sail even into the sea of persecution and dangerous trial, in order to save souls. There may be darkness for a time - they must row. The waves may rise high - they must row on. The wind may be contrary - still they must tug at the oar. Jesus will appear, lay the storm, and calm the sea, and they shall have souls for their hire. The vessel will get to land, and speedily too. There are particular times in which the Lord pours out his Spirit, and multitudes are quickly convinced and converted. "Alas!" says one, "I see no fruit of my labor; no return of my prayers and tears." Take courage, man; tug on; thou shalt not labor in vain, nor spend thy strength for nought. What he does thou knowest not now, but thou shalt know hereafter. Great grace, and great peace await thee; take courage, and tug on! 2. When a man forsakes the living God, and gives way to avarice, which appears to have been the case with Judas, he is fit for any thing in which Satan may choose to employ him. Beware of the love of money! The cursed lust of gold induced a disciple of Christ to betray his God: and has it not been the ruin of millions since? Few people love money merely for its own sake: they love it because it can provide them with the necessaries, conveniences, and comforts of life; those who have not God for their portion incessantly long after these things, and therefore are covetous. While a man watches unto prayer, and abides in the love of Christ Jesus the Lord, so long he is safe, for he is contented with the lot which God has given him in life. Reader, art thou like Judas (in his best state) put in trust for the poor, or for the Church of Christ. Do not covet; and take heed that thou grudge not; nor permit thy heart to be hardened by repeated sights and tales of wo. Thou art but a steward; act faithfully, and act affectionately. Because the ointment that prefigured the death of our Lord was not applied just as Judas would have it, he took offense; betrayed and sold his master; saw and wished to remedy his transgression; despaired and hanged himself. Behold the fruit of covetousness! To what excesses and miseries the love of money may lead, God alone can comprehend. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.”