A.D. 367 – 1871 12 witnesses 19 excerpts
“Or, He calls the passion, and the cross, the least, which if one shall not confess openly, but be ashamed of them, he shall be least, that is, last, and as it were no man; but to him that confesses it He promises the great glory of a heavenly calling.”
“(Hom. xvi.) Christ then fulfilled the Prophets by accomplishing what was therein foretold concerning Himself—and the Law, first, by transgressing none of its precepts; secondly, by justifying by faith, which the Law could not do by the letter.”
“He speaks not this of the old laws, but of those which He was now going to enact, of which he says, the least, though they were all great. For as He so oft spoke humbly of Himself, so does He now speak humbly of His precepts.”
“(Serm. in Mont. i. 8.) In this last sentence again there is a double sense; to fulfil the Law, either by adding something which it had not, or by doing what it commands.”
“(cont. Faust. xix. 7. et seq.) And lastly, because even for them who were under grace, it was hard in this mortal life to fulfil that of the Law, Thou shalt not lust, He being made a Priest by the sacrifice of His flesh, obtained for us this indulgence, even in this fulfilling the Law, that where through our infirmity we could not, we should be strengthened through His perfection, of whom as our head we all are members. For so I think must be taken these words, to fulfil the Law, by adding to it, that is, such things as either contribute to the explanation of the old glosses, or to enable to keep them. For the Lord has shewed us that even a wicked motion of the thoughts to the wrong of a brother is to be accounted a kind of murder. The Lord also teaches us, that it is better to keep near to the truth without swearing, than with a true oath to come near to blasphemy.”
“But how, ye Manichæans, do you not receive the Law and the Prophets, seeing Christ here says, that He is come not to subvert but to fulfil them? To this the heretic Faustusa replies, Whose testimony is there that Christ spoke this? That of Matthew. How was it then that John does not give this saying, who was with Him in the mount, but only Matthew, who did not follow Jesus till after He had come down from the mount? To this Augustine replies, If none can speak truth concerning Christ, but who saw and heard Him, there is no one at this day who speaks truth concerning Him. Why then could not Matthew hear from John’s mouth the truth as Christ had spoken, as well as we who are born so long after can speak the truth out of John’s book? In the same manner also it is, that not Matthew’s Gospel, but also these of Luke and Mark are received by us, and on no inferior authority. Add, that the Lord Himself might have told Matthew the things He had done before He called him. But speak out and say that you do not believe the Gospel, for they who believe nothing in the Gospel but what they wish to believe, believe themselves rather than the Gospel. To this Faustus rejoins, We will prove that this was not written by Matthew, but by some other hand, unknown, in his name. For below he says, Jesus saw a man sitting at the toll-office, Matthew by name. (Mat. 9:9.) Who writing of himself says, ‘saw a man,’ and not rather ‘saw me?’ Augustine; Matthew does no more than John does, when he says, Peter turning round saw that other disciple whom Jesus loved; and it is well known that this is the common manner of Scripture writers, when writing their own actions. Faustus again, But what say you to this, that the very assurance that He was not come to destroy the Law and the Prophets, was the direct way to rouse their suspicions that He was? For He had yet done nothing that could lead the Jews to think that this was His object. Augustine; This is a very weak objection, for we do not deny that to the Jews who had no understanding, Christ might have appeared as threatening the destruction of the Law and the Prophets. Faustus; But what if the Law and the Prophets do not accept this fulfilment, according to that in Deuteronomy, These commandments that I give unto thee, thou shalt keep, thou shalt not add any thing to them, nor take away. Augustine; Here Faustus does not understand what it is to fulfil the Law, when he supposes that it must be taken of adding words to it. The fulfilment of the Law is love, which the Lord hath given in sending His Holy Spirit. The Law is fulfilled either when the things there commanded are done, or when the things there prophesied come to pass. Faustus; But in that we confess that Jesus was author of a New Testament, what else is it than to confess that He has done away with the Old? Augustine; In the Old Testament were figures of things to come, which, when the things themselves were brought in by Christ, ought to have been taken away, that in that very taking away the Law and the Prophets might be fulfilled wherein it was written that God gave a New Testament. Faustus; Therefore if Christ did say this thing, He either said it with some other meaning, or He spoke falsely, (which God forbid,) or we must take the other alternative, He did not speak it at all. But that Jesus spoke falsely none will aver, therefore He either spoke it with another meaning, or He spake it not at all. For myself I am rescued from the necessity of this alternative by the Manichæan belief, which from the first taught me not to believe all those things which are read in Jesus’ name as having been spoken by Him; for that there be many tares which to corrupt the good seed some nightly sower has scattered up and down through nearly the whole of Scripture. Augustine; Manichæus taught an impious error, that you should receive only so much of the Gospel as does not conflict with your heresy, and not receive whatever does conflict with it. We have learned of the Apostle that religious caution, Whoever preaches unto you another Gospel than that we have preached, let him be accursed. (Gal. 1:8.) The Lord also has explained what the tares signify, not things false mixed with the true Scriptures, as you interpret, but men who are children of the wicked one. Faustus; Should a Jew then enquire of you why you do not keep the precepts of the Law and the Prophets which Christ here declares He came not to destroy but to fulfil, you will be driven either to accept an empty superstition, or to repudiate this chapter as false, or to deny that you are Christ’s disciple. Augustine; The Catholics are not in any difficulty on account of this chapter as though they did not observe the Law and the Prophets; for they do cherish love to God and their neighbour, on which hang all the Law and the Prophets. And whatever in the Law and the Prophets was foreshown, whether in things done, in the celebration of sacramental rites, or in forms of speech, all these they know to be fulfilled in Christ and the Church. Wherefore we neither submit to a false superstition, nor reject the chapter, nor deny ourselves to be Christ’s disciples. He then who says, that unless Christ had destroyed the Law and the Prophets, the Mosaic rites would have continued along with the Christian ordinances, may further affirm, that unless Christ had destroyed the Law and the Prophets, He would yet be only promised as to be born, to suffer, to rise again. But inasmuch as He did not destroy, but rather fulfil them, His birth, passion, and resurrection, are now no more promised as things future, which were signified by the Sacraments of the Law; but He is preached as already born, crucified, and risen, which are signified by the Sacraments now celebrated by Christians. It is clear then how great is the error of those who suppose, that when the signs or sacraments are changed, the things themselves are different, whereas the same things which the Prophetic ordinance had held forth as promises, the Evangelic ordinance points to as completed. Faustus; Supposing these to be Christ’s genuine words, we should enquire what was His motive for speaking thus, whether to soften the blind hostility of the Jews, who when they saw their holy things trodden under foot by Him, would not have so much as given Him a hearing; or whether He really said them to instruct us, who of the Gentiles should believe, to submit to the yoke of the Law. If this last were not His design, then the first must have been; nor was there any deceit or fraud in such purpose. For of laws there be three sorts. The first that of the Hebrews, called the law of sin and death, (Rom. 8:2.) by Paul; the second that of the Gentiles, which he calls the law of nature, saying, By nature the Gentiles do the deeds of the law; (Rom. 2:14.) the third, the law of truth, which he names, The law of the Spirit of life. Also there are Prophets some of the Jews, such as are well known; others of the Gentiles as Paul speaks, A prophet of their own hath said; (Tit. 1:12.) and others of the truth, of whom Jesus speaks, I send unto you wise men and prophets. (Mat. 23:34.) Now had Jesus in the following part of this Sermon brought forward any of the Hebrew observances to shew how he had fulfilled them, no one would have doubted that it was of the Jewish Law and Prophets that He was now speaking; but when He brings forward in this way only those more ancient precepts, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not commit adultery, which were promulged of old to Enoch, Seth, and the other righteous men, who does not see that He is here speaking of the Law and Prophets of truth? Wherever He has occasion to speak of any thing merely Jewish, He plucks it up by the very roots, giving precepts directly the contrary; for example, in the case of that precept, An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. Augustine; Which was the Law and which the Prophets, that Christ came not to subvert but to fulfil, is manifest, to wit, the Law given by Moses. And the distinction which Faustus draws between the precepts of the righteous men before Moses, and the Mosaic Law, affirming that Christ fulfilled the one but annulled the other, is not so. We affirm that the Law of Moses was both well suited to its temporary purpose, and was now not subverted, but fulfilled by Christ, as will be seen in each particular. This was not understood by those who continued in such obstinate error, that they compelled the Gentiles to Judaize—those heretics, I mean, who were called Nazarenes.”
“(Serm. in Mont. i. 8.) By the words, one iota or one point shall not pass from the Law, we must understand only a strong metaphor of completeness, drawn from the letters of writing, iota being the least of the letters, made with one stroke of the pen, and a point being a slight dot at the end of the same letter. The words there shew that the Law shall be completed to the very least matter.”
“He fitly mentions the Greek iota, and not the Hebrew jod, because the iota stands in Greek for the number ten, and so there is an allusion to the Decalogue of which the Gospel is the point and perfection.”
“He here asserts two things; He denies that He was come to subvert the Law, and affirms that He was come to fulfil it.”
“Amen is a Hebrew word, and may be rendered in Latin, ‘vere,’ ‘fidenter,’ or ‘fiat;’ that is, ‘truly,’ ‘faithfully,’ or ‘so be it.’ The Lord uses it either because of the hardness of heart of those who were slow to believe, or to attract more particularly the attention of those that did believe.”
“But shall abide in their essence, but pass through renewal.”
“Hence he says: for justice's sake, 1 Peter 3:14: "If you suffer anything..." Chrysostom: he does not say "by the pagans" and "according to the faith," but "for justice's sake," because martyrdom is not from just anyone or for just any cause, but for the father's justice — Ecclesiasticus 4:33: "Strive for justice." The prophets were killed not because they denied the faith but because they announced the truth; John the Baptist, because he announced the truth, was killed and was a martyr. And it should be noted that this beatitude is placed in the eighth position, just as circumcision was performed on the eighth day, in which a certain general circumcision of the martyrs is foretold. "For theirs is the kingdom." This appears to be the same as what is set down in the first beatitude; hence it is explained variously by the saints. For some say that this is the same as what is said: "Blessed are the poor, for theirs...," and this in order to designate the perfection of patience, James 1:4; for perfection is always designated by the fact that it returns to its own starting-point, as appears in a circle. Likewise, he who suffers persecution for justice's sake is poor, and all the other things are owed to him, since he is also meek and merciful, and so with all the rest; and therefore not only the first reward is owed to him but all the rewards. Others say that it is not the same; hence Ambrose says that the kingdom of heaven is set down here with respect to the glory of the soul and heart: for to the power of the soul the kingdom of heaven corresponds, but to martyrdom corresponds the beatitude which consists in the glorification of bodies, on account of the torments which they suffered. Or otherwise: the kingdom of heaven is promised to the poor in hope, because they do not fly away at once, but to the martyrs in reality, because they fly away at once. [87565] On Matthew, chapter 5, verse 11: "Blessed are you." Here he touches upon the dignity of those who are to teach the very doctrine of the apostles. And it should be known that all the beatitudes pertain to three things, since the first three are for the removal of evil, namely: blessed are the poor, blessed are the meek, and blessed are they who mourn; the other four are for the working of good; and the last pertains to the patient endurance of evil. Now these three ought to be present by excellence in the teacher of sacred Scripture, because in enduring evils he ought not only to bear them patiently but ought to rejoice; likewise he ought to remove evils from others; and thirdly he ought to enlighten unto good. Hence in these three he commends the apostolic dignity in order, and he begins from persecution, because by this the perfection of all the others is designated, and it signifies that no one ought to take up the office of preaching unless he is perfect, Proverbs 19:11: "The teaching of a man is known by patience," Psalm 91:15 (Vulgate): "They shall be well patient." Concerning this, then, he does three things: first he enumerates the evils they were about to suffer; second he teaches the manner of suffering: "Rejoice and be glad"; third he assigns the reason: "for your reward." Now evils are either present or absent; and present evils come about by word and by deed: hence he sets down the whole. He says therefore: "Blessed are you." But here Augustine raises a question, because first he says "when they shall curse you," and afterward "and speak all evil," which seem to be the same. But it should be known that those curse who bear reproach to one's face, but those speak all evil who slander the absent. For they curse those to whom many reproaches are made, Jeremiah 15:10: "All curse me," 1 Peter 2:23: "who, when he was cursed..." Blessed, therefore, when they shall curse you, that is, when they shall offend you by word and by deed. Chrysostom: the merit of eternal life consists in two things: in doing good and in enduring evil, and just as any good deed, however small, is not without merit, so every injury has its reward. "And persecuted," that is, by expelling you from city to city, 1 Corinthians 4:12: "We are cursed, and we bless," and below, 23:34: "Behold I send to you prophets and scribes, and some of them you shall persecute from city to city." "And shall speak," that is, they shall pierce you and defame you with many evils, 2 Corinthians 6:8: "as seducers," 1 Peter 4:14: "If you be reproached for the name of Christ." But it should be known that not all of whom evils are spoken are blessed, but it is required, first, that it be spoken falsely, and second, that it be for Christ's sake; hence he says "lying, for my sake," and this "for my sake" refers to all the aforesaid. Likewise note that what he says, "for my sake," is the same as what was said above, "for Christ's sake." [87566] On Matthew, chapter 5, verse 12: "Rejoice." Here he teaches the manner in which evils are to be endured. Above, when he was speaking of all in general, he said "blessed are they that suffer," that is, who are not indignant; but in the apostles this does not suffice — rather it is fitting that they should exult, James 1:2: "count it all joy," Acts 5:41: "the apostles went rejoicing." But against this, Augustine: "you command that these things be endured, not that they be loved." It must be said that one is not to rejoice over the tribulations themselves but over the hope which one has on account of enduring them, just as one who takes medicine does not rejoice over the bitterness of the medicine but over the hope of health. And he says "rejoice and be glad," where it should be known that to be delighted, to exult, to rejoice, and to be glad are the same thing in reality but differ in their notion. For delight properly arises from the conjunction with the very thing loved and fitting; joy consists not only in the conjunction but also in the apprehension of it; interior gladness and exultation are effects that follow upon joy and delight, because from these the heart is first dilated — hence "laetitia" (gladness) is as it were "latitia" (a widening); likewise, not only is the heart dilated within, but when it is expressed it appears outwardly, and then it is called exultation, as it were appearing outside. Now one must rejoice because it will be to the confusion of unbelievers and the joy of the faithful; thus blessed Lawrence rejoiced on the gridiron, as is read of him. And there is a twofold cause of joy: first, the reward, hence: "for your reward is abundant in heaven," namely in the Empyrean, hence 1 Thessalonians 4:16 (17): "so shall we always be with the Lord." Augustine: in saying "in heaven" he names both the object of beatitude and its substance, which will not be among bodily things but among spiritual things, namely in the enjoyment of God; and these spiritual goods are designated by the heavens on account of their solidity and firmness. And he says "abundant" on account of the superabundant reward of the apostles, Luke 6:38: "good measure," Genesis 15:1: "I am God, your reward." The second cause why one must rejoice is the example, hence: "for so." For it is a great consolation when some are likened to the great and preceding fathers, Acts 7:52: "Which of the prophets...," James 5:10: "Take, brethren, for an example..." And note that in this the dignity of Christ is designated, because he has his prophets suffering on his behalf just as in the Old Testament, and also the dignity of the apostles, who are likened to the prophets. [87567] On Matthew, chapter 5, verse 13: "You are the salt." Above, the Lord showed the dignity of the apostles as regards the fact that in tribulations they ought to be not only patient but even rejoicing; now, however, he states their excellence as regards the fact that they ought to restrain others from evils, and therefore he compares them to salt: "You are..." And concerning this he does two things: first he determines their office as regards restraining others from evils; second he shows how they ought to restrain themselves from evils, at the place: "But if the salt lose its savor." He says, therefore: "You are the salt." He compares them to salt for four reasons. The first, on account of the generation of salt, which comes from water and wind and the heat of the sun: for spiritual generation is from the water of Baptism and by the power of the Holy Spirit, John 3:5: "Unless a man be born again...," and from the heat of the sun, that is, the fervor of love which is from the Holy Spirit, Romans 5:5: "the charity of God..." Second, on account of the useful properties of salt, of which the first is use, since all things are seasoned with salt; hence it signifies the wisdom which apostolic men ought to have, Ecclesiasticus 6:23 (37:23): "the wisdom of teaching," Colossians 4:5: "in wisdom towards those that are without." The second reason was Leviticus 2:13, that salt was to be added to every sacrifice, because apostolic teaching ought to shine forth in every work of ours. The third is that it consumes the excess of moisture and thereby preserves from putrefaction: thus the apostles by their teaching restrained carnal concupiscences, 1 Peter 4:3: "the time past is sufficient," Romans 13:13: "not in rioting." The fourth effect is that it renders the earth barren: hence it is said that certain victors sowed salt over the city they had captured so that nothing might spring up there; so also the evangelical teaching makes the earth barren, so that earthly works may not spring up in us, Ephesians 5:11: "Have no fellowship..." The apostles, therefore, are called salt because they have a biting sharpness that draws men back from sins, Mark 9:49 (50): "Have salt in yourselves." But someone might say: it suffices that I have salt. No — rather it is necessary that the powers of salt preserve you from sin, and to this he adduces four reasons. The first is taken from incorrigibility, hence: "But if the salt lose its savor." Those things properly lose their savor which lose their own power: just as strong wine, when it loses its strength, so salt when it loses its bite, Mark 9:49 (50): "if the salt become unsavory, with what will you season it?" Hence someone loses his savor when he lies subject to sin, Romans 1:21: "they became vain in their thoughts." If, therefore, on account of tribulations or anything else you fall away from virtue, "with what will you be salted" — that is, with what other salt will it be salted? For if the common people sin they can be corrected, but if the prelate sins, no one can amend him, Hosea 8:5: "How long will they be unable..." And it should be noted that Luke 14:34 says: "But if the salt become tasteless" — for it is a great folly to give up eternal things for temporal ones. The second reason is taken from usefulness, hence: "good for nothing," and Luke 14:35 explains this: "neither for the land nor for the dunghill," because it makes the land barren and does not fertilize the dunghill. Thus spiritual men, when they sin, are worth nothing, because they are not fit even for secular affairs, as soldiers and the like are, Ezekiel 15:2: "Son of man, what shall be done to the wood of the vine?" etc., Psalm 13:3 (14:3): "They are all gone aside." The third reason is taken from the imminent danger and has two branches according to two dangers. The first is expulsion, hence: "except to be cast out," namely from the Church, Apocalypse 22:15: "Without are dogs..." Likewise, that the dignity of priestly teaching authority be taken from him, Hosea 4:6: "because you have rejected knowledge," below, 21:43: "the kingdom shall be taken from you," and this is: "except to be cast out." The second danger is degradation, because those who first live supernaturally and then fail become contemptible, and this is: "and to be trodden on," Luke 14:30: "This man began to build," Malachi 2:8: "You have departed out of the way, and have caused many to stumble at the law." And it should be noted, according to Augustine, that if certain holy men are held in contempt, as is said above (5:11): "and shall speak all evil," etc., they can nevertheless never be trodden underfoot, because they always have their heart in heaven, and it is properly those who are trodden underfoot who lie upon the earth. [87568] On Matthew, chapter 5, verse 14: "You are the light." Here the third dignity of the apostles is set down. For just as they ought to restrain others from evils, so they ought also to enlighten. And concerning this he does two things: first he shows their dignity, second he removes faint-heartedness, at the place: "A city cannot..." He says, therefore: "You are the light of the world" — as if to say, not of Judea only, or Galilee, but of the whole world, Acts 13:47: "For so the Lord has commanded us: I have set you to be a light to the Gentiles." And this was a marvel, that he was scarcely known in his own land and yet he went forth into every land. But it is objected that this saying, "light," seems to belong to Christ alone, John 1:8: "He was not the light," and afterward: "that was the true light." It must be said that Christ alone is light essentially, but the apostles are called light illuminated, namely by participation, just as the eye is a light that illuminates and yet is itself illuminated. And note that these three sayings — namely, "Blessed are you when they shall curse you," and "You are the salt," and "You are the light" — seem to pertain to the three last beatitudes: the first to "Blessed are they that suffer persecution," the second to "Blessed are the peacemakers" (because they make peace in themselves and in others), the third to "Blessed are the clean of heart." For if the apostles were excellent in these last three, much more so in the higher ones. The Lord had said: "Blessed are you when they shall curse you" and "they that suffer persecution"; they might therefore say: we shall endure so many persecutions, therefore we wish to hide ourselves. And therefore the Lord next removes their faint-heartedness, hence: "A city cannot be hidden." And first he forbids hiding, second he shows the manner in which they ought to manifest themselves, at the place: "so let your light shine." That they ought not to hide themselves he proves by two reasons: first, because they could not even if they wished; second, because they ought not, and this is: "neither do men light..." "A city cannot..." The city was the congregation of the faithful, namely the very company of the apostles, Psalm 86:3 (87:3): "Glorious things are said of you." Now it was situated "upon a mountain," namely Christ, Micah 4:1: "the mountain of the house of the Lord shall be...," Daniel 2:34: "a stone cut out..." Or "upon a mountain," that is, upon the perfection of justice, Psalm 35:7 (36:6): "Your justice is like the mountains." Now a city situated upon a mountain cannot hide itself, and so it is with the apostles: Chrysostom. Men set in a lowly place, if they sin, can lie hidden; but if set upon the summit, they cannot, 3 Kings 1:20: "the eyes of all Israel are upon you." Hilary explains it differently, though the sense is nearly the same: the city upon the mountain is Christ, because on the part of the human nature by which he communicates with us, he is a city, Jeremiah 1:18: "I have made you this day into a fortified city"; he is upon a mountain because he is in the divinity which is the mountain, Psalm 67:16 (68:15): "the mountain of God, a fat mountain." And therefore Christ could not lie hidden; and therefore you, apostles, ought not to hide me. [87569] On Matthew, chapter 5, verse 15. Second, at the place: "neither do men light...," as if to say: let us grant that it could lie hidden, still you ought not to hide it. For no one who receives a benefit ought to act against the intention of the giver. God gave you knowledge so that you might share it, 1 Peter 4:10: "as every man has received grace..." And this is: "neither do men light a lamp" — men, that is, or the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. By "lamp" can be understood, first, the evangelical teaching, Psalm 118:105 (119:105): "a lamp to my feet"; for a lamp has an incorporated light; the light of truth has been placed in sacred Scripture, and it has been lit by the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Or by "lamp" can be understood the apostles, insofar as the light of grace has been placed within them, John 5:35: "he was a burning lamp," Psalm 130:17 (132:17): "I have prepared a lamp." Or by "lamp," Christ, because just as a lamp is light in an earthen vessel, so is divinity in humanity, 2 Kings 22:29: "You are my lamp." The lamp being understood in this way, by "bushel" we can understand three things. First, according to Augustine, bodily things, for two reasons: the first, because a bushel is a measure, Deuteronomy 25:15; but what we do in the body will be repaid to us, 2 Corinthians 5:10: "we must all appear..."; or because all bodily things are measured, but divine things are infinite, since they are beyond measure. Those, therefore, put the lamp under the bushel who refer their teaching to temporal advantage, since that is held more precious; against which the Apostle says, 1 Thessalonians 2:5: "For neither have we been..." In a second way, according to Chrysostom, worldly men are called the bushel, because they are empty above and solid below: for above they have unsoundness, since they perceive nothing of the Holy Spirit, 1 Corinthians 2:14: "the sensual man...," but below, that is, in secular affairs, they are wise, Luke 16:8: "the children of this world"; and this is the more literal exposition. Then, therefore, according to this, the lamp is put under the bushel when the teaching is hidden out of worldly fear, Isaiah 51:12: "Who are you, that you should be afraid of a man?," 2 Timothy 2:9: "I labor even unto bonds." But if by "lamp" is understood the evangelical teaching or Christ, then by "bushel" can be understood the synagogue: for Christ was not incarnate for this reason, that he might lie hidden beneath Judea, but that he might manifest himself to the whole world, Isaiah 49:6: "I have given you for a light." "But upon a candlestick." This can be explained in three ways, because by "candlestick" can be signified the body, and by "lamp," the evangelical teaching; hence "bushel" and "candlestick" mean the same thing, as if to say: the evangelical teaching ought not to be subjected to temporal things, but all things ought to be at its service; hence when you give up possessions, your body, and even your life unto death for the love of Christ, then you put the lamp upon the candlestick. Or by "candlestick" is understood the Church, because those who are the lamp are set in a higher place, Ecclesiasticus 26:22 (17): "a shining lamp." But if it is understood of Christ, then by "candlestick": the cross, Colossians 1:20: "through the blood of the cross." "That it may give light to all." This too is explained in three ways. By "house" the Church can be understood, 1 Timothy 3:15: "that you may know how you ought to behave..." Or the house is the whole world, Hebrews 3:4: "for every house is built by some man..." etc. [87570] On Matthew, chapter 5, verse 16. Next is set down the manner in which they ought to manifest themselves, and first he sets down the manner: that they ought to shine before men, by enlightening them, Ephesians 3:8: "To me, the least of all the saints..."; the order: "that they may see," James 2:18: "show me from your works"; the end, because it is not for their own glory, 2 Corinthians 2:17: "we are not as many...," and this is: "and may glorify"; for we ought to do good works for the glory of God, so that God may be glorified in our good life, 1 Corinthians 10:31: "whether you eat..." etc. [87571] On Matthew, chapter 5, verse 17: "Do not think." Note here that the Lord fulfilled the law in five ways: first, because those things which had been prefigured he himself fulfilled in deed, Luke 22:37: "it is necessary that it be fulfilled"; second, by observing the precepts of the law, Galatians 4:4: "when the fullness of time had come"; third, by working through grace, namely in sanctifying through the Holy Spirit, which the law was not able to do, Romans 8:3: "for what was impossible..."; fourth, by making satisfaction for the sins by which we had been made transgressors of the law — hence, the transgression having been removed, he fulfilled the law, Romans 3:25: "whom God proposed as a propitiation"; fifth, by adding to the law certain perfections which either belonged to the understanding of the law, or were for the greater perfection of justice. Note that the law is broken in three ways: by denying it entirely, or by wrongly interpreting it, or by not fulfilling the moral precepts. "Do not think." The beatitude to which the teaching of Christ pertains having been set down, here he begins to promulgate his teaching, and first he lays open his intention, second he proposes the rule and precepts of his teaching, at the place: "But I say to you." Concerning the first he does two things: first he excludes the intention that was supposed, second he sets forth the true one, at the place: "I have not come." The Lord had said to the apostles (5:11): "Blessed shall you be when they shall curse you," etc.; hence the apostles might have suspected that such a teaching was about to be handed down, on account of which they would need to hide themselves, as if Christ were saying something against the law; and therefore the Lord excludes this, saying: "Do not," etc. And likewise, because it might be said that no other prophet, after Moses who gave the law, has broken the law, the Lord therefore says he will do something greater, hence: "but to fulfill"; for no one had fulfilled it. And note that this saying is very effective against those who condemn the law as if it were from the Devil, 1 John 3:8: "in this the Son of God appears"; but he himself confesses: "I have not come to destroy the law"; therefore it is not the work of the Devil. By this argument a certain man was converted to the faith and became a Friar Preacher. Hence the Manichees very much abhor this chapter; hence Faustus raises many objections, according to Augustine, and all the objections are reduced to three. First, from the authority of the law: for it is said, Deuteronomy 4:2: "you shall not add to the word which I speak to you, nor take away from it"; but Christ added; therefore he acted against the law. Likewise, Hebrews 8:13: "in saying a new one, he has made the former old"; but Christ said he was the founder of a new law, below 26:28: "this is my blood"; therefore he destroyed the old one. Third, John 13:15: "for I have given you an example"; every action of Christ, therefore, is a true instruction; if therefore he fulfilled it, we too ought to fulfill it: therefore we ought to be circumcised and observe all the legal precepts; and this objection is common also to the Nazarenes and the Manichees. Faustus said, therefore, either that Jesus did not say these words, but Matthew — who was not present at the discourse — said them, while John, who was present, did not say them; or that if Christ did say them and Matthew wrote them, the Gospel must be explained differently. For in sacred Scripture the law is explained in three ways: as the Mosaic law (Romans 7:6: "we are delivered from the law of death, in the law of God"); the law of nature (Romans 2:14: "for when the Gentiles, who have not the law..."); the law of truth (Romans 8:2: "the law of the spirit... has come"). Thus it is proved in three ways, therefore: of the old law, of the law of nature (Titus 1:12: "one of themselves, a prophet of their own, said, The Cretans..."), of truth (below 23:34: "behold I send..."). What he says here, therefore, "I have not come," etc., must be understood of the law of nature or of truth, which also comes to be in certain of the ancient fathers; and a sign of this is that the Lord, when he was speaking of the precepts, seemed to approve some and not others, namely those which are proper to the Mosaic law, such as "an eye for an eye" and the like. But against these things Augustine objects as follows. First, because whoever denies something of the Gospel will be able, by the same reasoning, to deny anything else whatsoever, and so annul Scripture; but the faithful man ought to believe whatever things are in Scripture. Likewise, what he says — that Christ speaks of another law and prophets — is false, because in the whole New Testament, wherever mention is made of the law, it is understood of the Mosaic law, Romans 9:4: "whose is the giving of the law"; therefore the Lord too speaks of these. Hence we must see first how Christ came to fulfill the law, and afterward we shall resolve the arguments. It must be known, then, that Christ fulfilled the law and the prophets in five ways. First, because those things which had been prefigured in the law and the prophets concerning Christ, he fulfilled in deed, Luke 24:44: "it is necessary that all things be fulfilled." Second, by observing the legal precepts to the letter, Galatians 4:4: "when the fullness of time came." Third, by working grace, which the law of nature was not able to do: for every law aims at this, that we be made just men; but Christ did this through the Holy Spirit, Romans 8:3: "for what was impossible to the law." Fourth, according to Augustine, by making satisfaction for the sins according to which we had been made transgressors of the law; hence, the transgression having been removed, he is said to have fulfilled the law, Romans 3:25: "whom God proposed as a propitiation," etc. Fifth, by adding to the law certain perfections which either belonged to the understanding of the law or were for the greater perfection of justice, Hebrews 7:19: "the law brought nothing to perfection"; and this appears to be Christ's intention, because when he has already made mention of all the legal precepts, he adds: "Be you therefore perfect," etc. (Matthew 5:48). Let us resolve, then, the arguments of Faustus as Augustine resolves them. To that saying (Deuteronomy 4:2), "you shall not add to the word," it must be said that Christ did not add but explained; for they understood "you shall not kill" of the act of homicide, whereas Christ explains that he also forbade hatred and anger. Likewise, to that saying (Hebrews 8:13), "the new has made the old obsolete," it must be said that this "new" is the same thing, because the old was the figure and the new is the fulfillment of the figures. To the point that we ought to observe it, it must be said that something can be signified by speech and by figure, and it makes no difference in whatever way it is signified. Before Christ was born, one could have said: Christ is to be born and to die; but now it is said: Christ has been born, and the like; and yet the thing is in agreement, because the same accomplished and future reality is pronounced in different words. Hence that which was signified by figures as future, when it has already passed, is signified as present through new figures, namely the sacraments of the new law. Hence, although Christ has fulfilled it, nevertheless, because the truth has now come, whoever would still fulfill it in the old way would do an injury to the truth. Thus, then, is "I have not come to destroy" to be understood. [87572] On Matthew, chapter 5, verse 18: "For amen." Here is set down the reason for the fulfillment, and he seems to assign a threefold reason: the first from the immutability of the law, the second from the penalty of those who break it, the third from the reward of those who fulfill it; the second at the place: "shall break," the third at the place: "shall do and teach." He says, therefore, "amen," and it should be known that in the old law all the mysteries of Christ were prefigured, but, as is said in Amos 3:7, the Lord does nothing without revealing it; the mysteries of Christ, therefore, will endure to the very last end, below at the end (28:20): "behold I am with you." Hence not all the mysteries of the prophets were fulfilled at Christ's first coming; rather they will be fulfilled up to the end of the world. And what he has said cannot be changed, Numbers 23:19: "has the Lord said, and will he not do it?" If, therefore, the law foretold things that are future, it is also necessary that they come to pass of necessity. Hence he says: "amen I say," that is, all things will be fulfilled successively up to the end of the world. It should be known that "amen" is a Hebrew word, and no translator, out of reverence for this term — since the Lord frequently used it — has dared to change it; and it is taken sometimes in the force of a noun, whence "amen": true; sometimes it is an adverb, that is, truly, and it is taken in this way here; sometimes it stands for "let it be done," as in the Psalm (40:14 [41:13]) where what we render "let it be" is in Hebrew "amen"; hence the verse is said: for "true," "truly"; for "let it be done," "amen" is said. Hence the Lord here rouses attention in his hearers. "Till it pass" — not according to substance, but according to disposition, 1 Corinthians 7:31: "the figure of this world passes away," 2 Peter 3:12: "the heavens being on fire." "Till," that is, up to the end of the world. "Jot." "Jot" among the Greeks is the letter which we call small I; among the Hebrews, however, it is called "yod"; and among the Greeks "iota" signifies the letter Y, and is a new letter (for all the letters signify some number), so it pertains to the completeness of the Decalogue, and perhaps for this reason he set down "iota" rather than "yod," according to what the saints say. The "point," or accent-mark, is placed above letters both in Hebrew and in Greek, but for different reasons in each: because among the Hebrews the aleph sometimes sounds as "a," sometimes as "e," and this is known by certain points, and those are called apices; likewise among the Greeks certain marks are placed above letters to distinguish breathings and accents, and these too are called apices among the Greeks. The Lord wishes to say, therefore, that nothing however small will fail to be fulfilled. [87573] On Matthew, chapter 5, verse 19: "Whosoever therefore shall break." Here the second reason is set down, taken from the punishment of those who break the law, as if to say: whoever shall break it will be held guilty of punishment as a transgressor of the divine observance. Now the least commandments, according to Chrysostom, are the commandments of Christ; hence: "whosoever shall break one of these least commandments" which I am about to speak. And the continuity is thus: because the law cannot be broken, therefore, since I do not break it, whoever shall break it will be held guilty of punishment. And they are called least, first, on account of humility, just as he also calls himself a little one, below 18:3: "unless you become..."; or they are called least with respect to the transgression, because he sins less who breaks them; but greater are the things which Christ commanded with regard to observance, because the law commanded "you shall not kill," Christ, not even to be angry. Augustine and Jerome say it differently: he speaks to the letter of the least precepts which are in the law, because he said "jot and tittle"; and they are called least because the principal ones are: "you shall love the Lord your God" and "your neighbor"; hence certain observances are called the least precepts, such as the many that are in Leviticus 19. And he says this as a rebuke of the Pharisees, because the Pharisees, on account of their own observances, transgressed many things, below 15:6: "you have made void." Now the law is broken in three ways: first, by denying it entirely; second, by wrongly interpreting it; third, by not fulfilling the moral precepts. "And shall teach." He does evil who acts wrongly, but he does worse who teaches others to act wrongly, Apocalypse 2:14: "you have there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam"; and therefore he says: "whoever shall break and teach," namely, teach others to break the commandments. And according to this it seems that he who breaks them will be in the kingdom of heaven. But it should be known that, according to Augustine, the kingdom of heaven is here taken for eternal life, and the Lord wished to give us to understand that no one will be there who breaks and teaches, etc., because there will be no one there who is not great, Romans 8:30: "whom he justified," etc.; hence he who is too small will never enter. Second, according to Rabanus, thus: men seek fame among men, because it is a certain glory for a man to be reputed great in the kingdom of men; but whoever breaks the commandments will be reputed least in the kingdom of heaven, not existing there at all: for he is reputed small there who transgresses the commandments, and least who teaches others to transgress; and this explanation is good enough. Chrysostom explains it differently: Scripture sometimes calls the final judgment the kingdom of heaven, as the Psalm says (96:1 [97:1]): "the Lord has reigned"; and there there will be different ranks, but the least will be he who teaches men to transgress the commandments, because, according to this, even those who are in Hell belong to the kingdom of heaven. Gregory: on behalf of the Church, hence: he will be called least in the Church, because when a man's life is despised, it follows that his preaching too is held in contempt. "But he that shall do and teach." Great is he who does well, but greater is he who both does and teaches; hence he will have great glory, below 10:32: "whoever shall confess me," Wisdom 19:22 (19:20 Vulgate): "in all things you have magnified your people." [87574] On Matthew, chapter 5, verse 20: "But I say to you, unless it abound." Above the Lord showed that it was not his intention to destroy the law but to fulfill it; hence here he begins to fulfill it. In the law there were four kinds of precepts: certain moral precepts, certain judicial ones, certain figural ones, and certain promises; three of these the Lord fulfills in words — namely the moral, the promissory, and the judicial, that is, he teaches how they are to be fulfilled; the figural ones, however, he fulfilled in deed, in his passion. Hence this part is divided into three: in the first he fulfills the law as regards the moral precepts, in the second as regards the promises, in the third as regards the judicial precepts; the moral precepts are of two kinds: some prohibitive, some permissive; first he fulfills the former, second the latter, at the place: "it was said" (5:31). Concerning the first he does two things: first he forbids homicide, second adultery, at the place (5:27): "You have heard," etc., "You shall not commit adultery." Concerning the first he does two things: first he sets down the necessity, second the fulfillment, at the place: "You have heard." He says, therefore: "But I say to you." Note that justice is taken in two ways: sometimes it is a certain particular virtue, one of the four cardinal virtues, and has a determined subject-matter, namely the exchangeable goods which come into the use of life; otherwise it is called the general virtue, which is the common virtue that the Philosopher calls legal justice, which pertains to the fulfilling of the law: and it is taken in this way here. "And more than that of the scribes." And he says: "of the scribes and Pharisees," because these were the more prominent in the justice of the law, since they even added certain further observances of their own; therefore, in order to designate the excellence of the New Testament, he shows that it surpasses even their justice. Hence it is said that whoever is less will be in the kingdom of heaven, that is, the Church is greater than that. The sense, therefore, is: "unless it abound," that is, unless your justice be more perfect than that of the scribes and Pharisees, you shall not enter, etc. And it should be known that the state of the Gospel is a middle state between the state of the law and the state of glory, and this is clear because in Galatians 4:3 the Apostle compares the state of the law to a child, and the Gospel to a perfect age; hence he says: "as long as we were children," etc., and afterward (3:24): "the law was our pedagogue," etc., and 1 Corinthians 13:11: "when I was a child," etc.; it is, therefore, a middle state, and this is natural, because no one can arrive at one term unless he passes beyond another: for no one can arrive at old age unless he passes beyond childhood; thus the Lord says that one cannot arrive at the state of the kingdom of heaven unless one passes beyond, etc. Likewise, a greater reward is acquired for greater labor, 2 Corinthians 9:6: "he who sows sparingly..."; now in the law temporal and earthly things were promised, Isaiah 1:19: "if you be willing...," but here heavenly things are promised; therefore justice ought to abound in us, because a greater reward is expected. But it is objected against this saying of the Lord, "unless it abound," that the justice of the law consists in the fulfilling of the Decalogue; but he who fulfills the precepts of the Decalogue will have eternal life, below 19:17: "if you will enter into life..." And it is resolved thus: it is said universally, first, that the observers of the Decalogue were never able to enter except by faith and through the redemption of the blood of Christ (Galatians 2:21): "for if justice be by the law..." And therefore it must be said that the saying "if you will enter into life" is to be understood with faith presupposed; but the scribes and Pharisees did not have faith, Romans 9:31: "but Israel, by following after the law of justice, has not attained to the law of justice. Why? Because," etc.; and this is a solution good enough. Another is Augustine's, who says that all these fulfillments which Christ makes are all contained already in the old law, since there too anger is forbidden, Leviticus 19:17: "you shall not hate your brother." What, then, does the Lord add? It must be said that he adds with respect to the depraved understanding of those scribes and Pharisees, since they believed that in that precept, "you shall not kill," nothing was forbidden except from fear of the act, the act of homicide. Hence the Lord explained this, and therefore he does not simply say "unless your justice abound beyond the law," but "more than that of the scribes and Pharisees." There is also another solution, with Augustine: for Christ had said, "whoever shall do and teach," etc., and "whoever shall break," etc.; but the Pharisees and scribes do not both do and teach, below chapter 23: "for they say," etc.; therefore "unless it abound," etc., means: that what you say, you also do. "You shall not enter," etc. But another question remains, because the Lord said, "whosoever therefore shall break" one of the least commandments "shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven," and yet he who does not abound shall not enter; therefore he who breaks the commandments will nonetheless be there. And Chrysostom resolves this by saying that to be in the kingdom is one thing and to enter it is another: for those properly enter who have a share in the dominion of the kingdom; those are said to be in it who simply dwell within it, wherever that may be — hence even those who are held in prison are said to be in the kingdom; so also it is with the kingdom of heaven, because those brought to punishment are in the kingdom but do not share in the kingdom. Augustine explains it differently, and says that from this we can understand that the kingdom of heaven is spoken of in two ways: one, which those who lack justice do not enter, and this is eternal life; the other, which those who break the commandments do enter, and this is the present Church. [87575] On Matthew, chapter 5, verse 21: "You have heard." Here is set down the fulfillment of the precept, and concerning this he does three things: first he sets down the precepts, second he fulfills them, third he warns to the observance of the fulfillment; the second at the place: "but I say," the third at the place: "if therefore you offer." Concerning the first he does two things: first he sets down the precepts about the prohibition of homicide, second the penalty for homicide. He says, therefore: "you have heard" this, Exodus 20:13 and Deuteronomy 5:17, and he says "by them of old," because, according to Chrysostom, just as if a teacher says to one of his disciples: it is a long time since I taught you the elements, it is time that you learn greater things, so does the Lord, Hebrews 5:12: "for whereas for the time you ought to be masters," etc. And it should be noted that concerning this precept a threefold error arises. For some said that it was not lawful to kill even the small animals; but this is false, since it is not a sin to make use of those things which are subjected to man's power: for it is the natural order that plants be for the nourishment of animals, and certain animals for the nourishment of others; and all things are for man's nourishment, Genesis 9:3: "even as the green herbs." And the Philosopher too says in the Politics that hunting is like a just war. The second is the error of certain ones who said "you shall not kill" means a human being; hence they call all secular judges who condemn men according to certain laws murderers. Against this Augustine says that God did not take away from himself the power of killing, hence (Deuteronomy 32:39): "I will kill and I will make to live," etc.; therefore it is lawful for those to kill who do so by the command of God, because then it is God who acts. Now every law is a command of God, Proverbs 8:15: "by me kings reign," Romans 13:4: "for he beareth not the sword without cause"; therefore "you shall not kill" must be understood: on one's own authority. The third error is that some believed that "you shall not kill another" but that it is lawful to kill oneself, since this is found recorded of Samson and also of Cato and of certain virgins who threw themselves into the flames, according to what Augustine recounts. But Augustine replied that whoever kills himself kills a human being, since one ought not to kill another except by the authority of God, nor oneself either except by the will of God or the instinct of the Holy Spirit, and thus he excuses Samson. "But whosoever shall kill." Here the penalty is set down: "he shall be liable to judgment," that is, to the penalty which the law will adjudge, Exodus 21:12. [87576] On Matthew, chapter 5, verse 22. There follows: "But I say to you," etc. The precept of the old law having been set down, here the Lord fulfills it, and this fulfillment does not empty out the law but rather makes for its greater fulfillment, because he who is angry is prone to homicide, though when he is angry he does not yet commit homicide. This is in a certain way contained already in that precept, because that law was given by God, and there is a difference between the law of man and the law of God, because man is the judge of external acts, but God of internal ones, 1 Kings 16:7: "man sees those things that appear"; hence in this "you shall not kill" the very movement toward killing is also included. But there is a twofold movement toward harming one's neighbor, namely of anger and of hatred; nor is hatred the same as inveterate anger, but it is spoken of by way of cause, since hatred arises out of inveterate anger. There is, then, a difference, because anger does not desire evil to one's neighbor except insofar as it wills vengeance — hence, once vengeance is exacted, it comes to rest; but in hatred the harm itself is willed for its own sake and the desire never comes to rest; therefore the movement of hatred is graver than that of anger. Now God forbids not only the movement of hatred but also that of anger, which is lighter, 1 John 2:11: "he that hates his brother." Now he sets down three degrees of anger: the first degree is of anger latent in the heart, the second of anger appearing outwardly, the third of anger bursting forth into harm. The first is at the place: "but I say to you," and Augustine says that the reading ought to be "without cause," since he who is angry without cause will be liable to judgment. Jerome, however, says that "without cause" does not belong to the text, because then a place would be left for anger; but the Lord leaves no place at all for anger. But is all anger contrary to virtue? It should be known that, as Augustine says, there were two opinions of the philosophers on this point: the Stoics said that no passion of the soul falls upon the wise man, indeed they wished true virtue to exclude passion altogether; the Peripatetics, however, said that anger does fall upon the wise man, but moderated, and this is the truer opinion; which is clear both by authority, because in the Gospels we find these passions in a certain way attributed to Christ, in whom was the fullness of wisdom; and by reason, because if all the passions were contrary to virtue, there would be certain powers of the soul that would serve only for harm, since they would have no fitting acts of their own, and then the irascible and concupiscible powers would have been given to man in vain. And therefore it must be said that anger is sometimes a virtue and sometimes not. Now anger is taken in three ways: first, as it lies in the judgment of reason alone, without any disturbance of the soul; and this is not called anger but judgment — thus the Lord, punishing the wicked, is described as appearing angry, Micah 7:9: "I will bear the wrath of the Lord." Second, it is taken as it is a passion, and this is in the sensitive appetite, and it is twofold, because sometimes it is ordered by reason and contained within the bounds of reason — namely when one is angry as much as one ought, at whom one ought, and the like — and then it is an act of virtue and is called anger through zeal. Hence the Philosopher too says that meekness does not consist in never being angry at all. And therefore Chrysostom says that if anger were entirely taken away, discipline too would be taken away, etc. This anger, therefore, is not a sin. There is a third anger which escapes the judgment of reason, and this is always a sin, but sometimes venial, sometimes mortal, and this will be said to arise from the very worst impulse. For something is a mortal or venial sin in two ways: from its kind, or from its circumstances, or in the act and by consent; for example, homicide is an act of mortal sin from its very kind, because it is directly contrary to the divine precept, and therefore consent to homicide is a mortal sin — because if the act is mortal, so too is the consent; likewise if it were a venial sin, so too would be the consent, and so on. Sometimes, however, a sin is mortal from its kind, but nevertheless the mere impulse is not a mortal sin because it lacks consent, as when the movement of concupiscence arises toward fornication: if it is not consented to, it is not mortal. Likewise, anger is a movement toward avenging an injury inflicted — for this is properly anger; if, then, this movement, for example in the matter of homicide, remains only in the passion, such that reason too is drawn along with it, then it is a mortal sin; but if reason is not perverted, then it is venial. But if the movement is not, from its kind, a mortal sin, then even if consent is given to it, it is not mortal. What the Lord says, then — "whosoever is angry with his brother shall be liable to judgment" — must be understood of the movement tending toward harm, which movement is a mortal sin provided it is with consent, Ecclesiastes 12:14: "all things that are done, he will bring..." etc. And this is: "but I," etc. And note that no prophet, speaking of the law of Moses, spoke in this way, "but I say," etc., but they only led men to the observance of the law of Moses. From this it is clear that the Lord shows that he has authority and shows himself to be a lawgiver when he says "but I," etc. Next is set down the second degree of anger, namely when it appears outwardly without the infliction of harm. "Raca," according to some, is not a word signifying any determinate concept but is an interjection of one who is angry. According to Augustine, it is like "alas," an interjection of one who grieves, and signifies a certain feeling; hence the anger already bursts forth outwardly, yet not into harm. According to Chrysostom, it is an interjection of one who holds another in contempt, and sounds a note of contempt. Now both of these are forbidden, namely both to show bitterness toward one's brother — the Apostle (Ephesians 4:31): "let all bitterness..." — and to despise him, Malachi 2:10: "why does he despise," etc. According to others it is a word signifying a determinate concept, and on this point there are two opinions: for, according to Augustine, it is the same as "ragged," from "rachos," and this opinion agrees with that of Chrysostom; according to Jerome, "raca" signifies "empty," hence "raca," as it were "without a brain," and this is a great injury — indeed it is done as an injury to the Holy Spirit when one calls a wise brother, full of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:4: "they were all filled with the Holy Spirit"), empty, etc. But Chrysostom asks: if "empty" is the same as "foolish," why did the Lord afterward say, "but whosoever shall say, You fool"? And he answered that in every language there are words signifying injury, but the injury arises from usage and the custom of speaking: for "raca," although it is the same as "fool," is nevertheless not used in the same way, since "raca" is said familiarly; and it is a sin when it is said with anger. "He shall be liable to the council." Augustine: it is a greater thing before God to be liable to the council than to judgment, because judgment applies while the case of the accused is still being examined and it is doubtful whether he is guilty, 1 Timothy 5:21: "without... judgment"; but after he is convicted of the crime, no more is done with the accused, but the judges betake themselves to council concerning the penalty to be imposed. Hilary: he is liable to the council of the saints, because he who does injury to the Holy Spirit deserves to be condemned by the saints. Chrysostom says that the apostles explained it thus: liable to the council, that is, so that he is known to those who came together in council against Christ. "But whosoever shall say, You fool." Here is the third degree, which is when one inflicts harm by word. And just as he who says "raca" inflicts injury upon the Holy Spirit, so he who says "fool" inflicts it upon the Son of God, who was made unto us wisdom, 1 Corinthians 1:30. "He shall be liable to the fire of hell (Gehenna)." This is the first place where mention is made of Gehenna, such that no one had ever before used this word. Jeremiah 19: near Jerusalem there was a certain pleasant valley called the valley of Topheth, or of the sons of Ennon; in that valley the children of Israel worshipped idols, and God threatened them through Jeremiah that in that place their own corpses would be cast down, hence Jeremiah 19:6: "this place shall be called," etc. Gehenna, according to the Hebrews, is the same as the valley of Ennon. Because, then, many were cast down and slain in that valley by Nebuchadnezzar when they were coming down from Jerusalem, therefore the Lord calls Gehenna the place of Hell. For just as he changed the earthly promises which were in the old law into heavenly and eternal goods, so he changed the temporal punishments which the old law inflicted into eternal punishments. Now, just as the faults themselves stand in relation to one another — since it is a greater thing to show anger outwardly than to hold it within, and a still greater thing to inflict harm — so too, first there is judgment, second the council, third a determinate penalty; and all of these, namely judgment, council, Gehenna, signify the punishment of Hell. And he says "in many ways" because he shows thereby a diversity of punishments, since those who inflict harm will be punished more severely.”
“Those to whom Christ preached, and for whose use he gave these instructions to his disciples, were such as in their religion had an eye, 1. To the scriptures of the Old Testament as their rule, and therein Christ here shows them they were in the right: 2. To the scribes and the Pharisees as their example, and therein Christ here shows them they were in the wrong; for, I. The rule which Christ came to establish exactly agreed with the scriptures of the Old Testament, here called the law and the prophets. The prophets were commentators upon the law, and both together made up that rule of faith and practice which Christ found upon the throne in the Jewish church, and here he keeps it on the throne. 1. He protests against the thought of cancelling and weakening the Old Testament; Think not that I am come to destroy the law and the prophets. (1.) "Let not the pious Jews, who have an affection for the law and the prophets, fear that I come to destroy them." Let them be not prejudiced against Christ and his doctrine, from a jealousy that this kingdom he came to set up, would derogate from the honour of the scriptures, which they had embraced as coming from God, and of which they had experienced the power and purity; no, let them be satisfied that Christ has no ill design upon the law and the prophets. "Let not the profane Jews, who have a disaffection to the law and the prophets, and are weary of that yoke, hope that I am come to destroy them." Let not carnal libertines imagine that the Messiah is come to discharge them from the obligation of divine precepts and yet to secure to them divine promises, to make the happy and yet to give them leave to live as they list. Christ commands nothing now which was forbidden either by the law of nature or the moral law, nor forbids any thing which those laws had enjoined; it is a great mistake to think he does, and he here takes care to rectify the mistake; I am not come to destroy. The Saviour of souls is the destroyer of nothing but the works of the devil, of nothing that comes from God, much less of those excellent dictates which we have from Moses and the prophets. No, he came to fulfil them. That is, [1.] To obey the commands of the law, for he was made under the law, Gal 4:4. He in all respects yielded obedience to the law, honoured his parents, sanctified the sabbath, prayed, gave alms, and did that which never any one else did, obeyed perfectly, and never broke the law in any thing. [2.] To make good the promises of the law, and the predictions of the prophets, which did all bear witness to him. The covenant of grace is, for substance, the same now that it was then, and Christ the Mediator of it. [3.] To answer the types of the law; thus (as bishop Tillotson expresses it), he did not make void, but make good, the ceremonial law, and manifested himself to be the Substance of all those shadows. [4.] To fill up the defects of it, and so to complete and perfect it. Thus the word plērōsai properly signifies. If we consider the law as a vessel that had some water in it before, he did not come to pour out the water, but to fill the vessel up to the brim; or, as a picture that is first rough-drawn, displays some outlines only of the piece intended, which are afterwards filled up; so Christ made an improvement of the law and the prophets by his additions and explications. [5.] To carry on the same design; the Christian institutes are so far from thwarting and contradicting that which was the main design of the Jewish religion, that they promote it to the highest degree. The gospel is the time of reformation (Heb 9:10), not the repeal of the law, but the amendment of it, and, consequently, its establishment. 2. He asserts the perpetuity of it; that not only he designed not the abrogation of it, but that it never should be abrogated (Mat 5:18); "Verily I say unto you, I, the Amen, the faithful Witness, solemnly declare it, that till heaven and earth pass, when time shall be no more, and the unchangeable state of recompences shall supersede all laws, one jot, or one tittle, the least and most minute circumstance, shall in no wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled;" for what is it that God is doing in all the operations both of providence and grace, but fulfilling the scripture? Heaven and earth shall come together, and all the fulness thereof be wrapped up in ruin and confusion, rather than any word of God shall fall to the ground, or be in vain. The word of the Lord endures for ever, both that of the law, and that of the gospel. Observe, The care of God concerning his law extends itself even to those things that seem to be of least account in it, the iotas and the tittles; for whatever belongs to God, and bears his stamp, be it ever so little, shall be preserved. The laws of men are conscious to themselves of so much imperfection, that they allow it for a maxim, Apices juris non sunt jura - The extreme points of the law are not the law, but God will stand by and maintain every iota and every tittle of his law. 3. He gives it in charge to his disciples, carefully to preserve the law, and shows them the danger of the neglect and contempt of it (Mat 5:19); Whosoever therefore shall break one of the least commandments of the law of Moses, much more any of the greater, as the Pharisees did, who neglected the weightier matters of the law, and shall teach men so as they did, who made void the commandment of God with their traditions (Mat 15:3), he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven. Though the Pharisees be cried up for such teachers as should be, they shall not be employed as teachers in Christ's kingdom; but whosoever shall do and teach them, as Christ's disciples would, and thereby prove themselves better friends to the Old Testament than the Pharisees were, they, though despised by men, shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. Note, (1.) Among the commands of God there are some less than others; none absolutely little, but comparatively so. The Jews reckon the least of the commandments of the law to be that of the bird's nest (Deu 22:6, Deu 22:7); yet even that had a significance and an intention very great and considerable. (2.) It is a dangerous thing, in doctrine or practice, to disannul the least of God's commands; to break them, that is, to go about either to contract the extent, or weaken the obligation of them; whoever does so, will find it is at his peril. Thus to vacate any of the ten commandments, is too bold a stroke for the jealous God to pass by. it is something more than transgressing the law, it is making void the law, Psa 119:126. (3.) That the further such corruptions as they spread, the worse they are. It is impudence enough to break the command, but is a greater degree of it to teach men so. This plainly refers to those who at this time sat in Moses' seat, and by their comments corrupted and perverted the text. Opinions that tend to the destruction of serious godliness and the vitals of religion, by corrupt glosses on the scripture, are bad when they are held, but worse when they are propagated and taught, as the word of God. He that does so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven, in the kingdom of glory; he shall never come thither, but be eternally excluded; or, rather, in the kingdom of the gospel-church. He is so far from deserving the dignity of a teacher in it, that he shall not so much as be accounted a member of it. The prophet that teaches these lies shall be the tail in that kingdom (Isa 9:15); when truth shall appear in its own evidence, such corrupt teachers, though cried up as the Pharisees, shall be of no account with the wise and good. Nothing makes ministers more contemptible and base than corrupting the law, Mal 2:8, Mal 2:11. Those who extenuate and encourage sin, and discountenance and put contempt upon strictness in religion and serious devotion, are the dregs of the church. But, on the other hand, Those are truly honourable, and of great account in the church of Christ, who lay out themselves by their life and doctrine to promote the purity and strictness of practical religion; who both do and teach that which is good; for those who do not as they teach, pull down with one hand what they build up with the other, and give themselves the lie, and tempt men to think that all religion is a delusion; but those who speak from experience, who live up to what they preach, are truly great; they honour God, and God will honour them (Sa1 2:30), and hereafter they shall shine as the stars in the kingdom of our Father. II. The righteousness which Christ came to establish by this rule, must exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees, Mat 5:20. This was strange doctrine to those who looked upon the scribes and Pharisees as having arrived at the highest pitch of religion. The scribes were the most noted teachers of the law, and the Pharisees the most celebrated professors of it, and they both sat in Moses' chair (Mat 23:2), and had such a reputation among the people, that they were looked upon as super-conformable to the law, and people did not think themselves obliged to be as good as they; it was therefore a great surprise to them, to hear that they must be better than they, or they should not go to heaven; and therefore Christ here avers it with solemnity; I say unto you, It is so. The scribes and Pharisees were enemies to Christ and his doctrine, and were great oppressors; and yet it must be owned, that there was something commendable in them. They were much in fasting and prayer, and giving of alms; they were punctual in observing the ceremonial appointments, and made it their business to teach others; they had such an interest in the people that they ought, if but two men went to heaven, one would be a Pharisee; and yet our Lord Jesus here tells his disciples, that the religion he came to establish, did not only exclude the badness, but excel the goodness, of the scribes and Pharisees. We must do more than they, and better than they, or we shall come short of heaven. They were partial in the law, and laid most stress upon the ritual part of it; but we must be universal, and not think it enough to give the priest his tithe, but must give God our hearts. They minded only the outside, but we must make conscience of inside godliness. They aimed at the praise and applause of men, but we must aim at acceptance with God: they were proud of what they did in religion, and trusted to it as a righteousness; but we, when we have done all, must deny ourselves, and say, We are unprofitable servants, and trust only to the righteousness of Christ; and thus we may go beyond the scribes and Pharisees.”
“Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets,.... From verse 3 to the 10th inclusive, our Lord seems chiefly to respect the whole body of his true disciples and followers; from thence, to the 16th inclusive, he addresses the disciples, whom he had called to be ministers of the word; and in this "verse", to the end of his discourse, he applies himself to the whole multitude in general; many of whom might be ready to imagine, that by the light of the Gospel, he was giving his disciples instructions to spread in the world, he was going to set aside, as useless, the law of Moses, or the prophets, the interpreters of it, and commentators upon it. Christ knew the thoughts of their hearts, that they had taken up such prejudices in their minds against him; wherefore he says, "think not"; he was sensible what objections they were forming, and what an improvement they would make of them against his being the Messiah, and therefore prevents them, saying, I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. By "the law" is meant the moral law, as appears from the whole discourse following: this he came not to "destroy", or loose men's obligations to, as a rule of walk and conversation, but "to fulfil" it; which he did doctrinally, by setting it forth fully, and giving the true sense and meaning of it; and practically, by yielding perfect obedience to all its commands, whereby he became "the end", the fulfilling end of it. By "the prophets" are meant the writings of the prophets, in which they illustrated and explained the law of Moses; urged the duties of it; encouraged men thereunto by promises; and directed the people to the Messiah, and to an expectation of the blessings of grace by him: all which explanations, promises, and prophecies, were so far from being made void by Christ, that they receive their full accomplishment in him. The Jews (t) pretend that these words of Christ are contrary to the religion and faith of his followers, who assert, that the law of Moses is abolished; which is easily refuted, by observing the exact agreement between Christ and the Apostle Paul, Rom 3:31 and whenever he, or any other of the apostles, speaks of the abrogation of the law, it is to be understood of the ceremonial law, which in course ceased by being fulfilled; or if of the moral law, not of the matter, but of the ministry of it. This passage of Christ is cited in the Talmud (u), after this manner: "it is written in it, i.e. in the Gospel, "I Aven", neither to diminish from the law of Moses am I come, "but", or "nor" (for in the Amsterdam edition they have inserted between two hooks), to add to the law of Moses am I come.'' Which, with their last correction, though not a just citation, yet tolerably well expresses the sense; but a most blasphemous character is affixed to Christ, when they call him "Aven"; which signifies "iniquity" itself, and seems to be a wilful corruption of the word "Amen", which begins the next "verse". (t) R. Isaac Chizuk Emuna, par. 2. c. 10. p. 401. (u) T. Bab. Sabbat. fol. 116. 2.”
“Not to destroy the law, &c. It is true, by Christ’s coming, a multitude of ceremonies and sacrifices, and circumcision, were to cease; but the moral precepts were to continue, and to be complied with, even with greater perfection. (Witham) — To fulfil. By accomplishing all the figures and prophecies, and perfecting all that was imperfect. (Challoner) — Our Saviour speaks in this manner, to prepare the minds of the Jews for his new instructions. For although they were not very solicitous about fulfilling the law, still they were extremely jealous of any change being made in the letter of the law; more particularly, if the proposed change exacted a more perfect morality. Our Lord fulfilled the law three several ways: 1. By his obedience to the prescribed rites; therefore he says, it behoveth us to fulfil all justice: and who shall accuse me of sin? 2. He observes the law, not only by his own observance of it, but likewise by enabling us to fulfil it. It was the wish of the law to make man just, but found itself too weak; Christ therefore came justifying man, and accomplished the will of the law. 3. He fulfilled the law, by reducing all the precepts of the old law to a more strict and powerful morality. (St. Chrysostom, hom. xvi.)”
“IDENTITY OF THESE PRINCIPLES WITH THOSE OF THE ANCIENT ECONOMY; IN CONTRAST WITH THE REIGNING TRADITIONAL TEACHING. (Mat. 5:17-48) Think not that I am come--that I came. to destroy the law, or the prophets--that is, "the authority and principles of the Old Testament." (On the phrase, see Mat 7:12; Mat 22:40; Luk 16:16; Act 13:15). This general way of taking the phrase is much better than understanding "the law" and "the prophets" separately, and inquiring, as many good critics do, in what sense our Lord could be supposed to meditate the subversion of each. To the various classes of His hearers, who might view such supposed abrogation of the law and the prophets with very different feelings, our Lord's announcement would, in effect, be such as this--"Ye who tremble at the word of the Lord, fear not that I am going to sweep the foundation from under your feet: Ye restless and revolutionary spirits, hope not that I am going to head any revolutionary movement: And ye who hypocritically affect great reverence for the law and the prophets, pretend not to find anything in My teaching derogatory to God's living oracles." I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil--Not to subvert, abrogate, or annul, but to establish the law and the prophets--to unfold them, to embody them in living form, and to enshrine them in the reverence, affection, and character of men, am I come.”
“(ord.) Having now exhorted His hearers to undergo all things for righteousness’ sake, and also not to hide what they should receive, but to learn more for others’ sake, that they may teach others, He now goes on to tell them what they should teach, as though He had been asked, ‘What is this which you would not have hid, and for which you would have all things endured? Are you about to speak any thing beyond what is written in the Law and the Prophets;’ hence it is He says, Think not that I am come to subvert the Law or the Prophets.”
“And that for two reasons. First, that by these words He might admonish His disciples, that as He fulfilled the Law, so they should strive to fulfil it. Secondly, because the Jews would falsely accuse them as subverting the Law, therefore he answers the calumny beforehand, but in such a manner as that He should not be thought to come simply to preach the Law as the Prophets had done.”
“(ord.) By ‘break,’ is meant, the not doing what one understands rightly, or the not understanding what one has corrupted, or the destroying the perfectness of Christ’s additions.”
The in-app commentary runs from the Fathers to the early-modern record, then stops — that's where the public-domain sources end, not where the reading does. For the modern reading, follow the sources directly.