Instructiones

BOOK ONE. PREFACE TO SALONIUS. You often ask me for the explanation of many things that require an interpreter in the divine volumes; I will gather, as they come back to memory, those things which have been set forth by you, my Saloni, with a zeal for learning, both diligently and copiously, and I will respond to them not from my own intellect but from the judgment of illustrious teachers, nor from my own rashness but from the authority of others, pursuing not so much the range of swelling eloquence as the measure of necessary brevity. For in this way both your countless inquiries can be satisfied, and, moreover, it will be free for me to insert from outside some things which I shall deem useful for your knowledge, such as this: what *alleluia*, *diapsalma*, *amen* signify; what *cidaris*, *ephod*, *siclus* are, and other things which, either frequently encountered in the sacred books or especially placed in the usage of the Church, require interpretation. Since these things often present themselves to readers throughout the whole body of Scripture, I have thought it not unreasonable to show them to you, together with their meanings, heaped up as it were in this work.

It is indeed fitting that with whatever care I can I should repay your talent, you who, scarcely ten years old, entered the hermitage and among those holy hands were not only instructed but also nurtured under Father Honoratus—that man, I say, first teacher of the islands and later also of the churches; while there the teaching of the most blessed Hilarius, then a novice of the island but now a supreme pontiff, formed you through all the disciplines of spiritual matters, and to this end you were later perfected by the holy men Salvianus and Vincentius, who excel equally in eloquence and knowledge. Having, therefore, used so many and such great teachers, you will also hear from me, the least of all, the things you have inquired about. In these matters, now recognize both you asking and me answering. Farewell in Christ. ON THE MORE DIFFICULT QUESTIONS OF THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS. ON GENESIS. By what testimonies of the scriptures is the Trinity proved? In many ways and by many meanings, indeed, this is spread and manifested throughout almost all the sacred volumes, but let us demonstrate it briefly in this very beginning of the divine scriptures. "In the beginning," it says, "God made heaven and earth." And below: "And the spirit of God was borne over the waters." "In the beginning," that is, in the Son, because through the Son God the Father made heaven and earth, to whom also that is said by the Father: "Let us make man in our image and likeness.

For he has worked all things through the Son, because all things have been made through him, and without him nothing was made. Moreover, the Spirit of God, namely the Holy Spirit, was borne over the waters. Behold, you have both God the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Likewise another passage: The heavens were strengthened by the word of the Lord, and all their power by the breath of his mouth. Behold the Lord and the Word and his Holy Spirit. Likewise in the Gospel: Go, baptize the nations in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. But the Father is unbegotten, the Son is begotten, the Holy Spirit is neither begotten nor unbegotten; lest if we say unbegotten, we seem to speak of two fathers, if begotten, of two sons, but rather he who proceeds from the Father and the Son, as a kind of concord of the Father and the Son. Nor indeed can there be a just concord among us without the Holy Spirit. The same Spirit is also called the love of God and the gift of God. The same is also the distributor of the graces. Therefore the Father from whom all things, the Son through whom all things, the Holy Spirit in whom all things, just as the Apostle also says: Since all things are from him and through him and in him, glory to him through the ages.

In what way was the Spirit of God borne over the waters? Not by wandering, but by power, while it stands above its creation by the commanding authority of the ruler. Where do we read that the waters were made by God? Although the text of divine reading did not clearly express that they were made at the beginning of creation, they were nevertheless made by God. For it is shown how some other things which are not written are to be understood concerning the rest. Just as the apostles are to be understood as baptized, although the more open significance of the writings does not fully reveal them as baptized. Although some wish this to be understood by that testimony in which the Savior says: He who is washed does not need to wash. And yet concerning the waters being made by God, that testimony can instruct us to some extent in which it is said: Let the waters be separated into one gathering and let the dry land appear; because, of course, he would not command that the waters be separated from the land which he had made, unless he himself had also made the waters. For he would not subsequently command in the order of creation that which he himself had not previously created to be distinguished. And we gather this for the reason that Genesis did not explicitly introduce mention of its creation. But that psalm which says: For the sea is his, and he made it, more clearly designates God as the author of this creation.

What is meant by the statement: "And the Lord saw that they were very good"? "Saw" means: he approved. What is the reasoning behind the statement that a human is written: "She shall be called woman, because she was taken from man"? The etymology, which does not sound in Latin, is preserved in the Hebrew language; for man is called *is* and woman *issa*, which the translation has most beautifully observed by retaining: "She shall be called virago, because she was taken from man." In what do we retain the likeness of God? In the mind. Where is Paradise defined as being? There are various opinions of many on this matter. Some, however, define it as being on earth, so that a terrestrial being could not have dwelt except on earth, yet they affirm that it was made inaccessible to man by divine power. What shall we understand by Eden in Genesis? The most sacred place itself, to the east of Paradise. What is to be understood concerning that tree of the knowledge of good and evil?

First, lest, as certain heretics interpret, evils be thought to exist in such a way that God is considered the creator of evils from this. In that tree, whatever it was, the commandment of God is to be understood; but in the observance of the commandment was the knowledge of good, in the transgression of the commandment was the knowledge of evil. Therefore, when the tree was tasted, that is, when the law of the commandment was violated, there was knowledge of evil, because punishment followed the transgression of the commandment and law. How is that which Scripture reported to us about God walking in paradise to be understood? The presence of God in that same place is made manifest by this appellation of walking; for it is the custom of Scripture, in order that understanding may more easily become clear to men, to show divine motions and affections through human significations. Just as when it speaks of the arm of God, it designates his power and strength; when it speaks of ears, that he hears all things without doubt; when it speaks of eyes, that he sees all things without distinction; when it speaks of soul, that he lives perpetually and always, or that all things are given life by the author himself.

Since God made all things good and nothing was made except by him, whence comes evil? From the privation of good, when that which a good creator brought forth as good is corrupted into evil by those who use it evilly. In the substance of creation itself, there is nothing that can rightly be called evil. Moreover, those things which are thought to be evil, that is, serpents and other animal creatures, are rendered harmful by an unsuitable mode of nature. For the poison which brings death to a man is life to a serpent. If man had remained perpetually immortal, he would not fear to incur the harm of poison. In this way, other things live in waters which, when exposed to land, die; and, on the contrary, other things live on land which, when immersed in waters, perish. Since the whole substance of creation proceeded from God as author, I ask what is to be thought concerning darkness. Some argue from this as follows: silence is said to exist where there is no sound, although we know that silence has no substance; thus, because where light is present there is no darkness, darkness is rightly considered the absence of light. Others think that this opinion is not sufficiently consistent with that testimony in which it is written: "Yours is the day and yours is the night.

Since no ignorance can exist in God, how is it that the Lord says in the opening of the book of Genesis: "Ada, Adam, where are you?" That is to say: "Adam, where have you withdrawn?" Therefore this utterance is not as if of one seeking due to ambiguous inquiry, but of one questioning with reproach. And otherwise: this speech does not show God as unaware of the truth, or ignorant of where Adam was, but rather shows that everyone who sins becomes, as it were, deviant in his own errors and, by withdrawing through transgression from the sight of God, is rendered unworthy of His knowledge. What does it mean when it says: "Cursed is the earth in your works"? Here some think that "works" are to be understood not so much as the cultivation and tilling of the field, but as sins. How is it to be understood when it says: "And he dwelt in the land of Naid"? Naid—or, as it is in Hebrew, Nod—means "unstable." Therefore it is not the name of a land, but, in accordance with the punishment and divine sentence, it declares that Cain was a wanderer and a fugitive.

Since above he had designated both the man and the woman by their names, what is it that in the following verses he adds and says: "He made them man and woman and blessed them and called their name Adam." Adam is interpreted as "man," and it is clear that by the name "man" both a male and a female can be called. What is it that in the years of Methuselah fourteen years are detected by careful calculation beyond the flood, when only eight souls are reported to have been in the ark? There is an error in the number, since in the Hebrew books it is read in such a way that this number of fourteen years is completed within the time of the flood. When the Lord says: "Their days will be one hundred twenty years," how is it that afterwards the lifetimes of Abraham and many others extend beyond these limits? Because there this number of years was assigned more for performing penance than for human life, within which prescribed number they would be free for confession so that they would not perish in the flood. Or if it is preferred to refer that number rather to human life, since now no one is allowed to live more than one hundred twenty years, that which was said: "Their days will be one hundred twenty years," did not promulgate it for those who followed in the immediate time after, but for posterity, because it did not say "are" but "will be.

Let God enlarge Japheth and let him dwell in the tents of Shem: what is to be understood by this? Concerning Japheth, which in our language means "breadth," the multitude of the Gentiles is born; from Shem, the Hebrews. Therefore this is signified: that the knowledge of God and of the Scriptures, after the expulsion of Israel, was to be claimed by our people. But it should be noted that the three sons of Noah occupied the three parts of the earth after the flood: the posterity of Shem, indeed, in Asia or the East; Ham, in Africa or the South; Japheth, with a part of Asia, extended into Europe and the West. What is it that is said in Genesis: "And that land went out Asshur and built Nineveh and Rehoboth city"? It does not mean two cities, for "Rehoboth" means "streets." Therefore the sense here is: he built Nineveh and the streets of the city. How should one respond to those who argue that Abraham took his brother's daughter Sarah as his wife? One should answer that what had not yet been forbidden by law from the Lord at that time was not considered illicit.

What was the reason that a sign was placed on the Jews—a matter we ourselves do not inquire into without shame—on that more shameful part of the body? Indeed, my Salonius, the profundity of such great questions would demand that we satisfy the matters you have proposed with an ordered and expansive discussion, and render to each a kind of dignity of dwelling upon them according to their merits. But what are we to do? For those of us who are hastening to so many things and need to act quickly, a bare and curtailed response must be offered to the things you have set forth. So, regarding what you now ask, recognize that nothing shameful can be seen in the very creation of the formed man, since God fashioned the whole man with every assembly of limbs. Moreover, it was not unfitting that generation should receive a sign on the part of the genital member, through which the beginnings of that generation itself were brought forth. That is to say, according to the inner sense of understanding, through this circumcision of the more secret part of the body, that more secret circumcision—namely, of the heart—was prefigured as something that ought to be applied.

It is written in Genesis: God tested Abraham, as if the Lord did not know whether Abraham would be faithful to God, unless He had tested him by a trial of the matter to be revealed. Not because God was ignorant of his faith did He test Abraham by an investigation of the truth, but he was tested for this reason, that by being tested he might be justified. How is it that Jacob says: I saw God face to face, and my soul was saved, when it is read in the Gospel: no one has ever seen God; or how is it that Moses is written to have spoken with God face to face as with a friend, and yet the same Moses says to the Lord: show me your glory? Because Jacob or Moses had not seen God in the glory of His own majesty, but through a form of visible creation subject to divine power, which could appear to human sight; but in that substance of majesty in which He is, how could God be seen by a man still mortal, when He Himself says to Moses: you cannot see my face, for no man shall see me and live. By this reasoning, therefore, both testimonies are true.

What is this that it says: He is the Anah who found Iamin in the desert, while he was pasturing the asses of his father Sebeon? Iamin is interpreted in Latin as *maria*, that is, a gathering of waters, which he himself discovered, a thing undoubtedly difficult in the wilderness. Iamin also indicates the asses which are born from wild asses by his training. There are those who think that he first discovered the mixing of different animals among themselves, so that mules or mules might be born. What are those firstborn rights which Esau sold to his brother Jacob? The prior and greater part of the firstborn rights was owed either in honor or in hereditary succession, as Jacob himself says: "Ruben, my firstborn, is first in gifts, greater in authority." And in the book of Deuteronomy it is written concerning the firstborn: "And his father shall give him double of all that he has; for he is the beginning of his children and the firstborn rights are owed to him." Whence also Isaac had thought that his blessing was to be referred to Esau by right of the firstborn.

What is to be answered to those who think that incontinence is to be charged against our fathers or patriarchs on account of their many wives? First, that at that time it was not yet prohibited by law, because it was the custom, it could not be a crime; next, that those things were then not disapproved before God, either on account of place or on account of time. On account of place, just as in one house, in one corner something is ordered by a master to be done which in another corner is by no means permitted to be done. On account of time, indeed, because in the still rude age it had been commanded: increase and multiply. But now it is commanded that even those who have wives should be as if they had none, not because justice is variable, but because times are changeable and cannot go together equally, and different things suit different times or different places. Finally, it is necessary that in these things, by the will of the Lord, under the appearance of present events, there was a certain foretelling of future things.

What is this, that it says: and behold a vine before me, and behold on the vine three fundi? Three shoots or three layers are indicated under this declaration of three fundi. ON EXODUS. God speaks to Abraham, that the children of Israel would return from the land of Egypt in the fourth generation. And how does Moses later write: but in the fifth generation the children of Israel went up from the land of Egypt? If you trace the genealogy according to the tribe of Levi, you will count four generations for the succession of sons; if the order of the tribe of Judah is repeated, you will find successions of five generations, although in the Hebrew, as the edition of Aquila, a most zealous translator, indicates, it does not have: in the fifth generation they went up, but armed the children of Israel went up from the land of Egypt. In the scriptures we frequently read: and the Lord said; how is this saying of the Lord to be understood? The Lord is said to speak or talk, when he causes the sound of expressed words, which are often not heard by others, to reach the ears of the saints, or when God speaks through the form of some assumed body, or when someone is instructed by the admonition of a night vision, or certainly when the Lord inspires in the hearts of the saints those things which he wishes to be done, so that they are done, according to that: I will hear what the Lord God speaks in me.

The Lord says to Moses: You will see my back parts; what is to be understood here? That the back parts of divine works in Christ were to be revealed in the last times, or that he would see them in spirit or in his descendants. These things are to be referred to those who inquire why God gave the law through Moses to only one nation, and that after much of the world's age had already passed. That that law was not given to the Jews alone, which is born in all nations by the constitution of natural law, the apostle also confirming this and saying: For when the Gentiles who do not have the law naturally do the things of the law, not having such a law, they are a law to themselves, who show the work of the law written in their hearts. And therefore the Lord did not too late gather the law of innocence into ten words, whose origin, already implanted in human breasts, had preceded. Nor did he too late inscribe it again on stone tablets, which he had already engraved before on the pages of the heart; for before this law of Moses, nature had its own law, through which it was easy to recognize the author of the world and of life, and through this to love him, and to preserve justice and love toward one's neighbor; in which two commandments all law and the prophets depend. Therefore they already knew this before: All things whatsoever you wish that men do to you, do you also to them; in which is the law and the prophets.

and to prove this also by examples: before this law of the letter, through that law of nature, Abel is recognized as righteous, Enoch is taken up, Noah is chosen, Abraham is called the father of nations. For this reason, this law of Moses was not promulgated late, because the preceding law of nature, through which many were found acceptable to God, had already taken effect. What is that finger of God by which the two tablets of the law are seen to be inscribed? The finger of God here is to be understood as the spirit of God. FROM LEVITICUS. For what reason is honey forbidden to be offered in sacrifices? Because, according to the inner sense, those who are dissolved by the blandishments of pleasures or the sweetness of voluptuousness cannot be partakers of the mysteries of God. Hence it is, therefore, that even the Passover of the Lord is commanded to be eaten with bitterness, because the austere strictness of truth is always present. Therefore, it is necessary that, without any honey of harmful flattery and pleasure, we always offer wholesome sacrifices to God and say: "Therefore, have I become an enemy by telling you the truth?" On the contrary, salt is commanded to be mixed in all sacrifices, namely, so that everything we offer for the honor and worship of Christ may always receive the salt of reason and discretion.

What pertained properly to the use of the priests, and what to that of the Levites, from among those things which the people offered? The first fruits of the crops and of other things were assigned to the priests, but the tithes to the Levites; however, from those tithes a tenth was owed to the priests. All things which God created are very good; how then are certain animals called unclean in the law? To pass over the rest which can be said on this point, they are called unclean for eating, not for creation; for the use of these as food is known to have been divinely forbidden by the law on account of certain figures. Since clean and unclean animals are distinguished by the divine law through Moses, how are animals which were to be received into the ark also called unclean before the flood? Moses, inspired by the Holy Spirit, is the writer and founder of the Pentateuch, and because in Leviticus a distinction concerning clean and unclean animals was to be set forth, also in Genesis, since the same author is of both books, he called the same animals unclean.

Which things from the Old Testament ought we to abandon, and which ought we to observe? We ought to observe the commandments that pertain to correcting life and morals, but to abandon the ceremonies and rites of sacrifices which at that time presented figures and shadows of future things. What shall we answer to those who object, asking for what reason God, having rejected the old sacrifices, took delight in new ones, since they affirm that nothing is corrected unless what was done is thought to have been done wrongly? This is a spacious question, but we, as necessity demands, will answer briefly: that God cannot be seen as mutable on account of this, because these things have been changed according to the suitability of the times; for the year is varied by seasons, and the span of life by ages. Nor is the principle of divine providence, which instituted these things, thereby varied; nor does a farmer, if he orders one thing in summer and another in winter in cultivating his field, change the principle of agriculture. It is not that the one who acts seems to be unlike himself, but the time in which he acts; therefore God commands what is suitable for each of his times. Just as here also he commanded concerning sacrifices, not for the sake of his own delight, but, like other things, for human benefit. And therefore he is the true Lord, because he has no need of our goods. But this very change of sacraments, lest it be thought newly and suddenly adopted, had long ago been foretold by prophetic and divine voices, in which it is said: "I will not accept from your house calves, nor from your flocks goats.

Finally, to conclude briefly: why did God wish diverse sacrifices to be offered to him? Because it was necessary that Christ be announced by some sacraments when he was about to come, and by others when he had come. ON NUMBERS. Balaam, that gentile—what is the reason that he is proven by the sacred history to have prophesied in accordance with the faith? So that the truth might become known in many ways, being proclaimed everywhere, even through unbelievers; and so that this sign, with a gentile prophesying, might be for the gentiles who would believe. For Elihu in the book of Job undoubtedly foretold many things about the future, and Caiaphas in the Gospel prophesied concerning our Lord and Savior. ON DEUTERONOMY. Since in Deuteronomy only seventy souls are recorded as having entered Egypt with Jacob, how is it that later in the Acts of the Apostles it is reported that seventy-five souls entered Egypt? It is certain that at the time when Jacob entered Egypt with Joseph and his sons Ephraim and Manasseh, there were only seventy souls; but there, where the number of seventy-five souls is reported, the author, by way of anticipation, thought that the sons and grandsons of Ephraim and Manasseh should also be counted, whom the divine reading of the account shows were later born in Egypt.

What is to be answered to the Jews who object to that testimony: “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree”? That a man who hangs on a tree is cursed, but a guilty man, not an innocent one. For the penalty of sin cannot be a curse upon innocence. For if Mordecai, having been hanged on a prepared tree, had fulfilled the sentence of the king’s cruelty, would they now judge him worthy of this curse? Or the Maccabees and others whom Scripture testifies were most shamefully afflicted by a similar death—are they considered cursed among them? Therefore our Savior, about to redeem man from death, did not shun the cross any more than he shunned death. So let them not slander in lesser matters, when we even glory in greater ones on account of the Lord’s patience. Nor is it surprising if he is said to have undergone the gibbet, whom we also confess to have descended into hell, who, although he himself had no sin, nevertheless underwent death coming from the curse of sin. And for that reason he hung on a tree, so that he might absolve us, by hanging on a tree, from the transgression that had been committed on the tree of perdition.

ON JOB. In Job, how is it to be understood that Scripture mentions “Gold of Ophir”? Ophir is a region extending toward India, and thus it indicates the gold of that region. Others affirm that “Gold of Ophaz” is very precious, which is called “obryzon” in Latin. What is meant by the fact that we read there, following the custom of secular authors, of the Pleiades, Orion, or Arcturus? Not that these are the names by which they are known among the Hebrews, but so that the significance of these stars might be more manifest among us, the translator wished to call them thus, as the usage of the Gentiles had found them. It is also to be observed generally that even the apostles or apostolic men, writing in their epistles to the peoples, sometimes make use of those testimonies which seemed to be widely known among the peoples. In the same book, what is it that is written about that dragon: “If all ships were gathered together, they could not bear the skin of its tail”?

He calls the ships "churches," which, troubled by temptations and tribulations, will scarcely endure the Antichrist at the end of the world. And rightly does he call the tail of that dragon, the devil, "Antichrist," from whom the final persecution will come. ON THE BOOKS OF KINGS. Why is it that the Lord later rejects Saul, the king whom he had previously thought fit to be chosen for the kingdom? Because God pronounces his own just and incorruptible judgment from equity, not from foreknowledge; he rejects someone when he deserves it, when he becomes unworthy of election. Moreover, it would by no means seem fitting to the sacrosanct truth and justice of God that the sin and offense should precede. How is it to be understood that in the Scriptures the Lord is often said to repent, as also of Saul when it says: "I repent that I made Saul king"? The repentance of the Lord is said to be a change of things established by him, which succeeds according to the vicissitude of things or according to the disposition of what is right. For it is necessary that divine dispositions, in order to become clearer to hearers, be indicated through the significations of the human mind.

We read that an evil spirit of the Lord was suffocating Saul; how of the Lord, if evil? Because all things brought forth with the Lord as author are subject to divine power; therefore the devil himself, although not as he now is, but once created good by the Lord and always subject to God under the dominion of the Almighty, was of the Lord. What does it mean that the Lord here avenges some things, but does not avenge all things? He avenges some things, so that it may be understood that he takes care of human affairs; he does not avenge all things, so that it may be recognized that a terrible judgment is still to come for all. How could the Witch of Endor summon the shade of Samuel? Either the devil then showed a false shade to those who saw it, or if it was real, it must be believed that he was permitted only as much as was granted by the Lord's allowance; nor is it surprising that for certain hidden and secret reasons, or for the manifestation of proofs, such things are permitted to the devil, since he also placed the Savior on the pinnacle of the temple and asked for and received Job to be tempted.

Since it did not happen, how are fifteen years added to the prayerful Hezekiah as if to a predetermined span of life? Because Hezekiah was indeed pressed by his end, not by a decree of fate but by God's summons and judgment; moreover, his years of life had not been previously fixed, so that they are understood to have been added through supplication. CONCERNING THE PROPHETS. How is it to be understood that the prophet Micah says: Behold, the Lord goes out from his holy place and descends and walks upon the heights of the earth? The Lord is said to descend when he shows by evident signs of his most worthy mercy that he has care for human frailty. Thus also angels, through that ladder of Jacob, ascending and descending, indicate a visitation of earthly things, not a fall of those descending. Thus also men of higher righteousness are thought to descend, if ever they condescend to inferiors by the impulse of holy charity. CONCERNING ISAIAH.

What is to be understood in the song of the prophet Isaiah, when he says: "I will sing to my beloved the song of my cousin of his vineyard; the vineyard has become for my beloved a horn of the son of oil"? Some think this song is sung by the Holy Spirit, others by a prophet who was likewise not empty of the Holy Spirit. He sings, however, in lament for his vineyard, which is the house of Israel. The beloved, moreover, is Jesus Christ. For it was said to him: "You are my beloved son"; he also calls him cousin, because he was born from the same stock. This vineyard, therefore, was planted for him on a horn, that is, in sublimity and strength, who is the beloved and son of oil, because he was anointed, whence he is also called Christ, or because he shone forth as a brilliant light for the whole world. In this song, he calls the grape "justice" and the thorns "iniquity." In Isaiah's vision, when he saw the Lord sitting upon the throne, what is understood about this, that he said: "Seraphim were standing above it, six wings for one and six wings for the other. With two they veiled his face, and with two they veiled his feet, and with two they flew, and one called to the other and said: 'Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts'"?

In this vision, John the Evangelist testifies that the Lord Jesus Christ was seen by Isaiah, saying: "This is what Isaiah said when he saw his glory and spoke of him." First, then, it is asked here how the seraphim, standing around the Lord's throne, are said both to stand and to fly at the same time. The prophet rightly expresses this in mystical speech, because to stand before God is the same as to fly and to be raised up on high; he who hastens to appear before the divine gaze will sit. As for the fact that the seraphim are indicated to cover their faces with their wings, this is because no human being nor any creature can contemplate the light of divine majesty as it is. Therefore they veil their faces and feet, because both the past before the world and the future after the world are hidden from us. The wings of the seraphim also indicate the swiftness of divine ministry; they are six each because we perceive in the world only those things that were made in six days. As for the fact that they call out to one another and say, "Holy, holy, holy, Lord of hosts," they show one divinity in the mystery of the Trinity.

What do we answer to those who say to us: what did the Jews do, if they were unable to believe? because it was necessary that the word of the prophet Isaiah be fulfilled, saying: he blinded their eyes and hardened their heart, so that they do not see with their eyes and understand with their heart and be converted, and I heal them. The prophet foretold this because God foreknew that this would happen. For God, to whom sin cannot be pleasing, cannot compel to sin. In these things, therefore, not divine predestination is to be understood, but foreknowledge. Concerning this, it is written in the Gospel: for this reason they were unable to believe, because again Isaiah says: he blinded their eyes and hardened their heart and the rest. They were unable to believe is said just as we also are often said to be unable to do something because we are unwilling. And concerning Pharaoh it is written: I roused you for this very purpose, to show my power in you. For he did not say, I made you for this, that you might be such, but I chose and roused you for this, when you had already made yourself such; therefore here too their eyes are said to be blinded and their heart hardened, because they had themselves already rendered themselves worthy of this blindness. Moreover, the Lord blinds and hardens the sinner by abandoning him and not helping him. If, however, this sense of a most profound question should satisfy someone less, let him tremble with me and say: the judgments of the Lord are a great abyss, because the judgments of God are always just but often hidden.

What is that which is written: "as a bridegroom he placed a mitre upon me, and as a bride he adorned me with an ornament"? How can the same one be both bridegroom and bride? He made a transition from the head to the body: for the head is Christ, the body is the Church, but nevertheless it is established that both are in Christ. However, this rule must be noted and held, which frequently occurs in the prophets, generating obscurity for those who are ignorant, when the order of prophecy turns either from the head to the body or from the body to the head. "Heaven is my throne, but earth is the footstool of my feet": how can this be understood, since we certainly believe that God is incorporeal? According to the custom of our manner of speaking, it seems to designate the attire of a ruler, so that God is understood either to inhabit the heavens or to have the earthly realms subject to him. CONCERNING EZEKIEL. For what reason is it written: "in that day of great tribulation no one will be freed except Noah, Daniel, and Job," when, at the time when the prophet Ezekiel was saying this, perhaps only Daniel was still in the body, while the other two were already then sleeping in peace or freed from the bonds of the flesh?

In these three saints, three kinds of human beings seem to be signified, who are promised to be freed from dangers on that day of tribulation: for in Noah, the governors of the Church are prefigured; in Daniel, the saints and those who pursue continence; in Job, the married and those who love justice. -II. What does that signify which is said in the prophet: "I will remove a stony heart from your flesh and give you a fleshy heart"? A hard and disobedient heart is shown by the testimony of "stony," but by the meaning of "fleshy" it shows a soft and teachable heart, and one that can receive the compunction that is instilled. FROM PARALIPOMENON. What is that which is written in Paralipomenon: "she who dwelt in Jerusalem in the second"? "In the second," that is, in the part. For Hezekiah made the second wall of Jerusalem, and his son Manasseh the third; therefore she of whom it is written dwelt in the second part of the city. The ark of the Lord, in which were the two tablets of the covenant, is to be believed to have been taken away where?

We read in Paralipomenon that Josiah, king of Judah, when he was celebrating the Passover of the Lord in Jerusalem, spoke thus to the Levites: place the ark in the sanctuary of the temple which Solomon, son of David, king of Israel, built; for you shall carry it no further. Some wish to understand this passage in the sense that Josiah, foreseeing the future, took care to hide the ark of the Lord in a certain place, though it is uncertain where. What is the difference between a holocaust and a sacrifice? That the priests ate part of the sacrifices, but a holocaust was a whole and perfect sacrifice, because it was given entirely to the fire in the offering of the sacrifice. There were also called peace-offerings, which the people were accustomed to eat. FROM THE BOOK OF PSALMS. Since the first psalm, in its first few verses, has distinguished the impious sinner and the heretic, what is the meaning of that conclusion at the very end of the same psalm, in which it says: therefore the impious shall not rise in judgment.

The beginning of this psalm concerns the distinction of merit, and its end concerns the distinction of judgment, in which it shows that every man without doubt rises again, that is, the just man to judge, the sinner to be judged, the impious to be punished. For then one who has already been judged will not be judged, according to what is written: because he who does not believe has already been judged. Since passion does not fall upon God, what does it mean that the wrath of God and fury are often spoken of in the scriptures? It is the custom of scripture that wrath is put for vengeance. For wrath is according to man, vengeance according to God, and fury according to the mind of the one who suffers, not according to the justice of the one who judges. Here also is that which is set down in the prophet: the Lord creating evils. Evils, therefore, are according to the feeling of the one who endures them, not according to the equity of the one who decrees them. What does that mean, which is frequently inscribed in the titles of the psalms, "To the end, a psalm of David"? That the psalms look to the promise of good things at the end of the world, or that those things which the Jews believed they could obtain in the beginning, we attain in Christ, whom we confess has come at the end.

How is it to be understood that it is written: "The words of the Lord are chaste words, silver examined by fire, tested, purified seven times from the earth"? The words of the Lord are called chaste because they are adulterated by no falsehood, and in place of silver which is examined by sevenfold fire, they are purified by the fire of the Spirit. "I will not gather," he says, "their assemblies from bloods," although "from blood" would have sounded more Latin; for what reason is it written "from bloods" against the rule of Latinity? In Greek it is read, that is, in the plural number signifying blood; the translator expressed the fidelity of this property also in Latin in the plural number. Since it is written in the psalm: "You will not let your holy one see corruption," how is it again written in another psalm: "What use is there in my blood, when I descend into corruption"? The Savior pronounces "descend into corruption" with the voice of the prophet, while he is pierced by the breaking in of the nails affixing him. On the other hand, the Lord did not let his holy one see corruption, because Christ forestalled the corruption of the flesh by a swift resurrection.

What does the prophet mean when he says of his enemies: "They have shut up their fat"? The fat of the impious is shut up when, fattened in understanding and thickened with iniquity, they withdraw either from justice or from the precepts of God; and for this reason he says elsewhere: "Their iniquity will come forth from the fat." Manna, however, that is, heavenly food, is thin and suitable for the nourishment of those who thrive on the subtlety of their perceptions. What is to be thought concerning this, which is written: "Their belly was filled from your hidden things, they were sated with pork and left what remained for their little ones"? Above, he asked that the Jews be separated from the few, that is, from the just: because many are called, but few are chosen. Now, however, he says that these same ones, first instructed by the hidden things of the divine law, then sated with their own pork, that is, with the subsequent filth of their doctrines, while they deny Christ, have transmitted this same impiety even to their descendants. How is it to be understood: "Day belches forth word to day, and night reveals knowledge to night"?

Day gives birth to word to day, as the apostles announce the Savior to believers. Night reveals knowledge to night, as Judas instills the teaching of perverse understanding into the Jews—or rather, day gives birth to word to day and night reveals knowledge to night, as every day and night the word and knowledge are spread by the faithful proclamation. "Your rod and your staff have consoled me"; what distinction is to be understood here? In the rod, correction is declared; in the staff, consolation. Since animals are not without sensation, how is it said in the psalm: "Do not become like the horse and the mule, in which there is no understanding"? Because in animals there is sensation, in humans there is understanding. Since God has no care for beasts of burden as for oxen, how does the psalm say: "And you will save the beasts of burden, O Lord"? He called humans, capable of reason, beasts of burden, devoid of reason; and he affirms that those are to be saved through present conduct, these through future conversion.

How should it be understood, what is written: "Let me go, that I may cool down, before I depart, and I will be no more"? This sense is made clear from the preceding verses. For above it had said: "Because I am a stranger with you and a foreigner, like all my fathers, let me go, that I may cool down, before I depart, and I will be no more," the word "foreigner" being understood from what was said above; but it is clear that he will be, who by calling himself a foreigner above declares that he has a homeland in which he will be. What does that indicate, which is read in the psalm: "In the head of the book it is written about me"? This is said from the person of the Savior, about whom it is written: "In the beginning God created heaven and earth," that is, in the Son, or certainly that: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." "Abyss calls to abyss," it says, "in the voice of your cataracts"; how is that to be understood?

Not undeservedly is the depth of the divine scriptures called the abyss, and therefore in the voice of the cataracts the abyss invokes the abyss, when the Old Testament announces the New, or the New Testament calls the Old to witness in the voices of the prophets. What is to be understood from this, which is written: "For your fathers, sons have been born to you"? That is, that by the succession of times, apostles have been rendered in return for the prophets. "A brother does not redeem; a man will redeem"; what is to be thought concerning this passage? That Moses did not redeem, but Christ redeemed. How is that to be taken, which David cries out to the Lord, saying: "I have sinned to you alone"? Sin is committed to God alone, because he alone is without sin; thus the justified man conquers even while he is judged, that is, either Christ in his passion, or according to that which is said in the prophet: "And come, let us be judged," says the Lord. "Men of blood," it says, "and deceitful men will not complete their days"; what is to be thought here?

Those who are snatched away by an untimely death do not complete their days. By this reasoning we can also understand this: do not snatch me away in the middle of my days. And otherwise: those who do not devote any part of their life to satisfying God do not complete their days. What does the inner meaning say about this, which is written: before your thorns produce a bramble? That is, before your sins are consummated. How does a just man wash his hands in the blood of a sinner? When vengeance is exacted from the impious, the saints not procuring this; and after the transgressions and the death of sinners, the life and works of the just shine more brightly. How is that which is read in the psalm to be understood: do not have mercy on all who work iniquity? This is said not so much with the spirit of one cursing as with that of one desiring the correction and amendment of sinners, that is, so that in the present life they may be corrected and not abuse divine patience up to the future severity of punishments.

God spoke once, and I heard these two things; what is to be understood here? "Once" here is not to be referred to number but to firmness. But what are those two things that pertain to the Lord? Both to be able to do everything and to will to have mercy. And otherwise: God spoke once, that is, in the Law; for in the Gospel he does not command other things: because he did not come to dissolve the Law but to fulfill it. What is it that is written: we passed through fire and water, and you led us into a place of refreshment? Fire and water indicate persecutions and martyrdom. Some here think that water is to be understood as baptism and fire as the Holy Spirit, who, poured in, burns up sins like fire; and from this comes what is written: the Lord your God is a burning fire. What does that saying mean, which is read: make way for him who ascends above the west; the Lord is his name? Prepare a way of good deeds for him who has surpassed the west, having conquered death.

You will separate voluntary rain, O God, for your inheritance, and it was weakened, but you perfected it; your animals will dwell in it; what is the sense of this passage? Rain here is to be understood as manna according to the letter, and as commandments according to anagogy; which commandments or law, although it may seem weakened by the transgressions of the Jews, is nevertheless shown to be fulfilled by the grace of the Gospel, in which now animals, that is, the nations, dwell and abide. What understanding is there in this, which we read: if you sleep between the middle lots, the feathers of the dove are silvered and the hinder parts of its back are in the appearance of gold? In this place the prophet prays concerning the apostles, that they may persevere as believers in the two testaments until the transition; in the dove, however, the Holy Spirit is indicated, in the hinder parts a more hidden understanding, in the silver the shining history of the scriptures, in the gold the inner or more precious sense.

The Lord said: I will turn from Basan, I will turn into the depth of the sea, so that your foot may be dipped in blood, the tongue of your dogs from the enemies, from him; what do we follow here? Basan in Latin means confusion. Therefore the Lord turns us from the confusion which is in his cross, in which cross he dipped his foot in blood at the clamor of the Jews that he be crucified, at the instigation of the enemies, that is, the demons; from the Savior himself this whole thing comes, because he endured all these things by his own will. Whom shall we take as those princes of Zabulon or princes of Nephtalim? The apostle Peter or Andrew, who are called from the same tribes, just as above the apostle Paul must be understood by the name Benjamin. What does it indicate, that it is read: they placed their signs, signs and they did not know as at the exit upon the summit. That the Babylonians, made insolent by victory, thus set up signs in the temple of God, as they are accustomed to be set up as a trophy upon the arches and entrances of gates.

What is the meaning of what is written: "But our God, before the ages, worked salvation in the middle of the earth"? He spoke of Judea, where Christ freed the world through the cross, which some think should be called the navel of the earth. And otherwise: He worked salvation in the middle of the earth, that is, in the virginal womb. What is the meaning of what we read: "Because the cup in the Lord's hand is full of pure wine, mixed, and he tilted it from this to that; yet its dregs have not been emptied"? The Lord's cup is mixed with mercy and judgment; it is tilted from this to that when the divine severity passes from mercy to judgment; but its dregs are not emptied because the final judgment is still reserved. What is the significance of what is written: "And the remaining thoughts will keep festival for you"? Here it is beautifully shown that God rejoices in purity of mind as if in a kind of festivity. "The voice of thunder in the wheel," it says; what is to be understood here?

He called the wheel itself the orb of the earth, because the roar of thunder rolls around within the wheel of that same orb. What is to be understood from this, which is written: "And he struck his enemies in the rear"? According to the literal sense, mention is made of those sores with which the Philistines were struck in the rear; but according to the inner sense, the enemies of God are struck in the rear when they are punished by the final judgment of the Lord. Whom does he mean when he says: "A boar from the forest destroyed it, and a singular wild beast devoured it"? Here he intends the boar to be understood as Vespasian, as some say, who laid waste to the Jews in war; the singular wild beast as Titus, the son of Vespasian, who consumed Jerusalem by siege. We read in the Psalm: "Israel, if you hear me, there will not be in you a new god"; how shall we accept this? It declares that idols or the Antichrist are to be rejected. But Christ was not a new god, although he shone forth in the world through flesh in our times. For in the beginning, the Word was God with God, himself creating man in the image of God, and he appeared at various times and occasions to Abraham or to our fathers.

How is this to be understood, which the psalm says: "God stood in the assembly of gods"? That is, in the congregation of the saints; for our Lord has granted his saints a share both of his kingdom and of his name. Hence he also says to Moses: "I have given you to Pharaoh as a god." Therefore they are called by the name of god, because they are also called sons of God. Nor is it surprising, given that ineffable indulgence of divine benevolence, if he willed that a man be called god, since a man has been called god. What is to be understood here: "Justice and peace have kissed each other"? That the law and grace have been joined together through the mediator, our Lord Jesus Christ, who made both one? How is it to be understood, what we read: "The Lord loves the gates of Zion, above all the tabernacles of Jacob"? That the Lord has preferred the fortifications of the church to the shelters of the synagogue. Mother Zion will say: "A man and a man was made in her, and the Most High himself founded her"; what do we follow here?

Mater Sion, as some wish, signifies Mary, in whom the man Christ was born, the creator also of his own mother. Yet it is better known and, according to the Hebrew, more truly said: "Does not Sion say 'man,' and a man was born in her, and the Most High himself founded her?" And the sense is this: who among men could announce this, as also that: "Or the arm of the Lord, to whom has it been revealed?" Therefore this says: that no man can utter, that Sion is saved in the man who was born in her. But the man himself is the Most High who founded her. And it is to be noted that he is also called the Son of the Most High. What is to be understood where it is written: "I became like a man without help among the dead, free"? Christ, indeed, free among the dead, because without sin he appeared among sinners. What is that land of oblivion of which it is said: "Shall your wonders be known in the darkness, and your justice in the land of oblivion?

Most rightly is it called the land of oblivion, the flesh of the impious abandoned by the Lord. And otherwise: the land of oblivion can also be understood in that which is said: "For in death there is no one who remembers you; but in hell, who will confess you?" In what way is the youth of the eagle renewed, according to that which we read: "Your youth will be renewed like the eagle's"? Eagles are said, in extreme old age, to become featherless and, carried back to the nest, to be fed in turn by their own chicks ministering to them, until, with the decrepitude of old age wiped away, they receive back, along with their feathers, the use of flight. According to anagogy, however, our youth is renewed either by baptism or by resurrection. "The abyss," he says, "like a cloak, is his covering"; what do we follow here? Not a few think that the abyss is here called the covering of God, whereas rather the covering of the earth is so called, as the order of the preceding verses itself declares, because the earth itself is veiled, surrounded or encompassed by the abyss as by a kind of cloak.

How do waters stand upon mountains, since it is written: "Waters will stand upon the mountains"? Certainly, either when clouds full of waters hang over the mountains, or when waves in the sea are stirred up in the manner of mountains. What is to be understood in this, that we read: "That serpent which you formed to mock them"? That serpent is the devil, but previously formed by the Lord, before he passed over into the name of the devil by the impulse of voluntary wickedness. The prophet Isaiah describes him as being mocked by little children. By what reasoning is it to be understood, that which is written: "Iron passed through his soul"? Christ is here most clearly designated, because by rising again he overcame the pain and torment of the nails that affixed him. Here "iron" can also be understood as the tribulation of harsh necessity, because it says "soul"; yet sometimes in the Scriptures "soul" is also used for the present life, as in the Gospel: "Is not the soul more than food?

What is the difference between a psalm and a canticle? That a psalm is so called from the psaltery, but a canticle is uttered by the voice, and that a canticle is understood for knowledge, a psalm for action; therefore a psalm pertains to the active life, that is, to *practicen*, a canticle to the contemplative life, that is, to *theorian*. The Lord has sworn and will not repent of it; in what way does the Lord swear? The Lord’s swearing is to promise immutably; rightly, therefore, does this change of speech employ that, because his promise holds the firmness of an oath. What does that indicate which is written: “He drank from the torrent on the way, therefore he raised his head”? These things are to be referred to the person of Christ, because he drank from the torrent, that is, from the passion; on the way, that is, in the world; therefore God, raising his head, granted him the name which is above every name. For what reason are those fifteen psalms prefixed with the title “Song of Ascents”?

There were once fifteen steps, as history shows, by which one ascended into the temple, and for this reason these fifteen psalms are marked with the inscription "canticle of steps," because they lead us through certain advances to the heights of spiritual things by a raising up. "Arrows," it says, "powerful, sharp, with desolating coals"; what is the understanding of this verse? Powerful arrows are the words of the Lord, which pierce our hearts with His love. But desolating coals are those which lay waste to sins, according to that coal of the prophet Isaiah, which is brought to his lips, so that it may purge the faults which he had contracted either by speaking or by keeping silent out of fear. What is meant by what is written: "Behold, he who guards Israel will not doze nor will he sleep"? Sometimes in the Scriptures the Lord is said to sleep, when rather faith sleeps in us, and the sleeping one leaves the unfaithful behind; but He truly does not know how to be absent from those who seek Him, He does not know how to sleep for those who are watchful.

We read in the psalm about Jerusalem: "Whose participation is in itself"; what shall we follow here? That diverse parts build one city, or that diverse members constitute one body of the Lord. What is to be thought concerning that where it is written: "Perhaps our soul would have crossed the immense water"? For "perhaps" in Greek is written κύριξ, which we interpret more clearly in Latin as "do you think," so that the sense is this: do you think our soul would have crossed the immense water, had the Lord not been in us? What does it signify that it is written: "Turn, Lord, our captivity like a torrent in the south"? It is the voice of a soul exulting, returning from the bonds of vices into freedom and conversion, whereby it prays that it may be released from the captivity of sins by the breath of divine mercy, just as torrents bound by ice are released by the warmth of the south wind. How is that to be understood: "Behold, the inheritance of the Lord's son, the reward, the fruit of the womb; like arrows in the hand of a mighty man, so are the sons of the outcasts"?

The prophet indicates that he speaks there about future things, since after that session he declares the time of rising; that is, after he has given sleep to his beloved, he shows what that resurrection of the saints will be, when he says: "Behold, the inheritance of the Lord's son, the reward, the fruit of the womb." Thus the inheritance of the Lord is in the sons, which he obtained as the reward of the fruit of the womb, because the Savior is the fruit of the womb, whose reward is certainly that the nations are his inheritance, whom he generates as sons through faith. The apostles are rightly called arrows, who, traversing the world as if in flight, pierced the hearts of the unbelievers with their teaching; the prophet excellently designates them as sons of the shaken-out ones, that is, of the prophets. For indeed, when the prophets are shaken out in their prophecy, what else is manifested in them but the discovered apostles? Therefore, since the apostles were generated from the shaken-out prophets, they are rightly called sons of the shaken-out ones.

What is this that we read: "As a weaned child upon its mother, so you will requite in my soul"? The weaning of our soul occurs when, from the infancy of ignorance, the mind is raised to the perfect food of life by the consummation of understanding. Therefore, he had said above: "If I did not think humbly," that is, if I did not think lowly and earthly things, "but exalted my soul," that is, but strove with my mind toward heavenly things, let this be the requital for me, that the consummation of understanding may follow my soul. "Blessed," he says, "is he who will requite you for what you have restored to us." Who is to be understood here? This psalm can be understood both concerning the captivity of the Jews, when they were led into Babylon, and concerning sinners who, expelled from the church, are given over to confusion. Here, therefore, according to the historical sense, as some think, Cyrus the king is signified, who restored this restitution after Babylon was overthrown and raged with total slaughter even against its infants. But in the inner sense, he restores the place of Babylon who leads it captive, which had previously held itself captive under the law of sin, and dashes the beginnings of vices against the rock which is Christ.

Often in the Scriptures it is said: "I confess to you, Lord"; how is this to be understood? Confession does not always seem to signify penance, for *confitebor* is sometimes used for "I will praise" or "I will give thanks" or "I will glorify the Lord." "My imperfection," he says, "your eyes have seen, and all will be written in your book"; what is the meaning here? The eyes of God see our imperfection, because God knows man even before he is formed; and otherwise: the eyes of God see our imperfection, because He looks into our thoughts even before they are completed. Moreover, all are written in His book, because all men are not born without His will, or because all our wills are most fully described before Him. Then it follows: "They will be filled with the day, and no one in them." "Day," that is, Christ, they will be filled, and apart from Christ no one will be in them, because those who are full of God cannot receive what is not of God.

Who are the raven's young, about which it is written: "and the raven's young calling upon him"? It signifies faithful children born from unbelievers. What is indicated in this, which we read: "before the face of his cold, who can stand?" By this, the cold of temptations is shown. For what reason are those two-edged swords of the saints called, about which it is written: "and two-edged swords in their hands"? They are called two-edged swords because in judgment they can punish both body and soul at the same time. And otherwise, because they punish both with the penalty of present suffering and with the fear of future suffering. And from this comes that which is sung in the same psalm: "a new song to the Lord," which those who are believed to be the purgings of the world will judge concerning nations and kings. FROM THE PROVERBS OF SOLOMON. "May the stag of friendship and the young one of graces talk with you"; what are we to follow here? Some think that the stag of friendship is to be understood here as Christ, the master of all love and charity, and the young one of graces as the Holy Spirit, who is the distributor of all graces, that is, charismata. Therefore, we are admonished by this always to seek the comforts of Christ or of the Holy Spirit.

What is this that is written: "The just man will fall seven times and rise again"? It means either when he stumbles in speech or thought, or certainly when he offends within the grace of the sevenfold Spirit. Some affirm that "seven times" is said here because of the seven days through which the course of human life revolves, in that the course of that life cannot be without sin. ON ECCLESIASTES. What is this that we read in Ecclesiastes: "And the almond tree will blossom, and the locust will grow fat, and the caper will be scattered, because man will go into the house of his eternity"? They relate that through these things a signification of human limbs is made: for in the blossom of the almond tree, white hairs [are signified]; in the fattening of the locust, the swelling of the feet; in the scattering of the caper, the coldness of desire. When these things have come upon an old man at the time of his final age, then it is necessary that he return to the earth, that is, as if into the house of his eternity. Yet this "house of eternity" is also well understood as that future land concerning which it is written: "I will please the Lord in the land of the living.

ON THE SONG OF SONGS. What is that which is written concerning the Church: "I am dark and comely, daughter of Jerusalem"? If dark, how comely? Because before its own examination, the Church is divided according to the diversity of those within it: it is comely in the saints, dark in sinners. Just as Jerusalem is called by Scripture sometimes a holy city, sometimes a sinful one. What does the term "cousin" mean in the Song of Songs? The Church, in whose name those words are spoken there to the Saviour, calls Christ "cousin," who is the son of the Synagogue; and because some have wished that the Church be understood at times as the sister of the Synagogue in the saints, therefore, according to a certain manner of scriptural expression, Christ is called both cousin and bridegroom of the Church. ON THE MORE DIFFICULT QUESTIONS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. ON THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW. For what reason are the four evangelists designated in the prophet by four different species of animals? Matthew holds the form of a man, because he speaks from the birth of a man, saying: "The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, son of David, son of Abraham." Mark is prefigured by the species of a lion, in that, like a lion, he thundered with a mighty voice: "The voice of one crying in the desert: Prepare the way for the Lord." Luke is announced in the calf, because he takes his beginning from sacrifices or from the priesthood, writing: "In the days of Herod, king of Judaea, there was a certain priest named Zacharias.

John is prefigured by the eagle, because, soaring in spirit to the heights, he speaks as if from on high, saying: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." How is it to be understood that the Lord Jesus Christ is called the son of David, when he was certainly not born from Joseph, who descended from the line of David? At that time, the Jews, according to the law, took close relatives as wives by reason of consanguinity, and there is no doubt that for this reason Mary also, coming from the same tribe, descended, indeed proceeded, from the line of David just as Joseph did. However, Mary's origin is signified through Joseph's lineage because it is the custom of the Scriptures to weave the series of descent through men rather than women. Since Mary was a relative, as is read, of Elizabeth, who is recorded as being of the daughters of Aaron, it is most evident that in Christ, according to the flesh, the succession of both kings and priests came together from each line.

The evangelist Matthew says that Joseph was born from Jacob. And how does Luke record that he was from Heli? Because one was his father by nature, the other by law. For among the Jews there was a custom from the law, that the surviving brother would take the wife of his deceased brother to raise up offspring. Therefore Jacob and Heli were uterine brothers, of whom, when the former died, the latter made use of the marriage according to the law. In their record, Matthew wove Joseph's lineage through the royal line, while Luke traced his descent through the priestly succession. Yet Joseph's father by nature was undoubtedly Jacob. Why in the Gospel is Mary called the wife of Joseph? It is the custom of the Scriptures to call even betrothed women wives. What is it that we read: "He himself will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire"? Because through the Holy Spirit, either sins are burned away in us, or sanctification is granted, or the fervor of love in enduring sufferings is kindled. Or certainly because, baptized by the Spirit, we will be examined by divine judgment. There are those who say that the apostles were baptized by the Holy Spirit, when fire appeared over them.

How is it to be understood concerning the body of that dove in which a manifest descent of the Holy Spirit to the Saviour was revealed: whether it had existed before, or whether it appeared suddenly, made for the occasion? It was shown for the occasion, indeed. For in order that a visible sign of the Holy Spirit, who was invisible, might be displayed, it is to be believed that the true body of that dove appeared for an hour, made by divine power for the time, and thereafter ceased to exist. Angels, however, when they present themselves to human eyes, are believed, as some hold, to assume a body for the moment from this thicker air, that is, the air near the earth. Moreover, they are thought to produce some voice when a blow struck against this air gives back the sound of words, as if from a palate. The kingdom of heaven is promised to the just. And how is it also said: that they themselves will possess the earth? Because a new heaven and a new earth are promised to the just in the future, so that then, with God, like the angels, they may possess both.

Since the Savior says that Tyre and Sidon could have done penance if signs of divine powers had appeared among them, why were those things not done there which would have brought salvation to believers? Because the Lord and Savior, according to divine dispensation, had not come except to the sheep of the house of Israel that had perished. And what does it mean that he had not come except to the sheep of the house of Israel? Because among all the other nations everywhere, Israel alone once worshipped God more specially and, so to speak, was a peculiar people of God on account of the merits of Abraham and the patriarchs or David, to whom Christ was specifically promised and, descending from their stock, from there assumed the very flesh in which he appeared on earth. But nevertheless, because miracles were later also performed among the Gentiles, this testimony can be understood in such a way that where it says: "I did not come there," the word "previously" is understood, so that both the truth of the testimony and the mercy of God toward all may shine forth more clearly.

In the Gospel, our Lord and Savior says: "My yoke is gentle and my burden is light." And how is it read in the Psalm: "Because of the words of your lips, I have kept to hard ways?" It is indeed clear that all who wish to live piously in Christ suffer persecution, but nevertheless, for those who love God, things which are hard in the present reality become light in the hope of future things. What is to be understood by that passage in which it is written: "Pray that your flight not be in winter or on the Sabbath"? According to the historical sense, it is to be understood thus: that your flight not be in winter, that is, that the hardship of the time not be added to the tribulation of the flight; that your flight not be on the Sabbath, that is, not on that day, of course, on which you are accustomed to have rest and leisure. But according to the higher understanding, "that your flight not be in winter or on the Sabbath" can be taken thus: that that flight not catch you either shivering in sins or idle from good works.

In the same Matthew it is written: "But I say to you: I will not drink from this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it with you, new, in the kingdom of my father." What shall we follow here? The kingdom of God, as learned interpreters explain, is the Church, in which Christ daily drinks his blood through his saints, as the head in its members. What is the reason that it is said: "From now on you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power and coming in the clouds of heaven"? And in another place it is said that they will not see him coming in the clouds of heaven except on the very last day, when all the tribes of the earth are lamenting, and then they will see the Son of Man in the clouds of heaven? Because in the first, the advent of the body, that is, of the Church, is announced through the manifestation and clarity of signs; but that other advent is of the head, that is, of Christ himself. In that advent, Christ comes through his members; in this, through himself.

CONCERNING MARK. What does it mean in the Gospel where it says: For he who has, it will be given to him, and he who does not have, even what he has will be taken away from him? For example, if someone having faith does not have charity, he also lacks that faith which he perhaps seemed to have; just as the Jews, not understanding Christ through the divine scripture, lost even that knowledge of God which they thought they held, and not receiving the Son, they do not have the Father either. The evangelist Mark indicates that the Lord was crucified at the third hour of the day; and how does another evangelist record that the hour at which he was crucified was the sixth? Because the former in his writings reported that hour in which he was truly crucified. But the latter thought to record the time of the earlier hour at which judgment was passed on him by the shouting Jews, as if by anticipation of the account he was crucified at the hour at which he was ordered to be crucified. Yet in this very passion of his we must hold this: that that man who was assumed suffered according to the will of the same, so that that Word which was in the beginning with the Father remained inviolate and undefiled; therefore, that which he had taken up for human weakness was subject to injury, but that which divine eternity possessed remained incorrupt.

CONCERNING LUKE. What is meant by what is written in Luke about the priest Zechariah—that he was of the course of Abijah? The priests had been distributed into twenty-four lots for the service of the temple, so that each might perform his priestly office in the order of his course; in this order, therefore, Abijah held the eighth lot, from which course Zechariah was a priest. Who are those who in the sacred scriptures received names before they were born? In the New Testament, apart from the Savior alone, we read only of John the Baptist; in the Old Testament, however, there are four—Isaac, Ishmael, Solomon, or Josiah—who appear to be younger in birth than in name. At the arrival of the Lord’s mother, how was John, still lacking sensation, able to leap in the maternal womb? It is thought by some that this was done rather by the mother’s sensation or joy, so that he could leap even in her inner organs; or certainly, if it is preferred to refer this to John, it is to be reckoned among divine miracles, just as also that event when the voice of a donkey burst forth into the sound of speech.

In the same Gospel, what is meant by what is read: "Now it happened on the second-first sabbath, as he was passing through the grainfields, his disciples were plucking ears of grain and eating them, rubbing them in their hands"? Some at this place think that the Lord's day is so called because it appears to be second from that legal observance of the sabbath and first in the celebration of evangelical grace. But if this seems insufficient to someone who contends that the day itself was rather the sabbath, because it is written about it: "What are you doing, which is not lawful on the sabbaths?" perhaps even he can nonetheless understand the sabbath day from this, so that in our observance it is now second which was once first in Jewish observance. For most correctly, the first day is reckoned as the Lord's day. How is that vision in which the Lord was transfigured, with three disciples taken up, recorded by Luke as occurring after eight days, but by the other evangelists after six days?

Luke, after the Lord’s discourse with his disciples, writes that this vision was shown to the disciples eight days later, and he includes both the day on which the Lord spoke and the day on which Jesus appeared in glory. Those, however, who thought that six days should be indicated, counting only the middle and whole days, passed over in silence the first and last days as half-full. Again, in the same Gospel it says: “For from this there will be five in one house divided, three into two and two into three. The father will be divided against his son and the son against his father, the mother against her daughter and the daughter against her mother, the mother-in-law against her daughter-in-law and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.” What is the meaning that, whereas above it seems to have set forth five persons, in what follows it has set forth six with the designation of persons? The mother and the mother-in-law can be understood as the same person, who is called by two names through the daughter and the daughter-in-law, and accordingly in what follows the number of persons can be seen as five.

In the parable of Lazarus and the rich man, certain questions arise: either how the rich man is in torments before the judgment, or how he speaks of Lazarus’s finger? Do bodies exist in the underworld? Or, that he himself desires water—did he feel the thirst of the body? All these things he speaks according to those affections which he once experienced from the body’s need. Moreover, his sensation of torments before the judgment, as if in a place of custody, is not without torments even before the judgment. In this also, that he sees Abraham in the underworld, a reasoning is held by some, that all, even the saints, before the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ are said to have descended to the underworld, though to a place of refreshment. Others think that place in which Abraham was is situated in the upper regions, apart from those places of the underworld, because of which the Lord says of that rich man: “lifting his eyes, when he was in torments, he saw Abraham from afar,” and that Abraham’s bosom designates the rest of that region.

How is this to be understood, which we read: the kingdom of God is within you? In each individual, according to the difference between good and evil deeds, either God reigns or the devil, because it is necessary that he by whose will he procures his work should be seen to be subject to his command. Therefore, if some are just, God is to be said to reign in them; the devil, if they are unjust. Faith can also be called the kingdom of God, by which one goes to the kingdom, by which indeed the just man lives and through which Christ dwells in the hearts of his saints. How is it that in Luke the Savior says to the thief: today you will be with me in paradise, when on that day, according to the human condition, the body was on earth and the soul was among the dead? Perhaps here “paradise” can be taken as that place of assigned rest where the Savior shows Abraham to be with Lazarus in the Gospel, or certainly it is to be understood that the Lord fulfilled this promise according to the effect of divine power, because God is to be known to be everywhere.

ON JOHN. How are the forty-six years that the Jews assert, according to the Gospel of John, shown to have been fulfilled in the building of the temple? It is sufficiently established from Scripture that Solomon built the house of the Lord in only seven years, since it says: and he built it in seven years. But forty-six years are placed in the restoration of the temple which took place in the days of Ezra after the overthrow of Jerusalem and the captivity of the Jews. Moreover, that rebuilding of the temple was long drawn out because the neighboring nations hindered the work with constant attacks. How did the Savior lead the assumed man into heaven, or how is heaven promised to the saints, when it says: no one ascends into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man who is in heaven, or how was he in heaven when he was still on earth? According to the flesh he was on earth; according to his divinity he was not absent from heaven. Therefore he himself who descended also ascended, because although he assumed a man, nevertheless the man and God, that is Christ, is one person, and since he is the head, while the saints are the members, it is necessary that the members follow where the head has preceded, so that the fullness of the body of Christ may be in heaven.

How should this be understood, which is written: "For God does not give the Spirit by measure"? Some affirm that this is to be understood specifically of the Son, because men, while some receive more or less than others, seem to receive the Spirit as if by measure, according to that saying of the Apostle: "having gifts according to the grace that was given us, differing whether prophecy according to the measure of faith," and so forth. But to Christ, His only-begotten Son, who also gives, the Spirit was not given by measure, because in Him is the whole fullness of divinity. The Savior says: "You go up to this day; I do not go up to that feast day"; and how is it afterwards written about him: "But when his brothers went up, then he himself also went up to the feast day"? Truth cannot speak falsehood, and therefore nothing else was done by Jesus than what he had declared he would do. For the Feast of Tabernacles, a solemnity of the Jews, comprises not one day but several days of celebration, just as the festival of Passover does. Therefore, because he had said, "I do not go up to that feast day," he certainly did not go up to that feast day itself, as he had foretold; for it follows in the Gospel: "When he had said this, he himself," that is, the Savior, "remained in Galilee," so that we understand that it was indeed in that solemnity, but not the same day, concerning which it is afterwards written: "But when his brothers went up, then he himself also went up to the feast day.

This feast day can also be understood figuratively, the feast to which the Savior professed He would not ascend, so that He might teach that the feast was to be changed in Himself. How is that passage to be understood in which it is written concerning our Savior Jesus Christ: No one laid hands on Him, because His hour had not yet come? This hour is not to be understood according to the mathematicians, but rather that hour in which He Himself wished to be crucified, in which He Himself wished to suffer; and therefore His hour had not yet come, because He had not yet completed everything, because He had not yet fulfilled all of the proposed work for which He had visited men and the earth. In what way is it to be understood, what the Savior says: When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own, because he is a liar, and his father? Above, the Lord had said to the Jews: If God were your father, you would certainly love me, and afterwards: You are from the devil as father and you wish to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning and did not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, here it is to be understood each one of you, he speaks from his own, because he is a liar, and his father, that is, the devil. There are those who argue thus: When he speaks a lie, that is, the devil, he speaks from his own, because he is a liar, and his father, that is, he is the father of the lie itself, because the lie seems to have arisen from him, so that, just as God begot the Son as truth, so also the devil begot a son as falsehood.

How is that saying to be understood: "Abraham, your father, rejoiced to see my day, and he saw and rejoiced"? Prophets were called "seers" because, by the gift of the Holy Spirit, they saw things that were hidden from others, as if they were privy to future events; among them, Abraham saw Christ in spirit. It is said in the Gospel: "We know that God does not hear sinners"; and how is it that in another place the Savior says: "Everyone who asks receives"? There are those who understand this as follows: "He," they say, "who said that sinners are not heard was blind and, as if still not anointed with eye-salve, could not yet see the truth; but it is certain that the ear of divine mercy is open to those who knock." It can also be understood in this way: how God does not hear sinners, so that even if they are heard in obtaining their own salvation, they are not heard in signs. The Lord and Savior: what does it mean that in the Gospel of John He says: "I came into this world for judgment, so that those who do not see may see, and those who see may become blind"?

This is no small question, but we briefly set forth, as the need requires, what the opinion of the learned holds on this matter. He came so that those who do not see may see, and those who see may become blind—that is, so that those who confess they do not see and seek a physician may see; but those who think they see and do not seek a physician may remain in their blindness. Therefore he said that he had come into this judgment, by which he would discern the case of believers and unbelievers. Thus, "that those who do not see may see" can be understood of the Gentiles, who were to see through faith; and "that those who see may become blind" can be taken of the Jews, who were blinded by their own unbelief. How is it that the Savior says: "The Father is greater than I," and in another place says: "I and the Father are one"? The Lord Jesus, being as truly man as truly God—God from God the Father, man from the mother—is believed to have spoken the former according to his humanity, the latter according to his divinity. According to this principle of divinity and humanity, even in the remaining passages that either sound his equality with the Father or his humility, the understanding will readily be clear.

How did the Magi offer gifts, as we read: "Opening," it says, "their treasures, they offered gold, frankincense, and myrrh"? And, warned by a divine response in their sleep not to return to Herod, did they return by another way? At that time, of course, the Magi, by the foreknowledge of the Holy Spirit, were offering gifts to Christ: gold, that is, as to a king; frankincense, however, as to a god, or because it represented the passion by its appearance; myrrh, moreover, presented a sign of burial. The Magi themselves were a type of the believers; Herod, however, signified the figure of the devil. And that it was said to the Magi not to return to Herod—that is, that those who come from the Gentiles to Christ should not turn back again to the devil. HERE BEGINS THE COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF MARK. The voice of one crying in the desert: "Prepare the way of the Lord; every valley will be filled, and all mountains and hills will be humbled, and the crooked will be made straight." The valley, it says, demonstrates this world, filled with the teaching of Christ; the mountains and hills humbled, however, are the perfidy of the devil and the worship of idols, which were humbled and cast down at the coming of Christ; and what it says: "The crooked will be made straight," that is, the depravity of the Gentiles, who now enter upon the straight paths of Christ.

The food of John, however, was locusts and wild honey; what is the interpretation of this? The locusts which he mentions signify a figure of the multitudes of people who were coming to John; the honey, moreover, declares the fruit of sweetness, assuredly of those by whose belief and faith John was being nourished. And when Jesus had fasted, it says, and afterwards had become hungry, as the Gospel reading testifies, saying: the tempter said to him: "If you are the son of God, command that these stones become loaves." Jesus, however, said to him: "Man does not live by bread, but by every word of God." Then the devil, it says, took him up and placed him upon the pinnacle of the temple and said to him: "If you are the son of God, throw yourself down, so that the angels may catch you, lest you strike your foot against a stone." These things were indeed done according to history; but according to allegory they are to be understood...... when the evangelist says: "But the good tree is the cross which brought forth the fruit of life for believers.

Everyone who hears my words and does them is like a wise man who built his house upon a rock: and rain came down, rivers arrived and rushed against that house, and it did not fall; for it was founded upon a rock, and the rest that follows; what is the meaning? The rock is of course Christ, and the house which he speaks of is the dwelling of our body; therefore on this rock, that is in Christ, let us build our house, and when rivers and winds come, that is the force of persecution and the storm, let us not fall when struck; but sand is understood as nothing other than heresy; therefore whoever builds his house upon this sand, that is upon heresy, will have denied his body and his faith, and will be foolish, for soon the rivers which are the force of persecution will come, and he will immediately fall. Behold, I send you like sheep among wolves; therefore be as prudent as serpents and as simple as doves.

Wolves are persecutors, but sheep are Christians who are preyed upon by wolves during a time of persecution. "But be," he says, "shrewd as serpents." A serpent, when its life is in danger, is said to guard its head, but to surrender its body to death. So too we should conceal our head, that is, Christ, by confessing him, but surrender our body to the wolves. The dove, however, is the Church, whose children, whenever they are killed by men, rejoice. "Render," he says, "what belongs to God to God, and what belongs to Caesar to Caesar." We are commanded in persecution to render to Caesar what is Caesar's, that is, the body, over which he has power, and to render to God what is God's, namely the spirit of faith. "Then," he says, "the kingdom of heaven will be likened to ten virgins who, taking their lamps, went out to meet the bridegroom and the bride; but five of them were foolish and five wise; the foolish ones, having taken their lamps, did not take oil with them in their vessels along with their lamps," and so on.

Of the ten virgins he mentions, we name five: hope, faith, charity, chastity, and almsgiving. The vessels are their dwelling-places, that is, the men in whom they dwell; and they are full of oil, that is, spiritual grace. The lamps, moreover, are the vigilance of the spirit. They go forth to meet the bridegroom, that is, Christ. The foolish ones, however, are the opposites of these: one who hopes for what she has seen, another is unfaithfulness, a third is without charity, a fourth is carnality, a fifth is unfruitful. Their lamps are extinguished because they have no oil, that is, spiritual grace. HERE BEGINS ACCORDING TO LUKE. "A son will be born to you," he says, "and you will call his name John, and many will rejoice at his birth; he will not drink wine or strong drink." The wine which John is forbidden to drink is understood as luxury; strong drink, however, is the juice of the date, which is understood to have nothing other than the sweetness of the flesh; therefore this kind drives spiritual men far away.

Receiving him," says the Lord Jesus, "a certain man was descending from Jerusalem to Jericho and fell among robbers, who stripped him and, after inflicting wounds, left him and went away. But a certain priest was going down that road, and when he saw him, he passed by; likewise a Levite, when he saw him, crossed over. But a Samaritan was making the journey; coming and seeing him, he took pity on him," and so forth. Jerusalem is interpreted as "vision of peace," but Jericho is the world; and the man who was descending from Jerusalem to Jericho is Adam, who was cast out from the face of God into the world and, falling among robbers—that is, among the devil—who stripped him and inflicted wounds upon him, that is, took away from him the garment of immortality and cast upon him the sins of death. But by the priest and the Levite we understand Moses and Aaron, who did not heal Adam's wounds, that is, the sins of the nations. For he calls the Samaritan Jesus; he himself healed his wounds, that is, healed our wounds; by pouring in wine and oil, that is, the sacrament of his blood and of chrism; and he led him to the stable, that is, to the church, and the stable-keepers are the bishops. And as for what he said: "Returning, I will repay you," thus at his coming he will give reward to the priests.

Jesus says: A certain man had two sons. And the younger said: "Father, give me my portion of my substance." And he divided the goods between them. And after a few days, having gathered everything together, the younger son set out for a distant region and there squandered his substance by living luxuriously, and so forth. He says "two sons," and introduces a parable of the Gentiles and the Jews. But there is another, inner meaning: for the two sons are understood as Adam and Christ; moreover, the portion of the patrimony is paradise, which Adam had received, which he lost through luxury and through disobedience. He says: "He went away into a distant region," that is, cast out into the world; and he took food with pigs, that is, with the Gentiles. But that he remembered and returned to his father—this is that the Gentiles, who had the figure of Adam, recognized their author. Moreover, the robe with which he was clothed is the life, of course, which the devil had taken from him and which was restored through Christ. And "the ring," he says, "on his hand"—this is the faith which he had lost; but the sandals show fortified footsteps which do not fear the snares of the devil, as the apostle says: "shod feet in the preparation of the Gospel." The slain calf is the passion of Christ, who suffered for Adam, that is, for the Gentiles, to whom the father says: "You are always with me, and all that is mine is yours.

Concerning the Apostle to the Romans. What is the understanding of that chapter which the apostle sets forth, saying: "But if our iniquity commends the righteousness of God, what do we say? Is God, who inflicts wrath, unjust? I speak according to man. Far from it. Otherwise, how will God judge the world? For if the truth of God has abounded in my falsehood to his glory, why am I still judged as a sinner, and are we not blasphemed, and as some say we say: 'Let us do evil, so that good may come, whose condemnation is just'?" A most obscure and perplexed passage in the apostle, and one needing many words to shake out and bring forth the sense, yet for us, on account of the haste of the discourse, it must be compressed. He had said above: "But God is truthful, but every man is a liar, as it is written: that you may be justified in your words and prevail, when you are judged." Then he also adds: "But if our iniquity commends the righteousness of God, what do we say?" Here he threshes out the question arising from the testimonies which he had placed above, and adds: "Is God, who inflicts wrath, that is, vengeance, unjust? I speak according to man," that is, according to human expression, because he had called God seemingly unjust, or because he had spoken of his wrath, since passion does not befall God. "Far from it": that is, far be it from being believed that we say God is unjust, who, if these things are so, inflicts wrath upon the delinquent. "Otherwise, how will God judge the world," except with the highest equity and justice?

Then follows: "For if the truth of God has abounded in my falsehood to His glory." And he sets this forth in such a way that it is the statement of one refuting, not approving, because if the truth of God had need of man's falsehood, then the sinner as such would not be judged, and what blasphemers say against the apostles would appear true. Therefore, what is it that he says? Even if from the comparison of injustice justice becomes clear, yet man ought not to be unjust so that God may appear just. The condemnation of those who affirm that we say this is just. Say what? Let us do evil, so that good may come. For the apostles were thought to say this among those who misinterpreted the apostolic saying, namely that: where sin has abounded, grace has superabounded. What is that which we read: "But why indeed did Christ, when we were still weak, according to the time die for the impious?" For scarcely does anyone die for a just man. For perhaps someone dares to die for a good man?

This is what he wishes to be understood: He died for the impious, when scarcely anyone can be found who wishes to die for the just. For on behalf of the good, that is, Christ, perhaps someone dares to die, and he himself modestly indicates concerning himself that he could die for Christ. And in another way: For scarcely does anyone die for the just. In the Old Law, in which there is justice on account of the severity of the commandments, scarcely a few martyrs are found; but in the New Testament, in which there is goodness on account of the piety of the precepts, countless martyrs have arisen. The Apostle says concerning God the Father: "But for all of us He gave Him up," that is, the Son; what does this signify? "He gave up" means he acquiesced to the giving up. For in the sacred books, God is sometimes said to do things in which He seems to grant patience. For there are things which God wills to be done, and others which He permits to be done. He wills, therefore, that those things be done which, when done, appear to be better. But He permits the worse, so that the freedom of human will may stand firm, in which freedom of the will, a just retribution of merits is exhibited by divine judgment to the followers of good or evil.

In this same epistle, what is to be understood concerning this which we read: "Who will accuse the elect of God? God, who justifies. Who is it that condemns? Christ Jesus, who died, or rather who rose, who is at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for us." These words, in which he himself answers, are to be read as a kind of irony. And the sense is this: Unless perhaps God, who justifies, or Christ, who died for them, will condemn His own elect; certainly not, since He also intercedes for us. This, therefore, is what he says: No one will condemn the elect. What is to be thought concerning this passage in which the apostle speaks: "For I myself wished to be an anathema from Christ for my brothers who are my kinsmen according to the flesh," and so on? "Anathema" sometimes, as also here, signifies a slaying and a killing. Therefore, here the apostle wishes to perish in the flesh, so that others may be saved in spirit. And otherwise: Here the apostle [shows] the force of excessive

He expressed the desire of love, wishing, if it were possible, to be anathema from Christ for the sake of his brothers, just as Moses, who, when he was petitioning God for his people, said: "And now, Lord, if indeed you will forgive them their sins, forgive; but if not, erase me from the book which you have written." The same author speaks concerning God: "Therefore, he has mercy on whom he wishes, and hardens whom he wishes; what do we follow here?" The heart is hardened by God when the punishment for crimes is delayed. Again, he himself affirms, saying: "What Israel sought, it did not obtain; but the elect obtained it, and the rest were blinded; what is the meaning of this matter?" Not because God strikes anyone who is willing to look with blindness, since, as it is written, he wishes all to be saved, but it is said that he delivered over those who had blinded themselves, in retribution for their malice, by abandoning them. For to deliver is the Lord's act of forsaking. How is that which is written to be understood: "If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him drink; for in doing this you heap coals of fire upon his head"?

This is: you heap up the fire of compunction when you return good for evil. And otherwise: not that the enemy ought to be fed with this intention, that coals of fire be heaped upon his head while he is being fed, but rather that that enemy, when he receives good for evil, if he is not moved by any repentance for his own malice, he himself heaps up coals of fire upon his own head. Since power is only from God, as the Apostle says, why are not all who administer it found to do so well and piously? Because all equally receive this life from God, yet not all live equally. I CORINTHIANS. Every sin, he says, whatever a man commits, is outside the body; but he who fornicates sins in his own body; what is to be understood here? That other sins are committed externally through the body, but fornication alone is administered in the passions of the body. How is that passage to be understood in which it is written: Do you not have houses for eating and drinking? Or do you despise the church of God and confound those who have not?

Among the Corinthians once, as some assert, a depraved custom had prevailed of dishonoring the churches everywhere with feasts in which they ate before the Lord’s offering, which they used to offer after supper at night; and when the rich came drunk to the Eucharist, the poor were tormented by hunger. This custom, as they report, came from the still-prevailing superstition of the pagans. Hence also in certain places throughout the countryside of Egypt or Syria, on the Sabbath day, after supper at night, they are said to gather at the church. What kind of prophecy is that concerning which it is written: “But if all prophesy, and someone unbelieving or unlearned enters, he is refuted by all, judged by all, for the secrets of his heart are made manifest”? The kind of prophecy is twofold: one of teaching, the other of divination. But divination flourished more in past times, teaching in the present. “The secrets of his heart are made manifest” while the church prophesies, that is, while it discourses morally, the conscience of the hearer is pricked.

What is the meaning of what is written, that the Son is about to hand over the kingdom to God the Father? He is indeed about to hand it over, yet not in such a way that He will lack it. For the handing over of the kingdom is our advancement, when we have merited to be fully in the Son within the Father’s kingdom. What is the meaning of what is written: we shall all indeed rise again, but we shall not all be changed? That is, we shall not all be changed into glory, because resurrection and incorruption are common to all, but change into glory belongs properly to the just. II Corinthians. The Apostle says: We beseech you for Christ’s sake, be reconciled to God; He who did not know sin made sin for us, so that we might become the justice of God in Him; what are we to follow here? Be reconciled, he says, to God, who made Christ the sacrifice for sin. But that the sacrifice itself is called sin, if you seek it in the Old Testament, you will find it. This can also be understood thus: that Christ was made the sacrifice for sin, because He sent His Son in the likeness of the flesh of sin.

It has been given to me," he says, "the goad of my flesh, an angel of Satan who strikes me." How is this to be understood? Some say that the apostle was often troubled by a headache. But I think it is better understood that he was struck in those sufferings which he himself enumerated, saying: "I have been beaten with rods three times, stoned once," and so forth. Therefore, he calls the tribulation of the flesh the "goad of the flesh," and the "angel of Satan" that by which, as if by an instigator, he suffered such great things. TO THE EPHESIANS. How is this to be understood, which the apostle writes, that the Lord proposed in the dispensation of the fullness of times to restore everything in Christ, both those in the heavens and those on the earth, in him? It is truly a wonder what is now being restored in heaven. Therefore, according to the opinion of some, that portion of angels which fell with its prince is being restored through the increase and fellowship of the saints, about whom it is written: "But they are as angels in heaven." Also, everything on earth is restored when, even in place of the failing Jews, believers from among the Gentiles are admitted. And otherwise: those things which are on earth are restored, while we are restored through the blood of our mediator and reconciliation. The celestial things are restored when joy for the angels arises from our salvation.

What is it that the apostle says about God the Father: from whom all fatherhood in heaven and on earth is named? Because, since He is the first and true Father to us, the name is derived from His name when others are called fathers. In what way does the apostle say: honor your father and mother, which is the first commandment, when among the commandments, as some arrange them, it is in the fourth place? Some discuss this as follows, saying: those three commandments which are above all pertain to God, the seven following pertain to man; and those three pertaining to God were held on one tablet of the law, while on the other tablet were those precepts which pertained to man. Therefore, this commandment is the first among the seven commandments which pertain to one's neighbor. Others, however, who affirm that this commandment is not in the fourth but in the fifth place—which we also approve—dispute about it thus: the Decalogue itself, because it is written in that first law, is rightly called the first commandment, which indeed the order makes first, followed afterward by the other precepts in the law. Likewise, in another way: honor your father and mother, which is the first commandment, and it adds in a promise. In what promise? That it may be well for you, and you may be long-lived upon the earth. Therefore, among the commandments, this is the first commandment which has this promise that we mentioned above.

To the Thessalonians. What is meant by that which is written: do not extinguish the spirit? To extinguish, that is, to put to flight through works of iniquity. David: do not take your holy spirit from me. It follows a little later in the same: that your whole spirit and soul and body be kept without complaint until the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ; what is to be understood here? Here he calls spirit that holy one, of which he had said above: do not extinguish the spirit. Which indeed, since it cannot be extinguished in its own substance, is extinguished for us, when it is taken away from us. For its gift or grace in men, just as it is kindled by their virtues, so it is extinguished by their vices. Others assert that spirit is to be understood here as the intellect and wisdom of the soul itself, concerning which the same apostle says in another place: and the spirit itself bears witness to our spirit, that we are sons of God. That is, that the holy spirit bears witness to this intellectual spirit of ours, that we are sons of God. In another place also the apostle speaks: I will sing with spirit, I will sing also with mind, here placing spirit for voice and saying that one should sing with voice and mind alike.

To the Colossians. What is to be understood in that chapter in which it is written to the Colossians: if you have died with Christ from the elements of the world, why do you still, as if living in the world, decide: neither touch nor taste nor handle, which are all things that perish in their very use, according to the precepts and doctrines of men, which indeed have a semblance of wisdom in superstition and humility, and in not sparing the body, not in any honor for the satiety of the flesh. Let us touch upon, as we can, a place wrapped in the deepest obscurities. He argues against those who, being Christians from among the Jews, contended that they should cling to their own ceremonies. And he had already said above about their reprobate observance in food or drink, and that their new moons and sabbaths had prefigured the shadows of things to come. After these things, again in the following he says: if you have died with Christ from the elements of the world, why do you still, as if living in the world, decide? That is, you judge, what do you judge? By saying, of course: neither touch nor taste nor handle, which are all things that perish in their very use (because all those things, he says, which you believe are not to be touched nor tasted, by their very use, when they are taken up, perish), according to the precepts and doctrines of men: which indeed have a semblance of wisdom in superstition and humility and in not sparing the body.

He speaks of human doctrines, because they understand the precepts themselves carnally, forbidding the eating of things prohibited in the law, but this, as he himself adds, in superstition and in vain humility and in affliction of the body, which body is certainly not to be spared either through that kind of abstinence or through circumcision. He continues, however: not in any honor for the satiety of the flesh; therefore this is what he wishes to be understood: all those observances, although they may seem to display some observance of wisdom, because they are thought to hold to the law of precepts, are nevertheless in superstition, not in any honor of God, because they are for fulfilling the will, an observance of the flesh. TO TIMOTHY I. What distinction of each thing is to be understood in those which the apostle sets forth, saying: I beseech, therefore, first of all, that supplications, prayers, intercessions, thanksgivings be made? Supplications are made for past or present sins, prayers for obtaining what we hope for, intercessions when we intervene for others, thanksgivings when we obtain what we ask for, or certainly when we render thanks and praises for the immense benefits of God.

How is that passage to be understood in which it is written: the sins of certain men are manifest, preceding to judgment, but those of others follow after? He had said above that an accusation against a presbyter is not to be received except under two or three witnesses, and a little later he added: the sins of certain men are manifest, preceding to judgment, that is, while they are known to all; but those of others follow after, that is, while they are afterwards proven in judgment. But if some think that this is rather to be understood of the judgment of God, it can be understood thus: those sins which each one has committed here beforehand precede to judgment; but those follow after for which we indeed gave the causes, but which are understood to have been consummated only after our departure. Therefore sins of this kind follow us into judgment, if, for example, the one to whom we gave cause for want has perished from hunger and destitution after our death.

II AD TIMOTHEUM. Alexander the coppersmith, he says, has shown me much evil; the Lord will repay him according to his works. And again: the Lord will strike you, whitewashed wall; how are these things to be understood? He says "will strike you," not "may he strike you," and again "will repay," not "may he repay"; whence it comes about that these words seem to have been spoken not so much in the spirit of a curse as of one announcing the judgment and vengeance of God. Likewise, in another way: and if by the administration of prophecy the prophet curses with an unmoved spirit, as in that saying: "let their eyes be darkened," he declares what is owed to their merits. Because every transgression and disobedience receives a just retribution of work and reward. AD HEBRAEOS. What do we follow in this, that the apostle says: by faith Jacob, dying, blessed each of the sons of Joseph and adored the top of his staff? The signification of the scepter is to be understood through the staff, and through this, of royal power and authority. The top, in which Christ is understood to have been adored, who evidently was to be the head of the kingdom of the Hebrews.

FROM THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. What is indicated by what we read: "sabbati habens iter"? That is, a thousand paces; on the Sabbath, it was lawful for Jews to go as far as the Mount of Olives, or certainly, wherever they were, they presumed upon the license to walk that distance. How is the Holy Spirit breathed into the apostles by the Saviour before the Ascension, according to the evangelist John, when, according to the Acts of the Apostles, he was sent into the apostles on the tenth day after the Ascension? There are many gifts of the graces of the Holy Spirit, according to what the apostle says: to one is given through the Spirit a word of wisdom, to another a word of knowledge according to the same Spirit, to another the grace of healings in one Spirit, and so on. Therefore, before the Ascension, they received the grace of the Holy Spirit by which they could forgive sins and baptize and instil the spirit of adoption into believers; according to which, at that time, when the Spirit was breathed into them by the Saviour, it had been said: those whose sins you forgive will be forgiven them, and those whose sins you retain will be retained. But after the Ascension, they received a much greater grace of the Holy Spirit in the working of miracles and the grace of healings and the perception of various languages, according to what had been promised to them on the same day, that they would be baptized with the Holy Spirit and clothed with the power by which they could preach the Gospel of Christ to all nations.

In this reception of the Holy Spirit, therefore, according to the distribution of the Lord’s grace, the progress of the apostles is demonstrated, not a conflicting diversity of the scriptures. And otherwise, why the Holy Spirit was given twice, a certain distinguished teacher has excellently explained, speaking of him whom the Savior first gave here by himself and later sent from the heavens, so that the love of neighbor and the love of God might be signified, which is diffused in the hearts of the saints through the Holy Spirit who was given to them. For the purpose of evangelizing the word of God, into which parts of the world did the apostles betake themselves? As much as history relates, Bartholomew into the Indians, Thomas made his way into the Parthians, Matthew the Ethiopians, Andrew softened the Scythians by his preaching, John corrected Asia with divine discourse, Peter, while preaching to the Jews, went around Cappadocia and Galatia, Bithynia together with Pontus and the neighboring provinces, and finally came to Rome to illuminate it. Paul, after he had filled the region from Jerusalem as far as Illyricum with the gospel, subdued so many countless and diverse nations with his precepts as if with arms, a victor.

In the Acts of the Apostles it is first read: “The men who were accompanying him,” that is, with the apostle, “stood amazed, hearing a voice, but seeing no one.” How then does the apostle later say: “And those who were with me saw a light indeed, but did not hear the voice of him who was speaking with me”? In the earlier passage, where they are reported to have heard a voice from God, they received not a voice but an indistinct sound of a voice, so that he later says they did not hear the voice—that is, the expressed meaning of words by which they could understand what was sounding. And therefore, for this reason, they are reported both to have heard and not to have heard on different occasions, because as far as the sound is concerned, they heard; as far as the words are concerned, they did not hear. Y. Why was common food formerly called what was considered unclean? Because, contrary to God’s prohibition at that time, it was available in common to other men who did not observe the law’s distinction of foods, by which the Jews boasted that they were a part of God. It was, however, purified, even as the Lord said to Peter: “What God has purified, do not call common.

What is this, that in the Acts of the Apostles those twelve who had been baptized by John’s baptism are baptized by Paul? This is because they had not been baptized in the name of the Trinity. For John’s baptism, although it baptized into the one who was to come, was nevertheless properly called John’s baptism; whence also those coming from heretics are not baptized by us, if it is established that they were baptized in the name of the Trinity, but only the imposition of the hand is applied to those converted to the right faith, so that through this the infusion of the Holy Spirit may be received. Concerning the Epistle of James. How is it said: God is not a tempter of evils and He Himself tempts no one, when nonetheless it is written: Your Lord God tempts you? The temptation of the Lord is called a test; for He does not tempt anyone in passions, but that temptation is from our own lusts, when we are cast down in humiliation. The temptation from the Lord is when, having been tested, we are glorified, and therefore the Lord is not a tempter of evils.

Concerning the First Epistle of John. How does perfect love cast out fear, when it is also written: the fear of the Lord, chaste, endures forever? Whoever loves God is certainly afraid to be without God. This is the fear of God that endures forever; therefore this fear descends from the perfect love of the Lord; but the other fear arises from temporal things, the loss of which we often dread. This fear the perfection of divine love casts out. Again, John in his epistle sets down: there are three things which bear witness: water, blood, and spirit; what is indicated in this? Similar to this passage, that also seems to me which he himself says in his Gospel concerning the passion of Christ: one of the soldiers opened his side with a lance, and immediately blood and water came out; and he who saw it bore witness. And in the same [Gospel] he had said above of Jesus: having bowed his head, he gave up the spirit. Some therefore argue from this as follows: water indicates baptism, blood seems to indicate martyrdom, but the spirit is the one who passes through martyrdom to the Lord. Yet more [interpreters] here understand the Trinity itself by mystical interpretation, because it itself perfectly bears witness to Christ: water indicating the Father, because he says of himself: they have left me, the fountain of living water; blood demonstrating Christ, of course through the blood of the passion; but the spirit manifesting the Holy Spirit.