Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews

and stirring them to this. And when he had divided the preaching with Peter, he made the needy faithful Hebrews in Jerusalem common. He writes, therefore, of necessity to them, consoling ^A them as they were fainting; for they were thoroughly exhausted by the afflictions brought upon them by their own tribesmen, since they [the latter] were autonomous in Jerusalem, having the power both to judge and to imprison whomsoever they wished. And he himself indicates this, saying: "Lift up the drooping hands and the paralyzed knees" (Heb. xii, 12). For as they were Jews, and had learned that their forefathers had received their good things straightway, they were fainting greatly, as not having yet attained relief. For this reason he discourses much about faith in this Epistle, and about the saints from the beginning of the world, that they had not yet received the good things, establishing two things: one, that one must bear all things that happen bravely; the other, that one must entirely expect the recompense. For the Lord will not overlook His saints whom He has had from the ages; so that then you too shall receive. He also speaks at length about the Old and the New Testament, and shows that the Law is no longer valid; for even if the temple was still standing, he indicates nevertheless that it would endure only until a certain time, and that our religion is true. He writes this Epistle from Italy. Moreover, this is prior to the Epistle to Timothy. For in that one he indicates that the end of his life is at hand. "For I," he says, "am already being poured out, and the time of my departure has come" (II Tim. iv, 6). ^B But in this one he promises the Hebrews that he will see them. "Know," he says, "that the brother Timothy has been set free, with whom, if he comes soon, I will see you" (Heb. xiii, 23). And it is likely that this took place. For he was held bound in Rome for two years, then he was set free, as he himself also indicates, saying: "At my first defense no one came to my aid" (II Tim. iv, 16); and, "I was delivered from the mouth of the lion," namely, Nero. Then, having gone into the Spains, perhaps from there he visited the Hebrews, and then returned to Rome again, when he was also put to death by Nero.

THEOPHYLACT'S COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS

CHAPTER I

§ 1. "God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets" (Heb. i, 1). Because they were ^D afflicted by evils, they thought themselves to be abandoned by God, and not to be of such care to Him as their forefathers had been; Paul…

^A shows the contrary, saying that you have enjoyed a greater grace than they did. For to them He sent prophets; but to you, He sent His own Son. And what is meant by "multifariously and in many ways"? It means diversely and in many forms. "For I," He says, "have multiplied visions, and in the hands of the prophets I have been likened" (Osee xii, 1). Therefore, why are you distressed and faint-hearted, being counted worthy of such great things?

"In these last days He has spoken to us in the Son." And by this He also rouses them, saying that the end is near. For he who is exhausted in a contest, as soon as he hears that the end of the contest is at hand, breathes again a little. And He hints at something else by saying, "In these last days." For, he says, when there was no longer time remaining for correction, but we were liable to punishment, when we were in despair, when the gifts had ceased; then, he says, we received more than the rest. And the phrase, "in the Son," is for "through the Son." And observe this passage against those who say that the preposition "in" is attributed to the Spirit. But why did He not say, "Christ has spoken to us"? Partly because they were weak and could not yet hear about Christ; and partly to show that the Old ^B and the New Testament are of one and the same. And observe also the "to us": for he joins and equates both those [the disciples themselves] and himself with them. Although He did not speak to them, but to the apostles, and through them to the many; yet he heightens the matter, indicating that He spoke even to them, and this is for their consolation.

"Whom He appointed heir of all things." That is, He made Him Lord of the whole world. For Jacob is no longer the portion of the Lord, but all [peoples]. But he said "heir," showing both the genuineness of His Sonship and the inseparability of His Lordship. But how did He make Him Lord? As man, just as he says in the second Psalm: "Ask of me, and I will give thee the nations for thine inheritance" (Ps. ii, 8). But what kind of lordship does he say this is? That of those who willingly submit, that which is of free choice. For this was given to the Son as man, since all recognize Him; since He had the natural [lordship] even over those who obey unwillingly, as it is said, "All things serve thee" (Ps. cxviii, 91), before all ages.

"Through whom also He made the ages." Having spoken about the flesh of the Son, which ^C appeared just yesterday and the day before, he now leads you up to the height of His pre-eternal divinity. Where, then, are those who say, "There was [a time] when He was not"? He Himself founded the ages, and how was there an age when He Himself was not? But since the Father is the cause of the Son, He is deservedly also the cause of those things which were made by the Son Himself. Therefore he says, "Through whom." For the Father is seen to act, ^D and in this He stirs them up saying that the end is near.

EXPOSITION ON THE SECOND EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY - CHAPTER II

^A "Thou therefore, my son, be strong." Yes, for this very reason all the more, because I am in distress, be strong. For if I, your teacher, were not suffering such things, perhaps it would be necessary for you to fall away, as one who has encountered dangers as a young and inexperienced man. Now, however, it is no small consolation for you to bear what happens to you bravely, because I myself also suffer such things, as if the nature of the matter admits of dangers, not your inexperience. Since, in general, every lesser person in any business whatsoever who has fallen into dangers is greatly consoled when he sees his own superior immersed in the same. Mark with how much affection he exhorts, "My son," saying—for he infused his soul, as it were, with the word—if you are a son, imitate the father.

"In the grace that is in Christ Jesus." ^B Do not be strengthened only by the example given through me, but especially through the grace of Christ. Have her as a fellow-warrior, through whom we have received authority to tread upon serpents and scorpions and upon all the power of the enemy, and to be harmed by no one.

"And what you have heard from me through many witnesses." What you have heard, not what you have debated; for faith is by hearing. And you heard not in secret, but with boldness, with many present. Some, however, have understood "many witnesses" to be the Law and the Prophets. For my word was fortified by scriptural ^C testimonies.

"Commit these to faithful men." He did not say: Tell, but: Commit, just as with a treasure. For what is committed is deposited in safety. He makes the disciple more attentive through this. To the faithful, not to the syllogistic and argumentative; to the faithful, those who do not betray the deposit.

"Who shall be able to teach others also." For what profit is there when one is indeed faithful himself and receives everything without questioning, but is not able to bring forth the teaching to others? And again, if I do not betray the word myself, but cannot also make others such? A teacher, therefore, must have two ^D things: to be faithful, and to be able to teach. For it is clear that these things are commanded to him regarding presbyters and bishops, not regarding the laity; for it would be absurd, where even Paul himself wrote to Greeks and Jews. And I am of the opinion that he also speaks of certain more mystical things, which ought to be committed to the faithful and to those able to teach.

"You therefore suffer affliction as a good soldier of Jesus Christ." Do you see that to suffer affliction belongs to a soldier? Therefore, not to suffer affliction is not the duty of a soldier. It is not, therefore, to be borne with a heavy heart if anyone suffers affliction, having been enrolled among the soldiers.

^A Its majesty is observed, nowhere falling short of itself; for the thing outside the form would be unformed and ugly, which is absurd to conceive regarding the Father. If, however, the majesty of the Father is as great as the form, and the character is equal to the form, then the character will also have as much magnitude as is observed in the form of God.

*Upholding all things by the word of his power.* You who not long ago, apprehending the phrase "through whom," were setting him up as a minister, hear now, if you are able to understand, how Paul here grants authority to the Son. He did not say, "upholding by power," but "by the word of power," that is, by the word that is full of power, which proves him to be powerful. For just as you say that the Father also spoke, "Let there be light, and there was light," so too does the Son uphold all things by a word, that is, he governs and sustains them. Or rather, it is a greater thing to sustain things that are falling into discord and moving toward non-existence than it is to produce all things. ^B And he did not say "governing," but "upholding," taking a metaphor from those who make a thing move and shift with a finger. For he bears such a great and immense weight of creation as if it were nothing, and he is able to do all things by a word alone. For a word in God is not something slight, as it is in our case.

Then, with so many heresies overturned at the very beginning of the Epistle, how do some dare to reject it as not belonging to Paul, making the character of the style an evidentiary proof, as being different from the rest of his Epistles? For they ought to have understood that the majesty of the concepts, and their undeniable ^C power, belong to none other than Paul, who had Christ speaking within himself. But if they take offense at the character/style, let them learn that Paul dictated the Epistle in the Hebrew tongue, inasmuch as he was addressing his discourse to the Hebrews; but it was turned into the Greek language, as some say, by Luke, or as others affirm, by Clement, whose style it preserves even more. They are, therefore, making a similar error—so to speak—those who take this Epistle away from Paul, just as if they were taking Paul away from Christ.

*Having by himself made purification of our sins.* Having spoken of the majesty of the divinity ^D of the Word, he speaks thereafter concerning the care he exercises toward men through the flesh, which is something much greater than upholding all things. He places two things here: first, that he purified us from sins, and second, that he did this by himself; and in many places he glories in this, that this was done through the Son himself. For by the cross and death which he himself endured, he purified us, not only in that he, being sinless, died for our sin, and paid the penalty to which he himself was not liable, and set the nature of man free from the condemnation that came upon it simply because of Adam's sin.

^A And also in that He gave us baptism, the image of His death, through which we who are baptized receive each time the remission of sins committed by us before, and also the power not to be so easily overcome by sin hereafter.

He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high. Having made mention of the Cross, He brings in the discourse concerning the Resurrection and the Ascension. He did not say, "He was ordered to sit," but "He sat," and "at the right hand," and "on high." ^B Not that God is confined by place, but that His equality of honor with the Father might be shown. For He has attained the very throne of the Father, and just as the Father is on high, so is He also. But if anyone should say, "But it is written, 'The LORD said to my Lord, Sit at my right hand,'" we will answer first that He did not say "He commanded," but "He said." Then, so that you might not think Him to be without beginning and without cause, the word is fashioned in this way.

Ver. 4. Having become so much better than the angels, as He has inherited a more excellent name than they. In the beginning, indeed, He compared Him to the prophets on account of the weakness of the hearers; but now, proceeding, He puts Him even before the angels, gradually leading the hearers to the truth. Now He said "having become" for "having been demonstrated," ^C just as John also says: "He who comes after me has been made before me," that is, has been demonstrated as more honorable than I. For he is not speaking here of the essence of the nature. But it is on account of the flesh that the word "inherited" was said; for as God the Word, He always had this name. In this way we also speak of man both in lowly and in lofty terms; as, for instance, when we say "Man is great," we name the whole from the superior part, but when we say "Earth and ashes," we name it from the inferior. Thus indeed with the Lord, sometimes we name the whole from the attributes peculiar to the Godhead, and sometimes from those names that look to the flesh.

For to which of the angels has He ever said: "You are My Son, today I have begotten You"? From where, he says, is it clear that He is better than the angels? From the name. ^D For the name "Son" indicates genuineness, that is, that He is begotten of Him. But if He is Son by grace, He is inferior to the angels. Therefore, what He says, "Today I have begotten You," signifies nothing else but that He is from the beginning, from which the Father is. For just as "He Who Is" is said from the present time—for that most especially befits Him—so also is "today." But some have interpreted "Today I have begotten You" not as said concerning the eternal birth, but concerning that which is according to the flesh. For this too was from above: for it was of the Holy Spirit, by the good pleasure of the Father.

And again: "I shall be to Him for a Father, and He shall be to Me for a Son." This is said openly on account of the flesh. For when Paul has touched upon this, he speaks the rest without fear. Having therefore assumed the nature,

^A the genuine name of the Son, which the Word united to it possessed by nature, it inherited, inasmuch as it subsists in Him; just as the angel also said: "And the holy thing which shall be born shall be called the Son of God"; and again: "He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest." This, however, belongs to none of the angels. Although some of the righteous are sons of God, they are so by grace; but with Christ the matter is otherwise, for in the hypostatic identity, the name of Son is bestowed upon the flesh that was assumed.

VERS. 6. "And again, when He bringeth in the Firstbegotten into the world, He saith." Christ indeed calls His advent in the flesh an "exit," as when He says: "He went out to sow," and again: "I went out from the Father." And rightly so. For we were outside of God, and He, having gone out to us as an ambassador, and having conversed with us, and having cleansed us, reconciled us to the King. But Paul now names this same entrance, by a metaphor taken from those who enter into an inheritance, or receive some dowry or possession. For this is what "bringeth in" signifies, when the Father hands over the inhabited world to the Son. For then He possessed it when it was voluntarily subjected, when also He was recognized. He is brought in, however, in no other way than in the flesh. For as God the Word, He was in the world, and the world was made through Him. But he makes the Father the one who brings in the Son, in order to make the discourse acceptable. Gregory of Nyssa and divine Cyril understood the "bringing in" in this way: that before the incarnation He had nothing in common with the creation, as He was God devoid of flesh; but when He was incarnate, then, because He participated in the creation, in that He united to Himself that which was created, He is said to be brought into the creation.

"And let all the angels of God worship Him." That is, Him who assumed flesh. He indicates here also how much more excellent He is than them, even as much as the Master is better than the servants: just as if someone, bringing a person into a house, were to command those in charge of it to worship him immediately.

VERS. 7. "And of the angels He saith: Who maketh His angels spirits, and His ministers a flame of fire." Behold the greatest difference, that they are created, but He is uncreated. For the word "maketh" signifies the production from non-being into being. He does not have this distinction with regard to the angels only, but also with regard to every ministering power. Neither did He say, "Who made," but, "Who maketh," that is, maintaining them by the word through which they were made. Of such a kind is that which is in the Gospel: "My Father worketh hitherto," which is to say, He contains those things which have been made and already finished, and guards them as they were finished.

VERS. 8. "But unto the Son: Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever." The angels, he says, are creatures and works; for it was said concerning them: "Who maketh." But the Son is not a creature; for neither is

He a creature, but King, and Master, and God. For a throne is attested for Him, which is a symbol of kingship, and an eternal throne. This is against Paul of Samosata, who introduces as a mere man Him who truly is God and eternal King; and against Arius.

"A sceptre of uprightness is the sceptre of thy kingdom." Behold again another symbol of kingship.

VERS. 9. "Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity." These things are applied to the Word of God made flesh, inasmuch as the flesh receiveth humble things.

"Therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows." This fights against the Jews, and Sabellius, and Marcellus, ^B in that it indicates two persons, God and God; and also against the Marcionites, who do not think the Son assumed flesh, since divinity is not anointed, but humanity. He says, therefore: "O God," that is, O God, "hath anointed thee God"—that is, the Father, indeed, thy Father according to divinity, but thy God according to the flesh. "The oil of gladness," that is, the Holy Spirit, beyond other men. For Christ did not receive the Spirit by measure, nor as one who works miracles through the Spirit, but He was anointed by the presence and of the whole ointment and of the whole anointing One. All spiritual [men] are His fellows, as having been sanctified by the same participation. For those also who were perfect and spiritual in the Law attained the Spirit through faith in Christ; ^C for which reason they were also called Christs, as: "Touch not my Christs." And those who are in the grace of the Gospel are more clearly fellows of Christ, as having become partakers of His death in baptism, and having been anointed with the Spirit, which is called the oil of gladness, as having freed us from the gloom of sins, and having prepared us to rejoice in the hope of future blessings. But that "O God" is instead of "O God," a trustworthy witness is the enemy Symmachus, who interprets thus: "Therefore hath anointed thee, O God, thy God, with the oil of joy above thy fellows." Observe, moreover, that "the God" [is used] with the article in reference to the Son, because of those who urge that "And the Word was God," being without the article, does not introduce Him as God in the proper sense.

VERS. 10. "And, Thou, in the beginning, O Lord, hast founded the earth; and the works of thy hands are the heavens." That, when you hear above, ^D "When he bringeth the Firstborn into the world," you might not think it to be a gift later bestowed upon Him by the Father, He shows now that He is its Creator, not in the end, but...

NOTE.

^A This is also against Paul of Samosata, demonstrating that Christ existed even before Mary, inasmuch as he is also the Creator of creation; and against Arius, who made him a minister, or rather an instrument, because it was said above: "Through whom also he made the ages." For look, here he is introduced as Creator. See also how the discourse concerning the uncreated nature and that concerning the dispensation are intertwined, and how at times things are spoken of as sublime because of the divinity, and at times as humble because of the humanity.

*They shall perish, but thou remainest, and all shall grow old like a garment; and as a mantle thou shalt fold them up, and they shall be changed; but thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail.* ^B The Apostle here hints at something greater than creation: namely, the transformation of the world. For all things shall be changed from corruption into incorruptibility, and this as easily as if one were to fold up a mantle. But if he effects this transformation into something better, and the creation of the world, so easily, did he have need of another for the lesser creation? It is no small consolation for the faithful being oppressed here to know that things will not remain thus, but will undergo a change; and that he whom they worship remains living forever and ever. *For thy years shall not fail.*

^C *But to which of the angels has he ever said: Sit at my right hand, until I make thine enemies a footstool for thy feet?* Look, he is again emboldened by them; for if their enemies were about to be defeated, and their enemies were the very same as those who oppose Christ. But the Father is not said to subject the enemies because the Son is powerless; for the Son, who will judge there, would much more have repaid them here; rather, it is to show the honor the Father has toward the Son. For the Father to be angry at the enemies of the Son, how does this not redound to the glory of the Son? How is this not a sign of great love toward the Son? But this has been spoken of more extensively in the First Epistle to the Corinthians; seek out what is written there.

*Are they not all ministering spirits sent forth to minister for the sake of those who are to inherit salvation?* He raises the spirits of the hearers, bringing forward the immense care God has for us; ^D since he has even ordained angels, who are superior to us, to serve us in matters pertaining to our salvation. He also seems to rebuke some who were intent upon the angels, and especially all the Hebrews in general, who clung to the law given through the angels and to their ministries in that law, to such a degree that they even preferred them to Christ. Do not, therefore, he says, be intent upon them; for they are fellow-servants with us. See

[THEOPHYLACTI BULGARIÆ ARCHIEP.]

and are our servants. Observe further how he does not attribute great excellence to the creatures: although there is a great difference between angels and men, he nonetheless establishes them as being close to us; for creatures differ but little from other creatures. Moreover, the angels served in the Old Testament in many ways, and even in the New; ^A they gave a response to Joseph through a dream, they announced the Gospel to the shepherds, sitting in the tomb they proclaimed the Resurrection, and at the Ascension they taught that he would thus return as he had ascended. An angel came to Cornelius, an angel came to Philip, an angel came to Peter in prison, and simply countless things of this sort. Mark well that it is the angelic office to serve for the salvation of men, and even more, of Christ himself. Hence, such a ministry is not to be neglected.

CAPUT II.

^B VERS. 1. *Therefore we ought to give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard.* For, he says, so great is the excellence of the Son who has spoken to us, above the prophets and the angels, the ministers of the Old Testament, that we must observe with greater care what He says than what the law speaks. Yet he does not say this openly, lest he strike them at the very outset; rather, he intended for this to be inferred as a consequence. Nor indeed does he say these things by comparing the New Testament with the Old—far from it—but he speaks against the opinion of those who boasted greatly of the Old, while despising the New.

*Lest at any time we should let them slip.* That is, lest we fall away, ^C lest we perish. And he has taken this word from the Proverbs: *For, my son,* he says, *let them not slip away:* that he might show both the ease of slipping and the gravity of the ruin. For that which has flowed past is not easily recovered.

VERS. 2. *For if the word spoken by angels was stedfast.* Behold, he reveals here his own meaning. By "the word spoken by angels," either the decalogue is to be understood—for it is likely that the angels were present at that time, to whom the nation of the Hebrews had been entrusted, and they themselves sounded the trumpets, and [produced] other such things, the fire, the darkness, just as in the Epistle to the Galatians: *Ordained by angels;* and again, *You have received the law by the disposition of angels*—or by "the word" is to be understood all the commands dispensed ^D through angels in the Old Testament, such as in the [time of] the weeping, in the judges, and in Samson. For this reason, he did not say "law," but "word," that he might signify these things. All these things, therefore, were firm—that is, they became true—and the threats were carried through to their effect, and none of them fell away.

*And every transgression and disobedience received a just recompence of reward.* Not this one, indeed, while that one not; but every one, and nothing remained unavenged. Moreover, he calls the punishment a reward, although it is [a term] applied to favorable things…

but the Apostle does not concern himself with mere words.

^A Ver. 3. *How shall we escape, if we neglect so great a salvation?* There, the [law] was a word; here, it is salvation. But if there was salvation there, it was not great; for they were rescued from enemies and received the goods of the earth. Here, however, it is exceedingly great; for this reason he said, "so great." For the destruction of death, and the ruin of demons, and the kingdom of the heavens—all these things come to pass for us through the things spoken by the Son. *Which having received a beginning to be spoken by the Lord, was confirmed unto us by them that heard Him.* ^B Making his discourse credible, he says that this salvation was not proclaimed through prophets or angels, but by the Lord of all himself, and from that very fountain it took its beginning; then it was firmly and faithfully transmitted to us through those who were eye-witnesses and ministers of the Word. This is what Luke also says: "For they certainly informed us." How then, in another place, does he say that he did not hear [this] from men? Because there, the urgency that compelled him to establish [the fact] that he was not a disciple of men was great and necessary. For he was being slandered as one who had not heard the Lord; and for this reason, there was a danger that his preaching would not be believed by his own disciples. Now, however, there is no such great need for this. For he was not preaching to the Hebrews, nor was he being slandered among them as being a disciple of men and not of Christ. Or [it is because] he adds here, *God also bearing witness with signs and wonders*, indicating that he received these things not from men, but from God.

^C Ver. 4. *God also bearing witness with signs and wonders.* Having said "was confirmed," he shows how. For so that no one might say, "Those who heard it invented it," he says, "God bears witness with them." He would not have borne witness if they had been inventions. *They testify,* he says, "but God also bears witness together with them," not by emitting a voice, but by confirming what they say through signs and wonders. We believe God, therefore, and not men. *And with various powers.* Wishing to signify the abundance of the gifts, he said "various." For never were there so many and so different signs performed. Since, however, pretenders and sorcerers also perform many things, he added *powers*. For those are not powers, but weakness, and imagination, and empty things. *And with distributions of the Holy Spirit, according to his own will.* ^D And he added this for the same reason. For the works of sorcerers are not of the Holy Spirit, but are deceptions of unclean demons. But he also hints at something else: For it is likely that there were not many among them who possessed gifts, and that these had ceased because of their sluggishness. So that he might comfort them in this regard as well, he says that the distributions…

^A of the Spirit occur according to His own will. He himself knows what is profitable for each, and thus he distributes grace. Often, because of an impure life, someone does not receive a gift; and often one who has a pure life still does not receive it, so that he might not be lifted up with pride. Hence, it was given rather to the humble and the simple-minded.

Vers. 5. *For He has not put the world to come in subjection to angels.* Still demonstrating the excellence of the Son, by which He exceeds the angels, he says: He did not subject the world ^B of the earth, or this world, to these, but to the Son. And he calls it "to come," because the Son of God always existed, whereas this world was about to be created, not having existed before, clearly. Therefore, with respect to the eternal existence of the Son, the world was "to come."

*Of which we speak.* That is, of which we said above, "When He brings the first-born into the world." Let not your mind, therefore, being led astray, search for another world. Some, however, have understood "the world to come" as the future world; about which he says we are speaking at all. For then the ^C angels will stand by as servants, but the Son will sit as judge.

Vers. 6, 7. *But one has testified in a certain place, saying, "What is man, that Thou art mindful of him? Or the son of man, that Thou visitest him? Thou didst make him a little lower than the angels; Thou didst crown him with glory and honor, and didst set him over the works of Thy hands; Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet."* He does not reveal the name of the author, because he is speaking with those who are learned in the Scriptures. All these things have been said generally concerning the whole of human nature, ^D yet specifically they apply to Christ according to His humanity. For the Son of God visited human nature, which was nothing, and having assumed it and united it to Himself, He was shown to be superior to all.

Vers. 8. *For in that He put all in subjection to Him, He left nothing that is not put under Him; but now we do not yet see all things put under Him.* Since they were subject to persecutions and were suffering adversities, so that they might not object: "How do you say that He has subjected all things, whereas we are being persecuted and driven about wretchedly by His enemies? Therefore they are not yet subject to Him, and you are deceiving us,"—for this reason he says: Do not be disturbed, nor be faint-hearted; for it is to come that all things will be subjected to Him. For this reason the Scripture said that He has subjected, putting that which is absolutely about to happen as having already happened, even if it has not yet occurred. Do not, therefore, grieve as if you were suffering bitter things; the preaching has not yet overcome all things, the time is not yet come for them to be perfectly subjected, yet they will certainly be subjected.

Vers. 9. *But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, for the suffering of death...*

^A crowned with glory and honor. He endeavors to show that the things said are applicable to Christ, and says that even if it seems that the passage “You have subjected all things” does not yet apply to Him, we have nevertheless shown that this will fulfill itself entirely. But this which is said, “a little lower than the angels,” is more appropriate to Him than to us. For He, on the one hand, having remained three days in Hades as a man, was made a little lower than the angels, since they are not at all subject to death; but we, being subject to corruption for the most part, are not a little, but greatly inferior to them. And the being “crowned with glory and honor” for the sake of the passion is more appropriate to Him than to us. By saying the “suffering of death,” He manifested the true death. For it was not an illusory appearance of death, but an active passion. ^B He reminds them of the cross and death, so that He might persuade them to bear afflictions courageously, looking toward their Teacher. But, He says, the cross was even glory and honor for Him; therefore, so too are afflictions and sufferings for you. Why then do you shrink back from the things that crown you? He suffered for you, the slave; will you, the slave, not endure to be afflicted for your Master?

*That by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone.* For God was not prompted by any debt, but by grace gave His Son unto death, and not for the faithful alone, but for the whole world. For even if all are not saved, He nevertheless fulfilled what was His duty. And well did he say, “taste.” For just as one having truly tasted, so, having made a small interval in death, He immediately rose. Hence, in this regard also, He is superior to the angels, because He was shown to be above death. For just as a physician, seeing a sick man afraid to taste the foods prepared for him, tastes them first himself so that he may persuade the sick man to be bold in taking them, so also the Lord, seeing us fearing death, tasted it, although He was under no necessity. For He was not subject to it, but ^C the whole was a matter of grace, so that by showing it to be nothing, He might persuade us also to be confident against it. But the Nestorians, perverting the Scripture, say: “That apart from God He might taste death for everyone,” in order to establish that the Divinity was not with the crucified Christ, as not having been united to Him according to hypostasis, but according to relation. Toward whom some orthodox man, mocking their foolishness, said: “Let the Scripture be as you say; even so, what is said is still for our sake. For even if we take ‘apart from God,’ the Lord died for every other thing, and for the angels themselves, so that He might dissolve their enmity toward us and procure joy for them.”

*For it was fitting for Him, for whom are all things.* That is, for the Father; “and by whom are all things,” that is, He Himself is the cause of all things. *And by whom are all things.* Observe that “by whom” is applied to the Father. For if it were a matter of diminishment, and only to the

Son, it would be attributed to the Father. But learn what “by whom” signifies. Since he had said, “for whom are all things,” lest anyone should think anything absurd—as if He Himself were in need of all things, for the preposition “for” (propter) signifies something of this kind, just as when we say, “For the sake of man the creation was produced”—he added, “by whom,” interpreting that “for whom” is to be understood in this way: that all things were made by Him. Thus, also when “by whom” is said of the Son, accept it as meaning “by whom” in the sense of “from whom.” B] *Who brought many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.* He adheres still to [the words], “You have crowned Him with glory and honor.” What he says is of this kind: The Father has done what was worthy of His own philanthropy, in that He demonstrated the first-born of all the sons who were to enjoy His glory to be more radiant than all others by means of sufferings, in order to show also to the others how they must struggle. He calls him the “captain” of salvation, that is, the author. Observe, however, how great the difference is: he is the Son, and we are sons; but He indeed saves, while we are saved; we are conjoined to Him, and yet we are separated. In the phrase, “Who brought many sons unto glory,” we share with Him; in the phrase, “the captain of their salvation,” we are separated from Him. And note that sufferings are a consummation and a cause of salvation, and that he who suffers for someone not only helps that person, but he himself also becomes more radiant and perfect. By “consummation” here, understand the glory with which He was glorified; and interpret this according to His humanity—or [understand] that He possessed the glory naturally, but was inglorious in relation to us, inasmuch as He was not recognized. But when after the cross He was known and glorified, He is said to have received glory which, although He had it by nature, He did not possess as offered by us. The divine Cyril says that the perfection is immortality, which was indeed lacking to Christ insofar as He was man; but the Father fulfilled this in Him through His resurrection. For after He rose, death no longer has dominion over Him. And He deemed the entire nature worthy of this perfection in Him. C] *For both He who sanctifies and they who are sanctified are all of one.* Behold, again, he shows that we are brothers of Christ, and in this we have been honored. “For He who sanctifies,” he says—that is, Christ—and “they who are sanctified”—that is, we—“are all of one,” that is, of the Father. But He is so as the genuine Son, and of the very substance of the Father; we, however, are creatures. Observe, however, the excellence [of Christ] even in the very words. He sanctifies, but we are sanctified; thus there is both identity and excellence. *For which cause He is not ashamed to call them brethren.* Observe here, too, the excellence. Through

that which he says, "He is not ashamed," he indicates that this does not arise from the nature of the thing, but from the affection of the Father who is not ashamed. For even if we are from one, there is still a great gap, namely as much as there is between the Creator and the creatures.

^B

Vers. 12. *Dicens: I will declare thy name unto my brethren; in the midst of the Church will I sing praise unto thee.* For having put on flesh, he also put on brotherhood, and at the same time brotherhood came into existence. But again, there is excellence here. For I will declare, he says, to those who are in darkness, to those who are ignorant; similar to this is: "I have manifested thy name to men."

Vers. 13. *And again: I will put my trust in him.* By this also he indicates that he has become man and our brother. For just as each of mankind does, so he too puts his trust in him, that is, in the Father, at the same time showing us that we ought to put our trust in God alone, since even He, being Son and needing nothing, nevertheless says that he puts his trust in the Father.

But some have understood it thus: Because, they say, he spoke above of Christ as brother, but below as father, in the midst he declares that those were names of the dispensation revealed in the last times; but his eternal name, which preceded all ages, is God. For who is it that one truly trusts in, if not in God? As if he were saying: Lest, when you hear him called brother and father, you think him to be one of the many; it is God, he says, in whom Scripture testifies that one must place confidence; so that the passage is not from the person of Christ, but of the prophet saying: I, the prophet, will be trusting in him—in Christ—as in God. But this interpretation does not fit.

And again: *Behold I and the children which God hath given me.* Here he makes Christ our Father. But as for "hath given," it is on account of the good pleasure of the Father which He showed in the incarnation of the Son. For if it had not pleased Him that the Son should be incarnate, there would not have been children for Him.

Vers. 14. *Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same.* Let those be ashamed here who say that he came by imagination and appearance. For he did not merely say that he partook of flesh and blood, as the children—that is, the rest of mankind—(although if he had even said this, it would have been enough to demonstrate that he was truly incarnate), but he even added "likewise," so that he might show us a true incarnation that is in no way different from our own.

*That through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil.* He gives the reason for the economy. In order, he says, that through his own death, which he undertook—as having become a partaker of, clearly, flesh and blood—he might destroy the devil, who held the power of death. How? Through sin. For since through

^A that first disobedience he caused men to sin, he was the one who created death, using it as a kind of soldier and a powerful weapon against human nature. Therefore, Christ Himself used this very same weapon against him. And this was, in truth, a demonstration of great power and wisdom: to slay the enemy with the very weapon by which he himself slew many. Some, however, have understood it thus: "Him who has sin," they say, "that is, the devil," which is the power and strength of death.

VERS. 15. *And might deliver them, who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.* That is, that He might deliver men, who were slaves of death and feared it, and were subject to it—that is, held fast in the slavery that was under it, inasmuch as it had not yet been destroyed; or because the men of old lived in constant fear, always expecting to die soon, and because of this fear they were unable to perceive any sense of pleasure. For he hinted at this by saying, "all their lifetime." They were therefore subject to bondage, that is, they were always trembling before death as slaves tremble before a harsh master, enjoying nothing pleasant. From this, infer that he who fears death is destitute of liberty and the slave of all. Moreover, this is a consolation to the afflicted faithful: ^B if those who are now hounded and imprisoned live more freely and pleasantly than those who of old seemed to live in the highest luxury, when death was strong and held its power. For those ancient ones, shaken by the fear of death, were slaves; but you have been delivered from that fear.

VERS. 16. *For verily he took not on him the nature of angels.* That is, He did not take hold of the nature of angels, nor did He bear it. This shows the great love of God toward the human race. For what He did not grant to angels, He gave to men: that He should assume flesh from their nature.

*But he took on him the seed of Abraham.* He did not say, "He took up," but "He took hold of," ^C to show that He pursued our nature, which was fleeing and had wandered far away; and, arriving, He took hold of it, and embraced it, uniting it to Himself, and arresting it from the flight by which it was fleeing from Him. He did not say, however, "the nature of men," but "the seed of Abraham," partly wishing to lift them up and demonstrate the splendor of their race, and that they have something more than the Gentiles in this, insofar as the Lord is from them—for He always grants them favor where it is allowed without offense—and partly to recall to their memory the promise: *Unto thee and to thy seed will I give this land.*

VERS. 17. *Wherefore it behoved him in all things to be made like unto his brethren.* Because, he says, He once deigned to take hold of our

nature, it was altogether consequent that He should be made like unto us in all things, that is, to be born, to be nourished, to grow, to suffer all things which it behoved Him to suffer, and finally to die; for this is what it means to be made like in all things.

*That he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God.* He took our flesh, he says, for no other reason than that through it He might have mercy on us and raise up those who were lying low. By what reasoning? By becoming our High Priest, and offering this flesh, which He had taken from us, instead of some other sacrifice, so that He might cleanse us from sins, and mediate between us and God; for we were in a state of hostility toward Him. And "faithful," meant for "true," and capable of fulfilling the work of a high priest; for this is the duty of a true high priest: to free from sins those for whom he is high priest; or it means one who is acceptable to God in his intercessions made to Him. ^B

*To make reconciliation for the sins of the people.* He has shown what it is to be "faithful in things pertaining to God"; that is, so as to appease and expiate the sins of the people. For this is the great proof of His love, that He did everything to take away sins. But why did He not say, "the sins of the world," but, "of the people"? Because the Lord’s discourse was for the time being about the Jews, who were His people, for whose sake He had come primarily, so that when they were saved, others also might be saved through them, even if the opposite turned out to be the case. Whence also the angel said to Joseph, *He shall save his people from their sins.* He indicates here, therefore, the nobility of the Jews, and in how much esteem they were held by the Lord. ^C

*For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.* This seems humble and vile, and unworthy of God. For when Paul discourses regarding the flesh, he speaks of all things as humble, yet it is not unworthy of the flesh. Nor should this seem marvelous to anyone, since the Scripture speaks many things pertaining to man and humble even regarding the Father, who was not incarnate, such as: *The Lord looked down from heaven, and saw the children of men;* and, *I will go down and see;* and numberless other things of this kind. Much more, therefore, is it said concerning Christ, who was incarnate and suffered in the flesh, especially for the assurance of his hearers and because of their infirmity; for men deem experience more certain than all other things. ^D What he says is of this sort: Not only as God does He know, but also as man He knows through experience. For the very flesh of Christ suffered much; it knows what affliction is, it knows what temptation is; so He is able to succour, that is, He is ready to extend the hand of compassion.

CAPUT III

VERS. 1. *Unde, fratres sancti, vocationis cælestis participes.* "Unde," that is, since I have said that He is such a High Priest—namely, faithful, and one who makes propitiation for our sins, and is able to aid us—consider this, and you will find that it is ^A entirely so. "Participants of the heavenly calling," he says; that is, we have been called thither, so let us seek nothing here; there is the reward, there is the retribution.

*Consider the apostle and high priest of our confession, Jesus Christ.* Because of the flesh, all things are humble, as has often been said. Therefore, he is called "Apostle" because He was sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And he is "High Priest of our confession," that is, of our faith; for He is not a high priest of the legal cult, but of our faith.

VERS. 2. *Who is faithful to Him who appointed Him, as also was Moses in all His house.* Being about to prefer Christ to Moses, he brings forth the high priesthood into the midst, and says that a people was entrusted to both this one and that one, but that greater things were entrusted to Christ than to Moses. Yet at the beginning he does not immediately indicate that excellence, lest they recoil; for even if they were believers, they still clung very much to Moses. Therefore, for the time being, he equals the Lord to him and says that He is faithful to the Father who ^B made Him high priest and apostle. For the discourse here is not about the manner of His essence, but about His commission. He is "faithful," therefore, that is, benevolent, caring for the things that are the Father’s, and not allowing them to perish, but rather seeking their salvation. "As also was Moses in all His house," that is, in the people. For he calls the people a "house," just as we are accustomed to say, "So-and-so is of this house." And "His," that is, either God’s or Moses’. For the people were also called Moses’, as in: "Your people have sinned." As a steward, he says, and an administrator of a house, so was Moses to the people.

VERS. 3, 4. *For he has been counted worthy of more glory than Moses, by as much as the one who built the house has more honor than the house. For every house is built by someone; but He who built all things is God.* Behold, here is the excellence by which the Lord surpasses Moses. ^C He was faithful, he says, and he also was in all the house, that is, in the people, but he himself was one from the house. For he was also a man, just like the others; even if he was holy, he was a fellow-servant to them, just as stewards in houses, even if they excel the others, are still fellow-servants to the rest. Since, therefore, he himself was also part of the house, he too was created by someone, and whoever created him surely surpasses him. But the Son of God created him—He who took on flesh and became High Priest because of him—and He therefore surpasses him. Observe, therefore, how ^D before this through the comparison He started from the flesh, but rose to the divinity, and the uncompounded...

^A superiority of the Creator over the created He demonstrated.

Verse 5. *And Moses indeed was faithful in all His house, as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken; but Christ as a Son.* Behold, here He brings forward another excellence: Moses, He says, was faithful as a servant, having been appointed for this purpose, that he might explain the affairs of the Master to the other fellow-servants, and might be a witness to God in the judgment of those things that were spoken. For if He calls heaven and earth as witnesses, as in that writing: *Hear, O heaven, and give ear, O earth*, and the valleys, as in that passage: *Hear, O valleys, the foundations of the earth*; much more so a man. But Christ is faithful, as a genuine Son and heir, managing the Father’s affairs according to the will of the Father. And the difference between such a Master and a servant is immense and altogether incomparable. ^B

Verse 6. *In His house, whose house we are, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end.* The house of Moses was the people, of which he himself was also a part. Christ also has a house, namely us; but this is if we stand fast unto the end, and do not fall away. For here He exhorted them to endure in afflictions, and not to be faint-hearted; for in this way we shall be the house of God, just as Moses was. He praises them, showing that although they had made a beginning, it is necessary to add an end as well. And he said well, *the confidence and rejoicing of the hope*. For one who hopes firmly that there will be a reward already rejoices from that time forward, as though the things hoped for were already present, and he is not cast down, but rather has confidence when he is afflicted for the sake of the Christ who is beloved to him. ^C

Verses 7-11. *Wherefore, as the Holy Spirit says: Today if you will hear His voice, harden not your hearts, as in the provocation, in the day of temptation in the wilderness, where your fathers tempted me, proved me, and saw my works forty years. Wherefore I was grieved with that generation, and said: They always err in their heart; and they have not known my ways. As I swore in my wrath, If they shall enter into my rest.* He has discoursed concerning hope, and that it is necessary to expect confidently a certain reward there, and rest in exchange for the labors here; and he demonstrates this from the prophet, who says that those who believe shall enter into rest, just as those who do not believe shall not enter, just as those of old did not. For after the Hebrews had crossed the Red Sea, and had received in the wilderness countless ^D proofs of God’s care and power for them, they decided to send scouts to explore the nature of the land into which they were about to enter. But those who had gone forth returned, the nature indeed

^A of the land admiring, but saying that men invincible dwelt in it. The people, therefore, who ought to have weighed the invincible power of God, being terrified by these words, murmured [60-61] and thought they ought to return to Egypt. God, therefore, being indignant that so quickly they had cast away the memory of so many wonderful works, swore that that generation which murmured should not enter into the land of promise; and indeed they all perished in the desert, except Caleb and Joshua. Since, therefore, David, speaking after that generation, said, "Today if you will hear his voice, do not harden your hearts," so that you may not suffer the same things which your ancestors suffered, and be deprived of the rest; it is manifest that he says these things as if there were another rest which we ought to obtain. For if they had truly received the rest, for what reason would he say, "Today do not harden your hearts, like your fathers, so that you do not enter into the rest"? What other rest, therefore, is there than the kingdom of heaven, of which the Sabbath was an image, as was the entry of the children of the unbelieving 62 generation that took place typically into Palestine? For there are three rests: the first is that of the Sabbath, in which God rested from His works, concerning which it is not credible that David is now speaking, as it was something that happened long ago; and the second is the entry into the land of promise, into which the Jews were to enter, and were to have rest from wars and from error. Nor does he speak of this now, for Palestine was already fully occupied by the Hebrews in the times of David. How then ^B did he speak concerning this, as if it still remained? It seems, therefore, that there is another rest, into which Joshua the son of Nun could not lead the people. And what could this be, if not that which is in the heavens? Give diligence, therefore, that you do not fall away from this through unbelief, just as your ancestors did. This, then, is the meaning of the whole passage, which extends far; but the individual parts must also be treated separately. Consider, however, that one must not demand an accounting from God, but whether He protects or does not protect, one must believe Him. For he accuses them for this very reason, that they tempted Him, that is, they did not hope in Him without hesitation, as in one who could do all things.

^C

VERSE 12. "See, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief."

"In departing from the living God." For unbelief finds no access in any other way, unless someone departs from God. For as long as one is attached to God, and has placed his hope in Him, as in One who is able to do all things, he deems nothing impossible. ^A Verse 13. "But exhort one another every day, as long as it is called today." That is, edify one another, and support and sustain, so that you may not fall. But if someone should fall, correct him as long as he lives; for this is what is meant by "as long as it is called today"—for there is hope. Indeed, let there not be a wicked heart in anyone; but if it should happen, let him not fall into despair, but exhort him and lift him up. "Lest any of you be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin." That is, so that one may not, out of ^B despair, come into a state of callousness and remain incurable. For just as bodies that have become calloused and hard do not yield to the hands of physicians, in the same way, hardened souls do not yield to the word of God. And he calls it the "deceitfulness of sin," either the deception of the devil—namely, not to hope for a future retribution—or else apathy. For to say, "Having once fallen into sin, I have no hope of pardon," is truly an imposture of sin. For sin, while it deceives and draws one to itself, makes one think such things, according to that which is said: "A wicked man, having fallen into the depth of evils, despises"*. And he who is contemptuous does not even endure to believe. From sin, therefore, comes unbelief. For they said, it says, "The Lord will not see, nor will the God of Jacob understand" [Ps. XCIII, 7]. And again: "For he said in his heart, He will not seek," and, "God has forgotten," and all things of this sort. ^C Verse 14. "For we have become partakers of Christ." That is, we and He have become one; and in this way we partake of Him, as the body partakes of the head. Here he inspires hope in them, as if saying: He who has so loved us, as to make us even His own body, will not permit us to be torn away from Him, if only we ourselves are willing. At the same time, he also tacitly indicates that which is said in another place: "If we endure, we shall also reign with Him." Since therefore we are even now partakers of those things of which Christ is—the sufferings, to wit—let us be ^D eager to be partakers also then of the glory. "If we hold the beginning of our substance steadfast to the end." That is, our faith. For through it we have subsisted and have been brought into being by a divine and spiritual essence, and regeneration. And here too he demands of us that we stand firmly in the faith to the very end. Verse 15. "While it is said, Today if you will hear His voice, harden not your hearts, as in the provocation."

in exacerbatione. Confirmat quomodo dixerit, ad ^A finem usque, et hoc significatur, inquit, per, Hodie. Nam hodie, semper est; sicut supra dixit: Adhortamini vos mutuo, donec hodie vocatur. Vel quod magis probandum est, utpote a divo Chrysostomo dictum, hyperbaton est: Dum dicitur, Hodie si vocem ejus audieritis, etc. timeamus ne quando relicta promissione, et quæ deinceps sequuntur.

VERS. 16. Quidam enim audientes exacerbaverunt. Audita, inquit, promissione Dei, nimirum, Dabo vobis terram Chananæorum, non adhibuerunt ei fidem, cæterum exasperarunt Deum per incredulitatem. Videte igitur ne et vos promissis non credatis. Non enim proderit vobis audire solum, nisi et credideritis: perinde ac neque illis profuit auditus: quin potius ob id justius interierunt, quoniam Dei sermonibus non crediderunt. ^B Sed non universi qui profecti sunt ab Ægypto per Moysen. Caleb enim et Jesus non fuerunt increduli: eam ob causam assecuti sunt promissionem, ingressique sunt in Palæstinam.

VERS. 17. Quibus autem infensus est quadraginta annis? nonne iis qui peccaverant, quorum cadavera prostrata sunt in deserto? Per interrogationem sermonem texit, quo clarior sit, minusque contradictionis habeat. Interrogationes namque in confessis atque certis ponuntur. Proponit autem et pœnam. Prostrata sunt enim, inquit, in deserto ipsorum κῶλα, hoc est, magna femoris ossa. A parte autem tota corpora significavit. ^C

VERS. 18, 19. Quibus autem juravit non intraturos in requiem suam, nisi illis qui increduli fuerunt? Et videmus quod non potuerunt introire propter incredulitatem. Paulo ante dixit, iis qui peccaverant: nunc autem, iis qui non crediderunt. Videtur igitur indicare fidelibus istis Hebræis, quod in alia etiam peccata non pauci eorum sint lapsi, præter pusillanimitatem et futurorum incredulitatem. Videmus igitur, quod infideles non sint ingressi in requiem, hoc est, ob oculos nobis posita est et in confesso peccati pœna. ^D

CAPUT IV

VERS. 1. Timeamus ergo nequando relicta pollicitatione introeundi in requiem ejus. Hic est redditio illius, Dum dicitur, Hodie si vocem ejus audieritis, et quæ sequuntur: metuamus ne et nobis eadem contingant. Cæterum, Ergo, ideo positum est, quod longius sit dilata oratio, priusquam redditio sequeretur. Videatur aliquis deesse. Hoc est, ne quo modo deficiat, ac frustretur ingressu in requiem hanc promissam. Hilariorem autem et minus molestam ora-

^A orationem faciens, non dixit, Ne deficiat; sed: Ne videatur deficere.

VERS. 2. Etenim et nobis nuntiatum est, quemadmodum et illi, sed non profuit eis sermo auditus. Annuntiatum est, inquit, perinde nobis de futuris bonis, atque illis typice de terra: verum id simpliciter nobis non proderit, nisi etiam credamus, omnemque pusillanimitatem deponamus, ut neque illis profuit audiisse. Animadverte autem quomodo de nobis loquens, rem ipsam ^B evangelium appellavit, tanquam verorum bonorum promissionem, ac quae veluti post trophæa et victoriam dantur: cum de illis autem loquitur, sermonem auditus dixit.

Non admixtis fide iis qui audierant. Hoc est, non unitis neque consentientibus per fidem cum iis qui audiverant, sed ab ipsis avulsis. Mire autem non dixit, consentientibus; sed, non admixtis, ut summam unionem significet. Qui audierant autem, eos hic dicit, qui crediderant: isti enim revera audisse dici queant. Divus autem Joannes Chrysostomus non admistos intellexit Caleb et Jesum. Illi enim extra seditionem permanserunt, neque cæteris commisti sunt, neque simul insurrexerunt et consumpti sunt cum aliis seditiosis, omnibus unam sententiam habentibus. Quibus autem his? nimirum his qui audierunt, nullamque utilitatem receperunt. Hoc vero juxta magnam et profundam suam sapientiam sanctus iste dixit; mihi autem indigno non dedit intellectum ^C quomodo illud dixerit.

VERS. 3. Ingrediemur enim in requiem qui credimus, quemadmodum dixit: Sicut juravi in ira mea, si introibunt in requiem meam. Unde perspicuum est quod ingrediemur in requiem nos qui credidimus? ex eo quia dicit Deus, non ingressuros eos qui non crediderunt. E contrario enim hoc intelligitur, et quemadmodum iis qui non crediderunt merces incredulitatis erat, quod requiem non ingrederentur; ita e contra nos qui credidimus, ceu fidei mercedem introitum accipiemus.

VERS. 3-5. Et quidem operibus ab institutione mundi perfectis. Dixit enim in quodam loco de die septima sic: Et requievit Deus die septima ab omnibus operibus suis. Et in isto rursus: Si introibunt ^D in requiem meam. Videtur oratio hæc esse non admodum consequens, sed secus est: sed hoc dicit, quod non possit aliquis affirmare Davidem de Sabbati requie loqui. Qui enim de hac loqueretur, cum ea jam olim fuerit, nimirum cum mundus primo conderetur? Sed manifestum est quod de alia quapiam quiete David verba faciat, nempe ingressu in regnum cælorum; quod ingrediendi vocabulum in futuro declinatur, tanquam deberent nonnulli post hæc ingredi. Ac quemadmodum Sabbatum requies dicitur in Scriptura, et nihil impedie

^A bat quo minus posthac introitus in terram promissionis etiam diceretur requies: sic jam nihil prohibet post hanc rursus requiem vocari futuram, regnum videlicet cœlorum, in quod ii qui non crediderunt, non ingredientur.

VERS. 6. 8. Quoniam ergo superest introire quosdam in illam, et ii, quibus prioribus annuntiatum est, non introierunt, propter incredulitatem, iterum terminal diem quemdam: Hodie, in David dicendo, post tantum temporis, quemadmodum dictum est: Hodie si vocem ejus audieritis, nolite obdurare corda vestra. Nam si eis Jesus requiem præstitisset, nunquam de alia loqueretur posthac die. Universum hoc conatur ostendere, quod Jesus Filius Nave non potuerit introducere in hanc requiem, de qua David locutus est, atque nos etiamnum loquimur. Quoniam vero ille non introduxit, David autem rursus post tot annos dicit: Ne induretis corda vestra, ^B quemadmodum patres qui propter incredulitatem non sunt ingressi, datque nobis e contrario intelligere, quod si crediderimus, ingrediemur; perspicuum est quod ista requies futura est, atque nos exspectat. De Palaestina enim utique non promittebat David: eam enim tunc temporis occupabant. Sed neque de septimo die locutus est: nam ea a constitutione mundi fuerat. Tertia igitur quies est, nempe regnum cœlorum, in quod verus Jesus nos introducit, adeoque fides in ipsum.

VERS. 9. Itaque relinquitur Sabbatismus populo Dei. Non dixit, requies; sed, Sabbatismus, proprium nomen ponens, et in quo gaudebant, et ad quod accurrebant. Sic autem appellat regnum cœlorum. Quemadmodum enim in Sabbato ab omnibus operibus carnalibus crassis abstinere lex jubebat, ac sacerdotes ^C ea sola perficere mandabat quæ ad cultum Dei pertinebant, et quæcumque animæ commodabant: ita tum omnia spiritualia erunt ac divina, nihil carnale, nihil laboriosum, ubi aufugit dolor, mœror, atque gemitus. Audi jam quid ipse dicat.

VERS. 10. Qui enim ingressus est in requiem ejus, etiam ipse requievit ab operibus suis, sicut et a suis Deus. Interpretatur quomodo talem requiem Sabbatismum appellavit: Propterea quod, inquit, cessamus et nos ab operibus nostris, quemadmodum et Deus, postquam quievisset ab operibus suis in condenda mundi machina, Sabbatum diem illam appellavit. Nam hic etiam justis multum laboris et certaminis imminet, tum propter alia cum propter virtutis sudores: illic vero, ne virtutis quidem moralis operatio est, sed Dei ^D inexplebilis fruitio. Quod igitur audire expetebant, videlicet quod ab hujus mundi laboribus liberandi essent, idipsum dixit, ut refocillet eos.

VERS. 11. Festinemus ergo ingredi in illam requiem. Postquam ostenderit tertiam quamdam esse

rest, he hereafter exhorts them to enter into it. And he well said, "Let us hasten." For faith itself alone does not suffice to bring one into that [rest], unless a good way of life be present with it. "Lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief." That is, the same as the Israelites. For just as those, having traveled the greater part of the journey and having suffered many hardships, nevertheless fell away on account of their unbelief, so also do you take heed, lest after so many struggles which you have endured, you fall, should you not behave as brave men unto the end; for this is what it truly means to fall.

VERS. 12. "For the word of God is living and effectual, and sharper than any two-edged sword." Even as then, he says, it was not war, nor sword, that destroyed them, but the word of God—for they fell of their own accord—so also will it be with us. For the same Word which punished them will also punish us; for He lives always, and is never extinguished. And he said "living" for another reason, that you might not, upon hearing "word," think it a word lacking in subsistence. It is "living," he says, that is, it subsists and is active, and into whatever soul it falls, it inflicts grievous wounds. Observe also the condescension: how he made mention of a sword and of cutting, things familiar and known to us, that he might show from these the excellence of His power.

"And reaching even unto the division of soul and spirit." He says something fearful: that it either divides the spirit from the soul, and leaves it destitute of the holiness derived from the latter—which the Lord in the Gospel called "the cutting in pieces"—just as a king, when a ruler has sinned, takes away his girdle and his dignity, and then punishes him, so in this case also is man deprived of his spiritual dignity, and then punished; or, [it means] that it reaches even to the incorporeal [faculties] themselves. Some, however, have interpreted this word in this way—a view, in my judgment, not inconsistent with the apostolic purpose—that the word of God, having entered into the soul, divides and partitions its parts, making it receptive and capable of the mystery. For just as an arrow, dividing the flesh, thus enters into it, so also the Word: unless it severs the obstructed parts of the soul, It would not enter into it.

"Of joints and marrow." That they might not become slothful upon hearing of the soul, thinking the punishment to be uncertain, he proposes also those things of the body. For things more manifest strike more deeply.

"And is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart." Herein he signifies the divinity of the Word. For it is God’s [prerogative] to judge, that is, to scrutinize and to know the thoughts. For "God," he says, "scrutinizes the hearts and reins."

^A *Verse 13. And there is no creature invisible in his sight.* Not only, he says, does he examine and search the hearts of men, but even if you speak of angels, or archangels, or Cherubim and Seraphim, all things are manifest to him. There is nothing that can escape his eye.

*But all things are naked and opened to his eyes.* In order to show more clearly how all things are naked and manifest before God the Word, he uses an expression taken from the metaphor of sheep whose skin has been flayed. For just as with them, once they are bent back by the neck, or receive the knife through the throat, and are slaughtered, and the skin is pulled down, all their inward parts are revealed; so too are all things manifest to God. Some, however, understood "opened" [τετραχηλισμένα] as the ornaments on the neck, or rather [those] hanging from the neck. Others have taken it to mean those bowing down to the ground, and having bent the neck, for the reason that they cannot fix their eyes upon the glory of the Judge and of our God, Jesus Christ. But you should accept the first [interpretation].

*To whom is our account.* To him, he says, we are about to give an account and the reckoning of what we have done. Do you see how he has exaggerated the matter? For lest, when you hear "in the same example of unbelief," you think that the punishment is the same both for us and for the Israelites, he shows through these things that ours are far more terrible. ^B

*Verse 14. Having therefore a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God.* As if someone were asking, "Give us counsel, then, so that we may not fall nor lose heart," he says that the things already spoken are indeed sufficient to instruct us in fear and to make us more secure; but furthermore, we have a High Priest who is able to help us, if only we hold fast to our confession. For he is not someone small and ordinary, but great and glorious; for he is the Son of God. And [he is] not such a one as Moses. For that man neither entered into the rest himself, nor brought the people in; but this one, having passed through the heavens, sits with the Father, and is able to give us entry into the heavens, and to make us heirs of the rest [promised] in his promises.

*Let us hold fast our confession.* He does not attribute the whole thing to the High Priest, but he also seeks what comes from us. For he is indeed able, but [this is so] if we also are worthy. But what confession does he speak of here? That there is a resurrection, that there is a recompense, that there are myriad good things there, that Christ is God. Let us hold fast to this confession; let us not allow it to slip away from us; but let us firmly hold fast those things which we confessed in the beginning of the faith, and all terrible things will pass away. ^D

*Verse 15. For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our infirmities.* Admonishing them to be confident, he makes his plea trustworthy, and says that the high priest is not one who is ignorant of our [infirmities], such as are many

of those many high priests who do not even know what affliction is; wherefore they are not ready to help those who are afflicted. But our High Priest has endured everything, and after having endured it, He ascended, so that He might be able to sympathize. ¶"Tested in all things according to the likeness, without sin." That is, He was persecuted, He was spat upon, He was falsely accused, He was driven away, and lastly, He was crucified. He underwent all these things for our sake according to our likeness—that is, in a manner similar to us—yet without sin. For He neither committed any sin at all, nor, when He was suffering these things, did He say or do anything sinful. Thus, you also can remain in your afflictions without sin. Why, therefore, are you listless and discouraged? Some, however, have understood "without sin" as meaning that He did not suffer these things as punishments for His own sins.

16 "Let us therefore come with boldness to the throne of grace." Because, he says, we have a High Priest who is without sin and who has overcome the world—for He says, "Have confidence, I have overcome the world"—we ought to approach with boldness, that is, not having a defiled conscience, nor hesitating, but relying upon the High Priest. For if we have sin, He is nevertheless without sin. Moreover, it is a throne of grace, not of judgment; therefore, one must approach with boldness, trusting that He will grant us what we desire. For there are two thrones: the present one, which is of grace, to which those who draw near receive through divine grace the remission of their sins; and the other, the throne of the Second Coming—not of grace, for no one receives remission then, but of judgment. He mentioned a "throne" so that, upon hearing "High Priest," you would not think that He is standing. For even if He is called High Priest as a man because of the grace and the humbling of Himself for us, He nonetheless sits upon the divine throne. "To receive mercy and find grace for timely help." For if we approach now, we shall find mercy and grace; for we are approaching at the right time. But if we approach then, we shall no longer do so, for it is not then a throne of grace. Now He sits as a King dispensing grace; then He shall arise for judgment. For it says: "Arise, O God, judge the earth."

CHAPTER V

1 "For every high priest, taken from among men, is established for men in things pertaining to God." He wishes hereafter to show that the New Testament is far better than the Old; and he begins first by comparing the priesthoods, both that of the ancient priests and that of Christ, and he shows the great superiority of Christ’s priesthood. In the meantime, however, because it was objected against Him that many of the qualities that ought to be present in priests were not present in Christ—for He was neither of a priestly tribe, nor was He a priest upon the earth, nor was He ordained by men—

^A but (to put it briefly) His priesthood did not have any bodily form, such as bells and plates, but all things were spiritual), he ^B first recounts what Christ has in common with the rest of the high priests, and then sets forth the things in which He excels. For then, indeed, is someone shown to be truly excellent by comparison, when he participates in some things, but in others is more excellent. Being taken from among men, therefore, is common to Christ and the rest; for He, too, being man, became a High Priest. And the being appointed on behalf of men in things pertaining to God, that is, to act as mediator, this also is common to Him and the others.

"To offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins." He interpreted what "being appointed on behalf of men toward God" is—that is, praying for our sins to appease God. And this too is common to Christ and the others, though not entirely; for He indeed offered Himself, whereas those others offered certain other things. But how a "gift" and a "sacrifice" differ in the strict sense, yet are used interchangeably in the Scriptures, you shall learn below.

"Who can have compassion on the ignorant and wayward." That is, who can be measured in his feelings, sympathize, condescend, and forgive those who sin out of ignorance. Observe that every sin is born of ignorance and error; for even if someone seems to know what evil is, yet at the time of the commission of the sin, surrounded by darkness, he suffers from ignorance and error, precipitated by the allurements of pleasure.

"Since he himself is also compassed with infirmity." I am of the opinion that this is a simpler and truer view, namely, that the High Priest ^C can have compassion on the ignorant because he himself is clothed with infirmity, and knowing the measure of human weakness from his own self, he also grants pardon. Some, however, understood it thus: that in this point alone does the high priest differ from the people—in his ability to forgive—since in other respects he is, like the rest, compassed with infirmity.

"And by reason hereof he ought, as for the people, so also for himself, to offer for sins." These things Christ no longer has in common with the rest, but ^D excels in them. For the Lord neither had the infirmity of sins, nor did He offer for Himself, but for the rest of mankind.

"And no man taketh this honor unto himself, but he that is called of God." He sets forth another mark of a high priest, which applies equally to Christ, namely, that one should not leap to the priesthood himself, but being called by God, should thus receive it. He here criticizes the high priests of the Jews of that time, who leaped to the honor themselves, obtaining it by purchase and corrupting the Law.

"As also Aaron." For indeed Aaron, being first called by God through Moses, thus exercised the priesthood,

^A et frangitur, et distribuitur. Quoties enim hæc fiunt, mors Domini annuntiatur.

VERS. 7. *Qui in diebus carnis suæ.* By "days of his flesh," he signifies the time during which He lived here, or the days He passed in this carnal life; not that He has now put off the flesh: by no means, for He retains it, but it is incorruptible and superior to carnal and blameless passions, namely, hunger, thirst, labor, and others of that kind. The Apostle took this text from David, who says in the hundred and fourteenth Psalm: "And in my days will I call." For the Apostle refers the entire psalm to Christ.

*Preces et supplicationes ad eum qui posset illum salvum facere a morte cum clamore valido et lacrymis offerens.* These things were spoken regarding the flesh; for He did not pray as God. Even if one were to suppose that He did pray, it surely would not be with "clamor and tears," for these are not of God, but must be attributed, irrefutably, to the human nature of the one Christ; partly so that the truth of the assumed nature might be demonstrated, and partly so that His care for us and the excellence of His love might be made manifest. For He prayed these things on our behalf, taking upon Himself what is ours, so that He might consume within Himself the fear of nature regarding death. For consider that nowhere in the Gospels is it written that He prayed for His own resurrection; rather, on the contrary, He speaks with authority, saying: "Destroy this temple, and I will raise it up," and, "I have power to take up my life." ^{B C}

VERS. 7, 8. *Et exauditus pro reverentia, tametsi Filius esset.* He said this also on account of the flesh and the weakness of the hearers; for they did not yet have a great opinion of Him. What he says, therefore, is of this kind: So great was His reverence, that His being heard was His own achievement rather than the grace of God; and because of this reverence, God reverenced Him, and as it were, moved by a sense of shame, heard Him, although He was the Son and had a natural boldness towards Him: so great and worthy of veneration was it. Do not despair, therefore, since you have a Master who is heard by the Father. If, then, you ask anything of Him, He will do it for you, which Christ Himself says to the disciples in the Gospel: "If you loved me, you would rejoice, because I go unto my Father; for my Father is greater than I"; and, "Whatever you ask in my name, He will give to you." ^D

*Didicit ex iis quæ passus est, obedientiam.* He learned, he says, to obey God the Father, having been instructed in this by the afflictions. But it seems entirely absurd what is said. For how did He learn obedience from the things which He suffered, seeing that even before He suffered, He was so obedient to the Father that He accepted even the passions themselves out of obedience? For the text says, He became obedient unto

^A death. Learn, therefore, that because these men seemed faint-hearted and prone to turn back, he speaks these humble things about the Son of God, so that he might abundantly persuade them to submit and obey the will of God, and not to be disheartened by tribulations, but to await aid from above. For, he says, even the Son, after enduring the passion, was heard for His obedience by the Father, and His soul was delivered from death. And from that time He learned continually to obey God, because obedience could achieve much. If, then, He gained from sufferings, you yourselves even more so. Do you see how, for the sake of the profit of the hearers, Paul condescended so far that he appeared to be saying even absurd things? But hear what follows.

And having been perfected. ^B Therefore, perfection comes through sufferings. How, then, are you distressed at the tribulations that perfect you?

He became to all who obey Him an author of eternal salvation. That is to say, not only was He Himself saved, but He also procured salvation for others; and not temporal salvation, as from wars, but eternal. To whom? To these: to those who obey. How then are you disobedient and in danger of falling from salvation? Do you see that the whole discourse has been shaped in this way because of the faint-heartedness of the hearers? Yet, behold here also the sublime. For He became the author of salvation, which is something belonging to the Godhead. For no one else, unless He be God, is the author of such salvation.

Called by God High Priest after the order of Melchisedec. Because, he says, He suffered, for this reason He was called High Priest, as having offered Himself. But even if He offered blood, yet He did not do so according to the order of the Jewish high priests, but according to that of Melchisedec. For just as that man was not anointed by man, so neither was Christ, but by God, through the Spirit ^C of the same essence with Himself. For just as that man did not offer legal sacrifices, so neither does this One; that man was a king, so also is this One; and countless other things.

About whom we have much to say, and hard to interpret, since you have become slothful in your hearing. Being about to launch the discourse into the distinction of the priesthood, he first rebukes them, showing that it was because of their infancy that he brought forward such humble things, and lingered in the discourse concerning the humanity of Christ. For if they had not been weak, he would have long since made mention of more sublime things. Because of your sloth, therefore, he says, is the discourse concerning how Christ is a High Priest after the order of Melchisedec difficult to interpret. And because you do not understand, for that reason I am not able to interpret it well. To the Corinthians, ^D indeed, he says that he cannot speak about spiritual things, inasmuch as they foster rivalries and contentions among themselves; and for that reason he calls them carnal. But these people, since the difficulty of learning had arisen from tribulations, he does not call carnal, but slothful. By saying "you have become," he shows that they were previously in good health, but later became such as they are.

^A VERSE 12. "For when for the time you ought to be teachers." He mixes accusation with praise, saying, "You ought to be teachers of others." For he shows that they had long since believed and had heard the mysteries; both of these are worthy of praise, if they had not become slothful. Time, he says, makes [men] stronger; but you have uselessly abused it by becoming weak. "You need to be taught again which be the first principles of the oracles of God." By principles, he refers to the things concerning the humanity of Christ. For just as with external letters one must first learn the elements, so here too it was necessary first to be taught about the humanity and to be accustomed to the humble matters, and then to approach those of the Divinity, which require a more perfect intellect. Behold now, you have clearly learned from Paul himself why he dwells upon humble words and only rarely speaks of something sublime, and that he does this on account of the infirmity of his hearers. ^B Behold, therefore, this Epistle also is full of humble things. And if it contains anything sublime, it does so only briefly. "And are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat." He did not say, "You have need," but "are become," meaning that you have brought this upon yourselves, having become such by your own choice. He calls humble discourse "milk" both here and in the Epistle to the Corinthians; and "solid food" he calls the more perfect and higher things. It was not necessary, therefore, he says, now to introduce legal matters, and from these to make a comparison of the incomparable Christ—that is, that He is a High Priest, and that He offered sacrifice, and that He prayed and made supplications with a loud cry—but because you are nourished by these things, I set them before you. Observe, however, that the things which are now present for us were what nourished them then, and that the oracles of God are true food. For "I will send a famine," he says, "upon them to hear the word of the Lord."

^C VERSE 13. "For everyone that partaketh of milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe." By righteousness here he refers either to the exact manner of living, as if saying this: "The imperfect man is unskilful in the higher philosophy and cannot receive a peak of perfect living"—which Christ also demanded, saying: "Except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees" (Matth. v, 20)—or he calls Christ Himself "righteousness," saying this: "He who is a partaker of the humble words concerning the incarnation does not admit the sublime words worthy of Christ, as one who is an infant and incapable of grasping them."

^D VERSE 14. "But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age." That is, the sublime doctrines concerning the Divinity of Christ. You see another kind of infancy, which is found even in the elderly—namely, that of the mind—and another perfection, which nothing hinders even the young from having. "Who by reason of use have their senses exercised..."

exercised for the discernment of good and evil. ^A He calls "habit" here the maturity and firmness of character. Whoever, therefore, is firm in character and life, he also has the sensory faculties of his soul exercised in the divine Scriptures, for the discernment of high and lowly dogmas, as well as sound and corrupt ones. For he does not speak here of life: everyone discerns this, and knows that malice is a base thing, and virtue a good thing. Observe, however, that there is a need for exercise, and practice, and experience of the Scriptures, if we are to discern which things are heretical and which are not, and not simply lend our ears to everyone. For the throat tastes food, but the soul tests words.

CAPUT VI

^B VERs. 1. *Therefore, leaving the word of the beginning of Christ, let us be borne unto perfection.* He had said above that you have become sluggish, and that you are infants, and that you have arrived at the need of being taught again the basic elements of the faith. And so now he says that you ought henceforth to think as perfect men, and to transcend the word of the beginning of Christ—that is, the first rudiments of the faith—and to be borne unto perfection, that is, to be capable of higher things. Or you may understand this passage in this way: because they seemed to limp in their conduct of life, he now speaks to them about a blameless life, as if saying this: It is not fitting for you always to be occupied about the beginning—that is, to be taught concerning the faith, as if you were mere novices—but also to be borne unto perfection, ^C that is, unto the best life. For that man is perfect who possesses a righteous life along with faith. For faith is the beginning and foundation, and without it nothing shall be established, just as no one can become learned in letters without the elements. Yet it is not fitting to be always occupied with the elements, nor always to be taught concerning the faith as if one were an infant and imperfect. But if anyone prefers to accept the former interpretation and rejects this one as being inconsistent with those things previously mentioned by Paul, let him know that it is his custom, while speaking of one topic, to leap to others: as in the Epistle to the Corinthians, while speaking of banquets and social meals, he launched into a discourse on the mysteries. Thus, therefore, even now, reproaching them at the beginning for their sluggishness and ^D weakness in receiving more perfect things, he proceeds into a discourse concerning conduct, calling them imperfect because they did not add a life to their faith.

*Not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God.* This is: let us not again from the beginning do those things which you were doing when you were about to be baptized—such as repentance from dead works, that is, the renunciation of the works of Satan. For he who approaches Christ, it is manifest that, repenting of his former dogma and manner of life, he thus

^A approaches; for unless he condemns the former, how shall he lay hold of the second? Hence he adds, "and of faith toward God." For after repentance from dead works, then comes faith. He says, therefore, that you do not need to be taught about faith as if you were beginners; for you have already believed. But he hints by these things that they were being shaken, and for this reason they were in need of a foundation.

"The doctrine of baptisms." Paul did not say this in the plural number as though there were many baptisms—for there is one baptism—but because this happens as a consequence. For if he were to instruct them again in the primary elements of religion, and baptize them again; and after they had lapsed, baptize them again; then there would necessarily be many baptisms; but this is absurd. It is not, therefore, necessary for you to be rebaptized, but to remain in the former baptism. Perhaps, moreover, these people, as those still attached to the Law, advocated many baptisms in the Jewish manner, even under grace. Observe, however, that baptism followed repentance. For since repentance itself by itself had no power to render one pure, for this reason we are baptized, that the whole may be of the grace of Christ. ^B

"The laying on of hands." Through which they received the Spirit, so as to prophesy and perform miracles. For when Paul, he says, had laid his hands on them, they received the Holy Spirit.

"The resurrection of the dead." For this is accomplished in baptism through the figure of the immersion into the water, and it is confirmed in the confession; for we confess that we believe in the resurrection of the dead.

"And of eternal judgment." That is, of the judgment which assigns either blessings or torments for eternity. He seems to say these things because it was likely that they would be shaken, even though they had believed long ago, or lived in a non-Christian manner, and sluggishly; "Watch," he says. For it is not permitted to affirm that if we live sluggishly, or fall from the faith, it will be granted to us to be rebaptized, or that we shall be able to wash away our sins anew, and obtain the same things that we did before. For you err, he says, by thinking these things. ^C

VERS. 3. "And this will we do, if God permit." "This will we do": do what? To be carried on to perfection, if God also willeth. He said this, however, not as if God would not permit these things, but just as we are accustomed to say: "If God wills, I intend to do this." At the same time, he also teaches us from this to depend entirely upon His will, and not even in matters that are admittedly good to trust in one’s own judgment and power. And this the Apostle Jude also openly admonishes.

VERS. 4. "For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened." He did not say that it is useless and unseemly, but "impossible," ^D

^A so as to cast them into despair, lest they hope that they can attain baptism a second time.

"And have tasted of the heavenly gift." That is, of the remission of sins; for no one can give such things except God alone. ^B "And were made partakers of the Holy Ghost." After the remission of sins, then there is the participation of the Holy Ghost; for He does not dwell in a body subject to sins. And He was given through the imposition of hands, as has been said above.

VERS. 5. "And have tasted the good word of God." He did not say openly what this is; however, he makes us understand that he is speaking of every spiritual doctrine.

"And the powers of the world to come." He calls either the performing of miracles by this name, or living like the angels, so that one needs none of the present things but looks to those to come, and already has as a pledge of the future life that which is here immaterial and spiritual.

VERS. 6. "And if they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance." That is, through repentance. What then? Is repentance cast out? God forbid! But the renewal through a second baptism is rejected. For it belongs to the laverhood alone to renew, as also the Prophet says: "Thy youth shall be renewed as the eagle's" (Ps. CII, 5). But it belongs to repentance to free one from old age, and to make one strong. However, to lead one back to that [former] brightness is not possible; for there, the whole [process] was grace. He says, therefore, "to repentance," namely, that of baptism. For ^C first a person is led to repentance regarding his past life, then is baptized, just as he himself had previously said, "Repentance from dead works." And it is manifest from what follows that he says these things forbidding the reiteration of baptism.

"Crucifying to themselves the Son of God afresh." Baptism is a cross. For our old man was crucified together with Him, and we have been grafted into the likeness of His death. And again: "We are buried with Him by baptism." For just as He died in the flesh upon the cross, so we in baptism have died to sin. Whoever therefore is baptized a second time, as far as it depends on him, crucifies Christ a second time. But this is absurd. For He died once and rose again, and death no longer has dominion over Him. Therefore, there is no second baptism, since there is not a second cross. For what would prevent a third and a fourth, and so on to infinity? He did not say, "crucifying afresh," and stop there; but he added, "to themselves," in order to show that because we live our life sluggishly, as if there were another baptism, we perform all things as if supporting an evil opinion within ourselves.

"And put him to an open shame." That is, triumphing over Him, subjecting Him to ignominy. But you may understand this in two ways: either because they who ^D then crucified the Lord devised such a manner of death for His dishonor,

^A or because Christ, having been once crucified, is believed henceforth to be immortal. He, therefore, who crucifies Him again puts forward this lie, which brings disgrace upon Christ, as one who, after the death He underwent but once, has henceforth tasted immortality. In two ways, therefore, he ^B says the thing is impossible: first, because he who has been deemed worthy of such great benefits and has had all things poured out upon him is unworthy to enjoy them again; and second, by that which is more fearful, that it is impossible for the Son of God to be crucified.

VERS. 7. *For the earth which drinketh in the rain that cometh often upon it.* By earth he signifies the soul, and by rain the teaching, as also in another place: *I will command the clouds,* saith God, *that they rain no rain upon the vineyard.* And again: *The river of God is filled with water,* that is, he who has been granted by God the grace to teach others is filled with the waters from above, that is to say, with gifts. He hints here at those who have both received and drunk in the word, and although they have often attained it, have not even so made progress, which he also said above: *When for the time ye ought to be teachers.* ^C *And bringing forth herbs meet for them.* That is, a virtuous life. For nothing is so "meet"—that is to say, suitable and well-fitted—as purity of life. *By whom it is dressed.* The earth, he says, produces the "herb"—that is, a good manner of life—for those by whom it is cultivated, and it is "meet" for them; for they who themselves cultivate virtue shall also enjoy it. Some, however, have referred the "for them" to the teachers; for by them the best manner of life is cultivated, as they themselves are also partakers of the virtue of their disciples. *Receiveth blessing from God.* Here he quietly strikes at the Greeks, who attribute the yield of ^D fruits to the power of the earth. For it is not the hands of the farmers that make the fruits, but the whole, he says, must be referred to God: He Himself blesses the earth and bestows fertility.

VERS. 8. *But that which beareth thorns and briers.* He did not say "germinating," as he spoke above concerning the herb, but "bearing," as one might say "spewing forth," and throwing away as some sort of excrement. Thorns and briers are the cares of life, and the deceitfulness of riches, and simply all sin; as David also says: *I am turned in my misery, whilst a thorn is fastened in me.* For it does not merely come upon one, but it is "fastened" in; and unless we pluck it out entirely, if even a small part remains, it causes pain and requires treatment and care. Moreover, it is a "brier"; whence, if you lay hold of it, it wounds you, and it is unpleasant on every side, bringing forth ignominy here, and in the world to come most especially.

^A Reprobate and near to a curse. He said that the good land is blessed by God; but concerning the unfruitful land, He did not say simply that it is under a curse, but "near to a curse," so that we might not despair. For he who is near to a curse will also be able to be removed far from it. ^B "Whose end is for burning." He added this also so that we might not despair. For He did not say, "which shall be burned," but, "whose end is for burning": that is, if it should persevere in its unfruitfulness until the end. Thus, it is possible for it to turn away from unfruitfulness, and to restrain its thorns, and to become approved, and to partake of the blessing.

VERS. 9. "But, beloved, we are confident of you, the things that are better and that belong to salvation, although we speak in this manner." Having rebuked them sufficiently and struck fear into them, he heals them again, so that he might not render them entirely listless. For he who strikes one who is already sluggish, makes him even more sluggish. He says, therefore, that I do not say these things as if I had condemned you, nor as if I thought you full of thorns, but fearing that this might happen. And he did not say, "We expect concerning you," but, "We are confident," that is, we are assured and firm concerning you, that you are not in this state, but better, and that you care for your own salvation, even if we have spoken so sharply. Either, therefore, he says this regarding their conversation and morals—that you are not such briers—or he speaks of the retribution—that you are not near to a curse, nor for burning, but some other reward is laid up for you. Observe, moreover, that which follows.

^C VERS. 10. "For God is not unjust to forget your work." Observe how he has lifted them up and strengthened them to hope for better things, reminding them of the former things and of the justice of God; for if God is just, He will not forget your work—that is, your compassion and brotherly love—but He will reward you. Wherefore, do not be fainthearted, but by all means hope for better things, since God is also by all means just. Therefore, I did not say what I said concerning you precisely as a rebuke; for I know that you are not worthy of a curse.

"And [of] the labor of love which you have shown toward His name, in having ministered to the saints, and [still] ministering." ^D He bears great witness to them; not of works only, but of works with alacrity. For to minister is an indication of promptness. By "love," he means the almsgiving which they showed, not to their brothers, but to the name of God. Observe the greatest consolation, that we do not perform acts of almsgiving to men, but to God; just as Christ says in the Gospel: "You did it to Me." For he who bestows bounty upon the unjust for the sake of the name of God, does this to God. "To the saints," that is, to the faithful. For every faithful person is a saint, even if he be in the world. For, he says, the unbelieving man has been sanctified in his wife, and the unbelieving wife…

in her husband. Faith, therefore, produces sanctification here. So let us not be diligent only toward those in the desert, as if they were the only saints, but also toward those in the world; for those are saints in both faith and life, but the laity also are saints in faith, and many in life as well. Observe, too, how he eases and mitigates his tone toward them. For he did not say, "you who have ministered," and then stop; but added, "and do minister," that is, and are still doing the same thing today.

VERS. 11. But we desire each one of you to show the same diligence to the full assurance of hope until the end.

VERS. 12. That you may not become sluggish.

But be imitators of those who through faith and longsuffering inherit the promises.

^A grow numb in faith. Therefore, I say these rebuking things to you, that I might rouse you, and that you might become imitators of those who have inherited the promises through faith and long-suffering. Who these are, he will say hereafter. Observe, however, how he first mentions faith, then long-suffering, because long-suffering comes from faith. For if one does not believe that He who promised will certainly provide, he will not have long-suffering.

For when God promised Abraham, because He had no one greater by whom to swear, He swore by Himself, saying: *Surely blessing I will bless you, and multiplying I will multiply you.* While there were many others who inherited the promises through faith, he passed over the others for the time being, reserving them for those who follow; he mentions only Abraham, both because of the dignity of his person, and because he was judged worthy of the promise and indeed attained it. And by this, he shows that one should not be fainthearted, but should wait for God, who is accustomed not to bring about what is promised quickly, but after a long time. ^B When did God swear by Himself? Either in those words where he says, "By Myself I have sworn"; or, perhaps, one might say that the particle "surely" (ἡ μήν) is an oath of God by Himself; for the "surely" (ἦ μήν) signifies "in truth, truly." Which is nothing other than a confirmation of the truth. And who else would truth be but God? Thus also in the Gospels the Lord, saying "Amen, amen," swears the same oath, not being able to swear by one greater, He swears by Himself, just as the Father. Although some have understood the Son Himself to have communed with Abraham at that time; for the Scripture says: *And the angel said to Abraham.* For surely, they say, the Father would not be an angel, but the Son, the angel of the great counsel.

And so, having been long-suffering, he attained the ^C promise. How, then, does he say at the end of the Epistle that *all these did not receive the promises, but saw them from afar and greeted them*, whereas here he says that Abraham attained the promise? He does not speak of the same things here and there; but here he speaks of those things promised to him in this life, which Abraham indeed attained after a long time; there, however, he speaks of heavenly things, which he has not yet attained. Both, however—both the fact that he attained it, and the fact that he has not yet attained it—serve for the consolation of the faint-hearted: the former, because we also, if we are long-suffering, will obtain; the latter, because if he, who was perfected so many years ago, has not yet attained, we are foolish to be distressed that we do not attain it yet. Observe also how he said that having been long-suffering he attained the promise, that he might show the great power of long-suffering, and that the promise alone did not accomplish everything, but also the long-suffering. Here, also, he strikes them with fear, ^D giving them to understand from the opposite, that it is hindered

^A by pusillanimity. And this befell the people long ago in the desert, who, having fallen into pusillanimity, by no means attained the promise. One might say, then: How is it that the saints, even though they were long-suffering, did not attain it, as he says toward the end of the Epistle? But they will attain it certainly; whereas those murmurers of the people neither attained it, nor will they attain it.

VERS. 16. For men swear by the greater, and an oath is the end of all contradiction among them for confirmation. That is to say, by an oath the dispute of every contention is dissolved. For many things are indeed said, and debated on both sides, but the oath, coming in last and confirming, solves all doubtful matters. ^B

VERS. 17. Wherein God, wishing to show more abundantly to the heirs of the promise the immutability of His counsel, confirmed it by an oath. That is to say, because even among men an oath brings all credibility, for this reason God also swears. Or, "wherein," that is, in His swearing by Himself, God, He says, showed us from abundance that He will certainly and immutably perform what He promised. For God ought indeed to be believed even without an oath, but yet for our sake He lets Himself down, and does not contemplate His own dignity, but in order that He might persuade us, He suffers things unworthy of Himself to be said. For we are the faithful heirs of the promise, who in His seed, which is Christ, have been blessed. Observe ^C how he says that even then the Son was the mediator of God and men: for by Him, as the Word, God and Father swore.

VERS. 18. That by two immutable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie. Of what kind and of what sort? That He should speak and promise simply, and then that He should add an oath to the promise. For because among men this of the oath seems to be more firm, for that reason He Himself also added it. "In which," for "from which" these two things, the promise is shown to be most certain, and it is impossible for God to lie. Just as, therefore, He swore for our sake, even though it was unworthy of Him to swear, so also, "He learned from what He suffered," understand this. For men think that to be more credible and certain which has been proved by experience. ^D

We have strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us. That is to say, great admonition and exhortation. For this is said not more for the sake of Abraham than for our sake, who have fled for refuge to Him, that is, who have hoped. To what point have we the exhortation? To lay hold of the hope set before us; that is, that from those things which were given to Abraham, we might also be more assured concerning those which pertain to us, and might not doubt concerning the

hope of future and heavenly things which we expect, but firmly and securely hold to this hope, and not let it go. For the promise made to Abraham pertains also to us, and especially to us who believe in Christ, as has been said above. ^A

VERS. 19. *Which we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and steadfast.* This hope we have as an anchor. For just as that keeps ships steady in a time of storm, so also hope makes those who are shaken by temptations ^B to be steady and patient. But he did not simply say "an anchor," but "sure and steadfast." For an anchor that does not keep the boat unshaken is no anchor, whether it be rotted, or when it is too light. He rightly mentioned not a foundation, but an anchor, because a foundation is placed upon things that are very solid and wise; but an anchor is for those who are in a storm, such as were these people, who were being tossed by waves of temptations.

*And which enters into that within the veil.* He said above, "Wait; for what is hoped for will come to pass." Now, making them more perfectly assured, he says that we already have these things in hope. For this [hope], having entered within the heaven, has caused us to be already in the promised goods, even if we are still down here, ^C and even if we have not yet received them. Hope has such power that it makes those who are of the earth heavenly. Just as in the Old Testament the veil separated the Holy of Holies from the rest of the tabernacle, so also heaven is for us a veil, separating the lower things from the more divine and supercelestial things.

VERS. 20. *Where the forerunner for us has entered, even Jesus.* Having said that our hope enters into heaven, he confirms what was said, proving it by the things themselves. For that Christ did indeed enter; and he did not simply enter, but entered as a *forerunner*, that is, as one showing that we too must enter. For a forerunner is a forerunner of certain ones who are to follow, ^D and there is not a very great interval between the forerunner and those who follow, just as there was not between John and Christ. Do not therefore be impatient; in a little while we shall enter where our forerunner is. And he was not content to say "forerunner," but added "for us," for greater confirmation, as if saying this: He himself had no need to go thither; for how should he, being God? But just as he took flesh for our sake, so also for our sake he entered within the heaven, that he might open the way for us. So we too shall necessarily enter. Or, "for us" means "that he might intercede for us with the Father," just as the high priest entered into the Holy of Holies once a year, to make atonement for the people.

*According to the order of Melchizedek, a high priest forever.* And this is the greatest con- [text continues]

consolation, since our High Priest is in the heavens, and is much superior to those who were among the Jews. First, according to the manner: for it is not after their order, but according to the order of Melchizedek. Then, according to the place and the tabernacle: for it is above and in heaven. And according to the Testament: for it is concerning better and more perfect goods; and according to duration: for it is everlasting and not temporary. Finally, according to the person: for he is the Son of God. Therefore, do not grow faint in spirit. But all these things are said on account of the flesh: for according to this he was made High Priest.

CAPUT VII

VERS. 1-3. *For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him. To whom also Abraham divided a tithe of all.* The goal of the Apostle is to demonstrate the difference between the Old and New Testaments; and he indicated this immediately at the beginning, when he said, "God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son." But because the listeners were infirm, inasmuch as they were faint-hearted in temptations, he refreshed their faint-heartedness in the meantime, and subsequently, when he had abundantly refreshed them, he again introduces the discourse concerning the excellence of the New Testament, by which it surpasses the Old. And observe his wisdom. He shows that Melchizedek, who was a type of Christ, was superior to Abraham. For if he had not been superior, he would not have blessed him, nor would he have received tithes from him. But since the priests of the law were descended from Abraham, Melchizedek also excels these, ^B inasmuch as he blessed them and received tithes from them, since he had blessed and taken tithes from their progenitor. But if Melchizedek, the figura of Christ, so far excels the priests of the law, how much more does the true Melchizedek, Christ? This is the meaning of the whole passage. But shortening the narrative concerning Melchizedek, he introduces contemplation, transferring the history mystically and spiritually to allegory.

"First," he says, "being interpreted, king of righteousness." He declares in this place in what manner Melchizedek is a figure of Christ; and first of all, from the name itself, learn the exact reason. For *Melchi* means king; and *Sedec* means righteousness. But who else is king of righteousness, except our Lord Jesus Christ? ^C Then also "king of Salem, which is king of peace." From the name of the city, he says, this is also plain. For Salem means peace, if you interpret it. But who else is king of peace besides Christ, who has made peace with the things which are in heaven and the things which are upon the earth? It is fitting for no mortal to be king of righteousness and peace, except for Christ alone.

VERS. 3. *Without father, without mother, without genealogy.* You have also

^A another likeness here. Just as Melchisedec is without father and without mother, not that he did not have a father or a mother—for he did have one, as one of mortals—but because his genealogy does not exist in Scripture, nor does the name of his parents appear; in this way Christ is without father according to the lower generation—for He was born only of the Virgin Mary, insofar as it pertains to the flesh—and without mother according to the upper generation—for He was begotten of the Father alone before all ages, ineffably and incomprehensibly. But he is also *without genealogy*. For who shall declare His generation? Since the Father who begat Him from above is also indescribable, and the very manner of His generation [is indescribable]. And the mother who gave birth below does not fall under logical analysis regarding the manner of the birth, such as how a virgin gave birth, how it was without pains, and such like. Christ, therefore, is truly both without mother and without father. But Melchisedec is without father and without mother not truly—for that is impossible—but because his parents are not recorded in Scripture, so that the phrase *without genealogy* is, as it were, interpretative of *without father and without mother*, as if the Apostle were saying: I called Melchisedec without father and without mother in the sense that he is without genealogy, and because his lineage is not mentioned in Scripture.

*Neither having beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God, he abideth a priest continually.* And this you shall understand just as the aforementioned points. For as a man, ^C Melchisedec certainly had both a beginning of days and an end of life; yet, inasmuch as we do not know when he was born nor when he died, according to our knowledge, he has neither beginning nor end. Christ, however, truly, as God, has neither beginning of days—for He is without beginning according to the beginning in time, even if He has the Father as a beginning as the Cause—nor end, for He is endless; to say it all in sum, He is eternal. Where then are the Arians? Let them hear that the Son has no beginning. Thus, therefore, Paul teaches us to resolve that which one might question: how is Christ a priest forever according to the order of Melchisedec, since Melchisedec had died and did not become a priest forever? We shall resolve this from here, saying that Christ, being eternal and endless, is truly always a priest. And now, indeed, He is believed to offer Himself for us at all times through His ministers, especially as He intercedes with the Father for us; but then He will perform for us more perfect and more mystical sacred rites, offering Himself to us as food and drink in a new way and beyond all understanding. But Melchisedec is said to have an eternal priesthood, not because he lives always—for he was dead—but inasmuch as his end is not recorded in Scripture, so that from this we might not be able to know when his priesthood ceased. As therefore also in the ^D

^A case of the names, they were mere appellations for him—Melchisedec and king of Salem—but in Christ they are the truth of the things, so too the fact that he had neither beginning nor end was in his case, because it was not written in the Holy Scriptures, a type; but in Christ, it is in accordance with truth. For if the likeness were to be everywhere, it would no longer be a type and a truth, but either both would be a type or both would be the truth. Or do we not also see this in his images? For even here, a shadowy painting has a certain likeness to an image that has already been finished, in that it marks out its character obscurely through lines; it also has a lack of likeness, in that the image, through [its] colors, has received the character more clearly and more manifestly.

VERS. 4. "Consider, however, how great this man is, to whom even the patriarch ^B Abraham gave a tenth of the spoils." After he had adapted the figure to the truth, or the things of Melchisedec to Christ, he now confidently demonstrates thereafter that the type itself, that is, Melchisedec, is more splendid than the very true priests among the Jews; and not [only] than them, but also than their patriarch himself. But if the type [is so], much more will the true High Priest, Christ, be superior to them. "See therefore," he says, "how great this man is, and how much he excels, to whom gifts offered not just any common man, but Abraham, such a great patriarch." For not without reason did he add "patriarch," but in order to extol the person; and ["from the spoils"], that is, from the trophies ^C of the most excellent and honored things. Nor can it be said that he shared with him a compensation for labor, as if with one who had fought a war alongside him and joined in his toil, but [rather] with one who was sitting at home. For this reason he previously stated above that he met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings. But if he is greater than the patriarch himself—which the very giving of the tithes obviously indicates—he is much more [greater] than the priests of the Law.

VERS. 5, 6. "And indeed those who receive the priesthood from the sons of Levi have a commandment to take tithes from the people according to the law, that 694 is, from their brethren, though they also have come forth from the loins of Abraham. But he whose genealogy is not numbered among them has taken tithes from Abraham." He now proves how Melchisedec is greater than Abraham, saying: Those who functioned in the priesthood from the Levitical tribe took tithes ^D from the people, as being superior and more honorable on account of the dignity of the priesthood. For for what other reason does the people themselves, who are afflicted with labors and hardships, offer tithes of every kind to priests who do not labor and do not till the field, unless it is because they are more divine and are engaged in a greater work? So great is the dignity of the priesthood, and thus those who exercise it are more sublime than their own brethren, even those who have come forth from the same loins. Since, therefore, Melchisedec tithed Abraham, even though his genealogy was not numbered from him—that is, since he was not of his race, for he was a foreigner—he is more powerful and more sublime than he. How

indeed would Abraham have given tithes to a foreigner, had he not flourished with great honor and dignity? But if Melchisedec, who was a type, is greater, and that too than Abraham, ^A much more does the true High Priest excel the priests of the law.

And he blessed him who had the promises. Because this was for Abraham in every place and universally a source of greatness—namely, that he had received promises from God—he adds this now: that the type of Christ blessed such a great man, one who had been accounted worthy of divine conversation, and who held God as his debtor.

VERS. 7. And without all contradiction, the less is blessed by the better. He said that such and so great an Abraham was blessed by Melchisedec himself. But we all know, openly and without contradiction, that he who blesses is superior to the one who is blessed; therefore, Melchisedec, who prefigured Christ, was greater than the patriarch. ^B

VERS. 8. And here indeed dying men receive tithes, but there he who has testimony that he lives. There is another argument by which he demonstrates that Melchisedec is greater than the priests of the law. For here, that is, in the law, those who receive tithes die; but there, that is, in the matter according to Melchisedec, he received tithes to whom the Scripture bears testimony that he lives. For it says: "Thou art a priest forever according to the order of Melchisedec." But understand Melchisedec’s living forever just as it was mentioned above, that is, that the Scripture makes no mention of his death. Some, however, understand the dying of the Levites and the living of Melchisedec in this way: that the manner of the Levitical priesthood was mortal—for it has been abolished—but the manner of Melchisedec’s, that is, of the ^C life according to Christ, lives and remains and shall remain forever.

VERS. 9. And, as it were, through Abraham, even Levi who receives tithes was tithed. So that the legal priests may not be able to say, "What is it to us if Abraham was tithed?" he says that through Abraham as a medium, Levi even, who was the chief of our priesthood and who received tithes, gave tithes. Is not Melchisedec therefore better than Levi, inasmuch as he was seen to receive tithes even from him, with Abraham as the intermediary? But as to what he says, "as it were," it means either, "to speak briefly," or, "so that I may speak thus." Because it seemed a bold statement to affirm that Levi, before he was brought forth into birth, gave tithes to Melchisedec, he corrected the expression. ^D

VERS. 10. For he was yet in the loins of his father, when Melchisedec met him. He constructs the argument of how Levi was tithed, and says that when his progenitor was tithed, he himself was likewise tithed in potentiality, since he was at that time in the loins of Abraham.

^A And he did not say "the Levites," but "Levi," to show his excellence. Behold, what has he dared! He has cast aside things Judaic. For this reason he foretold above, "You have become dull," because he was about to say such things, so that they might not recoil. Having therefore prepared them, and having equipped them as he wished, he now says what he wills. For not as the earth, having received seed, increases it and makes it grow, does the soul [always] contain and nourish the word. For in the former case there is nature, which has stability; but here there is the will, a thing most varied and easily changed. Wherefore a teacher must provide much by way of preparation.

^B VERSE 11. *If therefore perfection was through the Levitical priesthood (for the people received the law under it), what further need was there for another priest to arise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not to be called according to the order of Aaron?* He showed that Melchizedek was far better than both Abraham and Levi, having himself been in the order of priests. Now again he introduces another argument, showing that the priesthood according to Christ is far superior to that of the Levites, and that the priesthood of Christ is perfect, but theirs is imperfect. For if the priesthood of the law were perfect, it would have been necessary for the priest to arise according to the order of Aaron, for Aaron was of the Levitical tribe. But it is not said that a priest arises according to the order of Aaron, but according to the order of Melchizedek. It remains, therefore, that as if that one were imperfect, another is introduced. Moreover, this particle "further" (*eti*) has great emphasis; for it is as if he says this: If Christ were according to the order of Melchizedek beforehand, and then the law were given, one might not unjustly say that because the priesthood according to Melchizedek was as if imperfect, the priesthood according to the law—that of Aaron, that is—was given. But now Christ is later, and he received another form of priesthood. It is clear, therefore, that as the priesthood of Aaron is the more imperfect, another is introduced. And what is "the people received the law under it"? This is, one cannot say that the priesthood according to Aaron is perfect, but that it was given to others, and not to the Hebrews themselves: but indeed it was given to the people in its entirety, and the people received the law under this priesthood; that is, it was ordained that they use it, and thus proceed, and through it do all things. Why, therefore, was it cast out, if not because it was weak?

^{C D} VERSE 12. *For the priesthood being translated, there is of necessity a translation of the law also.* He now shows that the law is consequently abolished, and another covenant substituted. For if the priesthood is translated, it is necessary that the law also be different; for a priest is not without a covenant and laws and precepts. But the priesthood was translated not only in ritual—that is, so that it is no longer according to the order of Aaron, but according to the order of Melchizedek—but also in tribe. For it was translated from the priestly tribe of Aaron to the royal tribe of Judah. And behold the mystery. First it was

regia, then it became sacerdotal: just as Christ is always King, but last of all became High Priest, when He took on flesh, when He offered the sacrifice. ^A

VERS. 13. *In whom these things are said, [is] of another tribe.* He shows how the priesthood was translated regarding the tribe, and he says that "Christ," in whom—that is, him concerning whom these things are said, and unto whom they have come to pass—is of another tribe, namely Judah.

*From which no one attended to the altar.* From which tribe of Judah no one attended, that is, stood by the altar and cared for priestly works. ^B

VERS. 14. *For it is manifest that our Lord sprang out of Judah.* The diction "sprang out" (ἀνατέταλκεν) is noble, and taken from the prophecy of Balaam, who says, "A star shall rise out of Jacob" (Num. xxiv, 17), and also from Malachi, who calls Him the "Sun of justice." By which it is shown that the advent of the Lord came to pass for the illumination of the world. Concerning which tribe Moses spoke nothing regarding priesthood. For he assigned all things of the priesthood to the Levitical tribe; but to the tribe of Judah, the things regarding rule in wars.

VERS. 15. *And it is yet more manifest, if according to the similitude of Melchizedek there ariseth another priest.* What is "manifest"? The distinction between either priesthood: or that the priesthood and the testament are being changed is judged not only from this, that he who rises as priest is from another tribe and no longer from the Levitical, but it is also demonstrated more fully from this which we shall say: if according to the similitude of Melchizedek, and the following—that is, since a priest arises according to the order of Melchizedek. ^C

VERS. 16. *Who is made, not according to the law of a carnal commandment, but according to the power of an indissoluble life.* Who, [meaning] Melchizedek, did not become like the legal priests; for they received the priesthood from a law having carnal commandments. For it says: Circumcise the flesh, and wash the flesh, and rest the flesh, and you shall obtain carnal goods. But Melchizedek is not so, but by divine power he became a priest, so that he lives always, and his priesthood is indissoluble. Understand "the living" thus, as also above, namely through the fact that his death is not known. Or, take "who" concerning the priest, as if he were saying: Which other priest, that is, Christ, did not receive the priesthood according to a legal carnal commandment, but through the power of the Father, or His own, and He retains an indissoluble priesthood. ^D However, it was consequent, in opposition to "carnal," to have brought in "spiritual": How therefore did he bring it in, according to

^A the power of an indissoluble life? Because he indicated what is temporary through the word "carnal." And reasonably, in opposition to the temporary, he brought in "indissoluble life," which is to say, Christ lives by His own virtue and power.

VERS. 17. *For it is testified: You are a priest for ever according to the order of Melchizedek.* He confirms what he said, "of an indissoluble life," namely, because Scripture says He is a priest for ever. But some thought that he was not proving this, but rather how He was not made according to the law of a carnal commandment. For if He had been made according to the law, he says, it would have been necessary for Him to be called a priest according to the order of Aaron; but now, since it is written "according to the order of Melchizedek," it is clear that He was not made according to the law, but in a certain other, more divine way.

VERS. 18, 19. *For there is indeed a setting aside of the commandment going before, because of its weakness and unprofitableness: for the law brought nothing to perfection.* He said that there is a transference of the law, and he demonstrated this; now he seeks the cause. For we humans are finally at rest when we have learned the cause. And he says that for this reason a setting aside occurred—that is, a change and a casting out—of the preceding commandment, that is to say, of the previous Covenant, because it was found to be weak and unprofitable. What then? Did the law profit no one? It did indeed profit; but it did not profit toward making them perfect. For he brings in: "For it brought nothing to perfection." And how was it weak? Because it was only letters declaring, "Do this, and do not do that," but it supplied no power whereby the commandments could be fulfilled, which now comes to us through the Spirit. But heretics who slander the law leap in here, saying, "Behold, even Paul finds fault with the law." But he did not say, O foolish ones, that it was evil, but unprofitable and weak, that is to say, ^B toward the goal of perfecting. For just as milk is useful to infants according to the requirements of the times, but useless to adults and those who are perfect; so also the law was useful to the imperfect Jews, leading them away from idols and bringing them to God, and delivering to them fitting commandments. But to those having need of more perfect things, it was no longer so. For it prescribed carnal things, both sacrifices and purifications, which the spiritual do not need. For this reason it has now been set aside. And a setting aside is the setting aside of things that are ruling. Therefore, the law ruled formerly, because its time then remained.

*And the bringing in of a better hope, by which we draw near to God.* The legal commandment, he says, has been set aside, and a hope has been brought in—not such as the Jewish one. For they too had a hope that, if they pleased God, they would possess the land, and become superior to their enemies, and in general they hoped for bodily goods. But our hope is not of such a kind, but much better; for we hope for heaven, and to be near to God, and to stand, and to minister to Him together with the angels. Earlier, indeed, he said: *Entering into that which is within the veil*; but now: *By which we draw near*, he says, *to God*.

^A

*Vers. 20. And as much as it is not without an oath.* Here is another distinction between the new priest and the old ones, and between the one Testament and the other. For the priesthood of Christ was not promised simply, but with an oath, so that the word of God might be confirmed with an abundance of certainty; which he also said above, *God swore to Abraham*, for the sake of greater assurance.

*Vers. 21. For they indeed were made priests without an oath, but this one with an oath, by Him who said to him: The Lord swore, and will not repent: You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchisedec.* Priests of the law, he says, are appointed without an oath; for it was not said to anyone that God swore, *You shall be a priest according to the law*; but Christ [was appointed] with an oath, which was made by God saying to him: *You are a priest* in a new way. For it was not according to Aaron, but according to Melchisedec. ^B

*Vers. 22. By so much has Jesus become the surety of a better Testament.* That is, inasmuch as He swore that He would always be a priest; for He would not have sworn unless he were greater. So the New Testament is also greater than the Old. But what is "surety"? A pledge, a mediator.

*Vers. 23, 24. And they indeed were made many priests, because they were prevented by death from remaining; but this one, because he remains forever, has an eternal priesthood.* Here, too, he shows the excellence which Christ has over the priests of the law; and he says that there, indeed, they are many because they are mortal; but here, there is one, because He is immortal. He has, therefore, an "untransferable" priesthood—that is, uninterrupted, without a successor. Do you see how much greater He is? By as much as the immortal excels the mortal. ^C

*Vers. 25. Whence He is also able to save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through Him.* Since, he says, He is immortal, He is able to stand over and save all to the uttermost; that is, to give not a temporary salvation, but a complete one, namely, both here and in the life to come. For in the Old Testament, the high priest, even if he were admirable, offered to God only during the time in which he lived, such as Samuel and those like him; but after these things, he could no longer do so, for they had died. But here, the High Priest is eternal and ever-living. Therefore, He is able to save to the uttermost—that is, eternally—those who draw near through Him, that is, through faith in Him. For he who believes in the Son draws near to the Father entirely; for He Himself is the way to the Father, and he who has grasped this finds his lodging there.

*Ever living to intercede for them.* By reason of the flesh, this is spoken so humbly. For according to the flesh, He is indeed a high priest; however, in so far as He is a high priest, in that respect He is said to intercede. For He who raises the dead and gives life, like the Father, ^D

purified through Him the whole world. Hence in this also Christ excels them. ^A This He did once, by offering Himself. What does this mean? That He might offer for the sins of the people, not for Himself. Once, he says, He performed the sacrifice, but after this He sits as Lord. For lest, when you hear "priest," you should think that He always stands and is a minister, He shows that it was by dispensation that He became a priest. And when the dispensation was completed, He resumed His own proper dignity and loftiness.

VERS. 28. *For the law makes men high priests, having infirmity.* Lest you should understand that, while He indeed offered once, it was also for Himself, he establishes now that He did not offer a sacrifice for His own sins. For the law makes mere men high priests, subject to infirmity—that is, who cannot resist sin, but who, as weak men, stumble and fall into errors and sins. But one who is so powerful as the Son, how could He have sin? And not having it, for what reason would He offer for Himself? Moreover, not even for others many times, but once. For being powerful, it was sufficient to accomplish the whole by the offering which was made once. By "infirmity," however, you may understand sin itself, as this very Paul says in many places, or even death itself. For being mortal and weak, the legal high priests ^B were neither themselves sinless, nor were they able to cleanse others; but He is immortal and strong. Now listen to what follows:

*But the word of the oath, which is after the law, [makes] the Son who is perfected forever.* Observe the contrasts: there is the Law; here is the word of the oath—that is, the most sure, the most true. There, men are entirely servants; here, the Son, who is Lord, clearly. There, they are weak—that is, stumbling, having sin, subject to death; here, He is perfected forever—that is, eternal, powerful, not only now sinless, but always. If, therefore, He is perfect, if He never sins, if He always lives, why would He have offered for Himself, or at all for others frequently?

CHAPTER VIII

VERS. 1. *Now the main point of what is being said is this: We have such a High Priest, who has taken His seat at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens.* A "main point" (capitulum) is always said to be that which is greatest; when someone is about to take up the most important matters in few words, he says he is going to speak in summary (in capitulo)—just as the head, though it is small, is the most important part of the body. The Apostle says, therefore, even now: "Now the main point of what is being said," that is, so that I may say the greatest and most comprehensive thing, "we have God as High Priest." For to sit ^D is of no other but of God. Observe, however, how after having spoken many humble things, the term "high priest," the word "makes intercession," and...

whatever things pertained to His humanity, He ascends to that which belongs to the Godhead, namely, to sit. ^A He does this always, as does also His Teacher in the Gospel, so that through humble things He may lead the listener by the hand to receive the word; for otherwise the hearer does not follow, unless he ascends little by little; but through sublime things He may teach that those former ones were an act of condescension. He calls the throne of the Father the "throne of majesty," either because the Father Himself might be called majesty, or simply because the throne of majesty is the greatest throne.

Verse 2. Minister of the holy things.

And of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.

Verse 3. For every high priest is appointed to offer gifts and sacrifices: whence it is necessary for this one also to have something to offer.

or, which is more exact, all things which are offered by fire. For a *victim*, properly, is from the word [Greek: θύεσθαι], which is [Greek: θυμιᾶσθαι], that is, to emit smoke. Gifts, however, are fruits and whatever else is lacking in blood and fire. *Verumtamen*, these are found used indiscriminately in Scripture, as, *God had regard for Abel and his gifts*, [*Gen. iv, 4*], although they were from the firstlings of the sheep. But toward Cain and his sacrifices He did not pay attention, although they were from the fruits of the earth. But if anyone tries to explain this with cold dilutions, which we ourselves are not ignorant of, he will not know how to absolve himself of the charge of negligent reading of the Scriptures. For they are placed indiscriminately in many places elsewhere, and I could have compared ^B innumerable places with innumerable others, had this business not seemed inept. Nevertheless, may this same Apostle suffice for us, who is accustomed to call whatever is offered simply "gifts" in what follows. For hear:

*For if He were on earth, He would not be a priest, [seeing that there are priests who offer the gifts according to the law].* He further confirms this, that although He does not have a tabernacle below, but above, he is not prohibited from being a priest on this account. And observe his wisdom. For from that which anyone might rather argue that He is not a priest—namely, that He does not have a place on earth in which to perform the function of the priesthood—from this he himself rather confirms that He is a priest. For this very reason, he says, He is a priest, because He did not obtain a place on earth. For if He were on earth, He would not be a priest. For there were others ^C on earth as priests, and this matter would seem to pertain to a faction. But now, since He has heaven as His place, and has brought His own body there, He intercedes there for us to the Father. So since He is above, for this reason He is more truly a Priest.

*Who serve a copy and shadow of the heavenly things.* Here he shows the excellence of the priesthood according to Christ, calling the ancient one a copy and shadow of good things, but ours heavenly. For when nothing is earthly, but all things are spiritual that are performed in the mysteries, where there are angelic hymns, where there are the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and the forgiveness of sins, and again binding; when our citizenship is in heaven, ^D how are ours not heavenly? Therefore, the ones in the Old Testament shown to Moses were types and copies of these, that is, dim imprints and as it were shadowy delineations.

*As was answered to Moses, when he was about to complete the tabernacle: "See," He says, "that you make all things according to the pattern shown to you on the mountain."* Since those things which are seen by our eyes are more

^A understood than those we learn by hearing, for this reason God showed Moses everything—not only the construction of the tabernacle, but also the matters concerning sacrifices and the rest of the worship.

Now, however, he has obtained a more excellent ministry. These words depend on that previous sentiment: "For if He were on earth, He would not be a priest." But now, he says, since He is not on earth, but has heaven as the place for His priesthood, He has obtained a more excellent ministry. This means His ministry is not such as that of the priests on earth, but is celestial, in that it has heaven as the place of its proper rite.

*But also, how much better a Mediator of a covenant He is.* Having exalted the priesthood according to Christ by its place, the priest, and the victim, he next sets forth the excellence of the Covenant. And yet, he had said earlier that the Old Covenant was weak and unprofitable because of the infancy and weakness of the hearers, but he had quickly reconciled himself to it. Now, however, he lingers on this subject, and demonstrates that the New Covenant is more excellent than the Old—that is, the Gospel, of which Christ is the Mediator and Giver. For He Himself became the minister of the Gospel for us, having taken the form of a servant, just as Moses was the mediator of the Law.

*Which is established upon better promises.* This is what he sets forth to refresh those among the Jews who had believed: that the promises of our Covenant are better. ^B For it is not the goods of the earth, nor the fertility of offspring and an abundance of children that are promised to those who keep the Gospel, but the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, do not be fainthearted; the promises of the Gospel are more excellent, and it is foolish for those who possess the better things to grow weary.

*For if that first had been faultless, then would no place have been sought for the second.* Consider the order. He said that the Covenant according to Christ is better than the Old. And whence is this clear? "Because," he says, "it is established on better promises." For if the promises and the rewards are better, it is evident that the Covenant is also better, and its commands more divine. But whence is it clear that the promises are more excellent? From the fact, he says, that the former was rejected and this latter was introduced in its place. For the New Covenant holds the primacy for this reason: because it is better and more perfect. For if that had been faultless—that is, if it had made men faultless—another would by no means have been introduced. ^C But just as we are accustomed to speak in a more common way, saying, "The house is not faultless," meaning that it has a defect or decay, so too he says the Old Testament is not faultless—not because it is evil, but as being unable to make men better, since it was given to those who were as infants.

*For finding fault with them, He says.* He did not say, ^D

blaming it, but blaming them, that is, the Jews, who were unable to be perfected through the precepts of the Law. ^A *Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, and I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah.* He shows more clearly here that the Old has been cast out. For He introduces God speaking through Jeremiah, that He will "make a new covenant"—that is, entirely new; not as the Hebrews understand it, that Ezra renewed the Scripture. For the Scripture did not become new, but remained old, even if it was collected by him.

*Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt.* Lest anyone suspect that the covenant made by the Lord with Abraham had been cast out, He added: *In the day when I took them by the hand.* For the covenant, He says, which is in Exodus, I am about to cast out, which was given on Mount Sinai to your fathers who made the calf, so that the covenant made with Abraham reached its end in Christ. For He says: *In your seed shall all nations be blessed,* that is, in Christ.

*Because they did not continue in My covenant, and I disregarded them, says the Lord.* Do you see that from us the evils have their beginning? They, He says, did not continue, and for this reason I disregarded them. But the goods and the benefits originate from Him and take their source from Him. Moreover, as if defending Himself, He sets forth the cause for which He abandons them: because of their own inconstancy. ^B

*For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord.* After those days: which ones? Some say the days of the exodus, in which the Mosaic law was given. But it seems to me that He is speaking about those days of which He said a little earlier: *Behold, the days are coming.* When, therefore, those days have passed, I will make such a covenant, as you will hear next.

*I will put My laws in their mind and write them on their hearts.* Let the Jew show this: when did he receive a law without writing? For even after the return from Babylon, it was committed to letters by Ezra. But the Apostles received nothing written; rather, they received the law of the Spirit in their hearts. ^C Hence Christ also said: *But the Paraclete, when He comes, will remind you of all things and will teach you all things.*

*And I will be to them a God, and they will be to Me a people.* This was brought to fulfillment through the Gospel. For those who previously worshipped idols, now recognizing the true God, have become His people.

^A visible in that house where the Jews, Nazarenes, proselytes, and Greeks were. Because, therefore, even the Greeks were able to ascend into it, he calls it "secular."

VERS. 2. *For there was a tabernacle made, the first, in which were the lampstand, and the table, and the setting forth of the loaves, which is called Holy.* He calls this the "first" with respect to the place that is called the Holy of Holies, for this was the middle one. Before it, there was the bronze altar of burnt offerings, set up in the open air; then, with a curtain extended—or rather, a sliding veil—this middle part was the tabernacle, in which were the lampstand, and the table, and the setting forth of the loaves.

VERS. 3. *And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holy of Holies.* You notice here that the first was a veil, which Scripture calls a "sliding veil," as it was something drawn and pulled, which partitioned the atrium into which all entered in common, and in which they sacrificed upon the bronze altar, from the tabernacle that daily received the priests performing the sacred ministries. Once you had passed through this, there was again another veil, and within this, the tabernacle which is called the Holy of Holies, into which no one else entered except the high priest alone, and he only once a year. He calls it a "tabernacle" everywhere, because God dwells there.

VERS. 4. *Having a golden censer, and the ark of the covenant covered on all sides with gold.* He calls it the "ark of the covenant" as it held the tablets which contained the law. *In which was a golden jar having the Manna, and the rod of Aaron that had budded, and the tablets of the Testament.* All these were monuments of Jewish ingratitude. The jar, indeed, which contained the Manna, because they had murmured while being nourished with that food in a wondrous manner, and so that the memory of God's kindness and of their own bitterness might be transmitted to posterity. The rod of Aaron, because of the contradiction stirred up against him. The tablets of the Testament, because they had broken the first ones through idolatry. But you will ask, Why then is it written in the books of Kings that there was nothing else in the ark except the tablets, whereas now the Apostle asserts that the jar and the rod of Aaron were also deposited there? Perhaps, inasmuch as he was excellently instructed in Jewish matters by Gamaliele, he had this by tradition; since even now the Hebrews who follow the Pharisees agree that this is so. Yet not from the beginning, but they say that when the Ark was to be hidden in the times of Jeremiah, perhaps these things also were then deposited therein.

^C VERS. 5. *And above it.* That is to say, of the ark. *Cherubim of glory.* Either because they were glorious, or because they served God and pertained to His glory. He intentionally extols these, so as to show that things pertaining to us are greater. *Overshadowing the propitiatory.* He calls the propitiatory...

^A the lid of the ark, as you may learn more accurately from the Scripture itself, and not be deceived by the words of some and suppose it to be something else. It signified, however, Christ, who became the propitiation for our sins. He sealed and secured all things that were in the Old Testament. Concerning which it is not necessary to speak now in detail. He indicates here that these were not the only things to be seen, but that they were certain enigmas, the consideration and explanation of which require a longer space of time.

VERS. 6. *Now when these things were thus prepared, into the first tabernacle the priests always entered, accomplishing the services.* These things indeed were so, he says; but the Jews did not enjoy them, inasmuch as the veil separated them. For these things were kept for us, to whom they were prophesied.

VERS. 7. *But into the second the high priest went alone once every year.* Do you observe that the types have already been laid down? For so that they might not say, "The sacrifice according to Christ was offered only once, and how did He sanctify everyone?" he demonstrates that this happened before, since that which was offered once in the Old Testament by the high priest was more holy and more awesome.

*Not without blood.* Because he called the cross a sacrifice, having neither fire, nor wood, nor being offered ^B frequently, he shows that the ancient sacrifice was of this kind: for it was offered once in blood. But some have inquired how it is written in Exodus: *Thou shalt burn incense upon the golden altar*, which is evidently in the Holy of Holies, *Aaron, with incense of fine confection in the morning, when he shall prepare the lamps, he shall burn incense upon it; and when Aaron puts on the lamps at evening, he shall burn perpetual incense.* Hence, they say, the high priest entered into the Holy of Holies every day twice, in order to make incense where the golden altar was. How then does the Apostle say here that he entered once a year? And they explain it by saying that he entered once a year with blood, but twice a day with incense. Know, however, that they have doubted wrongly and ignorantly; for Aaron did not offer incense ^C twice a day upon the golden censer, but upon the golden altar; and this was not in the Holy of Holies, but in the middle tabernacle, in which were the candlestick and the table; whereas with the golden censer he entered once a year into the Holy of Holies: for one was a censer, and another an altar was. I have set forth the doubt, so that he who reads these things, hearing this from others, may not be led into error, thinking it to be sound.

*Which he offers for himself, and for the people's errors.* Again, *for himself*, he says, for the legal high priest offered for himself; but Christ not for Himself. For how, since He was separated from ^D sin—

and was distinct from the sinners? *Wherefore there is a great difference between this one and that.* He said *of errors*, not *of sins*, striking more fear into the ancient Jews, and all, and suppressing their pride. For even if you have not sinned willingly, yet you have sinned involuntarily and in ignorance, and from this no one is pure. Some, however, have said that he spoke thus because he was showing from this the difference between the sacrifice of Christ and the offerings of the Law. For the offerings of the Law remitted faults committed in ignorance: but the offering of Christ remits even sins committed knowingly.

^B The Holy Spirit indicating this, that the way into the holy places was not yet made manifest while the first tabernacle was still standing. He begins henceforth to contemplate more mystically the things concerning the tabernacles, and says, that since the Holy of Holies was inaccessible to the other priests—which are a figure of heaven—but the first tabernacle, that is, the one straight after the outer brazen altar, was always accessible to them, being a symbol of the worship under the Law, it was signified symbolically that as long as this tabernacle stands—that is, as long as the law holds sway, and the worship according to it is performed—the way of the holy places is not accessible, that is, the entrance into heaven, to those performing such worship; but to them it is invisible and closed off, and this way was set apart for the one High Priest, Christ, alone.

^C *Which was a parable for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience.* What I said before, that the Apostle now says, namely, that that tabernacle into which the priests were always entering was a parable, that is, a figure and sketch of the time according to the law that was present before the coming of Christ; at which time such sacrifices are offered, and are so weak that they are unable to perfect, according to the conscience—that is, according to the inner man—those who offer them. For they cleansed the filth of the bodies, not the sins of the souls. For they were not able to remit adultery, or murder, or sacrilege.

^D *Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.* *Only*, he says, imposed on the men who lived at that time and commanded concerning food and drink. For this one, he says, eat, and this one do not eat. But how did he say *in drinks*, since the law did not hand down anything regarding a difference in drinks? Therefore, either he says this concerning the priest not drinking wine when he was about to enter into the Holy Place, or concerning those who made vows, that is, promises to abstain from wine, just as the Nazarites also did; or simply, he said this to make such regulations and rites appear worthless and to ridicule them. And there were *divers washings*. For if anyone had touched a dead body, or a leper, or if anyone had a flux of seed, he was washed, and thus he seemed to be cleansed. And these were carnal ordinances, that is,

^A carnal commandments, cleansing the flesh, and carnally justifying those who were considered unclean according to the flesh. They were not, however, to be imposed until the end, but until a time of reformation—that is to say, until the coming of Christ, who was to rectify these things and introduce the true and spiritual worship of God. And because the law was a heavy yoke, he rightly said "imposed," just as it is written in the Acts: "Why do you tempt God to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers were able to bear?"

^B Verse 11. *But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come.* The worship of the Old Testament, he says, did not bring one into heaven; but Christ, having come, entered once into the Holy of Holies, for there the meaning is directed. He did not say, "having become a high priest," but "having come a high priest," which is to say, coming for this very purpose. He did not first come and then, by a chance occurrence, become a high priest, but the goal for which he came to earth was the priesthood. He did not say, "high priest of the things being sacrificed," but "of good things to come," as if the word were unable to express the whole accurately, calling those things that have come to us simply and indefinitely "good things." He called these "things to come" with regard to the time of the law; for just as he called that former time the "present" time, so he calls the things of Christ "things to come" in comparison to that time, or because of the mysteries to be revealed to us in the world to come.

^C *By a greater and more perfect tabernacle.* He refers here to the flesh, which was truly greater, in that God the Word and all the operation of the Spirit dwells within it. For God did not give the Spirit by measure. It is "more perfect," as accomplishing more perfect things.

*Not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building.* Here the heretics leap in, saying that the body is heavenly and ethereal. Yet if the Apostle had considered it to be heavenly and ethereal, how could he have said that it was "not of this building"? For heaven is not outside of created things. What, then, is it that he says? That the hands of the craftsmen around Bezalel made the old tabernacle, but the Spirit fashioned the tabernacle of God the Word. ^D Therefore he said that it was not of this building—that is, not of these created things, but spiritual and divine. For no creature has God the Word within itself according to substance, but that tabernacle was hypostatically united to Him. According to matter, therefore, the body of the Lord was similar to ours and of the same essence as us, namely, fashioned from the immaculate blood of the holy Virgin; but according to the manner of its constitution it was above us, both because it was hypostatically united to God the Word, or because— [alt-version omitted]

^A Since the material of the old tabernacle consisted of wood and skins, and gold, and silver, and bronze, and certain textiles, looking toward these things the Apostle said that it is not of this creation, of which the old tabernacle stood in need. For he brings forth the discourse entirely by way of comparison, and shows the superiority according to Christ. He calls the body of the Lord a tabernacle, as here, because the only-begotten Son of God dwells in it, and a veil, as it hides the divinity. He also calls heaven by these same names; a tabernacle, because the high priest is there; and a veil, because the saints are through it separated from the holy places.

Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood. ^B Behold, everything is changed and of such great superiority as the divine blood is to that of animals, with which the legal high priest entered.

He entered once into the Holy of Holies. That is, into heaven.

Having found eternal redemption. Not a temporary purification, as theirs was, but an eternal freedom of souls from sins. Or because, having entered once, by a single entry he bestowed an eternal benefit upon us. Observe also the word "found," for as if the thing had happened beyond expectation, he used this expression. For the matter of our freedom was uncertain; but he himself found this.

VERS. 13. For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling the defiled, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh. ^C Because it perhaps seemed improbable to many that by one oblation and the blood of one, he could provide eternal redemption, he confirms this, indicating that this is plausible according to the opinion of the Jews themselves. For if you, he says, believed that you were cleansed by being sprinkled with the blood of the heifer, and again with the ashes mixed with water (for the ashes were kept for the purification of the defiled, that is, of the polluted), how will the blood of Christ not cleanse souls? Observe now his discernment. He did not say that the blood of goats cleansed, but that it sanctified; not to glorify the legal things, but so that he might accomplish what he wills. For if the blood of a goat provided sanctification, as you believe, you ought much rather to be persuaded that the blood of Christ provides sanctification. For that he did not say these things to exalt the Judaic rites, see how he added: To the purifying of the flesh. For it was holy, he says, not to cleanse souls, but the flesh. ^D

VERS. 14. How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God. No high priest offered Christ, but he himself offered himself; and not through fire, as the heifers, but through the eternal Spirit, so that both the grace and the redemption should be eternal. And without spot, that is, without sin. For even in the Old Testament the heifer was required to be without spot.

^A He shall cleanse our conscience from dead works. There he said, He sanctifieth; but he added, to the purifying of the flesh: here, however, when he said, He shall cleanse, he immediately showed the superiority. For he adds that he shall cleanse the conscience, that is, the inner man, which was not the case there. And there, he who had touched a dead body was purified; here, however, the purification is from dead works, which are truly able to defile and to lead one away from God. ^B To serve the living and true God? Hence, he who touches dead works does not serve the living and true God, but has those works which he chooses instead of God. Thus, he who is given to his belly makes his belly his god; thus, the covetous man is a worshiper of idols. Such works, therefore, are dead, not only because they are alien to eternal life, but also because, while they are being performed, they are abominable, and indeed so vain and deceitful that they ensnare us and seem sweet, while they are nothing.

VERS. 15. And for this cause he is the mediator of the New Testament. This, namely, the death of Christ, troubled not a few of the weaker ones. For if he died, they say, how will he give what he promised? To this, Paul now applying a remedy, shows that for this very reason his testament is valid and firm, because he died; for a testament is not spoken of in the case of the living. ^C For this reason, he says, he died, in order to cleanse us, and in his testament he left us forgiveness and the enjoyment of paternal goods, having become the mediator between the Father and us. For the Father did not wish to grant us the inheritance, but was angry as with rebellious and alienated sons. Christ, therefore, became the mediator and reconciled Him to us. And how? That which we ourselves ought to have suffered—for we ought to have died—this he himself endured for us, and made us worthy of the testament; and henceforth, the testament was rendered stable through the death of the Son, in that he did not transmit the inheritance to the unworthy. For a testament has certain heirs—hear, therefore, the testament ^D of Christ: *I will that where I am, they also may be*—and others as disinherited: *I pray not for all, he says, but for them who believe in me through their word.* Furthermore, the testament has witnesses: *He who sent me beareth witness of me*; and, *The Paraclete shall bear witness of me*; and, *Ye are my witnesses.*

That by means of death, for the redemption of those transgressions which were under the former testament. Do you perceive that the death of Christ took place for our redemption? How, then, do you consider it to be of weakness, when it was so powerful that it cured the transgressions which were in the Law? How, therefore, do you flee for refuge to the Law, which is so weak that it could not even correct the transgressions which occur in it? Not because it was evil, but because it was weak. That they who are called might receive the promise of the eternal

^A inheritance. For if the death of Christ had not delivered us from the sins by which we made the Father an enemy to ourselves, how could we have received the heavenly inheritance? But "called," this signifies that at first, God was disposed toward us as a father toward children, and we had been called to the inheritance; but afterwards, we ourselves made ourselves unworthy of it through these sins.

"For where there is a testament, there must of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead." Do not, therefore, let the death of Christ trouble you; for if He had not died, neither would He have established a testament, so that we might become heirs. For it is beyond all controversy that a testament is valid after death; nor would we have been worthy of the inheritance at all, as the enmity had not been resolved.

"Otherwise, does it avail while he who has made the testament lives?" Read this as a question, and understand it.

"Whereupon neither the first was dedicated without blood." He persuaded the Hebrews not only ^B from common custom, but also from those things which happened in the Old Testament, which was more convincing to them. "Whereupon," he says, that is, because it is necessary that death should precede the testament, for this reason the first testament also was not dedicated without blood. And blood is a symbol of death. But there [it was] the blood of a lamb; for it was a type. Here, however, with the truth shining forth, the Son of God died in the flesh for our sake. But what is "dedicated"? That is, it received the beginning of its establishment and confirmation. For it would not have taken a beginning of operating in any other way, if the shedding of blood had not preceded.

"For when every commandment had been spoken according ^C to the law by Moses to all the people." "According to the law," that is, just as God had legislated, so that they might be spoken into the ears of all the people; "[of] every commandment according to the law," that is, of that which had been legislated.

"Taking the blood of calves and goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, he sprinkled both the book itself and all the people." For what reason was the book sprinkled, and the people? Perhaps so that the precious blood might be prefigured beforehand, by which we and our hearts were sprinkled; for these are the books, as he said above, "Giving my laws upon their heart." ^D And water is a symbol of baptism. And here are taken up the blood and the water, perhaps both because blood and water flowed from the side of the Lord; and perhaps also because baptism, of which water is a symbol, proclaims the death of the Lord, of which blood is the indication. And the hyssop was taken as a binding agent because of its density; and the wool likewise.

^A For since Christ was the lamb, for this reason it was also scarlet, that it might bear in its hue a type of the blood.

Vers. 20. Saying: This is the blood of the covenant which God hath enjoined unto you. But Christ saith: This is the blood of the New Covenant. Which is for the remission of sins. There, however, there was neither "new," nor "remission of sins." Do you observe, then, how He named the blood a covenant? So that it is necessary for death to be understood wherever a covenant is spoken of.

Vers. 21. And likewise he sprinkled with blood the tabernacle and all the vessels of the ministry. ^B And these things were a figure; for we are the tabernacle, according to the word: "I will dwell in them, and walk among them." And we are the vessels of the great house of God, some indeed of gold, and others of silver. We have been sprinkled, therefore, by the true blood of Christ, and were sanctified having been baptized into His death.

Vers. 22. And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission. Why did he add "almost"? Because those things were not a perfect cleansing, nor a perfect remission. For how could they be, since sins were not being remitted?

Vers. 23. It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these. He calls our things "heavenly," that is, those things which pertain to the Church. It has been said, moreover, in the preceding, how the Church is heaven. The Jewish things, therefore, ^C were patterns and types of these; for this reason they were also purified with the blood of calves, and with the ashes of a heifer, and with other things of such low value.

But the heavenly things themselves. That is, the things of the Church, which are ours.

With better sacrifices than these. Since, indeed, ours are as much better than the Jewish ones as heaven is better than earth—since they were expecting earthly goods, but our inheritance is heaven—they were rightly deemed worthy of a more excellent and more magnificent sacrifice, namely, the blood of the Son of God, who cleansed us more perfectly. Therefore, the death of Christ happened not only to establish the covenant, but also to bring about the true purification, namely, that of the soul. For this reason he makes mention ^D of the benefits of that death, because it seemed most ignominious to many, especially the death endured upon the cross.

Vers. 24. For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us. The Jews were exceedingly proud of the name of the Temple; for there was no such sanctuary in other lands, which could be compared with it either in the name of beauty or in the magnitude of its expense. For because the Jews were drawn to corporal things, God commanded it to be constructed most sumptuously. Wherefore, also

^A from the ends of the earth they came to it. What, then, does Paul do? Just as he did in the matter of the sacrifices, and abolished them, having opposed to them the death of Christ; so also here, having opposed to the temple the heaven, he shows the difference. For the other high priests used to enter into hand-made holy places, which were ^B antitypes of the true ones, that is to say, they were a figure of heaven. For this is the true holy place. But Christ has entered into heaven itself, although He fills all things and is present everywhere; but He says these things on account of human nature. And not only does he show the difference by this, but also by showing our High Priest to have become nearer to God. For the ancient high priests saw God through symbols, but Christ sees God Himself, having appeared to His very face. And this, too, is stated by way of condescension on account of human nature. What is, "for us"? With a sacrifice, he says, He entered which is able to propitiate the Father, but also to reconcile us to the angels. For even they were hostile to us as enemies of their own Master. Now, therefore, He appears for us; for this is what "now" indicates, that He has entered as High Priest: for He entered for the sake of our reconciliation.

"And not that He should offer Himself often." Nor did He enter now into heaven so that He might at another time enter again, offering Himself. ^C As the high priest enters into the Holy Place year by year. See the preeminence. That one year by year, Christ, however, once.

"In another’s blood." And this too pertains to the preeminence. For that one [entered] in another’s blood, of bulls and goats; but Christ in His own.

"Since He must have suffered often from the foundation of the world." Since, if He were about to offer Himself often, He says, He would need also to have died often, because He had to offer His own blood.

Now, however, once at the consummation of the ages, for the setting aside of sin, through His own sacrifice He has been manifested. Here he reveals also a certain mystery, why at the consummation of the ages, after many sins. For if His death had occurred at the beginning, when sin was not so widely spread, then no one would have believed, and since it was not fitting for Him to die a second time, all things would have been unprofitable. But now, since in later times there was a vast abundance of sins, justly did God appear at the consummation of the ages, so that He might set aside, that is, cast down, and render sin without confidence (boldness) through His sacrifice, that is, through the death of His flesh. He said such a thing also in another place: "Where sin abounded, grace did much more abound" (Rom. V, 20). But how did sin become deprived of its confidence (boldness)? By the fact that those who

had committed it were let go unpunished. For the confidence and freedom of sin is to bring on punishment. ^A Gregory of Nyssa also inquired in his Catechetical Oration and in his discourse on the Nativity of Christ concerning this very thing: Why was the Son incarnate at the consummation of the ages? And he resolves it thus: Just as the best physicians, while the fever is still inflaming the body from within and the causes effecting the disease are still aglow, provide no aid to the sick man by way of food, waiting for a time until the malady has reached its height: so too has it been handled with us. The Physician of souls waited until the entire sickness of wickedness was revealed, so that nothing of those things hidden should remain untreated, the physician only healing what is manifest to his sight. You shall learn more fully what the divine man says, if it is your desire to encounter his very discourses. ^B

VERS. 27. *And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment.* He now sets forth the reason why Christ died once: it is because He became the price for a single death. For it was appointed unto men once to die. Once, therefore, He died for all. What then? Do we not die now? Indeed; but we are not held by death as we were before, but rather through the hope of the resurrection, of which the Christ who suffered death for us became the leader, so that this death is not even death, but a sleep. Since, therefore, death was going to hold all men, for this reason He died, that He might deliver us. Or does the Apostle not wish to indicate by this now that He Himself paid the death that was owed by us as a punishment, but rather that because Christ was truly man in addition to also being God, just as men die once and then comes judgment, so too He died once? But hear also what follows. ^C

VERS. 28. *So Christ was once offered.* By whom? By Himself. For even if He is high priest, He is nevertheless also the offering, and the victim. *To bear the sins of many.* Just as in the holy Liturgy we offer up our sins, and we say, "Whether we have sinned unwillingly or willingly, forgive us"—that is, we remember them first, and then we seek forgiveness: so He too said to the Father, "For their sake I sanctify myself." Or He "offered" sins, that is, He took them away from men and offered them to the Father, that He might forgive them. Why, however, did He say "many" and not "all"? Because not all believed. For His death was an equivalent for the perdition of all, and so far as it pertains to Him, He died for all; but He did not offer the sins of all, because they themselves did not will it. Hence they made the death of the Son of God useless for themselves, which is indeed a horrific thing. ^D This is the opinion of the divine John Chrysostom. I found, moreover, in him, on this passage of the Gospel, "To give his soul a ransom for many," an annotation...

understanding "many" as equivalent to "all," for the many are indeed all. "He shall appear a second time without sin to those who await him for salvation." He died, he says, bearing our sins and offering them to the Father, so that he might wipe away those for whom he also died. For he who knew no sin, he says, the Father made sin, as he was taking upon himself what was ours. He shall appear a second time, no longer subject to sins, nor needing a second death on their account, but as a Judge for the salvation of those who await him, that is, those who believe in him and hope for his presence—and it is evident that they also live worthily of him. And yet, he will come not only for salvation, but will also be present for the punishment of the unbelievers and the sinners; yet nevertheless, he spoke of what was favorable.

Chapter X

were offered. Therefore, as though the sins were the same, ^A the same sacrifice was offered. But it was by no means the case that subsequent sins were the same as those that had occurred before. Thus, it is clear that those former sins remained unforgiven, and for this reason the same sacrifice was always offered: just as a medicine that is always applied in the same way signifies that the same sickness constantly afflicts the sufferer.

VERS. 4. *It is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.* He makes his argument stronger from the worthlessness of the things that were offered ^B and from the magnitude of the disease. Just as if someone skilled in the medical art, seeing the herb called Mercury being applied to one suffering from elephantiasis, were to say, "It is impossible for the herb Mercury to deliver one from elephantiasis."

VERS. 5. *Therefore, as He comes into the world, He says.* Christ, being about to enter into the world in a body, speaks through David. The Apostle’s purpose here is this: since he had shown the sacrifices to be weak and useless, in case someone should say to him, "How then do the Jews still perform these?" — for at that time the Temple was still standing for them, and all the legal rites were being fulfilled; but why had they not ceased? — he now points this out, saying that they had ceased ^C according to the will of God, but the Jews, being contentious and always resisting the Holy Spirit, are still occupied with them. Furthermore, he shows that even before the incarnation of the Lord, they had been rejected by God. And observe that this is what the Apostle intends. For he did not say, "Having entered," but "as He comes into the world," in order to show that even before He entered, they were hated.

*Sacrifice and offering Thou hast not desired.* That is to say, those prescribed by the Law. And an offering here signifies something different from sacrifice; ^D I suppose that by this term, bloodless sacrifices are signified.

*But a body Thou hast prepared for Me.* That is, Thou hast determined that My body should become a completed and perfect sacrifice.

VERS. 6. *Holocausts and sin offerings Thou hast not taken pleasure in.* Neither did Thou take pleasure in holocausts—that is, Thou didst not desire them, didst not deem them acceptable—nor in those things which are offered for sins. There were various names for sacrifices, according to various reasons: some for sin, some for error, some for salvation, some for propitiation, some for vows, and some for purification. All, therefore, were abolished, since "sacrifice and offering Thou hast not desired."

VERS. 7. *Then I said: Behold, I come; in the head of the book it is written of Me, to do, O God, Thy will.* Do you see that the sacrifices of the Law were rejected even before the incarnation? For when You had rejected the sacrifices, then I, Christ, said: "Behold, I come to do Thy will." And the will of God the Father is that the Son should be sacrificed for the world, and that men

^A be justified, not in the sacrifices of the Law, but in the death of His Son. "I have declared," He says, "Thy righteousness in the great congregation." Then it is interposed: "In the head of the book it is written of me"; for so the syntax must be ordered. By "head of the book" he means the volume of the Law, or the book of the Old Testament. In that Scripture, therefore, a record is made of my advent, and how I am to be sacrificed for the world. Or he calls the "head of the book" the beginning of the books of the Old Testament. For indeed, in the first book of Moses, the Book of Genesis, when he says, "Let us make man according to our image," he at once predicts and reveals the knowledge of the divinity of Christ.

^B VERS. 8, 9. Saying above: "Sacrifice and offering and whole burnt offerings and for sin Thou didst not desire, nor were they pleasing to Thee which are offered according to the Law," he then said: "Behold I come to do, O God, Thy will." Paul himself interprets this Davidic saying. But you might ask here: "What then? Were the sacrifices according to the Law not the will of God?" They were indeed His will; but the meaning of "will" is twofold. For one wills something primarily, as Paul does: "I will all men to be even as myself," that is, unmarried. One also wills something by permission; as when Paul says, "I will that younger widows marry," this is a permissive and indulgent will; for in order that they might not break their vow to Christ, he yielded to them. In this way, God, in the first and primary sense, did not desire savors and blood; but because He saw that the Hebrews were offering sacrifices to demons and were excessively preoccupied with those sacrifices, He yielded to them, ^C so that they might offer those sacrifices in His honor. But for what reason did the divine Paul bring forward this testimony, when he had countless others? Because of the impudence of the Jews. For since they said that the old system of worship was abolished, not because of its imperfection, but because of the sins of those who offered the sacrifices, and they brought forward the fact that even Isaiah blames their sins, saying: "Your hands are full of blood," and David himself, after saying: "I will not accept calves from your house," and the rest that follows there, infers: "But to the sinner God said"; since, I say, the more contentious of the Hebrews argued in this way, Paul brings forth a testimony in which the old system of worship itself is deemed ^D as rejected by God because of its own imperfection, not because of the sins of the people. For nowhere in the thirty-ninth Psalm, from which this testimony has been taken, does the Prophet make mention of the sins of the people. For this was the very reason he used the aforementioned testimony—hear it yourself: "He takes away the first, that He may establish the second." What is this "first"? The sacrifices. What is the "second"? The will.

of the Father, that is, the sacrifice made through the cross of the body of Christ. Those former things are cast aside ^A so that the offering made through the slaughter of Christ, which the Father willed, might be established and confirmed. Thus, it is not on account of the sins of those who offer that the sacrifices are cast aside, but on account of their own imperfection.

"In which will we have been sanctified, through the offering of the body of Christ once for all." In which will of the Father, he says, we have been sanctified, we who have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Christ that was made once for all; for this must be understood as implied. For we who believe that we have been sanctified through the offering of the Only-Begotten, have been sanctified in the will of the Father. And so the legal ordinances are not the will of God, but the offering of Christ, and the sanctification that comes through this.

"And every priest indeed stands daily ministering, and offering the same sacrifices frequently, which can never take away sins." Thus, to stand is a sign of ministering, but to sit—as Christ also does—is a sign of lordship, to whom the ministry is rendered.

"But He, having offered one sacrifice for sins forever." He Himself, Christ, He says, offered one sacrifice—His own body—for our sins, sufficient for us for all time, so that we have no need of a second.

"He sat at the right hand of the Father ^B. Expecting from henceforth until His enemies are made the footstool of His feet." So He is not only High Priest, but God as well. For having completed the work for which He also willed to be named High Priest by divine providence, He thereafter sits as God, and expects that His enemies should be placed under His feet. And His enemies are all the infidels ^C and the demons, who also shall be subjected; that is, their malice will remain inoperative, as they will be surrendered to the unquenchable fire.

In the meantime, however, Paul calls the infidel Hebrews his enemies, particularly to offer consolation to those who, of the Jews, had given their name to Christ and were suffering countless evils at their hands. Do not be faint-hearted, he says; they will be brought into subjection, or what is greater, they will be trampled under foot—they who now rise up against you. And this is evident from Christ sitting at the right hand of the Father. For since this has come to pass, that too will come to pass, according to what was said in the Psalms. How then were they not immediately placed under His feet—that is, removed from the midst? Because of the faithful who were to be born from them.

"For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are sanctified." He has perfectly ^D delivered from sins, he says, those who are sanctified and anointed with His blood, through being baptized into His death. For all who are baptized, having become united with the likeness of His death, it is clear that they are sanctified by His blood.

^A Ver. 15. *And the Holy Spirit also bears witness to us.* What does He bear witness to? That He has perfectly delivered us from sins through the one offering, so that we have no need of a second one. For after having said: *This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds I will write them; and their sins and their iniquities I will remember no more.* Do you see that God bears witness that He has granted the remission of sins? And He granted it when He was giving the New Covenant. He both gave and confirmed the New Covenant through the death of His Son, as has been shown previously.

Ver. 18. *Now where there is remission of these, there is no longer an offering for sin.* For if the remission of sins has been given through the one sacrifice, what further need is there for a second sacrifice? Thus it has been demonstrated that through the one offering of Christ we have been perfected, having received remission of sins, and we no longer have need of another sacrifice. Therefore, the Jewish offerings are superfluous and are performed out of contentiousness, as they were judged to be useless long ago by those by whom they are performed.

^B Ver. 19. *Having therefore, brethren, confidence.* Having demonstrated the excellence of our High Priest over the ancient ones, and of the Testament over the Testament, and of the offering over the offering, and even of the offering of Christ over the legal sacrifices, and that through it we have been delivered from sins, he now desists from this sort of dogmatic discourse, allowing the listener to catch his breath. He passes to the moral exhortation very opportunely. For having just made mention of the remission of sins, he next exhorts us not to slip back into the same things, saying: *Having therefore, he says, confidence* from the fact that our sins have been forgiven us. For just as the crime committed brings shame and causes [a lack of] confidence; so, remission gives [us] the ability to be bold.

*To enter the sanctuary.* For indeed, since our sins have been forgiven us, we have confidence to enter into the Holy Places, that is to say, into heaven.

*In the blood of Jesus.* That is, by his blood. For through the cross and the blood of Christ, having been deemed worthy of the remission of [our] faults ^C, we have received confidence.

Ver. 20. *Which He has inaugurated for us a new and living way.* This entrance into the Holy Places He Himself inaugurated for us, that is to say, He made a new way, having Himself been the first to begin it, and having Himself walked it first. He said "new" for "recent," that which has appeared in our own times. This is our boast, that those things of which Abraham was not deemed worthy, we have been deemed worthy, and now heaven has been opened to us.

*And living*, because the first way was death-dealing, since it led to the Holy Places of the Law, that is to say. For that one has no longer any place, but... ^D

to those who accept it, it became a cause of death. But this one leads so much to life, that it both lives itself and is eternal. Alternatively, understand "living" as "recent," instead of "living and flourishing," in contrast to the entrance into the ancient Holy Places; for that one is dead.

*Through the veil, that is, His flesh.* He inaugurated for us this way that leads to heaven, through His flesh. For when this was lifted up on the cross and taken up, then He revealed to us the heavenly things. Therefore, He also appropriately called it a "veil." For this is the property of a veil, that when it is removed, it reveals what is inside. ^A

*And a great priest over the house of God.* Having, that is to say, Christ as priest, and the house as us the faithful, according to the word: "I will dwell in them and walk among them." Or, as I think more likely, the heaven; for he calls that "the Holy Places," and says that the High Priest ministers in it, interceding for us. ^B

*Let us draw near.* To what? To faith and spiritual worship; or to heaven, where our High Priest is.

*With a true heart.* That is, without guile, unhypocritical toward the brethren; or "without doubting," not wavering at all, not doubting about future things, and therefore falling into faintheartedness. He adds: ^C

*In full assurance of faith.* He teaches us how we shall not be fainthearted, if we have the full assurance of faith, that is, faith that is complete and most perfect. For it is possible to believe, yet not in full assurance. As some say that for some there will be a resurrection, but for others there will not be; this is not a full faith, but imperfect. Therefore, let us draw near in full assurance of faith. For since nothing is visible—neither the temple that is heaven, nor the High Priest who is Christ—but it is hidden, just as of old the high priest was hidden when he entered into the Holy Places, for this reason a full and indubitable faith is required. ^D

*Having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience.* Having spoken about faith, he shows now that it is not faith alone that is required, but also a virtuous life. The Jews, therefore, used to be sprinkled in body, but we in our hearts, so that we may be conscious of no evil in ourselves. We shall be sprinkled by this very virtue, or also by the grace of the Spirit, who in the laver has forgiven our sins and strengthened us, so that if we strive, we may no longer fall into the same.

*And having washed the body with pure water.* By that of baptism; "pure," however, either because it makes us pure, or because it does not have blood mixed into it, like that of the ashes of old. For even if the grace of the Spirit in the laver purifies the souls, yet Paul joined here the visible to the visible. Since in the very use of baptism...

water is taken for the sake of the body, because since we are twofold, twofold is also the purification. ^A

*Teneamus spei confessionem immotam*. That is, let us hold fast that hope which we have professed, and let us hold it firm. For we hoped in the beginning of the faith that we ourselves also were to enter into heaven, and we professed, when we established the covenant of the faith, that we believe in the resurrection of the dead and in life eternal. Let us therefore hold fast this confession. *Fidelis enim est qui promisit*. He imparts to us strength, that we may hold our hope firm; namely, if we ponder in our mind the trustworthiness of Him who promised. For He is faithful, that is to say, true—even Christ Himself, who said, “Where I am, there also shall my servant be.” ^B

VERS. 24. *Et consideremus nos mutuo ad provocationem charitatis et bonorum operum.* He adds the perfection of charity. For he says, let us consider one another: that is, let us observe if anyone be distinguished in virtue, so that we may imitate him; not that we should envy him, but rather that we may be provoked to perform the same good works with him. Now this provocation is of charity, not of envy. For as iron is sharpened by iron, so a soul having communion with another soul incites it to the same things, but in charity. Or, converse mutually so that you may be kindled to love each other and be loved.

VERS. 25. *Non deserentes collectionem nostram.* He holds it as certain that meeting together generates love; therefore he warns them not to omit gathering among themselves, nor to plot separations and perverse conventicles. ^C For where there are two or three gathered, there am I in the midst of them. Moreover, the prayer of the Church also released Peter from his chains and freed him from prison.

*Sicut consuetudinis est quibusdam.* Here he accuses those who separate themselves from the Church.

*Sed consolantes vos ipsos.* That is, be a comfort to one another, admonishing one another in turn, and teaching, and consoling, and imparting relief for evils. For a brother helped by a brother is like a strong city. ^D

*Et tanto magis, quanto videtis appropinquantem diem.* That is, the day of the consummation. For, he says, we shall shortly be separated from this world; why then do we dissociate ourselves from one another? This was, in fact, a comfort to them, as they were weary from temptations, just as he says in another place, "The Lord is near; be not anxious for anything."

VERS. 26. *Voluntarie enim peccantibus nobis.* He exhorted them from the things that were more useful, namely, that we have confidence and that we have been gifted with the forgiveness of sins; now he strikes terror with things more somber. Observe, however, how inclined he is to pardon. For he says, "Voluntarily sinning"—as if

he meant that for those who sin involuntarily, there is some moderate pardon. But observe how he did not say, "those who have sinned," but, "those who go on sinning"—that is, those who remain in sin without repentance. For if we do not remain in it, but show a token of repentance, there will surely be room for forgiveness. Where, then, are those who claim that repentance is here being abolished?

"After receiving the knowledge of the truth." Either of Christ, or of all the dogmas.

"There is no longer left a sacrifice for sins." He does not say this to abolish repentance, as some have wrongly understood it; but he is showing that there is no second baptism, and therefore no second death of Christ. For he calls this a "sacrifice," as he does further on: "For by one sacrifice he has perfected unto eternity." For our baptism represents the death of Christ. ^B Just as that one was a single event, so also is this. Why, therefore, do you sin so fearlessly, when there is no longer any hope that you might effortlessly wipe away your sins through baptism? Claim, therefore, good works for yourself.

VERS. 27. "But a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and a jealousy of fire, which is about to devour the adversaries." Observe how he enlivens the fire, as it were. For just as a wild beast, once enraged, does not cease until it catches someone and, having devoured them, satiates its fury; so also that fire, being zealous for the commandments of God which have been transgressed, and becoming fierce on their account, devours forever whomever it catches. For he did not say, "destined to eat," but "to devour"—that is, eternally. By "adversaries," he means not only the infidels, but even the believers themselves, ^C who nevertheless perform acts contrary to the commandments of God.

VERS. 28. "Any one who has set aside the law of Moses." From the lesser, he shows that the punishment will justly come about, so that he may also win more credence for his argument. He calls it the Law of Moses because he himself ordained many things for them.

"Without mercy, on two or three witnesses, he dies." The construction is as follows: "Any one who has set aside the law of Moses, on the testimony of two or three witnesses, dies without mercy"; that is, if it is confirmed by the testimony of two or three that he has transgressed the law.

VERS. 29. "Of how much worse punishment, do you think, will he be counted worthy, who has trodden under foot the Son of God, and has considered the blood of the Testament common?" ^D He leaves the judgment to them; a thing we are accustomed to do in very clear cases, when we make the listeners the arbiters. But what is it "to have trodden under foot"? It means to have treated with contempt. For just as we have no regard for things being trodden upon, so if we take no account of Christ, we come to the point of sinning. And "has considered the blood of the Testament common," this is to say, has considered it to differ in no way from any other blood. Test

-^Aament, because through it the testament toward us was confirmed, which gives us the inheritance of good things, as we said above. These things are said concerning the mysteries. For when, upon receiving the immaculate body and blood, we roll the flesh that has received them in the mire of bodily impurity, do we not trample upon the Son of God? For the mud of the earth is not so unworthy of the divine body as is impurity. You may use this passage also against the Nestorians; for they, thinking Christ to be a mere man, consider his blood to be common, and differing in no way from the rest. "In which he was sanctified." He shows here the senselessness and ingratitude; for it was necessary, he says, to revere the sanctification by which he was gifted in the blood. "And has insulted the Spirit of grace?" For he who does not rightly steward the benefit bestowed, offers insult to Him who bestowed it. He made you a Son of God, yet you become a slave to passions? He came to dwell in you, yet you bring in the devil upon yourself? Are these things not an insult to the Spirit? VERS. 30. "For we know him who said: Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord. And again: The Lord shall judge his people. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God." These things he said from the context, to show that the Lord is going to exact vengeance upon those who sin. For He said this through the Prophet. But he also consoles those who were already losing heart because of the temptations from the Jews by whom they were being harassed; ^B for he says, as it were, such things as: Do not be cast down; you have the One who avenges and repays, who always lives, and those who harass you will by no means escape Him. You indeed fell into the hands of those who are men, and subject to death; but they will fall into the hands of the eternally living God, and therefore the inescapable One. VERS. 32. "But call to mind the former days." Therefore we did not say in vain that the verse, "Vengeance is mine," introduces the matter for their consolation secretly. For behold, he now speaks to them more clearly, exhorting them not to fail in patience. Therefore, he says, do not imitate others, but yourselves. For in the beginning of your faith you struggled; keep this contest always in mind; do not, through sloth, lose ^C what was won through right struggle. But observe here his spiritual wisdom: since he had earlier shaken their minds through the mention of Gehenna, now he softens them through commendations—not flattering them, but exhorting them through these very things. For he who counsels someone to imitate himself in those works which he previously performed persuades more easily. "In which, having been enlightened, you endured a great struggle of afflictions." Either he speaks concerning baptism, ^D

and ^A munition. He says "confidence," because those who have endured such things for God’s sake have great confidence. "Which has a great recompense." For you are witnesses, who have recognized that you possess better goods in the heavens.

VERS. 36. *For you have need of patience.* You have no need of anything else, but of patience alone: you have all other things, and there is no need to add anything.

^B That by doing the will of God, you may carry off the promise. The will of God is to endure unto the end. "For he who has persevered," he says, "unto the end, the same shall be saved." The Apostle exhorts them in this, just as if one were to see an athlete who has defeated all his adversaries and has won in the contest, but, being impatient of delay, when he sees those who bestow the crowns of victory dragging out the time, meditates flight, because he no longer wishes to endure thirst and heat, and another were to address him with these words: You have finished all things vigorously; wait a little while, and you will carry off the crowns. Overcome even this delay of the crowns with patience.

VERS. 37. *For yet a little while, and he who is to come will come, and will not delay.* He brings forward the prophet Habakkuk saying that the Judge, who is about to render the recompense, is near. But if Habakkuk then said, "a little while, and he who is to come will come," it is manifest that now he is closer. And that which he says, "a little while," signifies something very small.

VERS. 38. *But the just shall live by faith. And if he draw back, my soul has no pleasure in him.* It is necessary, therefore, for us to believe if we are to be just. But if the just man draws back—that is, if he suffers any ambiguity or hesitation, or if he withdraws, that is, succumbs to temptations—my soul does not take pleasure in him. Whose soul? God’s, according to the customary manner of speech of the Scripture; as in that, "My soul hates your feasts." Or Christ’s.

*But we are not of drawing back unto perdition, but of faith unto the acquisition of the soul.* Because he had terrified them when he said, "My soul has no pleasure in him," he ^C asserts that we are not of the number of those who perish because of drawing back or because of sloth or hesitation; but of those who persist, stable in faith, so that they may acquire their own souls, that is, possess, guard, and keep them. For acquisition is possession, a peculium.

CAPUT XI

*Now faith is the substance of things to be hoped for.* He describes faith to us henceforth, saying: Faith is the essence of those things ^D which are not yet, and the substance of those things which do not subsist; for example, the resurrection does not yet subsist, but faith establishes it, and places it before our eyes.

^A Argumentum, that is, demonstration and manifestation, of things not evident. For it causes these things to be seen by our mind as if they were present. If, therefore, faith is capable of such things, why do you wish to see them actually, so that you might fall away from faith? This, indeed, is nothing other than to fall away from being just. For the just shall live by faith.

In it, indeed, the elders obtained testimony. That is, in this same faith, all the ancients obtained testimony from God, and confessed that they served him.

^B VERSE 3. By faith we understand that the ages were framed by the word of God, so that from invisible things things visible came to be. Because faith is impugned by those who do not understand its power, who assert it to be an undemonstrable thing and a manifest imposture, he shows that the greatest things are accomplished through faith, and not through ratiocinations. For as to the fact that God by his word created the things that are from things that are not, what demonstration did he present to us? None, indeed, but faith alone. By faith, therefore, we understand that the ages were framed, that is, happened by the word of God. Why by faith? Because from things not visible, things visible came to be; it requires faith. Or thus: By the word of God, it happened that things which are were brought forth from things that are not. But when you hear "ages," understand also the eternal things contained within them, or rather times, and thus all temporary things, with a more unusual mode of speaking, with "ages" also signifying times. For properly, an age is nothing other than time, and is one, not many.

^C VERSE 4. By faith Abel offered a more abundant sacrifice to God than Cain. Because faith is a great thing and requires a noble soul, and the Hebrews were infirm in the faith, and at first indeed demonstrated faith, but later, on account of the frequency of afflictions, became fainthearted, he exhorted them by the things done by them preeminently, and by Scripture, saying that the just shall live by faith: and by ratiocinations, saying: "Faith is the subsistence of things hoped for": now, however, he also brings forth arguments from great and ancient men. For when a man finds participants in his adversities, he is refreshed and breathes again. He brings forward, therefore, Abel, saying: By faith he offered a sacrifice more abundant, that is, more precious, than his brother. For whom did he see before him? His father or his mother? But they had stumbled against God. Or his brother? But even he had not served God. By faith alone, therefore, he was led to offer to God of the better things he had, believing that he would receive a reward. By which he obtained testimony that he was just, God bearing witness to his gifts. For when God had said to Cain, "If you do not offer rightly, and do not divide rightly," he bore witness to Abel, ^D

^A that he also offered rightly, according to what he had received from Him, and divided rightly, according to what was better, as to a Master. It is said, moreover, that fire descending from heaven consumed the sacrifice, and from this Cain also recognized that Abel was preferred. For how otherwise would he have known? Hence, one of those who translated the Hebrew into the Greek tongue set it down thus: "The Lord looked down upon the offerings of Abel, and set them on fire."

*And by it he being dead yet speaketh.* That is, by faith itself he yet speaketh; which is to say, faith caused him to live on even to this day, and to be established as a teacher to all, speaking as if he were saying: "Imitate me, O mortals, and become well-pleasing to the Creator, having become righteous." He speaketh, therefore—that is to say, being glorified, being heralded, being remembered, he speaketh; just as the heaven speaks by being merely seen. For the word does not ^B achieve as much as his suffering. He said this, however, to show the faint-hearted that the righteous man enjoys honor in some measure even here; so act in such a way that you, too, may enjoy it. But some copies have "it is spoken of," not rightly, I think.

VERS. 5. *By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God.* This man showed a greater faith than Abel. For the things which befell Abel were able to be a scandal to him, in that, being righteous, he was permitted to be slain by his brother. For what does it profit that the slayer was punished? What advantage did Abel derive from it, since he had already been removed from the midst? Enoch, therefore, showed great faith, believing that God would be a rewarder in the life to come, ^C even if not in the present; and through that faith he pleased God, and being well-pleasing, he was translated. By faith, therefore, he was translated; that is, faith translated him, through which he was well-pleasing. See also how, through Abel, God showed that the judgment concerning death was true; but through Enoch, on the other hand, He showed that judgment to be temporary, and that it shall be abolished. That he was, therefore, translated while alive, and that he still lives, we know; but where, or how? It is uncertain, the Scripture not having said.

VERS. 6. *But without faith it is impossible to please him.* For if anyone does not believe that there is a recompensing of good and evil, he will not be well-pleasing to God. For how could he enter upon the laborious path of virtue, not being persuaded that ^D there are manifold and more lasting rewards in the world to come? Hear also what follows. *For he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.* That God is, and that He becomes a rewarder, we hold by faith—for some say that all things exist by chance—but what God is according to essence was held to be utterly incomprehensible by those who are more moderate. But what is meant by "to them that diligently seek him"? That is, to those who through their life seek...

to please him, not to those who are curious through secular wisdom. Observe Paul's wisdom, and how he everywhere sows the thought of God as a "rewarder" for the sake of the fainthearted faithful Hebrews. ^A

VERS. 7. *By faith Noah, having received an oracle concerning things not yet seen, moved with fear, prepared an ark for the salvation of his house.* Noah, he says, received an oracle from God, that is, he was instructed about things unseen, and he was not incredulous. But although the weather was clear and all were indulging in pleasures and delights, anticipating nothing terrible—for nothing of the sort was even to be seen—nevertheless, he, believing God, feared the flood and prepared an ark, by which he saved all who were of his house. Note, moreover, that God gives an oracle, and the Spirit gives an oracle; just as it is written concerning Simeon: *He had received an answer from the Holy Spirit* (Luke II, 26). Therefore, God is the Spirit himself. ^B

*By which he condemned the world.* That is, he showed them to be deserving of punishment, since even seeing the ark being prepared over such a long time, they did not come to their senses, nor did they believe that a flood would come. *And became heir of the justice which is by faith.* That is, he gained the status of appearing righteous before God; this name of "justice," he says, faith bestowed upon him.

VERS. 8. *By faith he that is called Abraham, obeyed to go out into a place which he was to receive for an inheritance.* Since the faithful among the Hebrews kept looking to him and to the other patriarchs, as though they had already received ten thousand good things, he intends to show that no one had yet received any reward. He says, therefore: By faith Abraham obeyed, being ordered to leave his fatherland. For whom had he seen, that he might imitate him? His father was an idolater; he had not heard the prophets. Thus, it was an act of faith to obey God as one speaking truly about the things he promised, and to leave behind what was in his hands. *And went out, not knowing whither he went.* And yet, even if he had known, who was compelling him, having abandoned things in reach, to pursue things not in reach? But he did not even know what that land was at all to which he was called. ^C

VERS. 9. *By faith he abode in the land of promise, as in a strange country.* The land, he says, which God promised to give to him and to his seed, he inhabited as a foreign one. How foreign? For he even bought the tomb of Sarah, and yet he did not waver, nor did he say: "God has lied"; but he believed that the one who promised would undoubtedly give it. *Dwelling in cottages.* He dwelt there so much as in a foreign land that he did not even have a house, but lived in tents, which is the way of strangers, passing from one place to another, because they possess nothing of their own. ^D

^A With Isaac and Jacob, the fellow-heirs of the same promise. Isaac, he says, and Jacob thus dwelt in it as in a foreign land. Isaac, indeed, being envied by the Philistines and having his wells taken away by those around Abimelech, and his wife as well, kept moving from one place to another. But Jacob, not only suffering persecution by fear of his brother Esau, but also having come from Mesopotamia, he bought the place where he pitched his tent; and he kept moving, sometimes to Bethel, sometimes to Ephrata, unsettled as a sojourner. Yet they themselves were heirs of the promise, as was their father: "For to you I will give it, and to your seed." Yet they did not disbelieve.

^B "For he looked for the city having foundations." For this reason, he says, they lived as sojourners in tents which have no foundation, because they were looking for the heavenly city, which has true foundations, which stand forever and are never dilapidated. Therefore, God, seeing them despise the earthly promises, delayed them, preparing greater ones for them, as they were worthy of them, which, of course, were not of earthly things. Then they, receiving a promise of earthly things, despised it and aspired to heaven. But you, O believers, having received a heavenly promise, desire the earth; and are you not ashamed of this?

^C "Whose architect and builder is God." Oh, how great is the encomium of that city, to have God as its architect!

^D "By faith even Sarah herself, being sterile." It is meant to put to shame, when he says, "Even Sarah herself," just as if he were to say: "The woman believed, and are you not ashamed, if you are found lower in greatness of soul than a woman?" But how did she who laughed believe? Indeed she did believe, even if she laughed, for she was later rebuked and became afraid, which was an indication of faith. For it is plain that she realized that the one who was conversing with her was someone great and above human nature.

"She received power for the conception of seed." That is, she was strengthened to receive and contain the seed of Abraham cast into her. Or, because the diligent investigators of these matters maintain that a woman also contributes a certain seed of her own, perhaps it is to be understood this way: "for the conception of seed," instead of saying, "so that she also might provide seed."

"And she gave birth beyond the time of life." He said above that she was sterile; now he says that she also gave birth beyond the time of life. Thus she had a double deficiency: one from nature, because she was sterile; and the other from old age. "Because she deemed Him faithful who had promised." By faith

^A they were born of one, and that one as good as dead, as the stars of the heaven in multitude, and as the sand which is by the seashore, which is innumerable. This faith did not only bring about the act of bearing, but also the producing of so many, a number that not even fertile women attain. Thus there are two miracles. But how were they innumerable, since they were often numbered? This is spoken hyperbolically according to the custom of Scripture, as in the phrase: "We saw cities raised up to heaven"; or else, because others are always being born, he called it innumerable.

^B Verse 13. "By faith all these died, not having received the promises." Two things are sought here: first, how can he say "all these died," when he had said of Enoch that "he was translated so as not to see death"? Second, how can he say now that they did not receive the promises, even though he had said that Abel still speaks, as he is celebrated by all? Furthermore, Enoch was translated, and Noah received a reward in being saved with his house and being called righteous, and Abraham sired children by Sarah. Therefore, take the phrase "all these died" as meaning: "All these have died, with the exception of the one who did not see death." But the fact that they did not receive the promises is truly said of all. For ^C God, the most bountiful, did not discharge the rewards for the great labors of faith by these things alone—for Abel through glory among men, for Enoch through his translation, for Noah through his preservation from the flood, and for Abraham through the procreation of his son—but it is clear that these were as it were tastes and pledges of the true promises, given first to the saints because of our faint-heartedness, so that, taught by these, we might be strengthened in faith regarding those others. Other things, truly great, and which have not entered into the heart of man, are prepared for them, which they have not yet received, just as the Lord says in the Gospel, that he who has renounced all things will receive a hundredfold in this age, and in the world to come eternal life.

"But saw them afar off, and embraced them." ^D Here he hints that they both saw and embraced—that is, cherished, taking the metaphor from those sailing who, seeing desired cities from afar, greet them familiarly while still in advance of entering them—the mysteries concerning the kingdom of heaven, the resurrection, and the ineffable goods. Or he understands Abraham and his descendants, since they themselves did not receive the promises concerning the land but saw them from afar—that is, four generations earlier—that their offspring, ascending out of Egypt, would inherit them. This indeed

^A interpretation does not follow those things spoken of in That these were all, as if it were fitting only for those around Abraham. And having confessed that they are foreigners and pilgrims on the earth, not only of the promised land, but of the whole world. For this reason, they did not even deign to receive this. For those fathers were not worthy of it, but of heaven. But their descendants received it; for they were worthy of the earth. Moreover, Abraham confessed himself to be a foreigner and a sojourner to the Hittites in these very words. Nevertheless, all were such, and David testifies, saying, "I am a sojourner, as were all my fathers."

VERS. 14, 15, 16. For those who say such things demonstrate that they are seeking a homeland. And if indeed they were mindful of that from which they had gone out, they would have had an opportunity to return. But now they reach for a better one, that is, a heavenly one. By saying, he says, that they themselves are guests, they signify—that is, they show—that they are seeking a homeland. Let us see, then, what kind of homeland they are seeking: the earthly one which they left behind, as Abraham left Mesopotamia? Yet it was permitted to him to return to that one. Since, however, he did not return, it is manifest that he was neither mindful of this nor was this his homeland, but he was longing for another, a better one, that is, a heavenly one, to which it was not yet the time for him to be raised.

^B Therefore, God is not ashamed to be called their God. On account of such virtue of theirs, he says, God holds them in such great esteem, that while He is the God of the whole world, both of the invisible and of that which falls under our sight, He is not ashamed to be called their God specifically, just as if they were to be ^C compared to all creatures. Or rather, God is said to be the God of the visible world, as its Creator and Lord; by this reckoning He is also the God of the Gentiles: but of these [the faithful], He is as a friend, which is greater.

For he has prepared a city for them. So much is He not ashamed of them, but holds them as His own, that even the city which they longed for, that which is in the heavens, He has prepared for them.

VERS. 17. By faith Abraham offered up Isaac, when he was tested. Abraham is greater than all in faith. For here not only was nature struggling, but also the word of God with divine command. For He who had said, "To you and to your seed I will give the land," ^D He commands, "Slay your son." Therefore, Abraham is said to be tested, not because God had a need to learn of his virtue, but in order that we, through that very experience and through his works, might learn of his virtue. Note, however, that temptations are so useful, that not only does God permit them to be brought upon the faithful by others, but He even tests them Himself, in order that He might show them to be more approved.

VERS. 17, 18, 19. And he was offering up his only-begotten, who had received the promises—to whom it was spoken: "In Isaac your seed shall be called." Reasoning...

^A that God is able to raise even from the dead. This is indeed to be wondered at, that, having no other child through whom he expected the promise to be fulfilled, but only this one, he nevertheless offered him. Whence, then? From great faith. For he believed that God is able, even after the slaying, having raised him from the dead, to fulfill the promise and, through him having come to life again, to multiply the seed. But how was Isaac an only-begotten, when he even had Ishmael? But in so far as it pertains to the word of the promise, he was an only-begotten; for this was in the strict sense the seed. "For in Isaac shall seed be called for you."

Whence also he received him in a figure ^B. What is the meaning of "in a figure"? It is: in a type, for the demonstration of the mystery that is in Christ. For just as then Isaac was released, but the ram was slain; so the one Christ, being both God and man, was, according to his human nature, slain for us, while his divinity remained impassible. But in another sense, Abraham was a type of God the Father, and Isaac of the Son of God; since God was about to dispense this great mystery, which is beyond the human mind, and to give His own Son for us, being exceedingly philanthropic. Nor did He wish to give even this as His own gift out of grace, but rather as rendering a debt. As if to say: I impart nothing ^C new to human nature by sacrificing my Son for it. For Abraham endured sacrificing his own son for me and for my sake. Therefore I am rendering a debt; I am not giving a grace. Or else, "in a figure" means that he received him back in the ram, that is, in the exchange of the ram; which ram was a type of Isaac, that is to say, the antitype of Isaac was slain.

VERS. 20. By faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau concerning things to come. For whence would he have promised such great goods to his sons, himself sitting in a strange land, had he not believed that God would give the things that were promised? ^D And what is the meaning of "concerning things to come"? Either that they were concerning things in the world to come—for they knew of the resurrection, and the blessings were spiritual—or concerning the goods upon the earth which they themselves were about to receive, or those who were to be born from them. He prefers Jacob to Esau, as being virtuous, and as having received the birthright, and as being worthy in all things to be preferred.

VERS. 21. By faith Jacob, when he was dying, blessed each of the sons of Joseph; and worshiped, leaning on the top of his staff. The sons of Joseph were Manasseh and Ephraim; and Manasseh was indeed the first, but Ephraim was the latter. Yet Jacob blessed Ephraim with greater blessings, and by the crossing of the right hand's imposition; and he so believed that the blessings would come to pass, and that the tribe of Ephraim would reign, that he even demonstrated it by the actions themselves. For he worshiped Joseph, signaling the adoration of the whole people. How then did he worship? Upon the top of his staff, that is...

leaning on his staff because of his old age. Some, however, say that he worshiped toward the top of Joseph’s staff, sensing that the scepter of the kingdom would be worshiped through the staff in the future.

VER. 22. *By faith Joseph, when he was dying, made mention of the departing of the children of Israel, and gave commandment concerning his bones.* To such a degree, he says, did he believe that the Israelites would be liberated from Egypt that he even adjured them to carry his bones with them. He did this, not because he was concerned about a tomb—for how would a man so wise have been ignorant that the earth is the Lord’s?—but in order to give the people perfect assurance that God’s promise would absolutely come to pass and that they would go forth. And because it is so pleasing to God that they not remain in Egypt ^B on account of the impiety there, it was not even pleasing to him that his own bones should be buried in Egypt.

VER. 23. *By faith Moses, when he was born, was hid three months by his parents, because they saw he was a proper child, and they were not afraid of the king's commandment.* Having enumerated great men who conducted their lives by faith, and what they accomplished, he speaks also of the parents of Moses, who were common people, inducing a blush in those who are weak and prone to faint-heartedness, inasmuch as they are inferior to such people. In the progress of his discourse, he even mentions a harlot so as to induce greater shame. He asks, therefore: why did they hide him for a three-month period, and this when the king’s commandment existed to destroy the male children? Why did they not fear? It is clear that they believed he would be saved. ^C But why did they believe he would be saved? Because they saw the child was "proper," that is, beautiful and graceful to the sight; and they believed that God had graced him immediately from his swaddling clothes. For they say that they were indeed about to cast him away, but when he smiled with grace, they let him be; so divine was everything about him.

VER. 25. *By faith Moses, when he was come to years, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter; choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season.* He comes to an example most familiar to them, namely, Moses; for this reason he lingers, treating it more fully. The construction is of this sort: By faith Moses refused to be called the son of Pharaoh’s daughter. When? When he became "great," that is, when he had already reached manhood. For it is ^D clear that he expected to receive greater things. The word "refused" indicates intense hatred and a decided alienation from the royalty of Pharaoh. Notice, however, how he calls the failure to suffer affliction together with the brothers "sin." God brings this reproach through the prophets: *They were not grieved for the affliction of Joseph*; and again: *He did not go forth to make a lamentation* (Amos vi, 6).

^A It is given as a sign to those sighing in Ezekiel; while the angels are commanded to cut down those suffering nothing of the sort. But if those who do not voluntarily suffer along with the afflicted are sinning, what must be thought of those who maltreat others and do evil themselves? Therefore, it signifies the participation in royal delights by the temporary pleasure of sin.

VERSE 26. *Esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures of Egypt.*

*For he looked toward the reward.* That is, with the eyes of faith.

VERSE 27. *By faith he left Egypt, not fearing the wrath of the king.*

catch him. And the sign of this fact is that he chose to stay in the neighborhood and hid himself there. Wherefore this too is of faith. ^A For he endured as seeing the Invisible. For as if he saw God abiding with him, he consistently tolerated all things. For it contributes much to patience to always have God in mind, just as David says: "I foresaw the Lord always before my face," and the rest.

VER. 28. By faith he celebrated the Passover and the sprinkling of the blood, so that he who was destroying the firstborn might not touch them. Everywhere Paul incidentally interjects a mystery, just as here too, in the midst of consoling/exhorting, he mentions the mystery of the Passover. For that sprinkling of blood, that is, the anointing of the doorposts, signified the shedding of the Lord’s blood, by which, being anointed, we flee in the night of this life from the destroyer of the firstborn of those not anointed. Moses, therefore, having then believed that the application of the blood would preserve the firstborn, commanded the people to do this. And yet that was the blood of a lamb; but nevertheless, inasmuch as it was a figure of the blood of Christ, it showed such great power and virtue. But you, truly anointed with His blood, do you not trust to be fortified by it? Yes, indeed. And he celebrated the Passover, that is, the eating of the lamb, and the unleavened bread, and the bitter herbs, and he believed that the people having gone out of Egypt would be preserved. For the manner of that meal was accommodated to their exodus.

^B VER. 29. By faith they passed through the Red Sea as by dry land. Lest they say, "Why do you bring forward inimitable men?" he brought forward the people as an example. For imitate, he says, at least these from the multitude, who believed that the water would not engulf them, and so they dared, trusting in God that they would walk across as if on dry land: so much does faith make that which is impossible into something possible. Why then do you hesitate?

That which the Egyptians experienced—they were devoured. And no one, he says, can say that it was imaginary; it was not water. For that it was the sea, the Egyptians are proof, inasmuch as they indeed attempted to enter, but were swallowed up by it when it was stirred up all at once against them, which during the transit of the Hebrews had stood as a wall; ^C just as later the flame prepared against the three holy children showed that it was flame, when it devoured the Babylonians; and in the same way, the lions that tore apart the accusers of Daniel.

VER. 30. By faith the walls of Jericho fell, having been compassed about for seven days. By faith: for when God commanded it, neither Joshua nor the people hesitated, nor did they say, "What is this? Does the sound of trumpets have the nature of casting down stones and fortifications?" But they believed that it would be so, and so it happened. ^D

^A

EXPOSITION ON THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS — CHAPTER XI

VERS. 31. By faith Rahab the harlot did not perish with those who were disobedient, having received the spies in peace. Behold, as I said above, he brings forth a most contemptible person, in order to shame them, since they appear to be inferior to such a little woman, and at the same time to show that the power of faith is great, since it accomplishes such things even in the reprobate. Therefore, she too demonstrated faith, hiding the men who were sought as spies. She would not have hidden them, had she not believed that the city would be captured. For she said thus: "I know that you will take this land; for we have heard of your works." And she, indeed, believed what she heard; but those who did not believe in the wondrous deeds of God perished.

VERS. 32. And what more shall I say? After he has finished his discourse on the harlot, and has sufficiently shamed them by the quality of the person, henceforth, for the sake of brevity, he does not go through all the others one by one, lest he seem tedious; yet he does not altogether keep silent, but while appearing to pass over them, he does not pass them over; and thus he neither exhausts the hearer, and nonetheless accomplishes what he wishes through many. ^B

For time will fail me as I tell it. What time? Either the whole of time—this statement is uttered, as we are accustomed to say, hyperbolically—or the time that is appropriate for the Epistle.

Concerning Gedeon, Barak, and Samson, and Jephthae, David and Samuel, and the prophets. Some inquire for what reason he places Jephthae and Samson and Barak here. What do you say? Since he placed the harlot, would he not place these? And do not recount for me the rest of their life, but consider this: whether they shone in faith. For he does not make an examination of lives, but an indication of faith. ^C

VERS. 33. Who through faith conquered kingdoms. Namely, those who fought with Gedeon.

They worked righteousness. Who? They themselves, and Samson. For they took vengeance on the enemies of their kinsmen and fellow-tribesmen, having appeared merciful to their own household and friends, but having risen up against the enemies who offered them violence. Now this is the duty of righteousness, to render to each according to their merit.

They obtained promises. As David. For He says, "The Lord swore to David: Of the fruit of your loins I will set upon your throne." Which, sensibly, came to pass in Solomon, but spiritually in the Lord Jesus, who is truly Solomon, the peaceful, and is peace itself in reality. For "Solomon" means this, if you interpret it, namely, "peaceful." ^D

They stopped the mouths of lions. Daniel and Samson.

VERS. 34. They quenched the power of fire. The three youths. But he did not say, "They quenched fire," but, "the power of fire," which is greater; for even if it were enkindled, it nevertheless had no power to burn against them.

They "escaped the edge of the sword." These were also ^A the three youths, or, if we may speak more properly, Elijah from the sword of Jezebel, and David himself from that of Saul.

"Out of weakness were made strong." This refers to those who returned from the captivity of Babylon, for they in no way differed from the bones of the dead, as it is written in Ezekiel. Moreover, Hezekiah also, when he was sick, received an extension of his life.

"Waxed valiant in fight, turned to flight the armies of the aliens." This also fits those who had returned from Babylon. For the neighboring nations, always envying them and rising up against them even more than before, were nevertheless defeated by them through faith, as they trusted in the power of God. It applies also, and most especially, to Samson.

Ver. 35. "Women received their dead raised to life again." The Sareptan woman through Elijah, and the Shunammite through Elisha.

"And others were tortured." That is, beheaded, as was John, or James the son of Zebedee. Others, however, define "tortured" as being beaten with clubs.

"Not accepting deliverance." That is, they could have refrained from rebuking those whom they rebuked, and been delivered from the punishment inflicted upon them, but they would not do so.

"That they might obtain a better resurrection." A better one, not like that of the children of these women, but better in comparison with that of the rest of mankind. For the saints shall be caught up in the clouds ^B to meet the Lord, shining forth—which in another place he calls an "exaltation." And, in another sense, because it is to eternal life. But the rest shall remain below, and for them the resurrection will be to eternal punishment.

Vers. 36. "And others had trial of cruel mockings." As Elisha was mocked by the children, or Samson by the Philistines after his eyes had been put out.

"Yea, moreover of bonds and imprisonment." As Jeremiah, Micaiah, and the apostles later on.

Ver. 37. "They were stoned." As Naboth, and Stephen later on.

"They were sawn asunder." As Isaiah was by Manasseh, whom they say was sawn with a wooden saw, so that the punishment might be ^C more painful and severe, as he was thus tortured beyond measure.

"Were slain with the sword." As Micaiah, and Zechariah, and John, and James. Observe, however, how some indeed escaped the edge of the sword through faith, while others died by the slaughter of the sword. For such a thing is faith: it both performs great deeds and suffers great things, and yet considers that it suffers nothing. Why, then, are you, who have not yet suffered anything of this kind, despondent and sad?

"They wandered about in sheepskins [melotes], in goatskins." As ^D

of a sheep or some other animal. ^A

"Being destitute." As was this very Elias and Elisha; for women used to feed them.

"Afflicted, tormented." For Jezebel did not afflict Elias a little by persecuting him.

^B "Of whom the world was not worthy." You cannot say, he says, that because they were sinners they suffered such things, but rather that they were such that they were more precious than the world itself. By "world," the Scripture means both the multitude of men and the structure of the world. Both are understood here. If, therefore, you compare the entire structure of the world, with the men who are in it, against these, you will find nothing equal to them in dignity. Here he rouses their hearts so that they seek nothing worldly, since the world is unworthy of the saints. For it is an injury to yourself if you accept your reward here; you have shown yourself to be of no value. If the whole world is not worthy of one saint, why do you seek a portion of it?

"Wandering in deserts, and in mountains, and in dens, and in caves of the earth." As was Elias, and the prophets who were being fed secretly by Obadiah in the cave. They were not even permitted, he says, to inhabit the wilderness without fear, but were driven away even from there by fear, and wandered now here, now there. ^C Yet, nevertheless, they believed they would receive eternal consolation from God, and therefore they endured these things.

"And all these, having received testimony through faith, did not receive the promise." Why, he says, are you faint-hearted, because, being in the contest, you have not yet received the rewards? All the aforementioned saints, although they already had testimony through faith that they had pleased God, had not yet attained the promises of heavenly goods. For some attained earthly promises, such as David. But that was not the object of their seeking; those things which are in the heavens, these truly are the promises.

"God having provided some better thing for us, that they should not be made perfect without us." "Some better thing," that is, to our honor. For that they should not seem to have the advantage of us by being crowned first, He appointed one time of crowns for all. ^D And He did not say, "that they might not be crowned," but, "that they might not be made perfect." Thus, they appear perfect at that time. Besides, even now they possess the earnest and pledge of honor. For whence comes to them the power to help those who invoke them? Whence the confidence to intercede?

and consummation, they shall then receive. Is God therefore ^A unjust to them, if they have indeed anticipated us in their labors, but in their crowns wait for us? By no means; for it is pleasing even to them that they should be brought to consummation together with their brethren. We are all one body; it affords the body greater pleasure when it is crowned jointly in all its members. God is a most loving Father of children, who has various sons; some indeed return more quickly from the fields, having completed their works, while others still remain there working. He has given to those who labored first a certain foretaste, saying and commanding them to wait for their brethren until the perfect banquet; and they, being men of brotherly love, wait joyfully, so that they may also be gladdened together.

CHAPTER XII

^B VERSE 1. *Therefore we also, having so great a cloud of witnesses compassing us about.* He did not say, "lifted up over us," but, "compassing us about," that is, surrounding us on every side. And He calls "witnesses" not only those in the New Testament, but those in the Old as well. For they, too, bore witness to the magnificence of God, such as the three children, Daniel, and all the prophets. He did not say "a multitude," but "a cloud," a term most appropriate to the present subject. For since they were oppressed by the heat of afflictions, the memory of the witnesses, he says, like a cloud ambient on every side, will refresh you.

*Laying aside every weight.* That is, the burden of earthly affairs and the cares mingled with them. For they are nothing else, he says, than a vain burden. Why, then, do you grieve to be freed from them?

*And the sin which doth so easily beset us.* Either that which easily encompasses us, or that which can easily suffer defeat—for it is easy, if we but wish it, to overcome sin. Or because through it one easily falls into dangers, for nothing is so perilous as sin.

*Let us run by patience the race that is set before us.* He did not say, "Let us box or wrestle," but he brings forward that which was lightest of all, which pertains to a race. Nor did he say, "Let us add to the race," but, "Let us persevere in this very thing." For some must run by continence, others by almsgiving, others by another virtue; but you, by patience—for this is what you need, as was also said above.

VERSE 2. *Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith.* That is, if we wish to learn how one must run by patience, let us look to Christ, just as those who are learning arts look to their teachers; which ^D also He Himself said: *Learn of me*; and again: *If they have called the master of the house Beelzebub, how much more shall they call them of his household*

^A you have reached, but only as far as persecutions, as far as robberies; ^B but Christ came even unto death. By saying "you have resisted," he indicates that sin also breathes forth something vehement and is an adversary; and that they themselves are standing and struggling, though not yet in the more deadly contests, but in the lighter ones.

*Struggling against sin.* Against the devil, who is sin itself, as its first inventor and teacher; or against sin itself and its shameful passions, which are hostile and destructive to us.

*Ver. 5. And you have forgotten the exhortation.* You are so relaxed, he says, and dissolved into sloth, that you have forgotten the words that exhort you to courage, even though you have not yet suffered anything great. For great and noteworthy afflictions often cause forgetfulness of necessary things.

*Which speaks to you as to sons: My son, do not neglect the discipline of the Lord.* For Solomon was not speaking to his own sons, but to all who could hear, and to you entirely: therefore the word "as" is added.

*Neither be weary when you are rebuked by Him.* Temptations are therefore brought about by God; and if they are from God, they will certainly result in our benefit. For God either directly wills that we be tempted, so that we may be freed from sins, or He permits us to be tempted for probation and that we may obtain more crowns.

*Ver. 6. For whom the Lord loves, He chastens; and He scourges every son whom He receives.* For it is impossible to find anyone beloved by the Lord without afflictions. Are robbers and thieves not also scourged? Are they, therefore, sons? By no means. For he did not say, "Whoever is scourged is a son," but, "Every son is scourged." Robbers, then, are not scourged as sons, but are punished as criminals. But here, having first said "He chastens," he then added "He scourges," so that you might understand the scourging of a son not as retribution for crime, but as education. *Whom He receives*, that is, whom He accepts, whom He takes to Himself more than others, whom He draws into intimacy.

*Ver. 7. If you endure chastening, God offers Himself to you as to sons.* For what son is there whom his father does not chasten? But if you are without discipline, of which all have become partakers, then you are illegitimate, and not sons. Through these very things from which they thought themselves abandoned by God, he shows them that they were objects of God's care. For, he says, if you were without afflictions, you would have been base-born and illegitimate sons, and not genuine. For which of the parents cares for the upbringing and seemliness of base-born children? But since you are afflicted, and from this it results for you that you live in an orderly and composed manner, just like all those previously mentioned, namely the just, who are also called sons of God

^A are: it is plain and irrefutable that God offers Himself to you as to sons, and takes care of you, so that you might not become undisciplined, and from this result lose your inheritance.

VERS. 9. Deinde patres quidem carnis nostræ habuimus eruditores, et reverebamur eos: non multo magis obtemperabimus patri spirituum, et vivemus? By their own actions He demonstrates again that it is necessary to be patient. For if, when our carnal fathers were disciplining us, we did not dare to shrink away, but were filled with shame and patiently endured whatever they inflicted upon us, how much more now, when God is disciplining us? ^B Observe, however: He did not say, "How much more shall we endure," but, "we shall obey," showing that it is the behavior of one who is resistant and opposed to God not to endure affliction. He called Him the Father of spirits, either of the gifts, or of the incorporeal powers, or, what is more appropriate, of souls. For in contrast to carnal parents, He posited the spiritual. Furthermore, He added, "and we shall live," to show that the disobedient does not live: for he is alien to God, who is Life.

VERS. 10. Et illi quidem tempore paucorum dierum. For they are not able to discipline us completely so as to make us perfect. For either the death of the father, or more advanced age, or the hardness of the son puts an end to the discipline; but God, being one who always disciplines, is able to make [men] perfect. ^C Secundum voluntatem suam erudiebant nos. Not always is what seems good to the father useful also to the son; for many teach even shameful arts.

Hic vero ad id quod utile est in recipiendo sanctificationem ejus. But God brings about discipline for our benefit; not that He might receive anything from us, but that He might rather impart His holiness, that is, His purity; so that, he says, we might become capable of His own good things. Discipline, therefore, is a participation in holiness; and rightly so: for it turns the soul toward the holy God, not allowing it to wander toward anything human.

VERS. 11. Omnis autem disciplina in præsenti quidem non videtur esse gaudii, sed mæroris. ^D Again, from common understanding He took the occasions for his exhortation, and says: All discipline, both divine and human, does not seem to be of joy, but of sorrow. He says well, "Seems": for it is not truly of sorrow. For how could it be properly of sorrow, when it is the mother of joy? But it is with respect to us, who bear discipline with difficulty, that "seems" was said.

Postea vero fructum pacatum exercitatis per eam reddit justitiæ. What is "pacatum" [peaceful]? That is, untroubled, smooth, sweet. For he who is sorrowful is troubled; but he who rejoices has a certain smoothness and tranquility. And this fruit is of righteousness, namely that God, since He is just, in

^A this life gives rest to those who have been sorrowful. Observe also that he calls discipline "exercise," as it strengthens the faithful and makes them like certain athletes, and more robust. Why, then, do you shun that which strengthens your souls?

VERS. 12. *Therefore, lift up the slackened hands and the paralyzed knees.* He speaks as if to certain pugilists and combatants. He took this passage from the prophet Isaiah, indicating by the metaphor of the principal members that they are altogether slackened in soul. For hands are a symbol of action, and feet a symbol of movement. Therefore, of one who is disheartened, the instruments of his soul, and consequently of his body, are slackened.

VERS. 13. *And make straight paths for your feet, so that what is lame may not stray, but rather be healed.* Here he speaks as if to runners, just as he said above: "Let us run with patience." He says, therefore, "Make straight paths." A *trochia* (track) is either the footprint of a chariot wheel that is marked upon the ground, or the ground subject to the feet of those running. Let your tracks, therefore, he says, that is, your ways, be smooth and level—that is, let there be nothing rough, sorrowful, or uneven in your souls, but run evenly and without sorrow and smoothly, so that, not being lame—that is, by nature of a more fainthearted disposition, after the manner of the Jews, for such [by nature] is that race—or also being lame concerning the faith in ^B future things, you might not yet stumble, and your feet might go astray, that is, become altogether twisted. For he who is driven by an innate faintheartedness, or one that has befallen him from the beginning, and who does not restrain himself but rather gives way, falls unawares into the precipice of despair and is from there with difficulty recalled. But rather strive so that what is lame in you may be cured—that is, even if hitherto you have had some incredulity, correct it rather; for where would there be incredulity in one who is patient? Observe also how he manifestly introduces repentance, and note this for the sake of the Novatians.

VERS. 14. *Pursue peace with all men.* What he said above, "Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together," he does also now, gathering them into love; and he admonishes them to have and to pursue peace not only toward friends and kin, but even toward enemies. For with all, he says, both Greeks and Jews and enemies. For "as much as is in you," he says, "live peaceably with all men" (Rom. XII, 18). If you have this sort of purpose, you will not be fainthearted in ^C affliction. Consider also what he said: "Pursue," that is, even the peace that is far off, strive to lay hold of, drawing it to yourselves.

*And holiness.* That is, purity; if indeed someone is unmarried, virginity; if, however, ^D

he is joined in marriage, keeping sobriety: not that marriage is the sanctification, but because they keep the sanctification obtained from baptism inviolate through lawful intercourse. For marriage is honorable, but it is not holy; rather, it is a guardian of holiness.

*Without which no one shall see the Lord.* For neither fornicators, nor adulterers, nor the effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind shall inherit the kingdom of God. And the Lord says in the Gospel: *Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.*

^B *Looking diligently lest any man fail of the grace of God.* As if they were traveling a long journey with a large company, he says: "See that no one has been left behind." For I do not ask this only, that you should arrive, but that you should also look after others—that is, visit them, understand them, and learn their state—which is what one does for the infirm. And even if one be the one lagging behind, do not neglect even him. By "the grace of God" he means the faith, the excellent manner of life, and the blessings to come. For all these things are of the grace of God.

*Lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you.* This is found in Deuteronomy. He took the expression from a metaphor of plants. And what he writes elsewhere, *a little leaven leavens the whole lump,* he is saying here as well: let no wicked person be permitted to the harm of the many; cut out the root of bitterness—that is, of sin—so that it may not bear shoots—that is, so that it may not make others like itself. And that sin is bitter, or rather, that nothing is more bitter than it, those who are tormented in their conscience after committing an offense well know. Observe, however, that he did not say it is a bitter root, but a "root of bitterness"; for a bitter root can produce sweet fruits. But a root of bitterness—that is, the source and cause—cannot possibly produce sweet fruit.

*And thereby many be defiled.* For the slothful, seeing the ungodly, come to imitate them, and their souls are defiled. Therefore, let such roots be cut out.

*Lest there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright.* He does not say this—that Esau was a fornicator—but stop there: *Lest there be any fornicator among you.* For he hints that certain such people were among them, though he does not wish to rebuke them openly, but feigns ignorance so that they might be corrected. Then from another beginning he says: *Nor any profane person as Esau*—that is, a glutton, a worldly man, one profaning and trampling upon spiritual things. For he sold the honor of the birthright given to him by God, and that for one morsel of food. This is profanity, namely, the contempt of divine things. Here he shows them how great an evil is sloth,

^A nor of Him? And, "The disciple is not above his master." What is it that he says, "author and finisher"? That is to say, He Himself both placed the faith in us from the beginning; for He says, "You did not choose me, but I chose you;" and He Himself will provide the end and consummation, that you may possess it most perfectly. "Who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame." It was possible for Him not to suffer, not to die; for being without sin, He was not subject to death; and He Himself says, "The prince of this world comes, and has nothing in me." If, therefore, He had not willed it, He would not have been crucified; which He also said, "I have power to lay down my soul." Yet He endured the cross, that is to say, not simply death, but the ignominious one, and He despised the shame arising from such a death. He did not say, "despising the sadness"; for He did not endure these things with sadness. "And is set down at the right hand of the throne of God." Do you see the end of patience to which He leads? This is what he said elsewhere, "Wherefore God also has highly exalted Him": speaking of the flesh. So He is able also to repay you for the afflictions endured for His sake. ^B For the chair and the seat at the right hand signifies equality with the Father.

VERS. 3. "For consider Him who endured such contradiction of sinners against Himself." If anyone, by considering the sufferings of his fellow-slaves, is abundantly comforted, how much more if he weighs the sufferings of his Lord, who endured such contradiction? That is to say, mockery, derision, insults, buffeting in the face, whatever they spoke against His teaching, the cries before Pilate, and finally the cross itself. For the expression is emphatic, "such," that is, leading even to death, and that with thieves, and that by sinners, the gentiles, that is to say, or even the Jews themselves. "Lest you be wearied in your souls, fainting." For to ponder Christ will give strength and vigor to your souls, and will not allow you to fail or despair in afflictions.

VERS. 4. "You have not yet resisted unto blood." There are two sorts of hortatory address and consolation, contrary to one another: the one is when someone says to another, "You have suffered great things, remember those"; the other is when he says, "You have not yet suffered anything great." For the former refreshes the fainting soul, since it has many witnesses of its sufferings; the latter brings down the one who is swelling with pride, and stirs up the one who is sluggish. Paul uses both of these now with the Hebrews. For having said above, "You endured a great combat of sufferings," and having exhorted them to imitate themselves, now on the contrary he shows they have not yet sustained anything worthy of estimation, ^C lest they be puffed up. And see his wisdom. After he had mentioned the ancient saints who had sustained great things, and the Lord Himself, then he shows that their sufferings are nothing. For, he says, you have not yet resisted unto blood.

^A And see how he makes the comparison. After he had shown the superiority of the New Testament over the Old in many ways, as is well known, he now sets forth the great and wonderful things of old—those which happened on Mount Sinai—and declares them to be small and of no consequence when compared with the things of the New Testament. For there, he says, there was much display designed to strike fear into that childish people. For the fire was added so that the punitive nature of the Lawgiver might be manifested, and that He might immediately appear as one to be feared. The thick cloud and the darkness signified the shadowed nature of the Old Covenant. For if that was a type, it is clear that until the truth came, the types were obscure, not being understood in what they signified. The invisibility of God was also signified through these things. For "a cloud," he says, is "under His feet." ^B And the storm roused the Hebrews, who were slothful, so that they would pay attention. As for the trumpets, they were as if a king were present. For this is how it will be at the second coming.

And with the "voice of words," which those who heard entreated that no word be added to them. For God was heard speaking, so that the legislation might be made authoritative, and so that they would not think the words were Moses'. In any case, the voice of God was indeed terrible, while that of Moses was slight. Therefore, they entreated God, saying to Moses: "Speak thou to us, and let not God speak to us." ^C For "they could not endure that which was commanded," that is, they could not bear with their ears what was spoken by God, because it was terrible. Therefore, they themselves were the cause of God appearing through the flesh, so that He might be capable of being grasped by them.

And "if a beast touch the mountain, it shall be stoned." And so terrible was that which was being portrayed. He indicates in this also the superiority of the New Testament. For the Old, although it had nothing so great as the New, was something terrible, and not even a beast was allowed to touch the mountain—that is, some animal from among those which the people possessed. But the New, having all things perfect, shows nothing terrible, but all things are gentle.

Moses said: "I am terrified and trembling." And if Moses, who had entered into the dense cloud, was so great and wonderful, was thus struck with fear, how much more the people? ^D "But you have come." They did not come near, but stood far off; but you have come near. Do you see the superiority?

"To Mount Sion, and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem." Instead of Sinai, we have Sion, the spiritual mountain, and the spiritual city, Jerusalem; that is, heaven itself, not a desert, as was theirs. "And to an innumerable company of angels." Instead of...

fear, we have joy: for this is what is signified by "panegyris" (a solemn assembly). ^A For where there is a panegyris, there is joy. This panegyris consists, therefore, in myriads of angels.

"And to the Church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven." He calls the faithful "firstborn," those who are consecrated to God and sanctified, whose names are in the book of life, just as the Lord was saying to the disciples: "But your names are written in heaven." Since God is the common Father of all, all men are indeed His children in a general sense; but the firstborn among them are the faithful, and those worthy of the adoption of sons which is by choice. Or, quite simply, all the faithful are sons; but the "firstborn" are those who are well-pleasing to God and, by their word and the conduct of their life, have been deemed worthy of embassies before God.

"And to God, the judge of all." Here he also terrifies them. For He is the judge of all, not of the Jews only, but also of the faithful. Therefore, fear Him. But he shows at the same time their superiority over those of old; for if those men could not endure even bare words, nor did they dare to draw near to the mountain, you, however, have approached the Judge Himself, that is to say, Christ. For the Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son.

"And to the spirits of the just made perfect." That is, to the souls of those who have been distinguished and shown to be perfect ^B before God, through faith of course, as he demonstrated: to whom you are destined to be joined, if you have imitated them.

"And to Jesus, the mediator of the New Testament." Not to Moses the servant, but to Jesus our Lord.

"And to the blood of sprinkling." That is, of purification. For the blood of Christ, having been sprinkled upon us, has purified and sanctified us.

"Speaking better than Abel." Did the blood of Abel speak? Certainly. "The voice," he says, "of your brother's blood cries to me." This is what was also said above, that it speaks even now, being proclaimed and celebrated among all mortals. But the blood of Christ emits a more splendid, more significant, and clearer voice, crying out through the facts themselves, that it has sanctified all. And in another way it speaks: where it finds a sincere mind, it stirs it up ^C and makes it speak. For the Spirit speaks with groanings that cannot be uttered. And the holy Cyril also understood it in such a way, that the blood of Abel cried out against the slayer, but the blood of Christ speaks for us to His own Father.

"See that you do not refuse Him who speaks." Because you do not believe His promises, but despondement...

^A know it. And who is it that speaks, if not Christ? For if His blood speaks, much more does He Himself live.

If those men did not escape when they refused Him who spoke upon the earth, what did they not escape? Punishment and destruction. By "Him who gave the oracle upon the earth," he means Moses, or even God, who though He descended from heaven, nevertheless gave the oracle upon the earth through Moses. For on Mount Sinai He gave the oracle—that is, He conversed, He spoke, He commanded.

How much more [shall we not escape] if we turn away from Him who speaks from the heavens? That is, from Christ who speaks from the heavens; that is, who, after His assumption, gave the law to us through the Spirit. He did not say this as if there were one person then and a different one now, but the manner of the legislation differs. For then, acting upon the earth, He gave the law; but now, having been assumed into heaven, as has been said, He would therefore be more terrifying. For that there was not one person then and another now, hear this very thing in what follows.

"Whose voice then shook the earth." You see that even then it was He who spoke, He who now gives oracles to us from the heavens. For His voice at that time, in the season of the legislation, shook the earth.

"But now He has promised, saying, 'Yet once more I shake not only the earth, but also the heavens.'" We maintain that there are two shakings mentioned in Scripture: the first, upon the legislation at Sinai; for "the earth," says David, "was shaken." The second, during the time of the sojourn in the flesh. For, he says, "all Jerusalem was shaken," and "the idols of Egypt shall be shaken." They were shaken—that is, they were moved away from the station of deceiving those who worshipped them, and their strength was cast down. The phrase, "yet once more," therefore, signifies a third shaking, which is to happen after the second—that is, the innovation at the consummation of the world, when all things shall be changed, being altered from corruptibility to incorruptibility. And the utterance is that of the prophet Haggai.

"Now this, 'yet once more,' signifies the removal of those things that are being shaken, as of things that are made." That is, the removal of the corruptible creation, which has the nature to be shaken, inasmuch as it is created—that is, it received a beginning of existence, and necessarily, therefore, has an end. For everything that has been made had a beginning, and therefore, at least as far as its own nature is concerned, it also has an end. For even the angels, by nature, do not lack an end, since they do not lack a beginning; but by divine grace they have received the quality of being without an end and being immortal.

"That those things which cannot be shaken may remain." That is, the

good things. For when these corruptible things have been changed, all things that then come to pass for the righteous will be incorruptible and unshaken, subject to no transference or change. ^B And so, receiving an unshaken kingdom, let us have grace. Since, he says, we are to be accounted worthy of such goods, immutable and unshaken, and are receiving such a kingdom, receiving already from this point the earnest of it in spiritual charismata, let us have grace: that is, let us not grieve, nor become despondent, but let us give thanks to Him who has both given such things and is to give more.

Through which we serve, pleasing God. Through which, that is, through giving of thanks. For if we are thankful, then we also serve pleasingly, and as those who know what sort of Master we have. For if we are not thankful both for tranquility and for afflictions, we do not serve Him in a way that is pleasing to Him. For what servant, who murmurs against his master (for he who does not serve him as is fitting murmurs), offers a pleasing ministry to his master? Therefore, he himself says elsewhere, "Do not murmur"; and again: "Do all things without murmurings." And the Israelites, indeed, fell in the wilderness as murmurers. ^C With reverence and religion. That is, let us speak nothing bold, nothing shameless, but let even our outward bearing show reverence toward men and religion toward God. Nay, for "our God is a consuming fire." Since he showed the things of the Old Testament to be terrible, and that those of the New possess nothing of the sort; lest they should despise its gentleness, he says: With reverence and religion let us give thanks to God. For the soul that despairs in afflictions casts off shame. Or it is because our service is accustomed to be done with reverence and religion. For our God is a fire, and we must be religious, lest we be consumed as contemners and indifferent. "Be religious," he says, "you sons of Israel." This also offers them consolation, in that we have such a God, who can consume our adversaries.

CAPUT XIII

VERS. 1, 2. Let brotherly love continue. Do not forget hospitality. He did not say, "Acquire brotherly love and hospitality": for they had these, as it seems; but because, on account of frequent ^D afflictions, there was a danger that they might grow slack in these virtues, he says, "Let brotherly love continue," let it stand firm, do not let it escape you. And, he says, "do not forget hospitality." For as though they had been despoiled of their possessions, perhaps they were conducting themselves more sparingly. Or he secures them for the future.

^A Since it was likely that some would say: "What then shall we do, if we do not even have the necessities?" he says: This is not so; it is not so. For God says through Isaiah, that "I will not leave you," and He does not lie in any way. But it was also likely that these very people out of the Jews would say: "With what things present shall we be satisfied? We were despoiled, we have nothing left." He says, therefore, that you are able to be satisfied with what remains, even if it be little. For God has said: "I will not leave you," which is to say: "I will not forsake you." And perhaps even if the Apostle understood this concerning necessary things, thou, however, shouldst accept this as spoken by God concerning every matter. ^B So that we might confidently say: "The Lord is my helper, and I will not fear what man shall do unto me." Since God said these things, they are absolutely trustworthy. Hence, therefore, let us say with confidence that those who despoil our possessions shall not straiten us.

VERS. 7. "Remember your leaders, who spake unto you the word of God." He also exhorted the Thessalonians to this, that they should hold them in honor to overflowing. And just as they impart the word, so should they, if it be possible, succor them in external bodily necessities. For this is what he hints at by "Remember." Or he encourages them toward the imitation of them. "Whose conduct considering, imitate their faith." This is to say, considering it more exactly. And just as the disciples of a painter [look] toward the first exemplar, so do you, always fixing your eyes upon the outcome—that is, the end of their conduct, which is their mode of life—because it had a good end, imitate their faith. ^C For from faith is a pure life born. For if they did not put faith in the things to come, but doubted, they would not have displayed an irreproachable mode of life. But again he heals their pusillanimity; or he speaks of the faith of the dogmas. He brings in, therefore:

VERS. 8. "Jesus Christ the same yesterday and today, and unto the ages." For as it seems, there were some adulterating the faith, and saying that "Another shall come," whom the Jews keep expecting even until today. He says, therefore, that He is the same Christ yesterday—that is, in all time past—and today—that is, in the present time—and unto the ages, which is to say, the future and infinite [ages], and no other shall come. Do not therefore be led astray. Or [he means] that just as He did not abandon your leaders, but helped them in all things, in this manner He will also help you. For He is the same.

VERS. 9. "Be not carried away by various and strange doctrines." "Various," that is, now these, now those, and sometimes by these, and sometimes by those. Furthermore, ^D [the text continues]

truth; then it is necessary to be on guard. For the truth is simple and looks toward one thing. Observe the expression, "Be not carried away," as if regarding certain light things, which are easily dragged hither and thither. For it is good that the heart be established by grace, not by foods, in which they who occupied themselves were not profited. These are the strange doctrines; for he implicitly censures those who were introducing the Jewish observance of foods. He says, therefore, that we ought to be established by grace, that is, by faith, and to be fully assured that nothing is unclean, but all things are clean to the believer. Therefore, there is need of faith, not of the observance of foods. For those who "occupied themselves" ^B in foods—that is, those who walked continuously in the observance of foods—profited nothing for their soul, as being outside of faith and serving the unprofitable law. And otherwise, what profit, he asks, did they have from the observance, since they were so polluted that they were not able to participate in the sacrifices?

VERS. 10. We have an altar, from which they have no authority to eat who serve the tabernacle.

Since he had said that foods ought not be observed, lest our things appear contemptible because they lack such observance, he says that we too have an observance, but not in such foods, but rather on the altar, that is, in the unbloody sacrifice of the life-giving body. For it is not permitted even to the legal high priests to partake of this, so long as they serve the tabernacle, that is, the legal types—those which are passing away, those which are being dissolved; for such was the tabernacle, or this world—just as the masses ^C did not participate in the legal sacrifices, as being unworthy.

VERS. 11-12. For the bodies of those animals, whose blood is brought into the holy places by the high priest as a sacrifice for sin, are burned outside the camp. Therefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people through his own blood, suffered outside the gate.

He demonstrates that the things which were honored among the Jews were types of our things, and he says that those sacrifices were of no account, those in which the people were forbidden to participate. But not even the high priests of the law partake of our sacrifice; for those [legal sacrifices] were types of this [our sacrifice]. For just as the high priest brought the blood of the animals offered for the sins of the people into the Holy places, but the bodies were burned outside the camp, thus also Christ, having suffered for the sins of the world, brought His blood into the Holy places ^D to the Father as High Priest, but His body was crucified outside the camp. Therefore, a remembrance of that sacrifice...

^A for through this some, by showing hospitality, have entertained angels. So great is hospitality, and the receiving of all persons simply, and without making distinctions, that for both Abraham and Lot it became the occasion for entertaining angels. Now the word “entertained” means, they did not know that those whom they received into hospitality were angels; and yet they entertained them hospitably. This is what makes them great, for if they had known, they would have done nothing great.

Remember them that are in bonds, as bound with them. For he who is bound to someone, even if he wishes to forget, cannot.

Them that are in adversity, as being yourselves also in the body. Them that are in adversity, whether in prisons, or in famine, or some other affliction. For he who considers that he himself is also clothed with a body subject to the same afflictions, will defend them, both because he feels with them, and because he fears lest he himself might be permitted to fall into similar evils through his own lack of compassion. ^B

Marriage is honorable in all, and the bed undefiled. See how great the discourse is regarding temperance. For having mentioned holiness above, he was speaking about this, and again after this, he will speak about fornicators and adulterers. In all things, therefore; not in those who are more advanced in age, while in the young it is not so; but in all. Or in all ways, and at all times. Not in affliction, but not in comfort; not in this respect honorable, but in another not; but let it be entirely honorable through and through. Here are put to shame those heretics who disparage marriage. For behold, it is called honorable, because it preserves a man in temperance. ^C

But fornicators and adulterers God will judge. Here also, with much severity, is the prohibition of fornication. For God will judge, that is, He will condemn. And with reason. For if marriage is allowed, fornicator and adulterer are justly punished.

Let your character be without avarice. He did not say, “Possess nothing,” but, “If you do have, do not be enslaved to them, but possess these things with freedom, so that if ever you happen to lose them, you do not suffer distress”; which he also said above, that “you took joyfully the plundering of your goods.” And otherwise, since many after emptying themselves of their possessions strive to acquire them again under the pretext of needing to give alms, he says: Let your character be without avarice. Therefore he also adds: ^D

Being content with such things as are present. He shows how we might be free from avarice. If we are content with what is present, if we seek nothing beyond our needs and necessities. For he who seeks more than he has, is clearly an avaricious person.

For He Himself has said: I will never leave you, nor [forsake you].

was taken down by some tachygrapher while Theophylact was explaining the Acts of the Apostles to his people, or that it was extracted from another, fuller commentary of his. Yet, that neither of these occurred—even though either one might suffice to attribute it to Theophylact—is argued by a similar inscription prefixed to the Proem of his commentary on the four Gospels, which exists in the Imperial Library at Vienna, in codex 271, and which reads as follows: *Ερμηνεία τῶν τεσσάρων Εὐαγγελιῶν ἀπὸ φωνῆς Θεοφυλάκτου ἀρχιεπισκόπου Βουλγαρίας*, "Interpretation of the four Gospels from the voice of Theophylact, Archbishop of Bulgaria." And yet, the Proem on the four Gospels that follows in the same manuscript is the very same one that those codices bear which are marked with the customary epigraph, namely: *Θεοφυλάκτου Ἑρμηνεία εἰς τέσσαρα Εὐαγγέλια*, "Theophylact’s Interpretation on the Four Gospels"—although the commentary itself, for I know not what reason, is not present in the cited codex; for the Proem is distinct from the body of the commentary itself. Perhaps for those who inscribed it in this way, *φωνή*, "voice," is equivalent to "Exposition," in which sense *γλῶσσα*, "tongue," is sometimes used.

I have pursued these matters at some length, not to claim this commentary definitively for Theophylact—as I know that to be impossible, since another codex, equally if not more ancient, explicitly attributes a different and separate commentary on these same Acts of the Apostles to Theophylact, namely the one edited by Sifanus—but to show that the view of those who wished it to have a place in the third volume of this edition is by no means to be condemned, even though it had long since been published for the most part under the name of Oecumenius. And I thought I should discourse on these things all the more, because the following commentary is likewise being snatched away from Oecumenius. By what right, I shall demonstrate a little later, as soon as I have finished what I still have to say concerning this commentary.

VII. Whenever I noticed that this commentary agreed with the Oecumenian one—for so I call the one that appeared published under his name—in the manner mentioned above, whenever I suspected my own copy to be faulty or mutilated, which frequently happened, I consulted it in order to find a remedy for the detected wounds; which usually succeeded quite happily, given that it seems to have been taken from a cleaner and more integral codex. Sometimes, however, both texts appeared corrupt to me, as neither provided a coherent sense. Then, indeed, I took refuge either in the Sifanian commentary, or in the Florentine transcript, or in the primary source of them all, Chrysostom, and sometimes in all of them. The reader will be able to observe some examples of this noted in the lower margin of the pages. But when the sense was correct, even if I saw that Chrysostom or any of the aforementioned commentaries disagreed in words or order, I decided that nothing should be changed in my copy. For it was established for me to edit not any and all other commentaries—however they might sometimes be preferred for their abundance or elegance—but only this Vatican one; wherefore I considered it my duty to labor only regarding its correction and preservation from the injuries of copyists. Hence I also took care to have it printed in such a way that, as closely as possible, it might represent the Vatican codex itself.

For which reason, since in the Vatican codex the text of the Holy Scriptures is first presented divided into various readings, which are read by the Greeks in the holy liturgy during the Paschal season, with a note indicating on what day each is to be recited; and furthermore, the entire book of the Acts of the Apostles is divided into forty, rather than twenty-eight chapters, as is common among us and the Greeks; I thought this whole arrangement should be retained. Yet, in order to consult the convenience and utility of the students, I have added the number of the same chapters—both in the lateral margin and at the head of the pages—according to the partition customary among us and the Greeks. But because the aforementioned readings do not immediately succeed one another, but often have interspersed between them more or fewer passages which are by no means customarily read in the holy liturgy, the scribe who wrote out the Vatican codex placed these words in the margin, or even within the body of the page, to indicate their beginning and end: *ἀρχή*, "beginning," *τέλος*, "end." And because all these readings, just as in our liturgy, so also in the liturgy of the Greeks, begin with these words: *Ἐν ἐκείναις ταῖς ἡμέραις*, "In those days"—often also some words are added or repeated for a clearer commencement of the sense—the copyist also wrote these in the margin alongside the text. But since these would be less necessary, and indeed could produce some confusion for the readers, and on the other hand I had found them not sufficiently accurately noted, I thought it better to omit them entirely; especially since, from the ecclesiastical...

417 IN THE SUBSEQUENT WRITINGS OF THEOPHYLACT. 418 by Kollar, the most deserving keeper of the praised library. The same man, however, encountered a doubt while he was describing it, as I did while interpreting it. But he, what I was not permitted to do, although I greatly desired it, brought to execution. He consulted, namely, codex 222, in which Lambecius and Nesselius affirm that Theophylact’s Commentary on the Catholic Epistles is likewise contained, so that by this comparison of both codices he might detect whether the Commentary in each was the same or different. He found, however, not without astonishment, that it was different; and moreover, that it was such a one that, in his judgment, it bore the genius, nature, order, and style of Theophylact all the more, the more the other seemed to him alien from all these. Nor did this man, most loving of the public good, stop here: but he undertook the work of copying out the three final leaves of this latter Commentary of its own accord, to serve as a specimen; and with these leaves, along with two others from the former Commentary, sent to the editors, he made them certain of his doubt, and most kindly offered his services to the public. They, having carefully weighed the matter, immediately decreed that the former Commentary should be rejected from this edition: especially since it had meanwhile been discovered by me that it was nothing other than a mere Catena of certain Greek Fathers on those Epistles, clearly similar to that which exists at Oxford in the library of New College, codex 58, from which Christian Wolfius selected and brought forth some things in volume III of *Anecdota Graeca* from page 92, and in volume IV from page 1. For after having made a collation, I had discovered that all those things existed word for word in the aforementioned copy, with this sole difference, that in the Oxford codex the names of the Fathers whose words are cited were accurately noted, whereas in the Viennese one, with the exception of one or two, they are entirely omitted: a circumstance which greatly tormented me as I interpreted; for with those names removed, and with no connection appearing between the things being said, it would be mocked as not some sort of Commentary, but as disconnected sweepings, and sand without lime, as the saying goes. But, you will say, if this is so, how did the illustrious Lambecius unhesitatingly ascribe to Theophylact a Commentary of this kind? I respond that it was for the same reason that he attributed two Commentaries on the same Epistles, although diverse, to one and the same author. Namely, he did not read those Commentaries himself, nor did he labor to determine their authors; but, having found notes on the front of the codices, he gave credit without any examination. When, therefore, he had read in that Commentary annotated by the hand of Tegnagnelius, his predecessor in the stewardship of the Imperial library: *Commentary of Theophylact*, just as I myself saw while I was staying in that city, he thought this was enough for him to count it among the Works of Theophylact. And yet it is clearly evident that Tegnagnelius adjudged a Commentary of this kind to Theophylact for no other reason—and that a most infirm one—than that it was joined to certain Commentaries of Theophylact in the same codex, and seemed to have been written by the same hand.

X. Therefore, with the aforementioned Commentary being entirely rejected from the genuine Works of Theophylact, the curators of this edition deemed it appropriate to substitute another in its place, which, in the judgment of the illustrious Kollar, bears the genius and style of Theophylact; and to that end they handed it to me to be rendered into Latin. But before I myself applied my hand to a version of this kind, I decided to compare those few leaves which I said were sent here from Vienna for the sake of a specimen with the Commentary of Oecumenius, especially since, while reading the first page, I seemed to have read something similar before in another author who did not come to mind at that time. Having therefore collated those leaves, I found that the one Commentary agreed with the other in such a way that I perceived the Viennese and the Oecumenian to be one and the same: not, indeed, that they agreed completely and everywhere; but because whatever diversity was in it could easily be attributed to the variety of the codices. When the curators of the edition found this out, they determined that everything ought to be done to detect some genuine Commentary on the Catholic Epistles, different from the Oecumenian; but if that should result less to their wish, it was to be inquired whether there were sufficiently valid arguments at hand by which the Oecumenian Commentary itself could be admitted into this edition with equal right, and be published to the light inscribed with the name of Theophylact. Defeated in this first hope a little later by the most unexpected death of Ignatius Inicci Accioli, papal legate to the King of Spain, by whose aid alone they hoped that they could obtain a copy of that Commentary inscribed *to Theophylact* on the Catholic Epistles, which is said to be kept in the most celebrated Escorial library, and which alone remained to be consulted, they turned their spirit and effort toward the other: in which they had become partakers

[removing] the other from these, by either placing some words of the Scripture—with the Greek text left entirely intact—repeatedly into the version; or, if that were less sufficient for removing the confusion, I translated the very text of the Scripture elsewhere and slightly inverted the position of the Commentary. I have noticed this confused and less appropriate collocation of the sacred text not only in this work, but also repeatedly in the Commentaries of others, and indeed even in those of Theophylact. This preposterous arrangement seems to have arisen from the fact that the exposition was not originally placed under its own proper text; but was put in the lateral margin by the authors or collectors, sometimes alongside, sometimes even below—of which thing many examples remain—and then was placed by copyists according to their own caprice or lack of skill, having dissected it from the sacred text. It at least seems certain that the variation which exists in different codices, or the confusion in one and the same codex, could have arisen from this cause; so that no one should be astonished if the Scripture text is seen to be arranged and divided here differently than in the Oecumenian Commentary: although Hentenius also introduced some change there, as he himself confesses, having brought forward the reason for the change.

Another thing, of which I would wish the reader to be forewarned, is that in the Viennese codex, the argument for each individual Epistle is indeed prefixed to them; but the Epistles themselves and their Commentaries are organized as an uninterrupted thread, without the distinction of verses or chapters. I have judged that these should be added for the sake of greater convenience, according to the customary manner of counting used by Latins and Greeks. I have left the arguments of the Epistles in the same way as they are in the codex, lest anyone accuse me of unfaithfulness, and so that the reader might recognize how many chapters the author of the Commentary, whoever he may have been, wished each Epistle to be divided into: for he enumerates more chapters in each than is commonly the custom to enumerate. That enumeration of chapters which is presented in the Oecumenian edition is also shown in the Commentaries. Furthermore, at the end of each commentary, the number of verses which the Epistle exposed in that commentary embraces is noted: which number, especially in the later ones, is much larger than the usual number. I did not wish to correct the errors that perhaps crept into such numbers, thinking it possible that the author, just as he enumerated more chapters, so also enumerated more verses, although I am entirely ignorant of the cause of this matter. But of this work, enough.

SECTION IV. Regarding the oration on the Adoration of the Holy Cross.

The Commentary on the Catholic Epistles closes the number of the exegetical works of Theophylact on the Scripture of the New Testament, as far as I am aware. In the following fourth volume, you will find his other Commentaries on the Old Testament. In this one, however, various short works of Theophylact are subjoined, from which this volume is, for the most part, composed. The first is an Oration on the Adoration of the Holy Cross: which oration was indeed edited in Greek and Latin some time ago by the most learned theologian of the Society of Jesus, James Gretser, in the second volume of *De S. Cruce*. We, however, exhibit the Greek text not from that same Gretser, but described from the Imperial Viennese codex. He took his from the Bavarian-Munich codex. But as far as it was possible to collect from an accurate collation of either text, I discovered that either one was described from the other, or both were described from one and the same codex. For they agree so much among themselves that this collation did not even provide variant readings, if you except one or two. And what is more, both have in the same place and in the same way two little gaps, one of which I filled in myself by conjecture. I subjoin the Latin version, which Gretser, who was very skilled in the Greek tongue, adorned. He added a few notes at the end of the oration; from these, we have selected two, which seemed of some moment, and placed them in their own spot, namely page 458. We have added one or two, to which some variety of the codices gave us an opening. For the rest, this oration is excellent, and most worthy of Theophylact, and in my judgment it bears the mark of his genius and style: for which reason there should be no suspicion regarding its author. It was delivered in the middle of the season of fasting, as is evident from its title, namely on some day of the fourth week of Lent, which is called by the Greeks *mesonēstia*, the middle of the fast, because indeed out of the seven weeks which the Lenten fast encompasses among the Greeks in their entirety, the fourth claims for itself the place of the midpoint. Throughout this entire week, the Cross is solemnly displayed by the priest for the people to adore. Wherefore, on the third Sunday, by which the following

^A week begins, is called by the Greeks *Kyriake stauroskyneseos*, the Sunday of the Adoration of the Cross. Besides this homily of Theophylact, there exist many others delivered by more ancient Greek Fathers on this very solemnity, which the aforementioned Gretser most accurately collected and edited in his aforementioned work, *De cruce*. From these it is at least established that the Greek Church and the Latin Church are in most complete agreement on this dogma of the adoration or veneration of the cross; and this is, above all, the benefit to be sought therefrom.

SECTION V. Concerning the Oration on the Presentation of the Blessed Virgin Mary in the Temple.

XIV. Francis Combefis, of the Order of Preachers, translated this oration into Latin and edited it, inserting it into the eighth volume of his *Bibliotheca concionatoria*. When the Greek text of the same, transcribed from the codex of the Royal Library of Paris, fell into my hands, I compared it with the Latin version of Combefis: which, although quite accurate, seemed to me a little more obscure; and so I attempted to produce another, clearer and more polished version. Whether I have succeeded in this, let those be the judges who wish to compare both. Meanwhile, since the illustrious author of the *Prolegomena Dissertation* has announced that this oration will be published with a new version of his own, I am bringing it forth to the light in whatever state it may be. If anyone prefers the other, let him approach the aforementioned Library. This version having been completed by me for some time, another copy of the same oration, transcribed from the ^B codex 15 (Seldenian) of the most celebrated Bodleian Library, was brought to me from Oxford. Comparing both, I detected faults in each, and found that one excels the other depending on the diversity of the passages. Although the Parisian copy seemed to yield something to the Oxonian, I nevertheless preferred to base this edition on the Parisian specimen, partly because that was the first to be translated into Latin and edited by Combefis, and partly because I had derived my own version likewise from it itself. Nevertheless, I have most diligently noted the variant readings of the Barocci codex (some of which should rather be called corrections) at the lower margin; these may deservedly be held in the place of the codex itself. As regards the oration itself, it seemed so excellent to Combefis that he did not hesitate to assert that Theophylact shows himself to be most wise even in this oration: and not undeservedly so, since a manifold light of eloquence, erudition, and vivid genius shines forth in it. However, more severe critics perhaps will not approve of his describing the taking of the Virgin Mary into the temple, and other similar matters, so minutely, as if he had observed everything with his own eyes. But pardon is easily granted to a Greek writer, as, having followed the tradition already accepted in his own regions, he thought that all these things should not only be recounted by him, but even adorned in the oratorical style. This, certainly, must be acknowledged in Theophylact: that, because he knew well what might especially oppose his own narrative (and this is the same thing, which has impelled some of the recent critics to the contrary opinion), he labored vigorously to remove it from the middle and to reconcile the probability of the whole matter: not to speak of the moral teachings which he wisely elicits from it.

SECTION VI. On the Martyrdom of the Fifteen Martyrs at Tiberiopolis, under the Emperor Julian the Apostate.

XV. This Oration of Theophylact (for so he himself calls this composition) has not only never been printed until now, but has also so escaped the notice of the learned that, of all those who have deliberately written about Theophylact and his works, no one at all has made mention of it. It lay hidden at Oxford in the most celebrated Bodleian Library among the Barocci manuscripts, in a codex that contains various other small works of authors. Nor, indeed, would knowledge of it ever have reached us, had not the ardent desire of those in charge of this edition to omit nothing at all that had Theophylact as its author added spurs to us, so that among other things we also examined the *Catalogus librorum mss. Angliæ et Hiberniæ*, edited at Oxford in the year 1697, for this purpose. ^C Applying ourselves to this, we fell upon page 28, volume I, number 197, containing a title of this kind: *Martyrium XV martyrum sub Juliano imperatore, auctore Theophylacto*. Having been informed of this matter, the chief patron of this edition (about whom you have some things in the *Prolegomena Dissertation*, number 104), on account of his exceptional ^D dedication to sacred letters

and his belief that no delay should be permitted, took care to have it transcribed and sent through the Venetian envoy to the King of England ^A. The transcript sent from Oxford was handed to me to be translated into Latin; and this was, for several reasons, a pleasing task: for I understood that I would be doing a kindness to a most distinguished senator; I would be fulfilling this duty to the well-deserving curators of this edition; and finally, I would be devoting my labor and effort, such as they are, to students of sacred letters. But as soon as I cast my eyes upon the transcript, there was indeed much to fill me with pleasure—namely, the utility and excellence of this little work; but there was also that which displeased me greatly: namely, the sheer and almost incredible corruption of the transcript. But more of this latter matter another time; now for the former. No one, I think, who has perceived and explored its subject matter and the things contained therein will deny the excellence and utility of this oration. It contains, indeed, a fairly unknown history of the martyrdom of fifteen martyrs, who, under the apostate Emperor Julian, shed their blood for Christ at Tiberiopolis; then the translation of their bodies carried out by the order of Michael, the first Christian King of the Bulgarians; and then various and truly notable miracles performed by God through the intercession of those same martyrs, both before and after that translation. Preceding this narrative are some things about the triumph of the Christian faith under Constantine the Great and his three sons; but much more is narrated regarding those things which the faithful of Christ suffered while Julian the Apostate reigned. All of these things, drawn from the storehouse of ecclesiastical history, are presented here not unsuitably ^B in place of a prologue, and as Theophylact himself says, so that this Oration might have a head and be perfect in all its members. Furthermore, a long narrative is woven concerning the invincible constancy in faith of a certain Cinamon of Adrianople, who was carried away into captivity by the Bulgarians, and concerning Enrabota, brother of the Bulgarian king, who, through the work of that same Cinamon, was converted to the faith and suffered martyrdom for that same faith. In this oration, therefore, are contained few things, but many of great importance, monuments of ecclesiastical history, to which it most highly pertains to commend to the memory of posterity the acts of the Holy martyrs and other things connected with them. But what if it also brings some benefit to profane history? Why, you will find in it some things regarding the kings of Bulgaria that you might seek in vain elsewhere. Other things, too (as will be clear from the appended notes), may be used to confirm or correct what has been said by others; hence, let it be said by right and merit, from the beginning, that a work of this kind is sufficiently useful and excellent, and worthy that it finally be brought to light at last.

XVI. But yet, its value would be diminished in no small way if one could justly have doubts regarding either its genuine author or the truth of the history it contains. But, as it seems to me, no one could call either into question. Not the first; because the codex, which we praised above, explicitly ascribes it to Theophylact, Archbishop of Bulgaria; nor is this inscription refuted by other codices; indeed, there is none at all (as far as we know) that displays the same oration. Nor indeed should the fact that it is found to exist in only a single codex cast doubt in any prudent person concerning its author; since it is clearly established that the works of many authors have been preserved in a single codex; though scholars do not for this reason revoke into doubt whether it belongs to the author whom the codex itself declares. And not to depart from the works of Theophylact himself: there exists one copy that I know of, in the Bavarian-Munich library, of his *Encomium on the Emperor Alexius Comnenus*: and one copy perhaps in the Imperial-Viennese library ^C (for that another copy is held in the Escorial library of the King of Spain, as some report, is uncertain to us) of his *Commentary on the Catholic Epistles*. On the other hand, there is nothing read in this discourse that does not comport with the author Theophylact. Whatever is narrated in it certainly preceded his own age. Likewise, no one, I think, who has been occupied for some time in reading the works of this author could deny that the style by no means departs from the genius of Theophylact. For a double style occurs in him (as far as I have been able to discover): the one which he used in writing his *Commentaries on the Scriptures*; the other in which he arranged his letters and certain particular little works, or sermons and orations. In the completion of the former, he used a transparent and most plain style; whether because he thought this style should be preferred to others in that genre of writing; or because he mostly used the words of others whose *Commentaries* he was reducing to a compendium, and especially those of Chrysostom. Wherefore, from such *Commentaries* ^D

^A indeed, I believe that the proper style of Theophylact cannot always be detected. But in other works, where he draws both ideas and words from his own reservoir, as it were, he uses a loftier and more difficult style, less accessible; which style is very similar to that which most Greek writers of that age, departing from the simplicity and purity of diction of their forefathers, were wont to use. In these works, therefore, Theophylact very frequently uses metaphors, allegories, and other more vivid tropes or figures, and a more prolix, and finally a looser or more involved phraseology. He also intersperses the words of Scripture everywhere, not only for the reason that he might confirm his own ideas by its authority, but also that he might express them in the very words of the Scriptures. This discourse is clearly of this kind of style; but because it is occupied for the most part with historical matters, it seems a little clearer and plainer here than elsewhere. Moreover, some turns of phrase familiar to Theophylact (as we have observed elsewhere) recur here as well. Besides the character of the style, some judgments or sayings also favor Theophylact—those which indicate an author writing in Bulgaria, as when he calls the fifteen martyrs of Bulgaria wonderworkers, ἁγίους τοὺς καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς, *our saints*, or *who are with us*. He also indicates, if I am not mistaken, that he is a native of the Bulgars, or an inhabitant of Bulgaria, when he exults with a singular and incredible joy over the conversion of the Bulgars to the Catholic faith, and extols the same—now joined to the faithful—with the highest praises; and also when he reveals that the peculiar customs of the Bulgars were well known to him; as when, for example, he relates that the Bulgars were accustomed to make loaves of such size that any one of them would be enough to satisfy ten men. For although these things could not but fit anyone else writing in Bulgaria, yet because no one else is brought forward as the author of this little work, they confirm—not lightly, in my judgment—that Theophylact is its progenitor. ^B XVII. But now, if Theophylact is to be considered the author of this discourse, as I believe he should be, there can surely be no prudent doubt that his historical narrative is perfectly consistent with the truth; for it is not credible that a man as grave and learned as he would have adopted a trite fable and wished to palm it off on others. But whatever he narrates in this discourse of his, he could easily have known either from some monument existing in the archives of Bulgaria, or from the certain and perennial tradition of the inhabitants. And indeed, although the passion of these martyrs happened long before—that is, in the waning fourth century of the Church, while Julian the Apostate was emperor—yet the translation of their bodies was not so distant from Theophylact’s age that firm monuments could not be available to him; for his episcopate in Bulgaria preceded that event by only about two centuries (as will be established from the things said below). From which no one can fail to see how easily the memory of something of great importance can be, and is wont to be, preserved over this interval of time, even if no visible monument survives. But as regards the aforementioned martyrs, there still stood in Theophylact’s time (as it seems possible to gather from the discourse itself) a temple built in honor of these same martyrs; there existed also the coffers in which their ashes were enclosed, and finally the marble tablets which had originally covered their urns. From these tablets, indeed, as those on which the names of the individual martyrs were inscribed, as well as their way of life, and dignity, and office—as Theophylact himself testifies—he could easily draw the information concerning events which had happened long before, under Julian, and commend them to the eternal memory of men through this discourse. Wherefore, I do not see why full credence should not be given to this history (even if it were written by some other person of less authority than Theophylact); unless perchance it seems to be an obstacle that there is a deep silence regarding this matter on the part of other writers, and that the aforementioned martyrs are not commemorated either in the Greek *Menaia* or in the *Menologies* of the Ruthenians or Muscovites. But regarding the first point, who can assert for certain that this author of whom we are speaking was the only one to commit to writing the history of the passion of these XV martyrs and their translation, when it is known and established that very many works of the ancients have completely perished? Furthermore, how many things are regarded as certain in both ecclesiastical and profane history that rest upon the authority and testimony of a single writer? In particular, the lives and deeds of saints often become known through the narrative of a single, even anonymous, author. But in our particular case, there could be a reason why their martyrdom was not handed down to memory by others. For if the account is taken of both the place and the time in which it happened, everyone will immediately understand that this fact most easily escaped the writers of that age.

^A For they attained the palm of martyrdom at a time when Julian the Apostate was endeavoring to raise up the falling cult of idolatry and restore it to its former honor; and thus the affairs of the Christians were in a most distressing state; and most of them were either passing a miserable life in exile, or were wandering of their own accord through deserts and mountains. Indeed, the place where the martyrs fell could hardly have been more impassable and hidden, being as it was a very small city, or rather a tiny hamlet situated on the highest peak of Mount Haemus; for such was Tiberiopolis at that time, as we shall show below. What wonder, then, if the report of this most excellent triumph remained unknown within its borders for so long? And if this was the state of affairs, it will not seem surprising that mention of them is missing from the Greek Menaea, and consequently from the Menologia of the Ruthenians and Muscovites, inasmuch as these were taken and translated from the Greek. But if in these later works some saints are commemorated of whom there is no mention among the Greeks, they belong to that class whose memory is celebrated in the entire Ruthenian Church, not to the number of those whose feast is proper to a certain place or region; of which kind seem to be these fifteen martyrs, who are the subject of the present discourse. For the memory of saints of this category is not usually recorded in the common Menaea, but in the specific registers of the place where their cult flourishes: we shall show later ^B that such a memory is not missing even for these martyrs. But even if no mention of them occurred at all elsewhere, no authority or value would have been taken away from this oration; nay, it should be judged as even more excellent on this account alone, and we should be all the more grateful that at long last it is coming to light, and the memory of many martyrs and wonder-workers is being rescued from total oblivion and darkness.

XVIII. Such and so great was the utility and excellence of this oration that it would have rendered my labor of interpretation light and even pleasant, had not the extreme corruption of the transcript, as I said at the beginning, caused me no small—nay, a very great—hardship. It was indeed of such a kind and extent that I can hardly imagine anything could have been written more erroneously. For everywhere there occurred repeatedly both the variation of letters, and the combination of several words, and on the contrary, the division of one and the same word. In the vowels, especially, the greatest fault was committed: for vowels and diphthongs, which are now pronounced with the same sound by the Greeks—namely, ŋ, i, υ, ει, οι, ε, αι, ο, ω—were placed indiscriminately. From which you can easily gather that the copyist who transcribed the codex from which our transcript was taken (that this fault does not fall upon the scribe of our copy, I know from elsewhere) was completely ignorant of the laws of Greek grammar; and furthermore, that he copied it not with the very exemplar placed before his eyes (for had he been looking at the letters that were to be transcribed, he would have erred more rarely), but that it was dictated to him by someone who pronounced the letters according to the modern Greek custom, and that he wrote down whatever he perceived with his old man's ears, using Greek letters as best he could. From this it resulted that in a disyllabic or trisyllabic word, four or five errors (especially if account is taken of spirits and accents) would not infrequently occur. Now, how much confusion these vices produce, and how much trouble for the interpreter, everyone can understand, and especially those who are not ignorant of the Greek idiom. Before I set about the Latin version, therefore, it was necessary to clear away the errors and restore the text to its true reading. The method I adopted in performing this task is this: the errors which I detected with certainty and without any doubt, I corrected in the text itself, without placing any note in the margin; otherwise, I would have had to fill almost the entire margin with them. But where I was uncertain whether some word lay in a mistake, or even if I discovered this with certainty, but could not ascertain the word that ought to be substituted by any certain conjecture, I left it as it was in the transcript in the text, and I appended in the lower margin the word which seemed to me to be the reading, with the prefix *io.* or *lows* [ἴσως], *perhaps*, so as to provide space and opportunity for the happier conjectures of others. Nevertheless, I have added some things to these, about the true and genuine correction of which I had the slightest or absolutely no doubt, so that from these, as a sample, the skilled reader may gather the huge errors with which the copy itself was infested in almost every part. Since, however, that codex was copied so carelessly, as we have said, one may also suspect that entire words were sometimes omitted through carelessness; a suspicion which has occurred to me more than once while interpreting. I will indicate in the notes some of the places where the transcript seemed to me not only faulty but also mutilated; others, the reader will be able to…

perhaps detect. But enough now about the quality of the copy. Now I should like to add a few words about the place and time where the martyrs suffered and where their bodies were translated; these facts will in some way illustrate and confirm what is narrated in this oration.

XIX. Regarding the place and time where the holy martyrs underwent their martyrdom, there can hardly be any difficulty, since the author expresses both quite clearly, saying that the place was Tiberiopolis, and that the time was that when the impious Julian held the height of power. He reveals not only the name of the city in which they suffered; he even designates its location, saying that it is situated at the northern region of Thessalonica,^A κατ' ἀρχὰς τῆς χώρας Ἰλλυρίδος, "at the beginning of Illyricum." In the epigraph of the oration, it is added that it is called Strumitza in Bulgarian: but I am certain that these latter words were added by some later copyist; first, because in the whole oration that city is always called Tiberiopolis and never Strumitza; and because those words are seen to be situated in the wrong place: they do not adhere to the ancient name of Tiberiopolis as they should, but are placed less aptly after the words "they suffered." Furthermore, there was a faulty construction in the codex (which I have amended in the edition); for when *Tiberiopolis* was in the dative case, as they say, it was followed—with the word *martyrisantōn* (martyred) interjected—by the genitive *eponomazomenēs Stroumitzēs* (of the place called Strumitza). Whoever added those words, however, I believe did so with the intention that the reader, at the very beginning, might understand that the Tiberiopolis in which they underwent martyrdom was to be distinguished from other cities of the same name. For there was another Tiberiopolis in that part of Greater Phrygia which is called Pacatiana; another on the island of Cyprus; and finally, another in Europe by the Euxine Sea; if indeed the place which is now called Barna or Varna (which is not an insignificant city, being augmented by archiepiscopal dignity) was once, as many believe, called Tiberiopolis. Others, however, are of the opinion that Varna is the same as the ancient Dionysiopolis; others, that it is Odyssus or Odessus. It is perhaps distinct from all of these, and taken now for one, now for another of the ancient cities, only because of the proximity of their locations. This much seems certain: those who confuse the Tiberiopolis (of which we speak here)—that is now Strumitza—with Varna or Barna are entirely mistaken; for how far the Strumitzian Tiberiopolis (if I may speak so for the sake of clarity) is from the Euxine Sea is evident from what has been said. For who, unless he were totally ignorant of geography, would say that Varna is at the northern region of Thessalonica at the beginning of Illyricum, as Theophylact asserted of Tiberiopolis? ^B

Furthermore, from this description it seems manifest that the location of this Tiberiopolis was within the borders of Macedonia, in that part which looks most closely toward Upper Moesia (now called Serbia), which part of Macedonia was for some time subject to the Bulgarian Empire: for it extended as far as Thessalonica, during the reign of Crubus, as Theophylact testifies in this very oration. This location of Tiberiopolis agrees excellently with the site of Strumitza, as is gathered from Nicephorus Gregoras, who entered it when he was passing through that way from Byzantium with ambassadors to the Kral, or King of Serbia, to go to Skopie. It is helpful to present here some of the words by which he describes his journey, as they seem very opportune for confirming what we said above regarding the location and smallness of Tiberiopolis or Strumitza. He says (Histor. Byzant. lib. VIII, cap. 14, num. 6): "We consumed the whole of the day on the journey from the crossing of the Strymon river, and we arrived at a small town (*polichnion*, a small city), which rises almost above the clouds (it is called Strumitza by the inhabitants), set upon a craggy and high mountain in such a way that men sitting on the battlements would look like small birds to those looking up from the valley... Three days from there we turned aside to the small town, *polichnion*, of Skopie, having now entered the borders of the Triballi, and we saw the Axios river flowing past," etc. From these words it is made clear: 1. That Strumitza was situated between the rivers Strymon and Axios, and was about a one-day journey from the former, but a three-day interval from the latter where it flows past Skopie (and therefore from Skopie itself). 2. That if referred to Thessalonica, it was toward the north, just as Tiberiopolis was, by Theophylact's testimony. 3. That the city was very small, or even a small town, resting on one of the lofty peaks of the Haemus mountain; for this mountain divides Macedonia from both Moesias(a). All these things are ^C

^A clear, unless my opinion deceives me. But that point is more obscure: by what reasoning could Theophylact affirm that this city of Tiberiopolis, or Strumitza, is xat' apyàs tīs xwpa upidos, that is, situated close to the beginning of the region of Illyris or Illyricum, when, if taken as Illyris properly so-called—which the Drinus river separates from Macedonia—it would be distant by several days' journey, and would hold the middle ground of Illyricum taken in a broader sense, whose eastern part, or what they called Eastern Illyricum, embraced Macedonia together with the Dacias and the Moesias within its circuit? But the whole difficulty vanishes if Theophylact's words are understood in the way that I am thoroughly convinced they must be understood, ^B namely that by the name of Illyris we are to signify here that entire tract of territory which the Bulgarians, using the Illyrian or Slavic language (as they still do), occupied and had brought under their own power; and which they inhabited at that time when they were subject to the Emperor of Constantinople (as was the case in the time of Theophylact). Now, of Illyris thus accepted, the first city one encounters coming from Greece, and especially from Thessalonica, is this one of which we are speaking, Strumitza; and this is evident from the fact, which we also observe elsewhere, that the Bulgarians had extended their empire as far as the borders of Thessalonica; and also from the fact that Nicephorus Gregoras suggests that the sacred paschal rites, at which he was present, were celebrated at Strumitza in the Bulgarian or Slavonic language. From which it clearly follows that the Bulgarians, or the Illyrian race, inhabited it at that time. But it is better to cite Gregoras himself, who quite wittily describes the song with which the Strumitzan ^C Bulgarians celebrated the paschal solemnity. “There,” he says (in the place cited above), “the Pascha was celebrated with difficulty, and contrary to our ancient custom, yet we did celebrate it. For there, all learning, rhythms, and the music of sacred hymnody are held as trifles: for the townspeople use an almost barbarous language, and are possessed of habits that would better befit the plow and the spade. Nor did they produce that sound which, though semi-barbarous, might yet be modulated and perhaps considered a species in itself, like the semi-Lydian, or if I may say so, the semi-Phrygian; but they sounded altogether beastly and mountainous: with which rite nomads themselves might sing, preceding their flocks to the ridges and forests in the new spring, when their pails overflow with milk.” This hyperbolic manner of writing may be pardoned in a Greek man, accustomed to the refined culture of the principal city. Meanwhile, it seems to be concluded from this that the Strumitzan inhabitants were neither Greeks by nation, nor did they use the Greek ^D language in their sacred rites; and thus they were either Bulgarians, or Servians, or certainly someone among the peoples of Illyricum. For the language which the Strumitzans used to perform their sacred rites appears to have been no other than Slavonic(a). Furthermore, does not Gregoras himself, in the preceding number, warn that the inhabitants of that place (at which time Strumitza was still almost a full day's journey away) were for the most part colonists of the Mysians (or Maesians)? I am indeed persuaded that by the name of Mysians, or Maesians, the Bulgarians are signified here; or the Servians (both are Slavonic peoples) who had long inhabited both Moesias. From which, if I am not mistaken, it is sufficiently verified that Theophylact could not unjustly assert that Strumitza, or Tiberiopolis, was situated very close to the beginning of the Illyrian region.

XX. But perhaps this may cause a scruple for some, that no ancient writer has mentioned any city of Tiberiopolis existing in the place where Strumitza was later. Indeed, Cellarius, a most skillful investigator of ancient geography, recognizes no Tiberiopolis there. Nor is there any mention of a Tiberiopolitan or Strumitzian bishopric in the six Greek Notitiae of the Patriarchates and episcopal sees, which are reported at the end of Codinus’ *De Officiis* in the *Corpus Historiae Byzantinae*. In the *Exposition* of Andronicus Palaeologus the Elder, indeed, the city of Tiberiopolis itself is numbered among the metropolises, and it is said to have been made the LXXV from the LXIII. But that such a city of Tiberiopolis is not Strumitza in the beginning of Illyricum, but rather is Varna on the Euxine Sea, is clearly affirmed in that place...

[Footnote a: I propose this as a mere conjecture. Elsewhere I have heard that sacred rites are now celebrated there in the Greek language. Perhaps Gregoras also wished to note only a corruption of the Greek language when he says that they used an almost barbarous language.]

^A

It is situated at Ricia, or rather Varna on the Euxine Sea, as is explicitly affirmed in that place. But these things, however true, should move no one. For not all places are entirely known to ancient geographers or handed down to the memory of posterity; rather, some things are unknown or passed over because of their own insignificance. The remaining writers, in fact, were accustomed to make mention of cities and other places only when the opportunity arose. Wherefore Cellarius, although very diligent, omitted some places; ^B but especially (which is relevant to our matter) he makes no mention of a Tiberiopolis on the Euxine Sea, which nevertheless can hardly be doubted to have existed. In the Greek *Notitiae* that still survive, some bishoprics have also been omitted, as scholars have noted long since. Moreover, the silence regarding the bishopric of Tiberiopolis may have arisen from the fact that this city, as long as it retained that name, may have had perhaps one or two bishops; since not long after the martyrdom of Theodore, the first bishop of the same city, it was devastated first by the Avars, and then by the Bulgarians, as the author of this very short work sufficiently indicates. ^C But the fact that it is not found enumerated among the episcopal sees under another name, namely Strumitsa, seems to have been because it was subject to an *autocephalous* archbishop, one of his own right, or constituted under the authority of no patriarch (for the aforementioned *Notitiae* only enumerate the episcopal sees that were subject to the five patriarchs): unless you would rather say that this city is designated in the same *Notitiae* not by the name Strumitsa (since that is Bulgarian) but by some other Greek word: or finally that Strumitsa is not listed because it either attained the honor of an episcopal see too late, or lost it too soon, or was adorned with that dignity only at certain intervals of time (as happened also to other small cities), ^D and thus it could have lacked this prerogative when those catalogues of episcopal sees which have come down to us were being written.

However, at least this seems to be beyond doubt, that there was a bishop of Strumitsa while Theophylact was alive: for he testifies in epistle 32, according to the edition of Meursius, that he had written to Pelagonios (or Pelagonia) and to the bishops of Strombitsa [*i.e., κὲ πρὸς τὸν Στρουμπίτζης*] and Malesoba. For the similarity and affinity of the name does not allow one to doubt that Strombitsa is the same as Strumitsa: especially since we have demonstrated above that Strumitsa (of which this is the discourse) stood at no great distance from Pelagonia; and even, as I myself judge, from Malesoba: and Theophylact appears to have sent his letters to those three bishops, as being neighbors. Nor did Theophylact merely alter the name of Strumitsa itself slightly; but Cedrenus also calls it Στρούμπιτζαν and Στρουπίτζαν, *Strumpitzan* and *Strupitzan* (unless a typographical error has crept into one or the other place). And indeed, that Cedrenus is speaking in that place of the Strumitsa of which we speak is manifest from the fact that in describing the journey of the Emperor Basil to Serres and Scopia or Scupos, he reports that he approached the same *Strumpitza* where he designates the location of that *Strumpitza* which we establish as Strumitsa, relying on the words of Nicephorus Gregoras. Others call the same place *Strumnitza* with even less difference, as did Ananias, its bishop, who in the year 1565 at the synod celebrated in Constantinople (at which synod Joasaph, the archbishop of that city, was deposed from the patriarchal throne for the crime of simony) subscribed with these words: "I, the humble bishop of Strumnitza, Ananias, have willingly subscribed based on my counsel," as the ecclesiastical or patriarchal history of Emmanuel Malaxos, the Peloponnesian, reports; which Martin Crusius, professor at the Academy of Tübingen, translated into Latin and edited in volume II of his *Turco-Graecia*. From which it follows that Strumitsa was adorned with an episcopal see not only in the eleventh century, in which Theophylact lived, but even in the sixteenth. That this see still exists even in our own time; and was even elevated to metropolitan dignity, was testified to me by Jacobus Nicolai, a *hieromonachos* from Olympia, or from the monastery of Mount Olympus, whom I addressed once or twice a few days before these things were sent to the press, as he had arrived at this city, in order to proceed then to Transylvania to perform the office of priest for the people of his own race there. He first informed me that he had stayed at Strumitsa for almost an entire month. Then, when I asked him about these fifteen martyrs, he replied that not only does their memory flourish in that city, but that a commemoration is made daily by the priests celebrating there: and that every year the solemn festival of these same martyrs is celebrated: and furthermore that a special office and readings concerning their martyrdom are held, and that all these things are contained in a certain special printed booklet in Bo-

-^Ascopoli, or, as the Greeks commonly pronounce it, Voscopoli, in Macedonia, a city in which a printing press was established a few years ago. This information, which I was able to gather after long and diligent inquiry from this one sacred monk, wonderfully confirms the truth of the history described in this oration of Theophylact: especially since he affirmed that he had read in the aforementioned booklet all the things that I myself was reporting from the aforesaid oration. Only this he did not hold correctly in his memory, namely, whether it is stated in that booklet that those martyrs suffered their martyrdom under Julian the Apostate. And these things are said concerning the place where the martyrs suffered, and the occasion for it.

XXI. The time, however, when this occurred can be easily determined. For it is known from the inscription and from the oration itself that they shed their blood for Christ during the reign of Julian the Apostate. Since he moderated the empire for a very short time (namely, from the month of November in the year 361 until the 26th day of June in the year 363), it is clear that in defining the time of the martyrdom we can hardly be wrong by a whole year. For it is evident from ecclesiastical history that he began his persecution against the Christians some time after he assumed the empire; and in this very pamphlet we read that the martyrs of whom this account speaks, after their flight first from the city of Nicaea, then from Thessalonica, had sojourned for some time at Tiberiopolis, and by their preaching and miracles had led the citizens there and the inhabitants of the neighboring places to the faith of Christ: a period of time that must have been of some duration, and not altogether insignificant. From this it is deduced with great probability that they underwent martyrdom a few months before the death of Julian, and thus around the beginning of the year 363, or certainly towards the end of the year 362. And there is no more to be said on this matter: it is only to be noted that the day of the martyrdom is placed in this very pamphlet on the 28th of November.

XXII. It seems that we must inquire more diligently regarding the time and place to which the bodies of these martyrs were translated with solemn pomp. Yet let no one here demand that we designate the exact year of this translation: for that is by no means possible to be done, since it is noted down nowhere. Wherefore it will suffice to indicate more recent times, as far as possible. This indeed depends on the time when the Bulgarian nation embraced the faith of Christ the Lord: for it is clearly asserted in this sermon that that translation was performed under the first Christian king of the Bulgarians. Concerning which matter we have said a few things in the Notes which we have appended on the lower margin of this oration, and especially on page 501. Nor do I judge it necessary to pursue or investigate that matter more fully here; since all writers who have touched upon this part of ecclesiastical history agree that the conversion of the Bulgarians happened in the ninth century; they only speculate that it happened twenty years sooner or later. For Greek writers seem to refer it almost to the year eight hundred and forty-six. However, Anastasius the Librarian in his *Life of Nicholas I* provides ^B accounts from which it is easy to gather that the Bulgarian nation did not give its name to the Christian religion before the sixty-sixth year of the same century. In this also almost everyone agrees, that the first king of the Bulgarians addicted to the Christian religion was [baptized] before Bogoris (Theophylact writes *Borisim* in this oration, the word being slightly changed), who was afterwards called Michael. But again they differ greatly in assigning the cause that induced him to embrace the Christian faith. For some relate that he was moved by the exhortations of his sister, who, while she was staying at Constantinople, had been imbued with the mysteries of Christ; others relate that he was impelled by the calamities of wars and famine; others that he was struck by a vivid image of future torments, which he had drawn from a remarkable painting, and that his eyes were opened to the light divinely infused. But it is not our concern to unravel these things. It is enough for me that Bogoris, or Borisim, for whatever cause—and whether it was one or multiple—was initiated into the mysteries of the Christian religion only around the middle of the ninth century: for from this it is established and made certain that the translation of the holy martyrs, of whom we now speak, occurred as that same century was drawing to a close; and thus that it preceded the age of Theophylact by about two centuries, as we hinted above.

XXIII. But as clearly as the time, at least the approximate time, of such a translation is known, so much the more obscure to us is the location to which the sacred treasures were carried. The author of the oration indeed calls it many times Bpayahnvitav, Bragalinitzan (or, if the 3 is pronounced after the manner of the modern Greeks, Vragalinitzan), and calls it both ^C πάλιν, a city, and επαρχίαν, a province, or me-

metropolis. But what or where this city may be, or might once have been, I have not yet been able to discover in my inquiries, since I have found it neither noted on geographical maps nor mentioned by any other author. However, since from the nature of the Slavonic language—not entirely unknown to me—and from similar instances that occur here and there, even in Theophylact, I had found by experience that this word ends with a Bulgarian termination (which language is a dialect of the Slavic or Slavonic), I immediately began to inquire whether, if the termination *itza* or *nitza* were removed, a city of this or a similar name existed in Bulgaria, or in some other region whose inhabitants used the Bulgarian language, such as was Bragalinitza, as is clear from the speech itself. But I found no other city that seemed to correspond with it in any way, except Bargala, which pertains to the second Macedonia, a part of the eastern Illyricum: for the name Bargala, when the Bulgarian termination is removed, remains, and agreed with it almost exactly; nor does it seem to be far from Tiberiopolis. Wherefore it is credible that it existed within the borders of the Bulgarian empire at that time, and that consequently the use of the Bulgarian language flourished there at that time.

XXIV. I had written thus far when the aforementioned monk Olympiota informed me that the city of Bragalinitza still exists in the second Macedonia, or, as he himself pronounced it, Bragarinitza; but that from a great city it has been reduced to the condition of a village, and is inhabited by Turks, with a few Christians intermixed; and that it is distant from Strumitza about a five hours' journey. He added that not only does the memory of the translation of the holy martyrs that took place there still flourish, but also that he himself, when passing through there, had seen with his own eyes the foundations of the temple which was said to have been built in their honor long ago. I do not have enough further information about these saints. For the rest, the most distinguished continuators of Bollandus, who have deserved so well of the Christian republic, will in their own time discuss, illustrate, and set forth this entire history most accurately and with the greatest force of erudition, as is their habit. Meanwhile, it will not be the least praise of this edition that it has provided an opportunity for such eminent men to complete this task, as it seems it will in fact do; since one of them, a man famous for his all-encompassing erudition, Joannes Stiltingius, whom I myself consulted about this matter by letter, responded with his usual kindness that he had not seen the acts of these martyrs.

SECTION VII. Concerning the Allocution to a Familiar relative to the things of which the Latins are accused.

XXV. This Allocution, which others call the *Epistle to Nicolaus the Deacon and Canstrisius*(a), was famous even at that time, when it still lay unpublished in certain more notable libraries. For not only had all those who wrote about the works of Theophylact made mention of it, but also some of its fragments remained obvious to everyone, being inserted in the *Jure Græco-Romano* which Leunclavius published, and also in the *Græcia Orthodoxa* edited by Allatius. But these had so sharpened the minds of the learned that they desired most of all to discover, from the very source, what kind of mind had resided in that sufficiently ancient author, that most learned and famous archbishop, regarding those things which have long kept the Greek Church severed from the Latin Church by an unspeakable schism. The first (of those I know) who seriously set his mind to fulfilling these most just desires of men of letters was the very generous patron of this edition, whom we have already mentioned above, and who, ever since the year 1753, had taken pains to have it transcribed from the codex *Cæsareo-Vindobonensi*, so that it might be inserted into this third volume of the Works of Theophylact as a no small ornament of the same. In the following year, I myself donated it to the Latin tongue; from which the learned author of the preceding Dissertation excerpted some portions for his own use. That it was to be made public property in this edition—the learned were warned both in the aforementioned Dissertation and also in the *Declaratione Græco-Latina*, which was issued to the light together with the first volume in the year 1754. But since the printing of this volume was delayed longer, for the reason we have mentioned, the most learned man Joannes Aloysius Mingarellius, a canon regular of the congregation of Saint Augustine of the Rhine, perhaps so that he might more speedily satisfy the

vows, thought fit to have it inserted into his *Fascicle of Anecdota*, which he published in the year 1756. And although this happened somewhat unpleasantly for the supporters of this edition, because they suspected that some of the praise for it might thereby be snatched away, it nevertheless turned out very conveniently for me: for thus I was able to perform the collation, which I was intending to do with the Bologna text, much more easily, now that it had been published. Moreover, Mingarellius joined to the Greek text a Latin version that is certainly accurate and polished; and for this reason, I was for a long time very much inclined in my mind to adopt it for this edition. But at length, thinking that there was no reason why I should deprive myself of the version which I had acquired by right of time, and after it had been wrestled, through no small effort, from a manuscript that was difficult for many reasons, I decided that I should not condemn it to perpetual darkness, and that I would place it here instead. However, since the Bologna manuscript, when compared with the Imperial-Viennese codex—which does not betray a very great antiquity—sometimes seemed to me clearer and more emended, I was able, with the help of the latter, to correct some errors in my manuscript (though I had previously removed several by conjecture alone), and from that, it was also permitted to me to perfect my version a little; thus the most excellent Mingarellius, who indicates that he was induced to publish this *Allocution* for this reason above others, so that the edition of Theophylact’s works might be perfected more and more, has not entirely missed his goal. And indeed, the reader will easily perceive from the variant readings which I have noted at the bottom of the pages that the Bologna codex, although for the most part clearer than the Viennese, can in turn be—and indeed ought to be—corrected in certain places by the Viennese codex. And surely no one, I think, who is willing to weigh the few notes I have added, will deny that the Viennese reading is to be preferred in certain passages to the Bologna one. We have also added variant readings that appear in the excerpts of Chomatianus, not indeed all of them, but only those which seemed to be of some importance. But now let us say a few things about the *Allocution* itself. ^A XXVI. Perhaps there will be those who, thinking that this little work of Theophylact could be of use only for hardening the followers of Photius in their schism, might bear it ill that it is being brought into the light of day by us, or at least might be surprised. But we are so far removed from the opinion of those who think in this way that we not only do not suspect that there is any danger lurking in its publication, but we also trust that a manifold fruit will accrue to us therefrom: namely, first, that our good faith in publishing the works of Theophylact may become clear to all; next, that the enemies of the Latin name may perceive that we have such confidence in the equity of our cause that we do not fear to bring forward into the public view the arguments that are brought against us; finally, that the Photians (for so it pleases me to call those of the Greeks who adhere to the schism, that I may distinguish them from their noble nation, which I greatly love and, as is fitting, cherish) may eventually learn to think more justly of the Latin Church and adopt a more moderate frame of mind. I trust that this will indeed happen if, with the storm of passion settled and prejudices set aside for a little while, they are willing to direct their mind and spirit toward the principles of Theophylact (whom they otherwise highly value, and not without reason). If they do this, they will surely admit that ^B there are neither many errors of the Latins, nor are they such as are fit to cause a rending of the Churches, and that none of them pertains to the head of the faith. They will admit that such errors, as they conceive them, are amplified beyond all reason and measure by certain more fervent (b) zealots of orthodoxy; and that some need no correction, while others need but a moderate one, so that it is of no great concern to the Church if it is carried out. They will admit that almost the entire cause of the dissension between the Greeks and the Latins should be reduced to the single particle added to the Creed, the *Filioque* (c), and that therefore peace with the Latin Church should not be disturbed on account of unleavened bread, nor on account of fasts (d), and still less on account of other considerations. They will admit that many things which are to them errors are mere customs (e), some indeed introduced out of piety, others out of a provident disposition. Finally, they will admit that out of a mere defect of charity, ambition, and pride (f), out of zeal not according to knowledge, and out of a blind self-love (g), so many ^C piles of...

Latin errors have been leveled with such bitterness. Therefore, let them read and read again, and weigh more accurately what that great doctor of theirs, by no means addicted to the Latins, wrote in this Address of his against the excessive, immoderate, and altogether irrational zeal of the Photians of his own time; and let them not wish to overstep so enormously the limits set by him. Let them think again and again what he would have written if he had fallen upon these times, in which their zeal, or rather hatred, for the Latin Church has flared up even to madness. And indeed, with what spirit would he now exist, or what, I ask, would he write, if in the History of the Patriarchs written by Dositheus, augmented by Chrysanthus, and edited at Bucharest in Wallachia in the thirteenth year of the present century, he were to discover all those kinds of slanders heaped upon the Roman Church, which even his most hostile enemies had ever invented? What if there fell into the hands of Theophylact a pamphlet published two years ago in Constantinople, which contains the encyclical letter of Eugenius the scholarch on the Holy Mountain, in which the preconceived errors of the Latins are said to be most numerous and innumerable, and are amplified in an amazing way? "Furthermore, it contains the 'Our Father,' adapted skillfully by some wise priest to the Pope as if he were the God of the Latins," and it even exhibits the entire Lord's Prayer adapted neatly by some learned priest to the Pope, as the God of the Latins. O truly remarkable invention of the most learned priest (a)! What if Theophylact were to cursorily glance through that Pseudo-evangelical "Trumpet" of some Macarius, printed in this city in the year 1754 with surreptitious types (copies of which were therefore consigned to the flames by public authority), inflated and blown up for the very purpose of inciting and inflaming the hatred of the populace, in place of Christian charity? To this is prefixed a preface by a Greek man, Ephraim, fully responding to the work itself, where he writes with the utmost and incredible impudence that the Latins are "truly pneumatomachs, antichrists, and antitheos, since they worship the creature, namely their own pope, in place of the Creator"; and he says that the Roman pontiff himself not only "destroys the authority of the Lord upon earth, and confines Christ to heaven alone, so that he himself may appear as an earthly God," but also that he is no longer "ordained by prayer and the invocation of the Holy Spirit, but by the observation and handling of members," words which natural modesty forbids from interpreting. What finally, if he heard that satanic saying (I use Theophylact's word, for no more apt one occurs here), that saying, I say, which is said to be bandied about by the Photian herd and instilled more deeply into the simple common people, namely: "Muhamedism is better than Latinism"? Would he not, upon hearing these things, seized with the greatest grief of soul and indignation, exclaim: What fury, O citizens, what such license of the tongue (b)! Verily, I fear lest what happened in his own age might now happen to Theophylact.

^A he feared would happen to him, namely that some of the more fervent Photians, reading how sharply he lashes out in this little work of his against their immoderate zeal, their defect of charity, their ambition, and their dropsical pride—where judgment is turned into contempt and esteem—might condemn him for crass ignorance and judgment in sacred matters, or even for carelessness, and indeed for the betrayal of the Eastern dogmas. Others, however—one would hope—might be moved by the authority of this most serious man and easily persuade themselves that the errors of the Latins are neither many, nor of such a kind as would be capable of rending the Churches, nor such as pertain to a head of the faith. But these same individuals, perhaps relying on his authority, might contend that they are justly estranged from the communion of the Latins, who added to the Creed the clause by which it is declared that the Holy Spirit proceeds also from the Son. ^B Therefore, it pleases me now to address them briefly, in a friendly and brotherly manner, and, to use the words of Theophylact, simply and candidly, as it entirely behooves a disciple of the fishermen.

XXVII. And first of all, as far as the present matter is concerned, I would wish them to be premonished that it is the disposition of the mind, rather than the words, that should be observed in Theophylact; and furthermore, whatever his sentiments may have been, his authority in this matter is not to be highly esteemed. As far as the first is concerned, I am certain he was so disposed in mind that if, during the time he lived, the procession of the Holy Spirit also from the Son had been called to examination and defined by some council gathered from both Greeks and Latins, he would have undoubtedly stood by the judgment and declaration of that council: just as very many Fathers, most excellent in holiness and doctrine, stood by the Council of Florence, and adhered to it perpetually and most constantly. ^C That Theophylact was affected by this disposition of mind, I conclude from his extraordinary love of peace and union, which shines forth clearly both in his other works and, most especially, in this very Allocution. But since he flourished before this controversy had been defined in any ecumenical synod (for it was first defined in the Second General Council of Lyons, in the year 1274), and since the heat of disagreement and schism—first stirred up by Photius, then not long before renewed by Michael Cerularius—was raging most vehemently during that time, it is not very much a matter for wonder if Theophylact also suffered himself to be swept along, at least to some degree. Yet because, for the reason we mentioned above, it is unknown to us whether his fervor grew into heretical obstinacy, we therefore condemn neither him of heresy, nor of formal, as they say, ^D schism (a); nor do we in any way begrudge him the title of a holy man, by which he is commonly distinguished by the Orientals.

XXVIII. But this very fact, which serves to purge or excuse Theophylact from these offenses, contributes as much as possible to diminishing his authority in this part. For since this controversy had not yet been subjected to examination by careful study and common consent in a council gathered from Greeks and Latins—which was first done in the aforementioned general synod—he could easily have been ignorant of the foundations upon which the Latin position rested, or in what sense they asserted that the Holy Spirit also proceeds from the Son, and what legitimate reason or cause they had for thinking that the particle *Filioque* ought to be added to the Creed of the Church for its own use. That this thing was indeed unknown to Theophylact can scarcely be doubted if the arguments with which he himself defends his case are weighed a little more attentively. For would he ever have used those evangelical words, *Show us the Father* (which indeed teaches that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son), *and it is enough for us* (b), if he had known that there were so many Fathers, and indeed most approved ones, and not only Latins, who flourished before the beginning of the dissension (to whom, therefore, no one truly thinking rightly could deny the name and rank of approved Fathers), but also Greeks, who handed down our position? Here, indeed, before I proceed further, I cannot restrain myself from vehemently complaining and expostulating regarding the manifest injury that the Greeks of our age do not fear to inflict not only upon the Latin, but also upon the universal Church, while they contend that this controversy of faith must be judged only by the Greeks, and defined according to their opinions. What then? Is the Catholic

Church confined within the borders of Greece or the East alone, even in the first centuries? Or must divine tradition, whose peculiar endowment it is to flourish always and everywhere, be drawn and weighed only from the Eastern Church? Who granted the Orientals this prerogative? Was it Christ, who commanded the Gospel to be preached in all the world? Was it the apostles, who announced it everywhere on earth; and whose leader, Peter, established Rome as the seat of both his doctrine and his authority? Where also Paul, having discharged the office of teacher for two years—not to mention the other apostles, some of whom disseminated evangelical doctrine in various provinces and kingdoms of the West through their own efforts, others through disciples established by themselves. Therefore, even if no testimony could be brought from the Greek Fathers for the Latin dogma, would not the unanimous opinion of the Latin Fathers be sufficient, not only that it should be absolved from every suspicion of error, but also that it should be attributed to the apostles themselves? And surely, if this consensus of the Latin Fathers did not escape Theophylactus, upon what grounds did he dare to affirm that this is taught by none of the approved Fathers, challenging us with evangelical words: Show us the Father? Are not Cyprian and Ambrose approved Fathers, whose testimonies the third ecumenical, or Ephesian, council uses? Is not the most approved Father Leo the Great, whose writings the fourth council called a *column of orthodoxy*? Is not the approved Father Augustine, whom the sixth council pursued with the highest praise just as much as Ambrose and Leo themselves? If, however, he was ignorant of this, it follows that his store of ecclesiastical erudition was much poorer than as befitted an archbishop of such a name: and thus his authority, in this regard, is not greatly to be esteemed. But what is more displeasing is what he adds: For if he is approved, he did not say it; and if he did say it, he is not approved. Which words seem to reek of a heretical spirit: for heretics are accustomed to measure the authority of the Fathers by their own opinion, and to pass judgment upon it; and while they dissent from them, they count them as nothing. But it is better to think mildly of Theophylactus, and to interpret those words kindly, as though they were not uttered in that spirit and sense; but because he was too much pleased with himself, and trusted that no Father could be found among the more illustrious Greeks—for he seems to have been unconcerned about the Latins—who would have taught that the Holy Spirit also proceeds from the Son. Therefore, it is worth the effort to investigate more accurately upon what and how valid foundations he relied in his such great self-assurance. But a little later he seems not sufficiently secure even to himself, when he adds: Furthermore, even if we were to grant this, it is not something rare that should be drawn into an argument. But what if there are not few and rare, not only Latin, but even Greek Fathers, who have handed down our dogma in either explicit or equivalent words?

XXIX. But before I demonstrate this, I demand by every right from Theophylactus and the champions of the Photian schism that they show us even one from their approved Fathers who, before the Photian times, denied that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son. But although they labor long and hard, they cannot point to even one (for we will show later that the Damascene, whom alone they have the power to oppose with some appearance of truth, does not disagree with us at all). For others are by no means to be considered opponents of our dogma, who either are completely silent on this matter or say only that the Spirit proceeds from the Father. For who is ignorant that it is a completely different thing not to assert that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son, and to deny it? It is one thing likewise to affirm that He proceeds from the Father, another that He proceeds from the Father alone? Wherefore I am in no way able to understand how Theophylactus and all the Photians traduced us as opposing Christ and the Fathers, for the reason that they straightforwardly assert that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father, and contend that we are making a *neoterism*, or innovation in the faith, when we assert that He also proceeds from the Son; purely on the ground that Christ said only, from the Father. But if it is an innovation to add anything, why do they themselves add something by saying, from the Father alone? Where did Christ, where did the Fathers assert this (at least before the times of Photius)? For what is this? Is it forbidden for us to express what Christ the Lord did not express, yet permissible for them to limit what was not limited by Christ? If He did not say that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son, that is, from Himself, neither did He deny it. Why, therefore, do the Photians deny it? And if they were only not asserting it, their silence would be bearable; but they actually deny it, and condemn those who do assert it, and consign them to every curse; that trite saying (on which even Theophylactus—

is driven by the iniquity of their cause), and employing a childish argument: If the Holy Spirit also proceeds from the Son ^A (a), what prevented Christ from speaking as follows: "Who proceeds from the Father and from me"? But let it be permitted to me to add: If He proceeds from the Father alone, what prevented Christ from expressing this; especially when He had already foreseen how many and how great would be the dissensions that would one day arise from that little word being omitted? The Photians have nothing to respond to these points; but for us it is easy to say what we should reply against them: namely, that Christ, if not in that passage, then at least in other places, if not in explicit words, then at least in equivalent ones, taught that the Spirit also proceeds from Himself. This is what our people have demonstrated thousands of times, both from the fact that the Lord Christ says (John x, 30), "I and the Father are one"; from which they infer that the Son is also one with the Father with regard to the principle of the Holy Spirit. And from that (John xvi, 15), "All things that the Father has are mine; therefore," they say, "the power of producing the Holy Spirit is also the Son's, or belongs to the Son." And from that (ibid. 14): "He will glorify me, because He will receive ^B of what is mine." For what, they say, can the Holy Spirit receive from the Son, unless it be His very self? And finally, from the fact that in John xv, 26, He says that He will send the Holy Spirit: since a mission in divine matters can be nothing other or be understood as anything other than an eternal procession ordered toward the production of something externally. What is more, He even teaches implicitly by the very words in which the adversaries put so much trust—namely, "who proceeds from the Father"—that He also proceeds from Himself. For whatever is said in the Scriptures about one person must also be understood of another, unless it is repugnant to His personal property, as the most true axiom of theologians, with St. Thomas (part 1, q. 25, cap. 25), asserts, resting on the reasoning that the three divine persons are all one and the same, with the exception only of those things which pertain to personal property. This is so certain that even if Christ had said in that passage, "Who proceeds from the Father alone," the production of the Holy Spirit could not therefore be denied to Him. Perhaps the Photians wonder at this or deny it. Let them then likewise deny that the Father is known by the Holy Spirit, or even that He knows Himself, because Christ said (Matt. xi, 22), "No one knows the Father except the Son"; or let them deny, with the Socinians, that the Son Himself is the true God, because He Himself, addressing the Father, says (John xvii, 3), "That they may know you, the only true God."

XXX. See to what, at last, the argument so much celebrated by the Photians comes: by the Photians, I say, who seem to be ignorant of that trite and self-evident maxim: He who asserts one thing does not deny another, unless it is repugnant to what he asserts. For have they ever proved, or will they ever be able to prove, that there is any contradiction in this, that the Son, together with the Father, is the principle of the Holy Spirit? For what? Must we think that any of the power which is in the Father is lacking to the Son? Or is it repugnant to the reason of the Son to produce a person other than Himself? Or, finally, that what has a principle cannot be the principle of another? None of these things, certainly. Why, therefore, do they so boastfully thrust forward this argument: "The Gospel of Christ teaches believers ^C clearly that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father; but those angels of darkness (the Latins) preach that He proceeds also from the Son: therefore they teach things contrary to the Gospel." So indeed, after countless others, Eugenius says in the cited pamphlet, whose Greek words are these: *The Gospel through the mouth of Christ announces to the faithful clearly that the Spirit proceeds from the Father, and they, the angels of darkness, announce that He proceeds also from the Son.* O excellent reasoning by the Scholarch of Mount Athos! Thus, is it so? He proceeds from the Father; therefore not from the Son: when one should rather say: He proceeds from the Father, therefore also from the Son, for the reasons indicated. But even Theophylactus himself ill-advises his own reputation when he calls the aforementioned argument a simple and absolute reason ^D (b), and added that we should seek another teacher besides our one master, Christ, if we wish to adhere to this dogma. But truly, if Christ, by saying, "who proceeds from the Father," does not in any way oppose us, then those who, among the Greek Fathers, merely teach and affirm that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father are to be considered much less opposed to us. Since, therefore, no one of the Greeks will deny that He proceeds also from the Son, and yet some of them affirm along with all the Latins that He does, to wish to deny it stubbornly, or even to condemn us for heresy because we assert it, is the business of those (c)—[I repeat the words which Theophylactus has]—who are full of the spirit of error.

XXXI. But come now, let us bring forward into the light the Greeks, and those approved, nay, most approved Fathers who think with us on this dogma; so that those who are wise may perceive from this how inconsiderately Theophylactus has provoked us with those words: "Show us the Father," etc. Approved indeed and most approved Fathers are Athanasius, Epiphanius, Gregory of Nyssa, Cyril of Alexandria, and Basil, to whom must be added Didymus, at least on account of his supreme antiquity. Furthermore, all these quite openly teach that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son. For although—to confess candidly what is the case—no Greek before Symeon Metaphrastes uses the very word ἐκπορεύεσθαι to express this, yet they use words and phrases of the same value entirely, such as προΐέναι, to progress; προχέεσθαι, to pour forth, to emanate; εἶναι, to be; ὑπάρχειν, to exist; ὕπαρξιν ἔχειν, to have existence, and the like, by which no one who is not thoroughly hardened in defending error could deny that the eternal production of the Holy Spirit from the Son is signified. And indeed the phrases εἶναι, to be; ὑπάρχειν, to exist; ὕπαρξιν ἔχειν, to have existence, are in themselves clear for signifying that which we intend. But Theophylactus himself also uses the word προΐέναι, to progress or to flow forth, to indicate the substantial procession of the Holy Spirit, while in Allocution num. IV, explaining why the Spirit is called the Spirit of Christ, he says, "not," he says, "as ὡς ἐξ ἐκείνου προϊόν, as if He flowed forth from Him; but, etc." Why then do the Greeks of our day, reading in their own Fathers that the Holy Spirit is προΐέναι, flows forth, or progresses from the Son, contend that this is to be referred to the temporal mission or diffusion of the same Spirit? Surely by the same reasoning one could explain that statement of the Lord Christ, ὃς παρὰ Πατρὸς ἐκπορεύεται, "who proceeds from the Father," as referring to a temporal mission; and thus deny His eternal production or procession from the Father as well. But now the testimonies of the Greek Fathers themselves must be set before our eyes.

XXXII. Therefore 1. St. Epiphanius, that I may begin with those who express themselves more clearly, says in the Ancoratus, n. 67: Χριστός, he says, ἐκ τοῦ Πατρὸς πιστεύεται Θεὸς ἐκ Θεοῦ, καὶ τὸ Πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἢ παρ' ἀμφοτέρων, "Christ is believed to be God from God from the Father, and the Spirit is from Christ or from both" (a). And n. 71: Θεὸς Υἱὸν καλεῖ τὸν ἐξ αὐτοῦ, τὸ δὲ ἅγιον Πνεῦμα τὸ παρ' ἀμφοτέρων. And in the preceding n. 8, he says the Holy Spirit is ἐν μέσῳ Πατρὸς καὶ Υἱοῦ, ἐκ Πατρὸς καὶ Υἱοῦ, τρίτον τῇ ὀνομασίᾳ, "in the midst of the Father and the Son, from the Father and the Son, third in appellation." And in the preceding n., that it is ἐκ τῆς αὐτῆς οὐσίας παρὰ Πατρὸς καὶ Υἱοῦ Πνεῦμα ἅγιον, "Holy Spirit from the very substance of the Father and the Son." And in heresy 74, n. 8, εἶναι φῶς τρίτον παρὰ Πατρὸς καὶ Υἱοῦ, "to be a light third from the Father and the Son." That it is also παρὰ Πατρὸς καὶ Υἱοῦ, "from the Father and the Son," he repeats twice in n. 9. And previously in that same place n. 7 he had said that it is τὸ ἅγιον Πνεῦμα παρ' ἀμφοτέρων, "the Holy Spirit from both." He has similar things in n. 10, and in heresy 62, n. 4. So that perhaps no one among the Latin Fathers has spoken either more clearly or more frequently on this matter.

2. St. Gregory of Nyssa in book I Contra Eunomium says two things in particular, from which it follows ineluctably that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son. The first is that the Son has the character of a cause or principle in relation to the Holy Spirit, and for this reason alone He is pre-understood to Him, just as the Father is in relation to the Son. His words are: Ὡς συνάπτεται Πατρὶ ὁ Υἱὸς, καὶ τὸ ἐξ αὐτοῦ εἶναι ἔχων οὐκ ὑστερίζει κατὰ τὴν ὕπαρξιν· οὕτω πάλιν καὶ τοῦ Μονογενοῦς ἔχεται τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον, ἐπινοίᾳ μόνῃ κατὰ τὸν τῆς αἰτίας λόγον προθεωρουμένου τῆς τοῦ Πνεύματος ὑποστάσεως, "Just as the Son is joined to the Father, and having being from Him does not come after in existence; so again the Holy Spirit is attached to the Only-Begotten, being pre-understood to the hypostasis of the Spirit solely by the consideration of the reason of cause." The Son is therefore αἰτία, cause, or principle of the Holy Spirit; therefore the latter proceeds from the former. The other saying of Nyssen is, Τοῦ λόγου τῆς αἰτίας ὑπεξηρημένου, ἐν μηδενὶ τὴν ἁγίαν Τριάδα πρὸς ἑαυτὴν ἀσυμφώνως ἔχειν. "With the reason of principle subtracted, the Holy Trinity in nothing disagrees with itself"; that is, there is no distinction between the persons of the most holy Trinity except from the reason of principle. Since therefore the Son and the Holy Spirit are really distinct from one another,

(a) Epiphanius does not only assert that the Spirit is from Christ or the Son, and indeed in the same way that Christ is from God the Father, that is, substantially; but he also proves that He is from both by the same evangelical words by which we prove the same; for he immediately adds: Ὡς φησὶν ὁ Χριστός· “Ὁ παρὰ τοῦ Πατρὸς ἐκπορεύεται, καὶ, Οὗτος ἐκ τοῦ ἐμοῦ λήψεται. As Christ asserts (John xv, 26): "Who proceeds from the Father"; and (xvi, 14): "He shall take of mine."

^A It is necessary that the ratio of principle should intercede between them, and thus, that the latter should proceed from the former. Nyssen presents this same principle more clearly and emphatically in his epistle to Ablabius with these chief words: "We do not deny the difference (in God) according to cause and caused, by which alone we understand one to be distinguished from the other, in that we believe one to be the cause, and the other to be from the cause." We do not deny the diversity according to the ratio of cause and caused (or according to the ratio of principle), and of that which is from the principle (in God): by which alone we comprehend that one is discerned from the other, insofar as we believe one to be the principle, and the other to be from the principle. When Nyssen says this, who would deny that he believed the Holy Spirit to be from the Son as if from the cause, since he did not doubt that He is distinguished from Him?

3. Didymus, in book II *On the Holy Spirit*, introduces Christ as providing the reason why He spoke of the Holy Spirit in John xvi, 13: "For He shall not speak of himself." With these words: "Because it is not from Himself, but is from the Father and Me; for this very thing which subsists is to Him from the Father and Me." Truly, most clear are the words which he has in the same place, with a few things interposed: "Neither is the Son anything else except those things which are given to Him by the Father; so also the Holy Spirit is not another substance beside that which is given to Him by the Son." Therefore, the Holy Spirit receives substance from the Son: therefore He proceeds substantially from Him.

4. Cyril of Alexandria, in book I *De Adorat.*, says: ^B "He is the Spirit from God, and the Father, and even from the Son essentially, or from the Father through the Son," that is, He is the Spirit from God, and the Father, and from the Son, who flows forth substantially from both, or from the Father through the Son. But will the Photians interpret this substantial efflux of the Holy Spirit from both as merely the outpouring of His gifts and charisms? But they are to be laughed at, not refuted, if they rage to that extent, especially since the same writer, in his *Commentary on Joel*, ch. II, sufficiently indicates that the Holy Spirit is from the Son in the same way as He is in Him, that is, substantially: for he says absolutely: "The Spirit is proper to Him (the Son), and is in Him, and is from Him." But how, O most blessed Cyril, is the Holy Spirit in the Son? "Just as," he answers, "He is understood to be in God and the Father." And in his response to the objections of the Orientals, to Anathema 9, he says: "The Son, having as His own that which is from Him, and the Holy Spirit *essentially innate to Him* (οὐσιωδῶς ἐμπεφυκὸς αὐτῷ), possesses Him who is from Him, and who exists substantially in Him." In the same way, in book XXXIV of his *Thesauros*, he says concerning the same Holy Spirit: "He proceeds from the Father and the Son." Moreover, he proceeds from the Father and the Son; and lest anyone should understand this of a temporal progression, he adds that He is of the Divine substance, proceeding essentially in It and from It: so that for Cyril it is the same to be from the Father and the Son, as it is to be from the substance of the Father and the Son. Who of sound mind would draw this to the temporal effusion of the Holy Spirit? Pair to this is what he says in the same book: "In Him (Christ) and from Him the Holy Spirit naturally exists"; and: "It is necessary to confess the Spirit to be of the substance of the Son, for as existing from Him by nature, it is necessary to admit the Holy Spirit to be of the same substance with the Son: for as existing naturally from Him, etc." ^C (a) He has similar things in Dialogue I, *De Trinitate*. And in his *Commentary on John*, he says He flows from the Son "according to nature, or naturally." Finally, that I may pass over the other testimonies, of which there are many, that which he has in *Commentary on John*, book X, seems peremptory, where, after he spoke of the Holy Spirit, "He is the Spirit of Christ and His mind" (which words alone should be enough to establish His procession from the Son: for how is He His mind, if He is not from Him?), a little later he adds: "As His spirit, as we said just now, knowing without being taught all things that are His, from whom and in whom He is, He reveals the divine mysteries to the saints," tanquam Spiritus ipsius, as we were just saying, and as knowing, without anyone teaching Him, all things that are His, from whom and in whom He is, He reveals divine mysteries to the saints. Can you hear, O Photian, "from whom and in whom He is" (ἐξ οὗ καὶ ἐν ᾧπέρ ἐστι); and will you still maintain that He is not from Him, or does not proceed?

(a) How rightly Theophylact opposes Cyril, when at number IV he says: "He is called the Spirit of Christ, but not as proceeding from Him, but as being proper to Him, for He is a relative." – He is called the Spirit of Christ, not because He flows from Him; but because He is proper to Him, for He is kindred.

Caesarea; and thereafter, he was sent as a prisoner to Rome. Thus, from Caesarea he came to Sidon; and thence to Myra of Lycia; then to ^A Cnidus; and having suffered much from that place, he came to the island. There, the viper fastened upon his hand, and he remained unhurt and unharmed. Afterward, he came to Syracuse, then to Rhegium in Calabria, then to Puteoli; and from there he went up on foot to Rome, meeting with the brethren who had come out to the Market of Appius and the Three Taverns. And having finally entered Rome, and having taught for a considerable time, he later suffered martyrdom in that very Rome, having fought the good fight there. The Romans, moreover, have enclosed his relics within a very beautiful shrine and basilica, and they celebrate the annual day of his memorial on the third day before the Kalends of July ^B. But that blessed one had already composed many exhortations for the sake of life and virtue before this, and had provided many instructions to men regarding their duties. Furthermore, through the very structure of his fourteen Epistles, he mapped out for men the whole manner of living.

The Chapters of the Acts of the holy Apostles

1. Concerning the teaching of Christ after the resurrection, and his appearance to the disciples, and concerning the promise of the gift of the Holy Spirit; and the sight and the manner of the Lord's assumption; and concerning his glorious second coming. 2. Peter's dialogue ^C with the disciples regarding the death and rejection of Judas the traitor. 3. Concerning the divine visitation of the Holy Spirit, which occurred on the day of Pentecost to those who believed. 4. Concerning the healing in the name of Christ of the man lame from birth, and Peter’s instruction, which was merciful, advisory, and sympathetic toward salvation. 5. Concerning the like-minded and universal communion of those who believed. 6. That an angel of God brought the apostles out of the prison by night, ^D and commanded them to preach Jesus openly and freely. 7. Concerning the ordination of the seven deacons. 8. The uprising of the Jews and the false accusation against Stephen, and his own speech concerning the covenant of God with Abraham, and concerning the twelve patriarchs. 9. Concerning the persecution of the Church, and the burial of Stephen.

Variæ lectiones et notæ.

notæ.

EXPOSITION OF THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES

^A of his wisdom and philosophical preaching and the piety of Paul. 27. Concerning Aquila and Priscilla, and the disobedience of the Corinthians: and concerning the good pleasure concerning them which God, proceeding from divine foreknowledge and providence, revealed to Paul. 28. Concerning baptism, and the gift of the Holy Spirit given through the prayers of Paul to those who believed in Ephesus, and concerning the healings performed by Paul. 29. The journey of Paul from the raising of Eutychus from the dead through prayer in Troas, and the pastoral exhortation which he delivered to the presbyters of Ephesus. ^B 30. The prophecy of Agabus concerning the things that were to happen to Paul in Jerusalem. 31. The exhortation of James to Paul, that he should take care not to appear to forbid the Jews to be circumcised. 32. Concerning the disturbance stirred up in Jerusalem against Paul, and how the tribune snatched him from the crowd. 33. Whatever Paul, when he had descended into the council, suffered and said and did with pointed accuracy. 34. Concerning the plot devised by the Jews against Paul, and the revealing of it to Lysias. ^C 35. Concerning the accusation of Tertullus against Paul, and his defense before the governor. 36. Concerning Felix his successor, and the promotion of Festus, and finally the hearing of Paul and his appeal during his time. 37. The arrival of Agrippa and Bernice; and the inquiry into the matters concerning Paul. 38. The voyage of Paul towards Rome, filled with many and great dangers. 39. How Paul arrived at Rome from Melita. 40. Concerning the discourse of Paul to the Jews who were at Rome.

Variæ lectiones et notæ.

b And here, more than half of the eighteenth chapter, concerning the calumny of the Jews before Gallio: and concerning the prior arrival at Ephesus and the journey of Paul, and concerning Apollo, is passed over. c And here, the remainder of the nineteenth chapter concerning the sons of Sceva the exorcists, and the sedition at Ephesus through Demetrius, are passed over.

FROM THE EXEGETICAL WORKS OF SAINT JOHN CHRYSOSTOM AND CERTAIN OTHER FATHERS: EXPOSITIONS ON THE ACTS, COLLECTED CONCISELY BY THE MOST BLESSED THEOPHYLACT, ARCHBISHOP OF BULGARIA

^A Commentary of our holy Father John Chrysostom on the Acts of the holy Apostles.

1 This book is known to few, nor is it itself known, nor he who wrote and compiled it. For this reason, I judged it necessary to descend into this study, so that I might instruct the ignorant and not allow such a treasure to lie hidden and concealed. For it will be able to profit us no less than the Gospels themselves, if we are filled with such philosophy and such rectitude of dogma, and especially with the things wrought by the Spirit. Let us not, therefore, pass it by, but let us examine it with all care and diligence. For here we are able to see the predictions which Christ foretold ^B in the Gospels, having come to pass in reality and been fulfilled, and the truth shining forth in the events themselves. Furthermore, one can see the great change in the disciples for the better, which was produced in them by the Spirit; and, moreover, one can find here dogmas which, if this book did not exist, would be clearly known to no one; but the head and sum of our salvation would lie hidden, and some things which pertain both to life and to certain stable sentiments concerning the faith would be unknown and uncertain.

^A Moreover, the greater part of the things contained here are the acts of Paul, who labored more than all. The reason for this is that the person who composed this book was his disciple, namely the blessed Luke; whose virtue can be seen from many other things, but most especially from the fact that he could not be torn away from his teacher, but followed him continually. For Demas and Hermogenes abandoned him, the one having gone off to Galatia, the other to Dalmatia. Listen to what he says about this: "Luke alone is with me." And writing to the Corinthians, he says of him: "Whose praise is in the Gospel through all the churches." And when he says, "He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve," and "according to the Gospel which you have received," he is speaking of his Gospel. Therefore, no one would be wrong to attribute this treatise to him; and when I say "to him," I mean to Christ.

^B But if someone says: "And why on earth did he not commit everything to writing, when he was with him until the end?" I would answer this, that even these things were abundantly sufficient for those wishing to pay heed, and that they always focused on the matters that were urgent, and that their zeal was not in writing books; for they handed down many things also by oral tradition. Now, all the things that are contained in this book are worthy of wonder; but most especially that condescension of the apostles, which the Spirit also suggested to them, preparing them to busy themselves with the word of the dispensation. For this reason, having spoken so much concerning Him, they have said but few things concerning His divinity. ^C But they spoke for the most part concerning the assumption of human nature, concerning the Passion, the resurrection, and the ascension. For that which was required at that time was this, that it be believed that He rose and ascended into heaven. Just as, therefore, Christ Himself was most eager of all to show that He comes from the Father, so too this one endeavors to demonstrate that He rose and was assumed, and went away to Him, and came from Him. For if that had not been believed previously, much more, with the addition of the things that happened concerning the resurrection and the assumption, would the whole doctrine of the faith have seemed incredible to the Jews. ^D Wherefore, little by little, he leads them up to higher things; and at Athens, Paul even calls Him simply a man, with nothing further added, and with good reason. For if they frequently attempted to stone Christ Himself when He spoke of His equality and like condition with the Father, and for this reason called Him a blasphemer—that is, guilty of divine laesa majestas—they surely would have hardly accepted such a discourse when delivered by fishermen, especially since the cross had preceded it. And what need is there to speak of the Jews, seeing that even the disciples themselves, on hearing Christ speak of higher doctrines, were often troubled and scandalized? For this reason,

were offended; therefore he also said: "I have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now." But if those who had lived with him for so long a time, and had been partakers of so many mysteries, and had seen so many miracles, could not ^A bear them, how could those who had just then been torn away from altars, and idols, and sacrifices, and cats and crocodiles—for such were the things which were worshipped by the Greeks and pagans as gods—and from other evils, have accepted the lofty words of these doctrines all at once? Or how, again, could the Jews, who daily learn and are instructed by the Law, saying: "Hear, O Israel, the Lord thy God is one, and besides him there is no other," and who had seen him nailed to the cross, and especially those who had even crucified him and buried him and had not seen him risen, have heard that this same man is God and equal to the Father, without recoiling and breaking away from it more than all others? Therefore, they lead them on gently and little by little, and they make use of a great deal of the economy of condescension, and they partake of the grace of the Spirit more abundantly; and they perform greater works than Christ himself had done in his name, that they might raise them up, lying prostrate on the ground on both counts, and assure them of the discourse concerning the resurrection. For this book is, above all, a demonstration and proof of the resurrection; for that fact once believed, the rest would also proceed prosperously. The argument, therefore, and the entire purpose of the book, as one might say in more summary terms, is this above all: let us now hear the beginnings themselves.

CAPUT I

VERS. 1. *The former treatise I made, O Theophilus, of all.*

He reminds Theophilus of the Gospel, so that he may show his own exquisite and accurate diligence. For at the beginning of that work he says: "It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order," not simply, but "as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the Word." He makes mention, therefore, of that commentary, and of the diligence which he used there, bringing it to mind. He reminds him of his diligence so that, holding in his mind and memory the very same diligence he used in that book, he might attend most especially to what is being written ^D here. For which reason he did not even need any other recommendation here. For to a writer who is held to be capable and serious, and who has established faith in those things which he heard, far greater faith ought to be given when he writes of those things which he did not receive from others, but saw himself. For this reason he does not say: "The first Gospel, which I wrote," but: "The former treatise or commentary"—for he was not vain or empty.

Therefore, he decorates himself from this—he whose praise is, as it says, in the Gospel. ^A But regarding what he says, "of all things," it seems to be opposed to the evangelist John; for the latter says: "It was not possible to write everything," while the former says he made the account "of all things" from the beginning until the assumption.

What, then, do we say? This: that by saying "of all things," he means that he omitted nothing of those things which gave consistency and urgency to the matter, from which the divinity and truth of the preaching is grasped. For those things through which the divinity and truth of the preaching can be learned, Luke and every one of the evangelists set down in their own account summarily and as if in a precise outline; and likewise John the Theologian himself ^B discussed all these things. For they left nothing out through which the dispensation of the Word according to the flesh is believed and recognized, and His majesty according to His divinity shines forth and is made manifest.

Yet John says that the world would not contain the books that would be written if everything the Lord said and did were written in detail and minutely, and especially if one were to seek to include in writing the reasons for the things said and done. For the reasons and causes of those things, according to which He acted and spoke, are neither grasped by human reasoning nor fully known, except that as God He did what He did, and at the same time presented His human nature; nor can they be expressed by word, nor are they capable of being committed to writing. Moreover, I believe that the word "suppose" added here moderates the ^C hyperbolic expression and shows that he is not strongly contending and asserting that the world could absolutely and entirely not contain them.

It is also possible to say this: that this evangelist, because he dwells on contemplation more than the others, rightly understands all His works and deeds, not only those which He performed in the flesh, but also those that He created from the age, both incorporeal and corporeal. If anyone were to attempt to write down one by one the end of their nature, and their production, and their difference and substance, and the rest, even if one were to grant this by concession, it would not be possible for the world to contain the books that would be written. But if anyone were to interpret "the world" here not as the world simply, but as the person who is placed in wickedness ^D and is obsessed with worldly and carnal things—for in many places Scripture is taken in this way also—then John rightly says that if anyone wishes to write down all the wonders performed by Christ, those who are such would not be able to contain them, as they are accustomed to be led to disbelief by the multitude and magnificence of the works. For by…

this reason, in many places the evangelists frequently omit the whole crowd of those who were healed, and pass by many of their miracles, only noting that many were delivered from diverse diseases and that many miracles happened, and things of this sort; but they do not provide a detailed narrative. For a particular narrative of the majority of these things is wont to instill in those who are coarser and caught in error, disbelief and a recoil from hearing, rather than faith and eagerness to listen. *What Jesus began both to do and to teach.* He speaks of the miracles and the teachings; but not only this, [he implies] that in doing he also taught. For he did not command others by word to do things while he himself did not do them, but through the things which he himself did, he exhorted men to transform themselves for the imitation of him and for the pursuit of virtue. It should be known that Theophilus was one of the pious men who had been instructed by Luke in piety. And do not marvel if, for the sake of one man, he went to such great lengths, so as to write two whole treatises for him; for he was observing the Master's voice, which says: *It is not the will of my Father that one of these little ones should perish.* But for what reason, when writing to one man, Theophilus, did he not produce one book, but divided the subject matter into two? For the sake of clarity, and to refresh the listener; furthermore, the treatises were divided by subject matter, and thus he himself also reasonably divided these treatises into two. *Until the day in which, having given commands to the apostles through the Holy Spirit, whom he had chosen, he was taken up.* Having given commands through the Spirit, that is, having spoken spiritual words to them. This is not purely human, that he gave them commands in the Spirit, just as the Master himself, speaking more humbly and in an accommodative manner, used to say: *But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons.* With the Spirit, he says, having given commands, not because the Son was in need of the Spirit, but because wherever the Son brings something to pass, there the Spirit, as being of the same nature, also works and is present with him. But what did he command? *Go, make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to keep all things that I have commanded you.* Having given commands, he says, he was taken up. He did not say, "He ascended," but he still speaks as if concerning a man. From this we learn that even after the resurrection he taught the disciples, but no one stated this time with precision. John indeed dwells on it more than all the others, but no one declared all things clearly; for they were hastening toward other things.

^A To whom he also presented himself alive after his passion by many proofs for forty days. Having spoken previously concerning the assumption, he speaks also concerning the resurrection. Since you have heard that he was assumed, so that you might not think he was assumed by others, he added: "To whom he also presented himself alive." For if he presented himself in the greater matter, much more so in the lesser, through forty days, yet not in forty days. For just as before the resurrection he was continually with them, so it was not then, but he would appear and depart again, raising their minds, and no longer allowing them to be disposed toward him in the same way as before. But he fashioned both with much wisdom and ^B precision, both that the resurrection might be believed, and that he might henceforth be thought greater than mere man, even though these things were contradictory. For in order for the resurrection to be believed, many human things needed to have happened, whereas for the other, the opposite was required. But nevertheless, both were accomplished at the appropriate time; for it was through the forty days from the resurrection until the ascension into heaven, during which he also ate and drank with them, showing that he himself is the one who was crucified and buried and rose from the dead. And for what reason did he not appear to all, but only to the apostles? Because he would have seemed like a phantom to the multitude, who did not know the mystery which is beyond speech. For if even the disciples themselves were unbelieving at first and were troubled, and needed the proof ^C of the hand and the table, what was it likely that the multitude would have suffered? For this reason, by the signs which the apostles received grace to perform, he makes the demonstration of the resurrection certain and common, so that the resurrection might be manifest not only to those then—which was to happen by sight—but also to all those after them.

"Being seen by them, and speaking the things concerning the kingdom of God. And eating together with them, he commanded them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father, which you heard from me."

The Lord himself called the kingdom of the Father that in which he had promised the disciples to ^D drink the new cup, calling it a new drink, which he drank together with them after his resurrection. And he ate a new food together with them, not according to the former order in which he ate and drank with them before he had risen. For then, except for sin, having been made like us in all things, he ate and drank just as we do, voluntarily yielding to the flesh to require the use of food; wherefore he also, wishing it, admitted the passion of hunger. But after the resurrection he no longer ate and drank because of necessity, but only as proof to all of the true

^A nature of his body, that it had suffered willingly and had risen divinely. He called this, therefore, a new food and drink, which he used with the disciples after the resurrection, not in the way he had been accustomed to before. For, he says, he "was eating with them" during the forty days, that is, sharing salt and sharing a table. But how, it is not for us to say. For these things happened in a more paradoxical manner, not because his nature had any further need of food, but because a condescension and accommodation occurred for the demonstration of the resurrection. And he was "revealing the mysteries ^B of the kingdom." Why, then, did he command them to do this? First, he led them, fearful and trembling, away into Galilee, so that they might hear his words with peace of mind; for they were ready to desert their post. Then, after they had heard and had spent forty days, he commanded them not to depart from Jerusalem. Why so? Because, just as no one allows soldiers who are about to engage a multitude to go out before they are armed, nor allows horses to leap from the starting gate until they have received the charioteer, so too he did not allow them to appear on the battlefield before the descent of the Spirit, so that they might not become easily subdued and captured by the many. And not only for this reason, but also because many were going to believe there. And a third reason is so that no one might say that, having deserted their own acquaintances, they had come among foreigners to boast; for this reason, he provides the proofs among those very people who had committed the murder, among those who had crucified him, those who had buried him, in that very city where the wicked deed had been dared. When, then, did they hear the ^C promise? When he said: "It is profitable for you that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Paraclete will not come to you." And again: "I will ask the Father, and he will send another Paraclete to you." But why, when he was not present, nor had he departed immediately, did he arrive only after eight or nine days, that is, when the day of Pentecost was being fulfilled? Furthermore, how, if the Spirit had not yet arrived, did he say: "Receive the Holy Spirit"? One may therefore say that he said this while preparing them to be receptive and most fit and sufficient for the reception of the Spirit; but they received it when it descended upon them. Or, he spoke of that which was to come as if it were already present and imminent, as when he says: "Tread upon serpents and scorpions, and upon all the power of the enemy." There is also another way to say it, that the gift of the Spirit is manifold and ^D various; for one is purifying, another perfecting; and one is sanctifying, another creating those who sanctify; one provides tongues, another prophecy; one of wonders, another of interpretations; and ten thousand other things. Therefore, nothing prevents...

us from saying that, according to the varied and manifold distribution of the Spirit, they received the grace of the Holy Spirit in different ways. However, the perfect and perfecting visitation of the Spirit, such that it could perfect others, came to the apostles at the time of Pentecost, when it appeared to them in the form of fiery tongues and filled them with its entire operation. For this reason, He departed, and That One came then; and not even then immediately, so that, having been brought to longing, they might thus receive the grace. For if the Spirit had descended while He was still present, and He had departed while the Spirit remained, there would not have been such consolation. For they were very loath to be separated from Him; therefore, He ascends, and the Spirit does not come immediately, so that, having been briefly saddened and having become longing and needy for the promise, they might enjoy the pure and perfect joy due to the presence of the Spirit. Furthermore, it was necessary for our nature to appear in heaven and for reconciliations ^B to be completed, and then for the Spirit to come. Observe what a great necessity He laid upon them to remain in Jerusalem because of His promise; for in order that they might not flee again after the Assumption, He retains them all there with this expectation, as if by a shackle, making them yearn through more auspicious hopes for the uncertain prospect of the things that were promised. Nor would one be wrong in saying that even then they had received a certain power and spiritual grace: not so as to raise the dead, but so as to remit sins. For this reason He also added: "Whose sins you remit, they are remitted to them," and so forth, showing what kind of operation He was giving. For now, indeed, He clothes them with this power; but after forty days, He grants the operation of signs. Therefore He says: "You shall receive power," and the rest.

"For John indeed baptized with water; but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days after this."

Having told them to wait for the promise of the Father, ^D "of which you heard from me," He added, "For John indeed baptized with water," and so forth; and He now clearly shows the distinction between Himself and John, and no longer as before, enigmatically and as if under a shadow, as when He said: "But he who is less in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he." Now, however, He says openly: "John indeed baptized with water; but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit," and He shows that they had already become greater than John, if indeed they too were going to baptize with the Holy Spirit. He did not say, "I will baptize you with the Holy Spirit," but, "You shall be baptized," everywhere leaving behind for us measures and patterns of humility; for by this time it was clear from the testimony of John that He Himself was the one who would baptize

^A for He will baptize us in the Holy Spirit and in fire. ^B But why did He say, "You will be baptized," when there was no water in the upper room? Because the Spirit is more authoritative; through Him even the water operates, just as He Himself is said to have been anointed, not having been anointed anywhere with oil, but having received the Spirit. Moreover, one can find that they were baptized with water at various times; for in our case, both may occur at the same moment, but then they occurred at different times and separately; for at the beginning the apostles were baptized with water by John, but after this, also with the Holy Spirit. But why did the Lord not declare when the Spirit would also come, but only says, "Not many days from now"? He says "not many," so that they might not fall into despondency; but He did not say precisely when, so that they might always watch in expectation. Why then are you amazed if He does not tell them of the peace of the consummation of the age, ^C when He did not wish to make manifest even this deadline, which was so close, for the reason we have stated? The expression "to be baptized" signifies the abundance and, as it were, the wealth of the communion and participation of the Holy Spirit; just as in that which is perceived by the senses, the one who is baptized—that is, drenched with water—is in a certain way, while his whole body is sodden, compared to one who merely receives water and is not thoroughly moistened in every part. Therefore, what has now been said is not contrary to the divine Gospels. For it is shown that even if it had been said to the apostles after Christ’s resurrection from the dead, "Receive the Holy Spirit," and they did receive Him—but there it is said that they had received the Holy Spirit, whereas here, "You will be baptized"—this signifies the pouring forth and the wealth of the gift which He gave them after He ascended to the Father. For just as when they had faith, they approached and said, "Increase our faith," so too here, in addition to the communion of the Spirit which they already had, they were receiving an addition of increased participation in the Holy Spirit who came upon them.

VERS. 6. And when they had gathered together, they were asking Him, saying: Lord, do You at this time restore the kingdom to Israel? VERS. 7. But He said to them: It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has placed in His own authority. VERS. 8. But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes upon you.

When they were about to ask, they approached together, so that by their multitude they might move Him and persuade Him. For they knew that what was said before was the response of one brushing them off—and not out of ignorance, but deferring the answer; as, for example, "No one knows the day"; for this reason they ask again. For since they had heard that they were to receive the Spirit, as

^A worthy, they henceforth wished to learn, and they longed to be released from their difficulties; for they did not wish to cast themselves again into extreme dangers. They did not ask first, "When?" but, "Is it at this time that you are restoring the kingdom to Israel?" Meaning, "Is it now?" — so much did they desire the day. It seems to me that it was not even then clear to them what the kingdom was; for the Spirit had not yet come to teach them. They did not say, "When is it?" but, "Do you restore it?" — so much greater things did they now imagine regarding him. For this reason, he too discourses with them in a relaxed manner; for he no longer says that not even the Son knows the day, but what? "It is not for you to know times or seasons." Not because he himself was ignorant of the culmination of the times did he refer the knowledge to the Father, but because there was a certain superfluous quality to the question, he profitably passed over it in silence. For his goal was to curb the curious questioning of the disciples regarding this. For he sent them to preach the kingdom of heaven, not to signal the quantity of the times. He does not tell them the time, having taught them things much greater, so that—as we have often said—they might be vigilant, and so that they would suffer no harm by not knowing; since he had taught them things far greater than this: that he is the Son of God, and that he is equal in honor to the Father; that he rose; that there will be a resurrection; that there will be a judgment; that he sat at the right hand of the Father. For what, tell me, is greater? To learn that he will reign, or when? Paul had learned things which it is not permitted for a human to speak; and Moses had learned the beginning of the world, and when, and how many ages beforehand; and he counts the years—and yet the beginning is, in general, more difficult to know than the end. Furthermore, they were not even asking him about the universal consummation, but, "Do you restore the kingdom to Israel at this time?" And he did not reveal this to them either, but just as he answered there to lead them away from thinking that the release from their difficulties was near—but that they would also fall into many dangers—so also here, except more gently, he said, "You will receive power." Then, so that they might not ask him again, he was immediately carried up. Then, ^B so that they might not say, "Why do you raise up the matter?" the Son says: "Which the Father has placed in his own authority." The authority of the Father is evidently also that of the Son; for just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to whom he wills. And if, where it is necessary to perform the fearful and secret things, the Father performs them with authority, how much more so where it is necessary to know! For it is far greater to raise the dead with the same and equal authority as the Father, than to know the day. ^C Why then...

concerning the things which the disciples were asking, did Christ not respond, but said: “You will receive power”? He answered by saying: “It is not for you to know,” and then he added: “but you will receive power.” ^A For indeed, this expression signifies a certain coming and, if I may so speak, an outpouring of the Spirit. It must be said, therefore, against the sect of the Phrygians, who think that the Paraclete was sent about two hundred years after the assumption of Christ into the women whom they consider to be prophetesses, Priscilla and Maximilla, and into Montanus, who was seized by the same madness as they were—for they claim that the promise, “I will send the Paraclete to you,” was fulfilled then. But why does he teach that which they were not asking, namely: “You will receive power”? Because he is a Master, who teaches not what the disciple wants, but what it is profitable to know. And when the disciples did not ask, he answered elsewhere: “And you will be my witnesses both in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.” Since he had previously said: ^B “Do not go into the way of the Gentiles, and do not enter into a city of the Samaritans,” because he wished for the word to be preached first to the Jews, but now the preaching had to be spread into the whole world; therefore, he rightly adds and says: “And in Judea and Samaria,” then, “And to the end of the earth.” Moreover, that which he says: “You will be my witnesses,” is at once an exhortation and a firm, unchangeable prophecy; for they attested the preaching to the end of the earth.

Vers. 9. “And having said these things, while they were watching, he was lifted up; and a cloud took him from their eyes.”

Vers. 10. “And as they were looking intently at heaven while he was going.”

^C While they were watching, he did not rise, but “while they were watching, he was lifted up,” since vision could not account for everything here either; for indeed, they saw the end of the resurrection, but they did not see the beginning; and they saw the beginning of the assumption, but they did not see the end. Why? Because there, with the one who had risen being personally present and speaking these things, and the tomb itself declaring that he is not there, it was superfluous to see the beginning; but here, it was necessary to know also the end. For the eyes were not sufficient to show the height, nor to teach whether he had ascended into heaven itself, or had stopped at some point. For this reason, the angels standing by teach those things which could not be comprehended by sight. ^D A cloud, moreover, received him, because this is a sign of the Lord and of divine power; for nowhere does any other power appear upon a cloud. Wherefore also David says concerning the Father: “Who makes the clouds his path”; and in another place: “God sits upon a light cloud,” and countless other things. Besides, he did not do even this in vain or simply. For the Lord, knowing that if he were invisible...

^A when he ascended, just as he also descended—or rather, condescended—it would be believed, when the Spirit appeared, that it was that same Spirit whom he had promised a few days earlier he would send; and that he would not cause himself to be suspected of having come down from the heavens; and that if, after this, he were to call Paul from above, or if he were to send thence to Peter the napkin not made by hands, it would not be believed that he was doing these things after his bodily departure—for this reason he ascended while they were looking on. He came from the cloud of the Virgin into a cloud, and ascended through a cloud to where he was before. And do not understand the words “where he was” in a local sense; nor take it to mean that he had put aside his flesh and, being without flesh as before, possessed his incarnate divinity; but understand for me “where he was” as referring to the height of incorporeality within his corporality, to the majesty of the unincarnate state within his incarnation, to the dignity of his own self-existent unchangeableness now made flesh, and to his voluntary humiliation and condescension; to that condition and state in which he would no longer converse with all men in a way that could be visible to the eyes, or dwell and live in the same abode with them.

Et ecce viri duo iis astiterunt in vestibus albis.

VERS. 11. Qui etiam dixerunt: Viri Galilaei, quid statis coelum contuentes? Hic Jesus, qui receptus est a vobis in coelum, ita veniet, quemadmodum spectastis eum abeuntem in coelum. ^C They used the word demonstratively, saying: “This Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in the way that you watched him going into heaven.” They did not say “being taken up,” nor “being carried and borne,” but “going.” For if, before the cross, he was borne upon the waters while still clothed in a passive and heavy body, let no one doubt whether, after he had received that incorruptible body, he cleaved the air. He will come, he said; he will not be sent. He will so come—that is, with the body that they desired to hear of—and he will come again in this way in the judgment on a cloud. He calls them “men,” signifying a clear and evident appearance; for indeed, the angels had assumed and put on the precise forms of men so as not to terrify them. And two men ^D stood by, because at the mouth of two or three witnesses every word shall be established. And by saying, “Why stand you looking into heaven?” they no longer allowed them to remain in that place and to expect that they would see him again; but they turned them away from that sight toward Jerusalem, toward the goal and message of preaching from that point on. Everywhere the angels minister as to the Lord: at his birth, and at his resurrection, and at his ascension; and before these things, when he was about to dwell among us.

^A in the world through the flesh. In this way the angels appeared, in such a manner as it was possible for them to be seen by men. Furthermore, the expression "In white robes" signifies either the purity of the angels or the illumination that was about to be given to the holy apostles. And another way concerning the expression "while they were looking on." Since the Lord knew that there would be men of corrupted mind who would oppose him, saying that he neither was from heaven nor had come [from there], nor having been taken up, was assumed into heaven, but was removed to some place situated outside the inhabited world—of whose number are those who adhere to the sect of Vitalis—[it was] in their sight, while they were gazing at him, [that] he ascended into heaven. ^B

VERS. 12. Then they returned to Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet, which is near Jerusalem, a Sabbath day's journey away.

Then, when? When they had heard. For they would not have endured [this] if he had not redirected them to a future coming. It seems to me that these things also happened on a Sabbath; for he would not have mentioned the distance in this way: "From the mount called Olivet, which is near Jerusalem, a Sabbath day’s journey away." For the length of the journey that the Jews were permitted to travel on the Sabbath day was fixed. Josephus ^C also relates in the twentieth book of his *Antiquities* that it is distant from Jerusalem by seven stadia. And Origen also says in his fifth volume that "a Sabbath day's journey was of three cubits." Nay rather, the holy Tabernacle and the Ark occupied and preceded the camp by such an interval, and they were stationed at such a distance; this was the distance that those who were worshipping the holy Tabernacle were permitted to walk on the Sabbath—it is one mile.

VERS. 13. And when they had entered, they went up into the upper room, where were staying Peter and James, and John and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot, and Judas of James.

VERS. 14. These all were persevering with one accord in prayer and supplication, with the women and Mary the Mother of Jesus, and with his brothers.

He did well to make mention of the disciples; since one indeed had betrayed him, another had denied him, and another had disbelieved. He shows that, ^D except for the traitor, all were safe. How then does he say, "With the Mother of Jesus," even though John said, "And from that time the disciple received her into his own home"? It is by no means contradictory; for if the disciple himself was indeed one [of those present], there was nothing to prevent her from also being present. Why then does he make no mention of Joseph here? Because he was dead. For if his brothers, who had often not believed before, had believed and were present, much more would he [have been], had he still been in the land of the living, and he would have believed, and would not have been absent from such a prayer.

^A Ver. 15. And in those days Petrus having arisen in the midst of the disciples, said: and there was together the number of names upon the same, as a hundred and twenty.

Ver. 16. Men brethren, it behooved this Scripture to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit foretold by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who became a guide to those who seized Jesus.

Ver. 17. That he was numbered with us, and he obtained the lot of this ministry.

In those days, that is to say, those which were before the Pentecost, Peter having risen, as one fervent, and as one entrusted by Christ with the flock, and as one who is the chief. See him doing everything according to common counsel, nothing authoritatively, nor by [sole] power; he encourages them also from the prediction, and he does not say, "Which David said," but, "The Holy Spirit by the mouth of David," and then concerning Judas, who became the guide to those who seized Jesus. See here also the philosophy of the man, how, in recounting the matter, he does not insult, nor does he say, "that vile and utterly polluted [wretch]"; but he simply declares what had happened. And he does not say that the Jews bought it, but, "he himself acquired it"; and reasonably. For he who paid the price, even if others were the buyers, he himself would be correctly considered the owner; for the price was his. Hear then:

^B Ver. 18. This man then acquired a field from the reward of unrighteousness; and having become prone, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.

Ver. 19. And it became known to all those dwelling in Jerusalem.

He discourses concerning the punishment which Judas endured in the present age, but not concerning that which is to come; for the souls of the weaker [brethren] do not look as much to future things as to present things. Observe, however, that he took the occasion for his discourse not from the sin, but from the punishment, to raise and amplify his speech. For Judas did not die by the halter, but survived being taken down before he was suffocated. And Papias, the disciple of John, relates this more clearly in the fourth book of the Exposition of the Dominical Oracles, saying thus: "Judas walked about as a great example of impiety in this world, having so swollen in the flesh that where a wagon can pass with ease, he could not pass; no, ^D not even...

^A his head alone. For they say that his eyelids were so swollen that he himself could not see the light at all, and his eyes could not be seen, not even by a physician’s probe; they had retreated to such a depth from the outer surface. And his private parts appeared more deformed and repulsive and larger than anything else, through which, as the only necessary parts of the body, the matter and worms flowing together from the whole body would escape. But they say that after many pains and torments he died on his estate, and that because of those who live and dwell near that road, the estate has remained deserted and empty of inhabitants up to this present time; nor can anyone even to this day pass through that place unless he covers his nostrils with his hands, so great was the flow through his flesh and onto the ground. This brought comfort to the Apostles. And as the guts of Judas were poured out, so too were those of the heretic Arius.

So that that plot of land came to be called in their vernacular tongue, Aceldama, that is to say, "field of blood."

VERS. 20. For it is written in the book of Psalms: Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein, and his bishopric let another take.

And the Jews indeed called that plot by this name and title, not because of this, but because of Judas; but he brought it to this, producing his enemies as witnesses through the name they had given it. Furthermore, that part of the speech, "Let his habitation be desolate," was said concerning this plot and his house. But that, "Let another take his bishopric, or prefecture," this means the primacy of the priesthood. "Let his habitation be desolate." What could be more desolate than a tomb, and a common tomb at that? Which is what that plot became.

VERS. 21. It is necessary therefore that one of those men who have accompanied us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us,

VERS. 22. Beginning from the baptism of John unto that day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of His resurrection.

He shares the matter with them so that it might not be brought into controversy and they might fall into strife. For this reason also, at the beginning of his speech, he said: "Men and brethren, you must choose from among yourselves," committing the judgment to the multitude by these words, and at the same time making those who were to be chosen venerable, and himself avoiding the offense of others. And that it was necessary for this to happen, he says it himself, and brings forward the prophet as a witness. But from whom is it necessary? From those ^D who have accompanied us in

^A all time. And he did not say, "from the good and upright men who are with us"; for thus he would seem to insult the others; but now he left the matter to the time. "A witness of his resurrection [to be] with us," so that the choir of the disciples might not be mutilated. He says he should be a witness of the resurrection, not of the other deeds. For indeed the one who appears trustworthy to testify that he who ate and drank with us, and was crucified, himself rose, would be quite acceptable ^B also to testify about the other things. For the matter being sought was the resurrection; for this had occurred secretly; the rest were plain and clear.

VERS. 23. *And they set up two, Joseph, who was called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias.*

VERS. 24. *And having prayed, they said: Thou, Lord, who knowest the hearts of all, show which of these two thou hast chosen.*

VERS. 25. *To take the lot of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas fell, that he might go to his own place.*

VERS. 26. *And they gave their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.*

*And they set up two.* Why not many? So that a greater consternation of minds might not arise, and the matter might not be reduced to many. But they now opportunely, while praying, call Him the Cardiognostes. Then they do not say, "Choose," but, "Show the chosen one," knowing that everything is determined by God even before the thought of men. He calls it "lot" everywhere, showing that the whole business depends on the kindness of God, and that He is the author ^C of the election: at the same time reminding them of the things of old; that just as He had cast lots for the Levites for Himself, so also [He did] for these. And who were those men? Perhaps from those who were with the twelve, the seventy, and from the others who had believed, the more fervent and upright, such as were Joseph and Matthias among them. And he calls Joseph also Barsabas and Justus, perhaps indeed also on account of the names that were common among them; and otherwise also [on account of] the change of life; perhaps also that nomenclature was of the character. But why does James, having received the episcopacy of Jerusalem, not begin the discourse, but concede the public address to Peter? Because he was an upright and modest man; because they thought and cared for nothing human, but had the common utility proposed. For indeed also those for the same reason conceded ^D the throne to him, and did not contend, nor struggle against him.

*To go to his own place.* He calls it "own place," which Matthias was about to occupy worthily. For just as it had become alien to Judas even before he fell from it, from the time when the matters of avarice and treachery had occupied him...

to turn to his own place. He calls it his "own" or proper place, which Matthias was to obtain in a way that was worthy and just. For just as Judas was alien even before he fell from that place, owing to the malady—namely, avarice and treachery—with which he began to suffer, so Matthias was "proper" to it even before he had obtained it, since he had shown himself worthy of so great an office. Why do they perform the election by lot rather than otherwise? Because they did not yet deem themselves worthy to learn ^B through some sign. Moreover, the Spirit had not yet come upon them; nor was there need, because the lot carried just as much weight. For if, where neither prayer had preceded nor were the men of any [great] worth, the lot carried such weight—because it had happened with a right intent in the case of Jonah—how much more is this the case here? And in another way: "his own place." Each person prepares for himself a place, whether good or evil, by his own deeds. This, then, is what it says: that Judas went into that evil place which he had built for himself by his betrayal of Jesus. For places are not by nature good or evil for us, but we construct our own place by our deeds. Thus, also, the midwives of the Hebrews, fearing God, built houses for themselves; thus also the wicked hear: "Walk in the light of your fire, and in the flame which you have kindled." [DIDYMUS.] The word "place" signifies many things. Among other things, it indicates a certain rank—for so we call the "place" of a bishop, and also of a presbyter or elder; and it is possible to observe the same in the opposite sense, with each person making a place proper and akin to himself through his deeds. Thus, indeed, one person will obtain the place of a false teacher and a false apostle, and another that of a tyrant and other wicked things. Since now Judas, having been snatched away by his own voluntary desire for money and possessed by avarice, took upon himself the rank and role of a traitor, it is rightly said that he went away to his own place. For having lost, through his deeds, the state of being with the apostles, he constructed for himself his own place.

CHAPTER II

wind, [and] it filled all the house where they were sitting.

EXPOSITION OF THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. — CHAPTER XIII.

^A What then? Must one obey every magistrate, even if he be wicked? How do you mean, "wicked"? If he is wicked regarding the faith, flee from him, even if he were an angel from heaven. But if he is wicked in his conduct, obey him. For "all that they tell you to do, do; but do not do according to their works" (Matt. XXIII, 3). Regarding those who are corrupted in the faith, he says: "Do not be carried away by diverse and strange doctrines" (Heb. XIII, 9). Why so? Because he who acts wickedly would not advise others to live wickedly; for he himself, in doing such things, feels shame—which is clear from his striving by every means to hide what he does. But he who is wicked regarding the faith desires to preach his own opinion to the people. ^B "And be subject to them." He indicates the intensity of this obedience through the word "be subject," so that one might even serve them through works, if necessity demands. "For they keep watch for your souls, as those who must give an account." Let those in leadership hear that just as the people ought to be compliant, so the priest ought to be watchful on behalf of the people, as one who must give an account for what they themselves sin. "That they may do this with joy, and not with groaning; for this is unprofitable for you." If you yield, he says, and show regard for your leader, you make the burden of the care he carries for you light for him, as he who rejoices in your submission. But if you are shameless and disobedient, he himself will still keep watch for your soul; unless you correct your disobedience, he will groan against you to God—which ^C is unprofitable for you. Observe, moreover, that he does not permit the leader to exact vengeance in any other way than through groaning. This produces mildness in the leader himself; yet for that person who does not find correction, it kindles a greater pyre of punishment, inasmuch as he provokes God to be a stricter punisher. Therefore, you who are disobedient to your leader, do not despise him because he only emits a groan; but rather fear, because he is handing you over to God.

VER. 18. "Pray for us: for we are confident that we have a good conscience in all things." Since some were slandering the Apostle, as though he were teaching a falling away from the Law, for this reason many of the Hebrews were hostile toward him. For this cause he did not even place his name at the beginning of the Epistle, since they could not bear to hear even that. ^D Now, therefore, making his defense to them, first he asks that they themselves pray for him—which we are accustomed to request from those who love us; then, he also shows himself to be innocent. For "in all things," not only among the Gentiles but also among you, we have done nothing with hypocrisy, but our conscience is pure, and we know nothing against ourselves.

^A of every nation [under the heavens] out of various nations into one sheaf of piety to be gathered; and through the apostolic word to be presented to God, it prefigured the sheaf of grain—in order to interpret the sheaves of souls, which are taken from diverse regions, but are offered to God as one first-fruit of grain. Why did the coming of the Spirit not happen without sensible symbols? Because, even though it happened in this way, they said: "They are filled with new wine." If this had not occurred, what would they not have said? And it was not simply a sound, but one from heaven, and also sudden, so that they might be more roused, as of a rushing and oncoming violent breath. He speaks of the great and vehement impulse of the Spirit; and he caused all to run together there and assemble. "And it filled all the house." ^B It filled the whole house so that the gift given might be shown to be not particular or special to some, but given to the whole body of the Church. For the house was a symbol of the world, just as the pool was of water; and this is a proof of the abundance and the vehemence. But fire did not fill the house (for it would have caused dread), but, what is more marvelous, that it was parted and settled upon each one of them. And he rightly says "parted," so that you may know that the same energy was sent from the Paraclete. Rightly, therefore, does he say "as of fire" and "like as a breath," so that you may not think anything sensible regarding the Spirit. It was not, therefore, simply wind or fire, but the Holy Spirit appearing there. But observe that when it was necessary for the Spirit to be made known to John, it was fitting that it appear as fire. ^C "And it sat upon each one of them." That is to say, it remained, it rested. For sitting has the indication of stability and remaining. Upon whom, however, did the Spirit sit? Upon the twelve apostles only, or upon the hundred and twenty? Evidently upon all. For Peter would not have simply and rashly brought forward the prophet, saying, "And it shall be in the last days, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh." And they did not simply receive, but were filled; and "all," he says, not the apostles only. But observe: when they persevere in prayer and supplication, when they be possessed of love, then the Spirit arrives. But why did he appear in the guise of fire? To show that he is of the same nature as He who was seen upon the bush in the guise of fire. And it sat indeed upon the head, but from the head the whole man was filled; for it was possible to see fire above their heads, not burning but sanctifying and shining forth. Why did they receive the tongues not upon the mouth but upon the head? The Spirit was not given into the tongue—that is, into the organ of nature—so that they would not be thought to be bringing forth from their own lungs and from their own mouth what they did not have; but as if into ^D the head, from the head the whole man was filled. [alt-version omitted]

^A Why, then, upon the head? Because the apostles were being ordained as teachers of the world. And an ordination is not performed simply, except upon the head. The fact, therefore, that tongues were upon their heads demonstrates the form of ordination. For ordination is placed upon the head, just as the custom has held even until today. Since, indeed, the visitation of the Holy Spirit is invisible, the Gospel is placed upon the head of the one who is to be ordained as a high priest; and when it has been placed there, one sees nothing else than a tongue of fire resting upon the head: a "tongue," on account of the preaching; "fiery," on account of Him who said, "I have come to cast fire upon the earth." He did not say, however, it was "founded," or "it arrived," but "it sat"; nor "it hovered," but "it sat upon," so that He might show that any man who is receiving a ministry is a throne of God.

"And they began to speak with other tongues." The grace of God arranged from the beginning that the word should be effective for the apostles. For what need was there of heralds, if there were no listeners? Since, therefore, it was necessary for the first fruits of the nations to receive order and place from the very beginning, the writer adds, "And they began to speak with other tongues." But for what reason did the Apostles receive the gift of tongues before other gifts? Because they were about to travel everywhere, and just as at the time of the building of the tower, the one language was divided into many, so then did many tongues come into one man, and the same one conversed in the language of the Persians, and of the Romans, and of the Indians, and in many other tongues, ^B while the Spirit was sounding and whispering within him. And the gift was called the gift of tongues, since they were able to speak in many voices all at once, just as the Spirit gave them to utter. For they did not speak from themselves, but they spoke from the Holy Spirit, prophesying—that is, understanding and declaring the testimonies concerning Christ that had been given through the holy prophets.

^C "And there were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, devout men from every nation under heaven. And when this sound occurred, the multitude came together and was confused, because each one heard them speaking in his own dialect." "Devout men." Even the very act of living there, having left their homelands, was a sign of devotion, especially indeed that they had traveled from different nations, having abandoned their houses. ^D

and relatives, acquaintances, connections, and kinsmen, and were dwelling in Jerusalem. But the phrase, "from every nation," is used instead of "from many nations." For Scripture uses the word "every" to mean "many," employing it in an hyperbolic sense. So it is also said: "I will pour out of My Spirit upon all flesh"; and: "All seek their own, not the things which are of Jesus Christ"; and: "There is not one that is righteous, no, not one." For by the universal and general term, it signifies the many.

Then, when the report spread, the multitude gathered; and they were confounded—that is, they were disturbed and marveled. For since that which occurred happened in a house, the crowd naturally ran together from outside, because each one heard them speaking in his own dialect. They knew that being Galileans—and especially the apostles, for they were looking at them more than the others—they were speaking those thousand [different] languages.

The multitude was confounded, not without cause; for they thought that [the apostles] were going to bring trouble upon them because of the rash deed committed against Christ; and conscience was shaking their souls, as the slaughter was still fresh in their hands; and everything terrified them. But this strengthened the apostles, that they were learning of the miraculous gift even from the hearers. For they themselves did not know whether it was, for example, Parthian that was being spoken, but they learned it from them. He mentions nations that were hostile and adversarial to them: Cretans, Arabs, and others; and this was a sign that they would be victors over all. Many, moreover, were there in a state of captivity. From all sides, therefore, testimony is provided by citizens, by foreigners, and by proselytes.

^A VERS. 7. And they were all amazed and marveled, saying to one another, "Behold, are not all these who speak Galileans? ^B VERS. 8. And how do we hear, each in our own language in which we were born?" VERS. 9. Parthians and Medes and Elamites, and those inhabiting Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, ^C VERS. 10. Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya belonging to Cyrene, and Roman visitors, both Jews and proselytes, VERS. 11. Cretans and Arabs—we hear them speaking in our own tongues the wonderful works of God. VERS. 12. And all were amazed and were in doubt, saying to one another, "What could this mean?" VERS. 13. Others mocking said, "They are full of new wine." ^D Everywhere, wickedness is joined to virtue. Some were marveling, while others were mocking and ridiculing. Truly, those [first ones] were religious; for they dwelt there for this reason, namely, that they might—

^A appear in the temple thrice a year according to the prescription of the law. But observe the madness of the others. “They are filled with new wine,” they say; and yet the season was not such, for it was Pentecost and the third hour. But wickedness dares anything. And what was more grievous was that, while those—the Jews, the Romans, the proselytes, they who had perhaps crucified [Him], and those from almost all nations—were marveling and confessing, and they were preaching in their own languages, there were nevertheless found some who mocked. Now, did those who mocked understand the apostles speaking in tongues, or not? For if they did not understand, how did the apostles speak in all languages? But if they did understand, with what confidence did they dare to attribute the cause to drunkenness, having at their feet those who could refute and convict them—namely, those who were listening and understood that they were speaking in tongues and were not drunk? In such a way one might raise a question. But I say the opposite: if they did not understand, they would not even have disparaged the miracle by accusing them of drunkenness. For why would anyone try to disparage that which causes him no annoyance? Therefore Luke also says, “mocking,” as if slandering and calumniating. They calumniated therefore as if they understood, but were not pleased with what was being said; for they were speaking of the great works of God. How then, understanding, did they relate the things being said to drunkenness? From much madness, from excessive cruelty. For it is a habit of the many, if they are not pleased with what is said, to think that the speaker is possessed by a demon ^B or is deranged, or to accuse [him] of drunkenness and pretend not to understand what he says; even though he speaks safely and uprightly, and the mocker, though he brings an accusation, still hears and understands. Those [men] dared even more to charge them with drunkenness because they were hearing [it] in their own tongue, and believed others were not understanding it, as if they were of a different language. For they themselves understood the things being said, but the rest, because of whom they were mockingly accusing the apostles of drunkenness, they thought did not understand the miracle. For just as when the Lord cast out demons, they understood and saw the prodigies, but when they ought to have praised [Him], they objected "Beelzebul," and seeing all diseases and sufferings being healed, they made the wonders to be material for envy and calumny and murder. So too now, although they were unable to deny the unexpected and preternatural gift of tongues, they nevertheless dared to disparage the miracle by [accusing them of] drunkenness. Observe also the malice ^C, which is proven by both the time and the hour. For at Pentecost, from where [would there be] new wine? For new wine is indeed called *gleukos*. Then, does drunkenness furnish different languages, or does it even destroy the one that exists? Observe [how] ^D wickedness is proven by the time and the hour.

^A For what does God contrive? If that mockery had not been suspected, the Jews would have refused to enter and listen. God permitted it, so that the mockery might gather many together.

VERS. 14. But Peter, standing with the eleven, raised his voice and declared to them: “Men of Judea and all you who dwell in Jerusalem, let this be known to you, and give ear to my words.”

VERS. 15. “For these are not, as you suppose, drunk, since it is the third hour of the day.”

You saw there [God’s] providence and care; observe here also [his] courage. For if he had had an audience of people all admiring him, would it not have been a wondrous thing even then for an unlettered and private man to break forth with a voice in such a great multitude? ^B But since he had hearers who were mocking and inclined toward murder, how could it not be a thing beyond human nature? But observe how, immediately, as soon as he let out his voice, he refutes the calumny and shows that they are not drunk, nor even alienated in mind, as those who are frantic. But what is [meant by] “with the eleven”? He put forward a common opinion and voice, and he himself was the mouth for everyone. The other eleven stood by, confirming by their testimony what was being said. And [the phrase] “he raised his voice,” means with great boldness, so that from the very beginning they might learn the grace of the Spirit. For he who could not bear the questioning of a cheap serving-girl, this man converses with such boldness in the midst of crowds baying for blood. ΣΕΥΗΡΙΑΝΟΥ.〗 Before receiving the tongues, Peter, being questioned by one serving-girl, was afraid and says: “I do not know the man.” There, one serving-girl and much timidity; here, an infinite multitude and a voice full of boldness. ^C He did not say, “As you mock, these are drunk,” but, “As you suppose,” speaking more mildly, and not wanting to show that they said this deliberately and maliciously; but at first he attributes ignorance to them, and does not charge them with wickedness, paving the way for them toward repentance. And what is this? “Is it not the custom for men to be drunk at the third hour?” But he does not linger on this. Nor did those who mocked think this [in reality] of them, but as detractors and mockers they said so.

VERS. 16. But this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel:

VERS. 17. “And it shall be in the last days, says the Lord, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men ^D

^A visions shall see, and your elders shall dream dreams.

VERS. 18. “And yes, upon my menservants and upon my maidservants in those days I will pour out of my Spirit, and they shall prophesy.”

Nowhere meanwhile is the name of Christ, nor his promise, but the promise of the Father. Observe, however, the prudence. He did not come forward and say those things relating to Christ immediately—namely, that “He, after being crucified, promised these things to us.” For had he spoken thus, he would have overthrown everything; although these were sufficient to demonstrate His divinity, yet they were not believed. The thing desired, however, was that faith might be held, and that the things said might be believed to be true. But if they were not believed to be true, it might have happened that they would be overwhelmed with stones. Nothing solves ambiguities other than prophetic testimony. Therefore, when some inexplicable question arises, do not have recourse to reasonings. For the reasonings of thoughts are both overturned and established, but who solves the voice of God? A reasoning is solved; Scripture is not solved. He did not say, “I will pour out my Spirit,” but “of my Spirit.” It is not the Spirit that is poured out, but the gift of the Spirit, upon all flesh—that is to say, upon those who have believed—that is, upon the Gentiles; but he does not yet reveal this to them. Yet the phrase “upon all flesh” gives them also good hope and does not ^B allow the advantage to be theirs alone, thus also cutting off envy. Observe, moreover, how diverse and varied is the revelation of the Holy Spirit. This one has attained the grace of the Spirit and prophesies; another, who lacks the strength to serve in such a ministry, receives the gift of visions: just as Peter at the sixth hour beheld the image of the sheet; as Cornelius at the ninth hour saw the angel. What is in the heart is not called a *horama* (a sight), but a *horasis* (a vision). Otherwise, someone sees a *horasis*, as he who was seeing says, “Go”; but otherwise, not seeing the spectacle with his eyes and contemplating the matter to be contemplated; otherwise, when someone in the highest state is instructed and taught through the imagination. ^C

VERS. 19. “And I will give wonders in heaven above, and signs on the earth below, blood, and fire, and vapor of smoke.

VERS. 20. The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the coming of the day of the Lord, the great and magnificent.”

VERS. 21. “And it shall be, that everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.”

These things teach clearly beforehand both concerning the future judgment, and concerning Jerusalem and the captivity of that time, and the things that were to happen because of the cross of Christ, and the things that fell upon the Jews through the war of the Romans; for while much blood was being poured out by them throughout Judea, and smoke was being generated, as cities and villages ^D were burned.

^A The pregnant belly of death, just as from the womb of one in labor, I mean from the bonds of death and the depths of Hades, the Savior Christ emerging, and coming forth as from a strange childbirth of the resurrection. On this account he is also called firstborn from the dead.

For it was not possible for him to be held by it.

VER. 25. For David says concerning him: I foresaw the Lord before me always: for he is at my right hand, that I should not be moved. ^B

VER. 26. Therefore my heart rejoiced, and my tongue exulted. Moreover, my flesh also shall rest in hope.

VER. 27. Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, nor wilt thou give thy holy one to see corruption.

VER. 28. Thou hast made known to me the ways of life: thou shalt fill me with joy with thy countenance.

For it was not possible. Athletes, if they are anointed, cannot be seized and captured by their adversaries; and they are protected and remain untouched and inaccessible to the teeth of the serpent. So too, Christ, having been anointed mystically by his own Spirit and engaged with death, and having overcome that pestilence, when the adversary approached, he was broken. ^C Furthermore, what he says, "For it was not possible," is to be understood in this sense: that inasmuch as he is God born of God, and is one who was not capable of any change, either in a worse transformation or in any other way; and because he rose in such a way as no longer to be about to die. Then he brings in David, who removes all human reasoning. Such a matter is prophecy, and it says: "For David says concerning him," not concerning himself. And again, he comes to the humble ones. For it is not now, he says, but old. And God willed these to happen from above, and so they were established: "I foresaw the Lord before me always." He calls his Father his Lord, because he took the form of a servant. ^D And what is said, "at the right hand of the Son," and again, "to sit at the right hand of the Father," signifies equality, and a like condition. Moreover, "my flesh also shall rest in hope." Since Jesus, as he had accepted death, laid it aside in order to raise it again from death, and consequently that flesh, since it was his own, rested in hope because of the expectation of the resurrection. And what is said, "Thou wilt not leave my soul in Hades," and although some apply this to the person of David, although...

EXPOSITION OF THE FIRST EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY BY THEOPHYLACTUS, ARCHBISHOP OF BULGARIA.

Argument of the First Epistle to Timothy.

Timothy was one of Paul's disciples, and so approved, and so closely attached to Paul, that he even chose to be circumcised by him for the sake of the economy, even though he [Paul] was preaching against circumcision to others, and had even resisted Peter himself concerning it. And Paul himself, in many places, bears witness to the great virtue of this man. To him he now writes concerning many necessary matters.

But someone might ask, why does he not write to Silas, or to Clement, or to Luke, or to any other of those who were with him, although there were many, but only to Timothy and Titus? And it may be said that he still kept those with himself, whereas he had entrusted Churches to these. It was necessary, therefore, to exhort them through writings, and to explain what needed to be done.

But if you should ask, why did he not first perfect them in all divine wisdom, and then appoint them to teach, but after entrusting the teaching to them, he writes again and sets them in order? Learn first, that no one is perfect, even if he becomes a teacher, but that this man also needs guidance in many things from those who are more perfect; otherwise, and with the Church just being constituted, it was not easy for the bishop to form all things himself by his word. Then, observe through the whole Epistle, that the instruction to Timothy is not such as is given to disciples, but such as befits a teacher.

^A spiritual body; for the flesh that is raised up after the resurrection is a spiritual and incorruptible body. He says "paths of life," as the souls of the just, together with the Savior, trod them ascending from the lower regions. But the words, "You will fill me with gladness with your countenance," refer to the face of the Lord, meaning the most God-befitting manifestation of God and our own inspection, by which He will visit and look upon us more perfectly and absolutely.

"Viri fratres," [Men, brethren], it is permitted to speak with boldness to you concerning the patriarch David, that he indeed both died and was buried, and his monument is among us to this day. ^B Being therefore a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn to him with an oath that, of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, He would raise up Christ to sit upon his throne, he, foreseeing, spoke concerning the resurrection of Christ, that His soul was not left in Hades, nor did His flesh see corruption.

Having fulfilled the testimony of David, he adds: "Men, brethren." When he is about to say something great, he uses this prologue, stirring them up and making them well-disposed; for where it did no harm, he used great moderation of mind. For if he had said simply, "These things were said by David," he would have seemed harsh and stirring them to anger rather than making them obedient. But by the great honor which he pays to the blessed David, he brings it about that the prophecy is easily admitted and approved as being spoken concerning Christ. And his whole speech is ordered in this way: for when he had said that he both died and was buried, he did not say, "And he rose again," but, "And his monument is among us," which is equivalent to saying, "He did not rise again." ^C Then, not even thus does he come to Christ, but again David is praised, and through the praises of him, the goal proceeds. For he says these things for this reason, that through respect for him and his lineage, they might receive the discourse about the resurrection, as if the prophecy were injured if this were not so, and their honor were being destroyed. "God swore to him with an oath." He did not say, "He promised," but "He swore," representing the unchangeable nature of the promise. "To sit upon his throne." In many places of the divine Scripture, "throne" is used for "kingdom," as also here, and in the passage, "Your throne, O God, is for ever and ever." But "according to the flesh He would raise up Christ"—he says "according to the flesh," for as to the divinity, He exists eternally, sitting together with the Father. He attributes all things to the Father so that they might meanwhile accept what was being said. But how did He sit upon the throne of David? ^D Because He is King of the Jews, and much more so of those who crucified Him.

^A VERS. 32. *Hunc Jesum resuscitated Deus, cujus omnes nos sumus testes.* VERS. 33. *Dextera igitur Dei exaltatus, ac promissum Spiritum sanctum a Patre consecutus, effudit hoc, quod et vos nunc videtis et auditis.* VERS. 34. *Non enim David ascendit in caelos: sed ipse ait, Dixit Dominus Domino meo, Sede a dextris meis,* VERS. 35. *Quoad effecero inimicos tuos scabellum pedum tuorum.* VERS. 36. *Certo sciat ergo tota domus Israel, et Dominum et Christum a Deo factum esse hunc ipsum Jesum, quem vos cruci affixistis.*

He flees back again to the Father, although it would have been enough to have said it earlier; but he knew how much utility this brought to the hearers for the acceptance and approval of those things which were pressing and were primarily required and necessary. Furthermore, by the expression "exalted," he covertly signifies that He has been lifted up on high and dwells in the heavens, but not even this was stated openly at the beginning. Observe, however, how at the beginning of the discourse he did not say that Christ had sent down the Spirit, but the Father, when he also brought forward the prophet Joel as a witness. But after he made mention of His signs, and of the things that had happened to Him, and discussed the resurrection with confidence, then he says that He Himself poured out the Spirit; so that it was of Him that the prophet was speaking: *And it shall come to pass in the last days.* ^B By "the promise," he means either that which He promised to us the apostles, or that which the Father had promised to Him before He was crucified and suffered the punishment. For since he was about to say a great and sublime thing—namely, that Christ had poured out the Spirit—he veils and covers it by saying that the Father had promised this to Him. For whatever anyone says, if it does not have a useful result and end, he says it rashly and in vain. And he shows that the cross not only did not make Him humbler, but actually made Him more splendid; if indeed He promised it then, even as John says: *He shall baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire*; but now, after the cross, He gave it. ^C But He Himself says: *The Lord said to my Lord.* Here he no longer speaks with hesitation and restraint, having gained confidence from the things that had been said. But what did the Lord say to my Lord? If David calls Him Lord, much more will they not despise Him or consider Him unworthy. Moreover, through that which he says, *until I make your enemies*, he struck fear into them—that is, naturally, so that they might be seen and subjugated. And lest faith in him be disparaged, he attributes and ascribes the saying to the Father. But since he had also spoken great things, he again leads the discourse down to humble things: *Sit at my right hand.* Through this, *Sit at my right hand*, the equal honor of the Son and the Father is understood. For in the case of a bodiless essence, ^D it is not possible to conceive of a right or a left. But who the enemies are, the Apostle declares, crying out: *When He shall have put an end to all authority, the last enemy shall be destroyed—death.*

And that He was made Lord and Christ by God, is this very one. “Made” is used for “constituted.” For there is no discourse here about *ousiosis*, that is to say, about substantiation or essentiality, and *hypostasis*, that is to say, subsistence. Furthermore, he does not yet cease or desist from humble expressions. For even though it was fitting to add: “Let all the house of Israel know with certainty that He sits at the right hand,” for this was gathered from what had been said before, he does not say this, but what is much more humble and lowly, namely that God constituted Him Lord and Christ; for the word “made” signifies this. Thus one must look everywhere and consider by what means benefit is obtained for the hearers.

^B When they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles: “What shall we do, men and brethren?” And Peter said to them: “Repent, and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord our God shall call.” And with many other words he testified and exhorted, saying: “Be saved from this crooked generation.”

Do you see how great a thing is gentleness? How it pricks and softens the hearts of men more than severity and bitterness? For here too, the blessed Peter brought their own daring deeds to their remembrance, but he did so mildly, and added no word of punishment. They were therefore put to shame by Peter’s gentleness, because to those who had delivered his Master to death—and who even then were murderous towards them and desired to make away with them—he nevertheless discoursed in the manner of a father and a teacher, with care for them. For they were “pricked,” he says; they were not simply convinced, but condemned themselves. For they say, “What shall we do, brethren?” as if they were at a loss and in anguish over what they had dared to do. Those whom they had called impostors, they now call brethren, and this they do not merely by using such an appellation openly and freely, but by demonstrating their love and how much they had been won over and were well-disposed towards them. For the apostles themselves had also called them thus when Peter began his speech. ^C But although all were questioned, Peter replies again. For they all offered him their mouth, and he says: “Repent, and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.” Nor is this in conflict with, “Baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit ^D”

^A.” For the Church understands the holy Trinity to be indivisible, so that, because of the consubstantial union or unity of the same essence and nature in three subsistences or persons, he who is baptized in the name of Christ is baptized in the Trinity, since the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are not separated one from the other, nor divided among themselves. For if the name of the Father were not God, and the name of the Son were not God, and the name of the Holy Spirit were not God, one would have to say, “In the name of the God Jesus,” or also, “In the name of the Son alone.” But, he says, “in the name of Jesus Christ,” knowing that the name of Jesus is God, just as the name of the Father and of the Spirit is God. “And you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” See how he designates one gift of Christ and of the Spirit, since there is one dignity; which, while discussing it above, he had called “the promise.” Then, “and to your children.” For the gift is greater when they also have heirs to their goods. “And to all that are far off.” But if to those far off, then much more to you who are near. See, however, when he rightly signified the calling of the nations through the expression, “to those who are far off.” When? When he found them pricked to the heart and condemning themselves. For when a soul has condemned itself, it can no longer be envious ^B.

Vers. 41. “Then they indeed, having gladly received his word, were baptized; and there were added in that day about three thousand souls.”

Vers. 42. “And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine, and in the communion, and in the breaking of bread, and in prayers.”

Vers. 43. “And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles.”

Vers. 44. “And all that believed were together, and had all things common.”

Vers. 45. “And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.”

Vers. 46. “And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, praising God, and having favor ^C with all the people. And the Lord added to the Church daily such as should be saved.”

Here is fulfilled the prophecy which says: “Who hath heard such a thing? who hath seen such things? Shall the earth be made to bring forth in one day? or shall a nation be born at once? for as soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth her children.” And fear came upon every soul ^D. For not as...

as though they were worthless. For since Peter abounded with great grace from above, and was demonstrating the promises and the things to come, they were reasonably struck with fear; for the signs and wonders that were performed confirmed the things that were being said. Just as it happened in the time of Christ—first signs, then teaching, then miracles—so it was now. ^A And all who believed were together; not in place, but in disposition and resolve, and in the indissoluble concord and affection toward one another. And the phrase "as anyone had need," he says, not simply, but in a thrifty manner; for this is what it means: as anyone had need. It is not as the wise men among the Greeks did; some abandoned the land, and others threw much gold into the sea. This was not a contempt for money, but foolishness and lack of sense. For the devil endeavored to slander the creatures of God, not [because it was] pointless to use money well. And spending their time daily; not one day, or two, or three, but daily; and with one accord, as if with one soul. Observe, moreover, how the Jews who believed did nothing else but attend to the temple, as they had become more zealous and held the place in greater reverence. And the apostles did not for a time drag them away from there, so as not to do them harm. Breaking bread from house to house; he means the temple by "house" here as well. For they ate in it. And "breaking bread" signifies their great temperance and simplicity of diet. For he says they partook of food, but did not live in luxury. Thus, they were changing their manner of life for the better because of the faith. ^B But how did they have favor with all the people? For he says: "And having favor with all the people." How? Through the things they were doing: through alms, through pure conduct. For even if the priests, moved by envy and jealousy, stood against them, they still had favor with the people. ^C

CAPUT III

^A I have not: but what I have, that I give thee. In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, arise, and walk. Vers. 7. And taking him by the right hand, he lifted him up.

These men appear everywhere to be in great concord. Peter signals to him; they came together to the sepulcher; regarding him, he says to Christ: “And what shall this man do?” ^B Indeed, the author of the book omits explaining the other signs one by one; yet he considered that the sign by which all were moved should not be omitted. But they were going up into the temple; why? Were they still living according to the Jewish custom? God forbid. But they were doing this usefully and by way of condescension, and as if accommodating themselves to the man. Observe, moreover, how they were assiduously devoted to prayers: and at the ninth hour they were praying there together. He mentions both the place and the time accurately, providing proof of what he writes. How then does he not give the name of the lame man? Because not even the apostles themselves knew it; for the man was entirely unknown to them. And this perhaps so that they might not appear to be showing favor or performing the healings out of personal partiality, and so that no suspicion of fakery might be taken up by any of the most shameless—lest any think that some of those known to the apostles were feigning healings performed upon themselves for their favor. How then did they not learn his name after the healing? Because they had no leisure to be occupied in matters that brought no utility or benefit. But to me it seems that not even the common people knew the man’s name; rather, they called him "the lame man" simply because of his affliction. For the infirmity was so notorious and well-known to all that, whenever anyone heard "the lame man," although perhaps there were others, they immediately understood him. Whence, then, did they know that he had been lame from his mother’s womb? From the voice of all; from the testimony of all. For all knew him from his sitting in the temple, but also from the man who was healed himself. Why then did they not bring him to Christ to be healed? Perhaps those who were sitting in the temple were some of the unbelieving; since they did not even bring him to the apostles, seeing them entering and knowing they had performed such miracles. “Silver and gold I have not.” He did not say, "I do not have *here*," as we are accustomed to say, but, "I have absolutely none." Observe, moreover, how John is everywhere silent, while Peter speaks even for him. What then? Do you neglect and turn away from the suppliant because you do not have money? No; but "What I have," he says, "this I give." So also did Christ, ^C often healing by word alone, often also touching, wherever they happened to be weaker in faith, so that the things that were done might not appear to happen by chance. And taking him, he says, he lifted him up. This made the resurrection clear; for what was occurring was an image of the resurrection.

^A

And immediately his feet and ankles were strengthened. VERS. 8. And leaping up he stood and walked, and entered with them into the temple, walking and leaping and praising God. VERS. 9. And all the people saw him walking and praising God. VERS. 10. And they recognized him, that he was the one who used to sit for the sake of begging alms at the Beautiful gate of the temple: and they were filled with wonder and ecstasy, that is, alienation of mind, on account of what had happened to him.

Walking and leaping: testing himself, and making a greater trial, whether he were truly healed and restored. For on account of the novelty of the thing, which had happened beyond hope, it is credible that even he himself doubted concerning himself. ^B Some, however, say that he also did not know how to walk; and for this reason he moved his feet as if leaping. But observe how he did not remain quiet: partly indeed out of joy and gladness, and partly to stop their mouths, lest it be thought to be dissimulation. For this reason he leapt, as if he were someone who was henceforth almost unknown on account of the event. For we use this expression concerning those who are scarcely recognized. But on account of the benevolence and love with which he followed them, he did not depart from them, perhaps giving thanks to them, and gladdening them. Moreover, the miracle takes place in the temple for the salvation and benefit of many. ^C

VERS. 11. But when the healed lame man held Peter and John, all the people ran together to them in the porch which is called Solomon's, astonished and struck with admiration. VERS. 12. Which Peter beholding, spoke to the people thus: "Men, Israelites, why do you marvel at this? Or why do you look at us, as if by our own power or piety we had made him walk? VERS. 13. The God of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, the God of our fathers, glorified His Son Jesus; whom you indeed delivered up and denied in the presence of Pilate, when he had judged him to be worthy of release; VERS. 14. But you denied the holy and righteous one, and asked that a murderer be granted to you. VERS. 15. And you killed the Author of life; whom God raised from the dead: of which act we are witnesses. ^D VERS. 16. And by faith in his name, this man, whom you see and know, His name has strengthened, and the faith which is through him has given him this perfect soundness in the presence of you all."

^A He does not place the testimony so nakedly, because each of them was spoken together with many accusations and the punishment decreed against them, just as this one is also: *And I will give the wicked for his burial, and the rich for his death.* ^B Comforting them, however, he says that the daring deed was not yours, but God willed it so. At the same time, he also addresses those words which, reproaching him as he hung upon the cross, they said: *If he loves him, let him save him;* and, *If he is the Son of God, let him come down from the cross,* and the like—almost saying: "These were nonsense, O foolish ones; for if it had to happen thus, and all the prophets testify to this, it is manifest that he did not descend out of weakness, but rather out of ineffable power and surpassing authority and unutterable philanthropy."

VERS. 19. *Repent therefore, and return to health, that your sins may be blotted out, in order that times of refreshment may come from the presence of the Lord;*

VERS. 20. *And that he may send him who has been presented to you, Jesus Christ;*

VERS. 21. *Whom heaven must receive until the times of the restoration of all things, of which God spoke by the mouth of all his holy prophets from of old.*

"That your sins," etc. He does not speak of that sin which they dared to commit at the cross, for he had said above: *And now I know that you did it in ignorance, as did also your rulers.* But what was it that he said there: *And now I know?* "Now I know," he says—it is profitable to speak thus, so that I may win your salvation; or "Now I know that you did it in ignorance," from the fact that I see many of you returning and being saved. For it is likely that he says this to those among them who had already returned and believed. But how did they do it in ignorance? For to ask for a robber, not to accept him who was judged fit to be released, and even to wish to kill him—what ignorance is this? ^C But he spoke thus, opening to them the door of conversion; for this reason he does not say: "Repent of the things you dared to do at the cross," but rather "in order that your other sins may be blotted out for the time being." *Repent therefore,* he says, *so that times of refreshment may come.* He shows here that they were about to fall into many tribulations; for this discourse would be fitting for one who is about to weep and who desires some comfort. And see how he proceeds by the way. In the first address, he hinted at the rest and the seating in the heavens; ^D but here, also at his manifest presence. "There will be," he says, "a time of refreshment." For what would the times of refreshment be, if not those of the resurrection? Which Paul also seeks, saying:

And we who are in this tabernacle groan, being burdened. But if anyone says that these are times of refreshment even after the destruction, nothing prevents it. For God cut short the times of their affliction and captivity for the sake of the elect, that those who have believed might find refreshment and be saved from that severe necessity. ^A *And send the Christ Jesus, who has been preached to you.* This is in place of: It is necessary to receive him, since he is God, and ought always to sit with the Father. *Whom heaven must receive until the times...* He declares the cause why he does not come now: It must be restored, he says, and all things must be brought to an end, and then he will come. But how does he say above: *Whom heaven must receive*? Had it not yet received him? Certainly it had. How then did he not say: "whom heaven has received"? He says this as though speaking of the times above. But the words "until" and "as long as" in Holy Scripture are not indicative of a specific time. For how are we to understand that which is said to God: "Thou art from everlasting to everlasting"? The meaning of the passage before us, therefore, is this: Many things, he says, the prophets said were to be, which have not all yet come to pass and been fulfilled, but are still happening and will happen until the consummation. For Christ, having been taken up into the heavens, remains there until the consummation of the world; ^B arriving then with mighty power, after all things which the prophets foretold have been restored—that is, when the end arrives and the things of sense cease—then Christ will be higher than the heavens.

VERS. 22.

VERS. 23. *For it shall be that every soul, whoever does not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people.*

VERS. 24. *And all the prophets, both from Samuel and those who follow, as many as have spoken, have also announced these days.*

VERS. 25. *You are sons of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with your fathers, saying to Abraham: And in your seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed.*

^C VERS. 26. *To you first, God, having raised up His Servant ^D Jesus, sent Him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from your iniquities.*

[CYRIL.] He said: "A prophet like me." But the phrase "like me" is to be understood not in terms of nature, but in terms of action. Not, therefore, of essence, but of circumstances. For if he had said "like me" in essence, not one would have risen, but many. "The Lord will raise up for you a prophet." Immanuel is called a prophet because of His human nature, as one who is in the place of Moses, a mediator between God and men. I would even call Him Moses—Moses compared in a parable, the truth being compared with the shadow. ^A For Christ is born in Bethlehem, just as Moses was in Egypt; the former was an Israelite, and so is this one as regards the flesh; the former was of a priestly family, this one from David because of the Virgin; Pharaoh ruled in his day, Herod in this one's; the former kills infants, this one kills infants; the former killed the males, this one also; the former is saved through his mother, and this one was saved through his mother and with his mother. "He shall be cut off from the people." [DIDYMUS.] ^B Since the soul of man is immortal, it is not utterly and completely cut off, but is cast out of a certain good order, where it had been placed before. Thus also, Judas was cast out and removed from the order and company of the apostles. Since, therefore, the soul is immortal, by his extermination and casting out we understand its falling away and being deprived of the goods which it was destined to enjoy, if only it had lived its life in a way worthy of God. "You are the sons of the prophets." He says "of the prophets" to mean: Do not be dismayed, and do not think ^C that you have been made aliens to the promises. "You are the sons of the prophets," so that I might tell you that these things have happened for your sake. What is meant by "sons of the covenant"? It is equivalent to "heirs"—not heirs recently and newly enrolled, but as sons, and otherwise, to show to what extent it is by right of adoption. As if he meant: If, therefore, you yourselves also wish it, you are heirs. For this reason he says, "You are the sons of the prophets and of the covenant." "He sent Jesus to bless you." For He sent Him to others indeed, but to you first, who crucified and killed Him. When? Only from the cross? No, but even after this and after the resurrection. For, he says, having raised Him up, He sent Him to you first, to do what? To bless you and save you, if you yourselves also choose to turn away from your sins.

CHAPTER IV

^D VERSE 1. "And as they were speaking these words to the people, the priests and the captain of the temple and the Sadducees came upon them," VERSE 2. "Being offended because they were teaching the people and proclaiming in Jesus the resurrection from the dead:" VERSE 3. "And they laid hands on them, and put..."

them in custody ^A until the next day, for it was already evening.

When they had not yet recovered from the former trials, they encounter others. And see how events are arranged. First, they were all mocked together; second, they fall into dangers, but not in immediate succession. Rather, after having first distinguished themselves in their public addresses, and having performed a great miracle, then finally, after they had gained confidence through God’s permission, they embrace the struggles. But observe for me the progress and advancement of the Jews in their wickedness and audacious impudence. For they who previously sought one in Christ who would betray Him, now, after the cross, having become bolder and more shameless, lay hands [on them] themselves. And with them, he says, was also the commander of the temple, so that they might again cast a public charge upon what had been done, and not treat it as a private matter; which is what, he says, they strive to do in all instances. ^B And they put them into custody until the next day. They, indeed, by doing this, were wishing to soften them and were keeping them under guard, but the delay of time made the apostles more bold.

VERSE 4. "But many of those who heard the word believed; and the number of the men came to be about five thousand."

What is this? Had they seen the apostles prospering, and not rather bound? How then did they believe? Do you see a manifest divine efficiency? And yet the fact that they had already believed should have made them weaker, but Peter’s address, composed by the divine Spirit, had cast seeds into the depths of their understanding and had touched their very souls. Those men, in the sight of the multitude, bound the apostles, so that by seeing them, they might also make the others more cowardly. But the opposite happened, and they examine them in private, ^C so that observers might not profit from their boldness of speech.

VERSE 5. "And it came to pass on the next day, that their rulers and elders and scribes were gathered together at Jerusalem."

VERSE 6. "And Annas the high priest, and Caiaphas, and John, and Alexander, and as many as were of the high priestly family."

VERSE 7. "And having set them in the midst, they were inquiring, 'By what power, or by what name, have you done this?'"

VERSE 8. "Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them, 'Rulers of the people and elders of Israel: ^D VERSE 9. If we are today being examined for a good deed done to a weak man, by what means this man has been saved,'"

'" ^A VERSE 10. "Let it be known to all of you and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ the Nazarene, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by him this man stands before you sound." Besides other evils and inconveniences, they did not even keep the ordinances of the Law. Look, for instance, at the multitude of high priests; whereas one alone ought to have held the office for life. They surround the matter at hand with the appearance of a court, so that they might be held accountable for an unjust judgment. They were inquiring by what power or in what name. And yet, they knew. For, being vexed at their proclaiming the resurrection in Jesus, they detained them. Why, then, do they ask? Because they hoped that the apostles, fearing the court and the multitude, would deny it, and thus they thought the whole matter would be successfully managed by them. For see how craftily and cunningly they question. "By what name," they say, "have you done this?" For they preferred that the apostles should confess it to be their own work, rather than of the power and virtue of Christ. And see how they were repressed, because they did not even want to name the healing of the lame man. ^B For why do they not say "of what kind it was"? But they just say, "You have done this." "Rulers of the people and elders of Israel." Observe the philosophy; and consider, where the situation demands, how he sharply rebukes them. He addressed them honorably, but when he came to the subject, he does not omit the fitting rebuke, subtly reminding them that it was for such things that they were always offended and stirred to judgment. Now, what he says is to this effect: "In the highest degree, it was fitting that we should be crowned for these things and proclaimed as benefactors; but since we are called to judgment and are pleading our cause, let it be known to all of you and to all the people of Israel"—which was the very thing that vexed them most; and this is what Christ also told them: "What you have heard in the ear, preach upon the housetops." "By the name of Jesus Christ the Nazarene." "Do not think," he says, "that we are concealing our country; rather, we proclaim it even more. And indeed, we confess the passion, and we preach the resurrection." "Whom you crucified." He reminded them of a word that could sufficiently terrify them. For what kind of wounds do you think they received from these words? ^{C D} VERSE 11. "This is the stone which was rejected by you builders, which has become the head of the corner." VERSE 12. "And there is no salvation in any other; for there is no other name under heaven given among men, by which we must be saved." This is the stone, that is, the very approved and tested one, which became the head of those joined together through him into one building of the Church of those two peoples; namely, of the Jewish [people] which believed, and of all...

from the nations; and there is no salvation in any other. ^A Here he speaks in elevated terms. For where it was necessary to teach, they also produce prophecies; but where it was necessary to speak freely, they only set forth their own opinion. For when there is no need to settle anything, but to demonstrate it with boldness, he does not spare. For he did not fear now that he might strike, as he does in other cases, adapting and arranging his words for the salvation of his hearers. It is manifest to all, he says, that the name was not given to us alone, but also to all; because, he says, even the Jews thought there was a resurrection, but a cold and childish one.

^B Seeing the boldness of Peter and John, and perceiving that they were unlettered men and laymen, they marveled; and they recognized that they had been with Jesus. And seeing the man who had been healed standing with them, they had nothing to say in contradiction.

For it is possible for someone to be unlettered and yet not a layman, and a layman and yet not unlettered; but here both concurred, and for this reason they marveled at them, as they spoke and declaimed. And whence did they perceive it? From those very things which they were saying. And he does not say this—namely, that "they recognized them"—simply; but [he implies] that they had been with Jesus at the time of the passion. For these men alone were with him then, and they had seen them at that time low-spirited and cowed, and this sudden change astonished them most of all. For he who then, when even a maidservant was questioning him, did not stand his ground, now, having advanced into the midst of the chief priests themselves and the council, speaks with boldness and constancy.

^C Having ordered them to go out of the council, they conferred among themselves, saying, "What shall we do to these men? For that indeed a notable sign has been done through them is manifest to all who dwell in Jerusalem, and we cannot deny it. ^D But that it may spread no further among the people, let us threaten them that they speak no more in this name to any man." And having called them, they charged them not to speak at all nor to teach in the name of Jesus. But Peter and John answering toward them said, "Whether it is right in the sight of God to hearken unto you rather than unto God, judge."

^A For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard. But they, having threatened them further, let them go, finding nothing how they might punish them, because of the people, because all glorified God for that which was done. For the man was above forty years old, on whom this miracle of healing was shewed. Why do they not lead them to Pilate, but judge them themselves? Because they were ashamed and abashed at the things which they had previously committed, and feared lest they should be reproached and accused on their account as well.

^B Vers. 23. And being let go, the apostles went to their own company, and reported all that the chief priests and elders had said unto them. Vers. 24. Who when they heard that, they lifted up their voice to God with one accord, and said, Lord, thou art God, which hast made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all that in them is. Vers. 25. Who by the mouth of David thy servant hast said, Why did the heathen rage, and the people imagine vain things? Vers. 26. The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against his Christ. Vers. 27. For of a truth there were gathered together against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, Vers. 28. For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done.

They reported it. It is not for the sake of vainglory that they relate it, but to demonstrate certain proofs of the grace of Christ. ^C Behold also how precise their prayers are. For when they were praying that the one who was fit and suitable for the apostleship might be designated for them, they prayed, "Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all." For there was need of foreknowledge in that case; but since here it was necessary that the mouths of the adversaries be stopped, they cry out, "Lord, thou art God, which hast made heaven and earth." ^D Many, however, of those from the heresies divide the Godhead, saying that there is one God the maker of the world, and another the Father of Christ. Whence they also divide the Scripture, saying that the Old Testament belongs to the maker of the world, but the New to the Father of Christ. And following upon this impious opinion of theirs, they say that these Gods are contrary to each other, and their Scriptures likewise; so that those who flee for refuge to the Lord are enemies of the maker of the world, and are better than he; just as, indeed, even the men of the world are ill-disposed toward Christ and his doctrine.

For this reason, the holy apostles, cutting off this heresy and sect, show that one must understand that the same God is both the maker of the world and the Father of the Savior, since both testaments were given by Him. ^A *Who through the mouth of David thy servant didst say: Why did the nations rage?* As though seeking covenants from God, they bring the prophecy into the middle; at the same time they are consoling themselves, because the enemies were meditating these things in vain.

VERS. 29. *And now, Lord, look upon their threats: and grant to thy servants, that with all confidence they may speak thy word.*

VERS. 30. *By stretching forth thy hand unto cures, and signs, and wonders to be done by the name of thy holy child Jesus.*

VERS. 51. *And when they had prayed, the place was moved, and shaken, where they were gathered: and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spoke the word of God with confidence.*

^B *To do what thy hand and thy counsel decreed to be done.* That is: They themselves did not have power; but you are he who allowed whatever happened to come to pass, and brought it to an end; you who know how to easily settle and explain every matter, who are wise and clever, who made use of the works of your enemies for those things which you had decreed. For those men gathered together as enemies; but they were doing what you willed. But what is it that he says, *“Whatsoever thy hand...”*? Here it seems to me that it means the same thing through power and will, because it is sufficient that you alone should have willed it. For no one decrees and predestines by force and power. That is: whatever you established and decided. ^C *And now look.* Observe, he did not say, “shatter them, and strike and lay them low,” but what? *Look upon their threats, and grant to thy servants to speak thy word with confidence.* *And when they had prayed, the place was moved, in which they were gathered.* By this it was signified that they were heard and visited by God. For that is at times a sign of wrath, at times also of visitation. The apostles, however, were praying, not refusing and entreating that no inconvenience should happen to them; but they were laboring for the sake of the preaching. But why did God shake the house? In order to terrify, indeed, those who were threatening; but to bring the apostles to confidence, since it was the beginning, and they needed a sign which could be perceived by the senses. The place was therefore moved, ^D and confirmed them all the more. *And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit;* that is, they were revived, and the gift was set aflame within them.

VERS. 32. *And of the multitude of them that believed, the heart and soul were one: and not any one said that ought of the things which he possessed was his own: but all things were common unto them.*

VERS. 35. And with great power the apostles gave testimony of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus; and great grace was in them all.

VERS. 34. Neither was there any one needy among them. For as many as were owners of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things they sold,

VERS. 35. And laid them down before the apostles' feet. And distribution was made to every one, according as he had need.

"One heart," etc. Heart and soul here signify the same thing. And with great power they gave testimony of the resurrection; he shows that they were entrusted with something, as it were, and as if he speaks of a debt; this is what is meant by, "They gave testimony." Neither was there any one needy. Therefore grace [was with them], because no one was needy; that is, from the great readiness of those who contributed, no one was needy. For they did not give in part, and reserve in part; nor did they give all as if it were their own, but all who believed were nourished as if from one house. "And brought the prices of the things they sold." This signifies the great honor and reverence of those who brought them; for they did not even dare to hand them over into their hands, but laid them down at their feet, making them lords and stewards, so that they might be expended as from common funds, and not as from private and personal belongings; and this also freed those who gave from vainglory, and afforded those who received twofold joy, as it both relieved their want and rendered them free from shame. ^C

VERS. 36. And Joses, who by the apostles was surnamed Barnabas, which is, by interpretation, the son of consolation, a Levite, a Cyprian born,

VERS. 37. Having land, sold it, and brought the money, and laid it at the feet of the apostles.

CAPUT V.

VERS. 1. But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a piece of land,

VERS. 2. And kept back part of the price of the land, his wife being privy thereunto; and bringing a part, laid it at the feet of the apostles.

VERS. 3. But Peter said to him: Ananias, why hath Satan filled thy heart, that thou shouldst lie to the Holy Ghost, and defraud of the price of the land?

VERS. 4. Whilst it remained, did it not remain to thee? And after it was sold, was it not in thy power? Why hast thou conceived this thing in thy heart?

Thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God. ^A

Ananias, hearing these words, fell down and gave up the spirit; and great fear came upon all who heard these things. ^B

VERS. 6. And the young men arose, wound him up, and carrying him out, buried him.

But Joseph—it does not seem to me that this is he who was compared with Matthias. For that one was also called Justus; but this one is Barnabas, which is translated "son of consolation." It seems to me that he also received this name because of his virtue. But how was he both a Levite and a Cyprian? Because the law was already being loosened without being observed; and consequently, the Levites were both moving and dwelling abroad, and doing business.

Now, as he is about to relate what happened to Ananias and Sapphira, and wishes to show that they have sinned, he first makes mention of the one who had acted rightly; for since there was such a multitude doing these things, with so many signs being performed, and such great grace present, it is strange that, not being instructed by any of these things, he brought destruction upon himself. And the terrible thing is that the sin was committed with consent, and no one else saw what had happened; hence it came about that the wretch brought this upon himself to do. Some say: if Satan filled the heart of Ananias, why did he himself suffer the punishment? Because he himself was the cause, having readied himself to receive his efficacy and hidden power, whereby he was filled. "Was it not thy own while it remained? Was it not in thy power?" For was there any force of necessity? Do we drag you against your will? "Why hast thou conceived this thing in thy heart?" There were three signs in the same matter: that he knew things done in secret; that he was not ignorant of things meditated upon in the mind; and third, that he destroyed them by command and decree. ^C

Many of the neglected-minded ones, putting forward the events concerning Ananias and Sapphira, accuse the Prince of the Apostles of murder. But the accusation does not pertain to Peter, but rather to the Holy Spirit, who justly passed sentence against them. For Peter only rebuked the lie; but the Spirit, having the power of life and death, killed those who had sinned against Him. And the same can be said concerning Sapphira: that Peter did not kill her, but since the transgression belonged to both, the Judge condemned both equally. Therefore, Peter, not being ignorant of this, as one who spoke everywhere through the Holy Spirit, uttered this voice having received it from Him. ^D

VERS. 7. And it came to pass that about the space of three hours had elapsed, and his wife, not knowing what had happened, came in.

VERS. 8. And Peter answered her, saying, "Tell me, if..."

you sold the land for so much?" She said, "Yes, for so much." ^A And Peter said to her, "Why is it that ye have agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord? Behold, the feet of them who buried thy husband are at the door, and they shall carry thee out." And immediately she fell down at his feet and breathed her last. And the young men came in and found her dead, and having carried her out, buried her beside her husband. And great fear came upon the whole Church and upon all who heard these things.

A space of three hours had passed, and the woman had not learned of it, nor had any of those who had been present spoken of the matter; for they were afraid. The writer, wondering at this fact, sets forth both things: both that about three hours’ time had intervened, and that the woman entered, not knowing what had happened. ^B Observe, too, that Peter does not call her, but rather waits so that she might enter when she wished, giving her space if she desired to repent. But no one dared to tell her what had happened. This is the fear of a teacher, this is obedience. "Tell me, if you sold the land for so much?" He wished to save her; for he was the author of the sin. For this reason he gives her an opportunity for a defense and for repentance, saying, "Tell me, if for so much?" Yet someone might say that he treated them harshly and bitterly. But what bitterness was it? If someone who gathers wood against the law is stoned, much more so the sacrilegious; for this money was sacred. Why did she fall at his feet? Because she had stood near him. She had been allowed to stand near him ^C so that, if she wished to repent and confess, she would not be ashamed of others as if they were listening. "And they found her dead; and having carried her out, they buried her." Notice that they no longer took care to avoid touching unclean things according to the law, but simply and without any observance touched the dead. Observe also this: that they were severe with their own, but in the case of outsiders, they did not employ punishment. Each, however, in an appropriate way: the former, so that they might not seem to force people to approach the faith against their will through the fear of punishment; the latter, because they did not permit those who had once approached and been deemed worthy of instruction and spiritual grace to be despisers and sacrilegious; ^D and this, especially in the beginning. For this would have provided an opportunity for slandering the preaching. "And great fear came upon the whole Church." They paid the penalty, and others gained the profit. And yet, even before this, signs had been performed, but there was not such great fear. It is true, therefore, what is said: "The Lord is known when He executes judgment."

VERS. 12. And by the hands of the apostles were performed

signs and wonders among the people. And they were all with one accord in Solomon's portico. ^A VERS. 13. And of the rest, no one dared to join them, but the people magnified them. VERS. 14. And the multitude of men and women who believed in the Lord was added more and more. VERS. 15. So that they brought forth the sick into the streets, and laid them on beds and couches, that when Peter came, even his shadow might overshadow some of them. VERS. 16. The multitude also of the towns round about came together into Jerusalem, bringing sick persons, and those who were troubled by unclean spirits, who were all healed. ^B After men began to fear them, Peter himself and the other apostles performed more signs. And they were in Solomon's portico. They no longer remained at home, but were in the temple. Since he said "in Solomon's portico," lest you wonder how the crowds allowed this, he says: "Because no one dared approach them; but the Jewish people magnified the apostles." So that they brought forth the sick into the streets. This did not happen in the time of Christ, that the sick should draw healings through the streets and by a shadow, or that no one should dare to approach. How, then, does this happen here? Because it was the work of Him who said: "He who believes in Me, the works that I do, he also will do, and greater than these he will do." ^C From all sides, the miracle increased for them: from those who had believed; from those who had been healed; from those who had been punished; from the boldness with which they undertook the work of preaching; and from other virtue and care for their lifestyle. For what happened was not of signs alone; but the life and virtue of the men were also great and truly apostolic. ^D VERS. 17. And the high priest arose, and all those with him, which is the sect of the Sadducees, and they were filled with jealousy. VERS. 18. And they laid their hands on the apostles, and put them in public custody. VERS. 19. But an angel of the Lord by night opened the doors of the prison, and leading them out, said: VERS. 20. Go, and standing in the temple, speak to the people all the words of this life. VERS. 21. And having heard this, at dawn they entered into the temple and taught. But when the high priest and those with him had come, they called together the council, and all the senate of the children of Israel, and sent to the prison to have them brought.

But when the ministers arrived and did not find them in the prison, they returned, ^A reporting that they found the prison closed with all security and the guards standing before the doors, but upon opening them, they found no one inside. 24 When the high priest and the captain of the temple and the chief priests heard these words, they were perplexed concerning them, as to what might come of this. 25 But someone arrived and reported to them, "Behold, the men whom you put in prison are standing in the temple and teaching the people." What is it that it says, "rising up"? Awakened, moved by the things being said. Now they attack them more vehemently and sharply, yet they do not immediately bring them to judgment, because they thought they would terrify them more by public custody. Observe, however, with me, how the life of the apostles was woven. ^B First there was despondency because of the withdrawal of Christ; then cheerfulness because of the descent of the Spirit; again despondency because of the mockers; then cheerfulness because of the faithful and the sign; again despondency because they were held in custody; then cheerfulness because of the defense; again here, cheerfulness because of the brilliance and the signs; but then despondency because of the high priest and those who arrested them. For as many as live according to God, one might find them being treated and exercised in such a way. But an angel of the Lord opened the doors of the prison by night, led them out, and for their consolation and for the benefit of the Jews. 26 Then he who was captain of the temple guard went with the ministers and brought them, but not with force, for they feared the people, lest they be stoned ^C by them. 27 And having brought them, they set them in the council; and the high priest questioned them, 28 Saying, "Did we not strictly command you and forbid you not to teach in this name? And behold, you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching, and you wish to bring upon us the blood of this man." 29 And Peter and the apostles answered and said, "We must obey God rather than men. 30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom you laid hands on and hanged on a tree. 31 Him God has exalted at His right hand to be Prince and Savior, ^D to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins."

^A And we are His witnesses of these things, and so is the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey Him.

One ought, after fearing God, to be like those who always snatch [the soul] ^B from the hands of the enemy. Yet the security of the prison was double—the seal and the men—and everything was sufficient to cause them to suspect that what had happened was a divine operation. “Did we not,” they say, “strictly forbid you?” But what does it matter even if you did forbid? If they had indeed been persuaded at that time and had agreed to obey, then you would be rightly conducting an inquiry now and demanding an account of their actions. But if they said they would not obey, what is the meaning of your questions and demands now? “And you intend to bring this man’s blood upon us.” To them, He still seems to be a mere man. They say this, wanting to show, as they suppose, that their prohibition had become necessary, and that they were ordering these things out of concern for their own safety; but they were saying these things rather to incite the multitude against them. “We ought to obey God rather than men.” The apostles do not answer ferociously. For they were teachers; they were not getting angry, but were pitying them, considering how they might deliver them from their error and their rage. “And we are His witnesses of these things.” Of what? That He promised forgiveness and repentance. For the resurrection was now already acknowledged. That He gives forgiveness, both we testify and the Holy Spirit, who would not have come if sins had not first been forgiven. And see how, while mentioning the crime, they add the forgiveness, showing that while the deeds committed were worthy of death, the things granted were given as by a benefactor. He also said, “Him God has exalted as Prince and Savior,” attributing everything to the Father, ^C so that He might not seem to be alien from the Father. But why did they not immediately realize that they had left the prison? So that, being reduced to perplexity first, if they wished, they might grasp and be taught that the power was divine. “And the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey Him.” He did not say, “whom God gave to us,” but “to those who obey,” at once being modest and showing the magnitude of the gift, and also indicating that they themselves could have received it too. For this is the reason God permitted the apostles to be led into court: that those men might be instructed, and that these might be exercised in speaking freely and boldly, and that all might learn.

^D When they heard this, they were cut to the heart, and they consulted to put them to death.

VERS. 34. But there stood up one in the council, a Pharisee named Gamaliel, a doctor of the law held in honor by all

^A commanded that the apostles be removed for a short while. 35 And he said to them: "Ye men of Israel, take heed to yourselves what you are about to do concerning these men." 36 "For before these days rose up Theudas, claiming himself to be somebody; to whom a number of men, about four hundred, joined themselves: who was slain; and all, as many as obeyed him, were dispersed, and brought to nothing."

The others, indeed, hearing this were cut to the heart; but these men were being rent asunder, and were deliberating about killing them. Now this Gamaliel was the teacher of Paul; and it is worth wondering how he, being both versed in the law and endowed with judgment of mind, did not yet believe, since not even Paul had yet believed. "Take heed to yourselves what you are about to do concerning these men." Observe the prudence of the public address; how he immediately struck them with fear, and so that he might not be suspected ^B of being like-minded with them, he discoursed as one speaking to those of the same opinion, and he did not use great vehemence, but spoke thus: "Take heed to yourselves," he said, "what you are about to do." "For before these days." He sets forth two examples, and does not mention ancient ones, but new ones, because such things have more strength in persuading. For which reason he also, wishing to signify these, used to say: "Before these few days." And although he could have brought forward other things, he was content with these. For "in two witnesses shall every word be established." He does not say, however, by whom they were killed, but says here that they were dispersed. Josephus also makes mention of Theudas in the nineteenth book of the *Archaeology*, as Eusebius says in the second book of the *Ecclesiastical History* in these words: ^C "When Fadus was procurator of Judea, a certain impostor named Theudas persuaded the crowd, having taken up their possessions, to follow him to the river Jordan. For he said he was a prophet, and that at his command the river would divide and provide them an easy crossing; and he deceived many. But Fadus did not allow them to enjoy their madness, but sent a troop of horsemen against them, which slew many and took some of them alive. And the head of Theudas himself was cut off and carried to Jerusalem."

37 "After this man rose up Judas the Galilean in the days of the enrollment, and drew away much people after him; he also perished; and all, as many as obeyed him, were dispersed."

38 "And now I say to you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone; for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to naught." ^D

But if it is of God, you cannot overthrow it; lest perhaps you be found even to fight against God." ^A

And they consented to him; and calling in the apostles, they scourged them and charged them not to speak in the name of Jesus, and they released them.

They indeed went from the presence of the council rejoicing, that they were counted worthy to suffer for the name of the Lord Jesus. ^B

And every day in the temple, and from house to house, they ceased not to teach and to preach Jesus the Christ.

It seems the Galileans in the times of Pilate followed the dogmas of Judas the Galilean. Now the dogma of Judas was this: that one should not even to his lips call any man Lord, nor pay him honor or deference; and thus certainly not the king. And many of them, because of this, not saying "Caesar is Lord," suffered grievous punishments, teaching that one must not, beyond the sacrifices in the law of Moses, offer others to God, and they forbade them to be made on behalf of the people and the nation of the Romans for salvation. It is likely therefore that Pilate, being indignant at these Galileans, ordered them for these causes, which seemed against the law to be performed as sacrifices, to be killed; so that then, in the sacrifices being offered, the blood of those offering it was mingled, just as it is reported in the Gospel according to Luke. "Depart from these men." ^C Having spoken this, they offer examples to them, and they themselves think about themselves, lest perhaps, while planning to overthrow others, they be overthrown; for he who fights against that which is pleasing to God does not overthrow that, but he overthrows himself. For if it is a human matter, you would have to trouble yourselves; but if it is divine, you would not be able to destroy it even by troubling yourselves. He did not say that it is from God, but that it is human. For if he had said, "It is from God," they would have disputed it; but if it is from men, he pushes them forward against the apostles. For this reason he wisely orders them to await the outcome of the matter. See, however, he did not say, "If it is not from God, you shall overthrow it; but if it is of God, you shall be overthrown." They ^D were persuaded by him. For this reason they were persuaded, because the apostles were not present, he said these things, and as though he were thinking these things for them. How then did they scourge them, if they were persuaded? They were persuaded to refrain from killing them—for that is what they wanted—and they abandoned that intention; yet they fulfilled their own anger by scourging them.

They were persuaded indeed in this, to abstain from their slaughter. For they had that in mind; and they abandoned that will, yet they satisfied their wrath by scourging them. [alt-version omitted]

Variæ lectiones et notæ. 66 In vulgato pro, τοῦ Κυρίου Ἰησοῦ, ἐστί, αὐτοῦ. 67 Ισ. τό. 68 Θυσίαι: erat. 69 Ισ. τότε. 70 ἐκείνων.

Caput VI

VERS. 1. *In those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplying, there arose a murmur of the Hellenists against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration.* Not in those very days, but in some days after them; for it is the custom of Scripture so to speak. Now, he calls those who spoke Greek "Hellenists" or "Grecanics." "In the daily ministration"; the ministration to the widows, therefore, was daily. He calls the work of distributing alms "diaconia," that is, ministry. ^A And it was not through malice that the widows were overlooked, but through the negligence of the crowd; wherefore, when the matter was brought into the open for consideration, the cause of the grievance ceased.

VERS. 2. *And the twelve, having called the multitude of the disciples together, said: It is not fitting that we, leaving the word of God, should serve tables.*

VERS. 3. *Therefore, brethren, look out from among you seven men of good report, full of the Holy Spirit and of wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business.*

VERS. 4. *But we will give ourselves continually to prayer and to the ministry of the word.*

VERS. 5. *And this word pleased the whole multitude. And they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolaus, a proselyte of Antioch.*

VERS. 6. *These they set before the apostles; and praying, they laid hands upon them.*

VERS. 7. *And the word of God increased, and the number of the disciples was multiplied in Jerusalem exceedingly; and a great multitude of the priests obeyed the faith.*

^B They themselves do not choose, but they permit the election to the multitude, who were also to receive the benefit of their care and function; and they themselves choose and present them, and by the laying on of hands they ordain, create, and declare them. "It is not fitting that we, leaving the word of God, should serve tables." For necessary things are to be preferred to unnecessary ones. "Men from among you, of good report, full of spirit." He does not simply say they are spiritual, but "full of spirit and of wisdom." For it was a work of the greatest philosophy to bear the complaints of widows. "And praying, they laid hands upon them." See how it is not superfluous; for he does not say "how," but only that they were declared and ordained through prayer. For this is what ordination is—the hand is laid upon the man, but God effects and works the whole business. ^C But what ordination did these seven receive? Was it that of deacons? I judge that their name and dignity was that of presbyters; but they were ordained for this time for this purpose, namely, to minister to the believers in what was necessary. And the number of the disciples was multiplied exceedingly in Jerusalem. He did not

simply say this, but showed how great is the power of almsgiving and of the ordaining of ministers.

EXPOSITIO IN ACTA APOSTOLORUM. - CAP. VI.

^A VERS. 8. Stephanus autem, plenus fidei atque virtutis, faciebat prodigia et signa magna in populo. VERS. 9. Concitati sunt autem quidam de Synagoga, quæ Libertinorum appellatur, et Cyrenensium et Alexandrinorum, et eorum, qui erant ex Cilicia et Asia, qui cum Stephano disputabant. VERS. 10. Qui cum non possent resistere sapientiæ atque Spiritui, qui loquebatur, VERS. 11. Allegaverunt et subornarunt homines, qui dicerent se audivisse illum proferentem verba, quibus et Moyses contumelia afficeretur, et divina majestas læderetur. VERS. 12. Itaque commoverunt plebem et seniores, et Scribas, et adorti eum, rapuerunt et adduxerunt in concilium. VERS. 13. Ac falsos testes produxerunt, qui dixerunt: Homo iste non desinit verba contumeliosa adversus locum sanctum et legem proferre. VERS. 14. Audivimus enim eum dicentem: Jesus Nazarenus hic demolietur hunc locum, et mutabit ritus et instituta, quæ tradidit nobis Moses. VERS. 15. Cumque intuiti essent eum omnes, qui sedebant in concilium, viderunt faciem ejus tanquam angeli.

Vide ut etiam ex illis septem quidam erat eximius atque prælatus. Nam etiamsi ordinatio communis erat, attamen hic gratiam majorem adeptus est. Ac vide ut antehac prodigia non fecerit, sed posteaquam notus et clarus evasit: ut ostendatur solam gratiam non sufficere, sed ordinatione etiam opus esse, itaque incrementum Spiritus factum est; nam etiam in electione ante ordinationem testatur eum Spiritu plenum fuisse; sed dona sunt varia atque diversa.

^B Concitati sunt autem quidam de Synagoga. Concitationem, exacerbationem eorum vocat, et iram. Erant autem diversæ Synagogæ. Qui disputabant cum Stephano. Idcirco disputabant ut cogerent illum aliquid dicere. Ille vero apertius fortasse disserebat, ac legem finem habere dicebat: aut, non dicebat quidem, sed innuebat ac tecte significabat. Nam si plane ac palam dixisset, falsis testibus opus non habuissent. Vide autem ipsum non committere, nec occasionem præbere docendo, sed a disputantibus cogi. Allegaverunt et subornaverunt viros, qui dicerent. Non ipsi disputantes testificantur: statim enim deprehensum et animadversum esset, illos invidia motos calumniari falsumque crimen intentare: sed alios conducunt: ne res videatur esse importuna, contumeliosa atque injuriosa. ^C Nam Deum quidem ob impiam ac crudelissimam cædem non timebant, sed ad hominum gloriam respiciebant. Ac falsos testes produxerunt, qui dixerunt. Ubique falsum testimonium; non enim simpliciter volebant occidere, sed per suffragium et judicii speciem, ut etiam gloriam, ut existimabant, apud homines assequerentur.

they did not fear the wicked slaughter in which they were staining themselves with blood, but they were concerned for the reputation of others. And they brought forward false witnesses who would say—everywhere false witness is leveled—that he was not simply wanting to kill, but that the sentence had been broad, so that they might also damage the reputation, as they thought, of those being killed. But they were not saying "he brings forward," but "he does not cease speaking." For we heard him saying that Jesus the Nazarene... Contumeliously, he says "the Nazarene" destroys this place. They said this also concerning Christ: "You who destroy this temple." For they were worried mostly about the temple. But the accusation and dispute is twofold: whether he is going to change the rites and institutions, and introduce others in their place. ^A And all who sat in the council, looking intently at him, saw his face as the face of an angel. God had made him graceful. For because he was a about to say something, in order that he might immediately strike them with awe by his very appearance, He glorified his face. For there are even faces filled with spiritual grace, lovely to those who love, but awe-inspiring to enemies.

CAPUT VII

VERS. 1. The high priest said: Are these things so?

VERS. 2. And he said: Men, brethren, and fathers, listen: The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran.

VERS. 3. And said to him: Leave your country, and your relatives, and come into the region which I will show you.

VERS. 4. Then having gone out from the land of the Chaldeans, he dwelt in Charran. And from thence, after his father had died, He brought him into this land, in which you now dwell. ^C

VERS. 5. And He gave him no inheritance in it, not even a step for his foot; and He promised to give it to him for a possession, and to his offspring after him, when he had no child.

VERS. 6. But God spoke in this way: that his offspring would be a sojourner in a foreign land, and they would bring them into servitude, and they would deliver them, and they would afflict them for four hundred years.

VERS. 7. And in the nation to which they shall be in servitude, I will judge, said God. ^D

They were not concerned about the wicked deeds by which the divine majesty was injured; but this man—they brought a charge against him of having uttered words by which the divine majesty was injured. And Moses is everywhere fixed in their minds; for the business of God was not so much a care to them as the institutions of Moses. But here, at the beginning, he elevates their opinion, and proves that neither the temple nor the institutions are of any value, and that they will not prevail over the preaching of the Gospel, and that God brings about clever results out of difficult situations. Observe, therefore, through these things, their harangue being woven together...

and how the word of piety perhaps provides that the Holy Spirit is second in dignity from the Son, as one who has his existence from him, and receives from him, and altogether depends on that cause. See how clearly the Great Basil teaches the dogma of the Latins. Indeed, Mark of Ephesus in the Council of Florence, since no other testimony offered itself to him that might respond to this evidence, maintained with great contention that this text had been falsified and interpolated. But what an injustice! For, as John Niger, who had brought it forward, retorted, the codex from which it was taken was of the best quality, brought from Constantinople by Cardinal Cusanus, on parchment, written six hundred years before the Council of Florence, and thus before the rise of the dispute between the Greeks and the Latins on this matter. From whence, then, the suspicion of corruption? But more codices do not have it in this way, Ephesus objected. What of it, if older ones, written before the schism, exhibit the text as we have cited it? Other codices, whatever their number, should rather be said to have been corrupted on purpose by the Photians, with the greater foundation that they were all produced after the rise of the schism, and in some, words favoring our dogma were discovered to have been erased with a knife. Add that this text, as it is cited by us, contains nothing that conflicts with the remaining sayings of the Great Basil; provided, however, that it is read as the Photians read it. For they read it in such a way that it would follow that he remained in doubt whether the Holy Spirit ought to be called second in dignity from the Son and third from the Father: although it is certain that he never doubted in this matter; since both in other places, and especially at the end of the three hundredth epistle, to the canonical women, he says it is a sacrilege to place the Holy Spirit before the Son, or otherwise than in the third order from the Father: which other Fathers also taught. Insititious, therefore, is that *ίows*, "perhaps," which they read after *παραδίδωσιν*, "he delivers." But if this is held as certain, as without a doubt it ought to be, even from this alone it becomes more likely that he added the disputed words; since from this alone it is invincibly demonstrated that his opinion was that the Holy Spirit also proceeds from the Son: for no divine person can be second or third in order or in dignity from another, unless he proceeds from him; certainly Catholic doctors and Fathers recognize no other order in divine things. ^A ...the source of the Holy Spirit. Thus also other Greek Fathers. It is certain, however, among the Fathers, that *πηγή*, "fountain," is the same as *αἴτιος*, "principle." Wherefore also Athanasius himself, in his second oration against the Arians, calls the Father *πηγήν*, the fountain of the Son; and Basil says that the same Father is *ῥίζαν καὶ πηγήν*, the root and fountain, of the Holy Spirit. The same holy Father, in his epistle to Serapion, says that the Holy Spirit *ἴδιον εἶναι κατ’ οὐσίαν τοῦ Υἱοῦ*, is proper according to the substance of the Son; from which it clearly follows that he adhered to our dogma, since in his oration against the Arians he proves in this way that the Son is from God (the Father) and in God. His words are: "Since therefore the Word is proper by nature to the substance of God, he is from him, and in him." But Athanasius's mind is perceived even more clearly from what he says in the fourth homily (according to the Greeks, the third) against the Arians: "For he (the Son) himself, as it has been said, gives the Spirit; and whatever the Spirit has, this he has from the Word." When, truly, the Holy Spirit possesses nature and essence in the first place, who can doubt that Athanasius thought that he received this from the Son? Which Photius attributes to Chrysostom in codex 277: "Christ," he says, "gave us the Spirit who is from him." Anastasius Sinaita, Bishop of Antioch, in the first book *On Right Dogmas*: "And yet the Lord, showing him to exist from himself, breathing on his disciples, said: 'Receive the Holy Spirit.'" Finally, St. Symeon Metaphrastes in the *Martyrdom of St. Dionysius*: "Christ sends into his disciples the Spirit proceeding from him for the guidance of the infidel nations."

^A Abraham departed from the Chaldeans. For it was permitted by the ancestral customs of the Chaldeans, just as it was also for the Medes and Persians, to have intercourse with mothers and sisters; for this reason he circumcised the flesh of the foreskin, renouncing the kinship of the flesh and refusing the unlawful marriages of relatives. Others say that circumcision was commanded to Abraham and his descendants for this reason: that it might be clear that Christ according to the flesh would be from them. For we know that circumcision in the flesh, performed figuratively in the olden days, bore the image of saving baptism, signifying by the casting away of the foreskin the renunciation of birth according to the flesh, and making those who are circumcised children of God. "And he circumcised him on the eighth day." In the first place, Isaac is circumcised on the eighth day; hence [it is the custom] also for the Jews. But Ishmael [was circumcised] when he was thirteen years old; that is why those who are descended from him, the Ishmaelites, are circumcised in this way, as Josephus says. "They sold [him] into Egypt." Having nothing to charge against their brother, but [rather] because he had come for their sustenance, they dealt evilly with him; and without knowing it, they were working with the prophecy and were [even] against their will the causes of his salvation, although after many trials that happened to him, they turned great fear and unbearable shame upon themselves. Although Joseph, bearing it without keeping a grudge, did no harm to them, but also nurtured them when they were starving and made them known to Pharaoh. "And he died, and our fathers, and they were transferred to Shechem." In Shechem were buried Abraham and the patriarchs, which was perhaps called Sychema. For Abraham himself bought it from Emor, that he might bury Sarah there. "And they were placed in the sepulcher." By saying this, he shows that Abraham did not even become the master [of the land] up to the point of his burial. ^B "And as the time of the promise drew near which God had sworn to Abraham, the people grew and multiplied in Egypt." "Until another king arose, who did not know Joseph." This man, dealing craftily with our race, oppressed our fathers, to make them expose their infants, so that they would not be kept alive. In which time Moses was born, and he was comely before God; he was nurtured for three months in his father’s house. "And after he had been exposed, the daughter of Pharaoh took him up and nurtured him as a son for herself." ^C And Moses was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians; and he was powerful in words and deeds. And when his fortieth year was being completed, it came into his heart to visit his brothers, the sons of Israel.

VERSES 17ff.

^A

VERS. 24. *And seeing one being wronged, he defended him, and exacted vengeance for the one being oppressed by striking down the Egyptian.* VERS. 25. *But he supposed his brothers to understand that God gives them salvation through his hand; but they did not understand.* VERS. 26. *And on the following day he appeared to them fighting and urged them into peace, saying, "Men, you are brothers; why do you wrong one another?"* VERS. 27. *But the one wronging his neighbor pushed him away, saying, "Who appointed you a ruler and judge over us?* VERS. 28. *Do you wish to kill me as you killed the Egyptian yesterday?"*

That he says, *The time of the promise was drawing near*, indicates that they had not even increased in those four hundred years, but that the end was about to draw near. For already in Egypt more years than four hundred had passed. But the people were growing and multiplying in Egypt. If that which happened to Joseph is wonderful—that he was sold by his brothers and, having been sold, saved them—this is more wonderful: that the king was feeding him who was going to overthrow his rule. He who was about to be destroyed by the one who had condemned him to death was being educated and reared for the overthrowing of the one by whom he was reared. But that he says ^B that he compelled them to expose the infants so that they would not remain alive, implies that he did not wish to destroy the infants openly. And see by what things the devil attempted to overthrow the promise of God; through these it increased. For Israel was being afflicted, but it was growing and multiplying. For this reason, Moses is received into the royal house and reared and educated, and is again driven into exile; but in exile he is judged worthy to whom that vision might happen, and the moderation and leadership of the people is entrusted to him: thus also He effects that the sold slave should reign where he served. Furthermore, what he says ^C, *asteios*, signifies "urban," used for "graceful" or "acceptable," that is, to God. But his parents bore him, and observed that he was beautiful. For the flower of grace had preceded the age; but having observed his beauty, they spared him, but hid him out of fear of the edict. They were conquered, and under the compulsion of fear they hit upon the idea of casting him out. But they eluded the edict, being moved by mercy, and having made an ark in imitation of that which was made in the time when Noah lived, and having called upon the God of Noah, they cast the child into the river together with the ark, ^D that they might seem to obey the edict, and yet keep the child safe. And while they are casting him, God counsels the daughter of Pharaoh, who was unaware, to go out to the river; she went out, being unaware...

^A and Moses was saved through the symbols and signs of the common salvation of the Church. For the ark was of wood, and the wood was from the water, and it was salvation for him who had been abandoned; and she who took him up was not a Jewess, but from the nations, an Egyptian. And Moses was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians. Neither Moses, nor those with Ananias and Daniel, would have endured to be erudite in and instructed by foreign discipline, had they not been compelled by the necessity and force of their masters. For they made use of it in no matter, unless perhaps someone might say that it was good to learn it for the sake of overthrowing their deceits and impostures. And having struck the Egyptian, he avenged him who was oppressed. Moses did not make away with the Egyptian driven by desire or frenzy, nor overcome by anger, but rather moved by zeal and devotion to God. Whatever is done with zeal for God, even if it be a killing, is not a killing. At any rate, Phinehas, who killed two with one hand and one stroke, was heard, and Phinehas stood and made atonement, and the plague was stayed. But the things which Moses did were an enigma of things unknown. For this which was happening was a sign that God was about, through Moses, ^B to kill the Egyptians, but to save the Israelites. And he thought his brothers understood that God was giving them salvation through his hand. Yet by the very deeds themselves, the protection was being declared; what need was there, then, for understanding? And yet, they did not understand even so. And on the following day, he appeared to them as they were fighting, and sought to reconcile them to peace. He who had shown anger against the Egyptian, see how he speaks with kindness: "Men, you are brothers; why do you wrong one another?" "See who has made you a ruler and a judge over us?" The same words they said to Christ. Such is the custom of the Jews, to do wrong to those by whom they are benefited. ^C VERS. 29. Fugit autem Moyses ob hoc dictum et factus est peregrinus et inquilinus in terra Madian, ubi genuit filios duos. VERS. 30. Et expletis annis quadraginta apparuit ei in solitudine montis Sina angelus Domini in rubo ignis flamma conflagrante. VERS. 31. Quod spectrum Moyses conspicatus admiratus est. Cum autem visendi causa accederet, accidit ad eum Domini vox: VERS. 32. Ego sum Deus majorum tuorum: Deus Abrahami, Deus Isaaci, Deus Jacobi. ^D Moyses autem tremefactus animadvertere et intueri non audebat. VERS. 33. Sed Dominus ad eum, Solve, inquit, calceos pedum tuorum: locus enim, in quo consistis, terra sancta est. VERS. 34. Vidi, vidi inquam, incommoda et miserias populi mei, qui est in Ægypto: ac gemitum

eorum audivi. Itaque ad eripiendum et liberandum eos descendi, et nunc veni, mittam te in Ægyptum.

Fugit autem Moyses. Ac ne hujus quidem fuga oeconomiam, id est, providentiam atque dispositionem Dei exstinxit. Expletis enim, inquit, annis quadraginta, visus est ab eo angelus Domini; quando exsul erat, quando non amplius sperabat, adeo ut etiam filios duos procrearet. Nota autem eum nunc Filium Dei, angelum vocare, quemadmodum etiam hominem. Apparet autem ei non in templo, sed in solitudine ac loco deserto; ac ne in ipsa quidem solitudine, sed in rubo. Ecce etiam dignus judicatus est, qui hanc vocem audiret: Ego, inquit, sum Deus patrum tuorum: ille magni consilii Angelus, id est nuntius. Solve calceos pedum tuorum. Locus enim, in quo consistis, terra sancta est ^B. Locus sanctus erat propter apparitionem Christi, ac multo mirabilior co loco, qui erat in Sanctis sanctorum. Illic enim nusquam sic apparuit. Deinde multa quoque cura atque sollicitudo adhibetur. Vidi enim, vidi inquam, vexationem populi mei.

VERS. 35. Hunc Moysen, quem repudiaverant, cum dicerent: Quis te praetorem et judicem constituit super nos? VERS. 36. Hunc, inquam, Deus principem ac redemptorem misit per manum angeli, qui ei apparuerat in rubo. Hic eduxit eos factis prodigiis ac signis in terra Ægypto, et in mari Rubro, et in solitudine annis quadraginta. ^C 66 VERS. 37. Hic est ille Moyses, qui dixit filiis Israelis: Prophetam excitabit vobis Dominus Deus vester ex fratribus vestris sicuti me: eum audietis. VERS. 38. Hic est, qui fuit in congregatione in solitudine cum angelo, qui loquebatur ei in monte Sina, et cum majoribus nostris: qui accepit oracula viva, quae daret nobis. VERS. 39. Cui majores nostri obedire noluerunt: sed eum repulerunt, et animo suo versi sunt in Ægyptum. VERS. 40. Cum dicerent ad Aaronem: Fac nobis deos qui praecedant nos. Nam Moysi huic, qui nos eduxit de terra Ægypti, nescimus quid acciderit. VERS. 41. Et vitulum fecerunt in diebus illis, et obtulerunt hostiam simulacro, ac suarum manuum operibus delectabantur. ^D

Hunc, inquit, Moysen, qui vitae periculum adiit, qui ab illis fuerat contemptus, quem aversati erant, quem repudiaverant, cum excitasset Deus misit per manum angeli, qui apparuerat ei in rubo. Quem angelum dicit, palam ac manifesto Deum viderat ac nominat. Hic est ille Moyses, qui dixit filiis Israel, Prophetam excitabit Dominus Deus vobis ex fratribus vestris.

sicut me. Just as I am rejected, by those by whom I ought especially to have been honored. Pharaoh wanted to do away with Moses, and he escaped; and Herod [wanted to do away with] the Lord, and He was preserved in Egypt. Each as an infant was plotted against; both gave the law, and neither was obeyed. This is he who was in the congregation, in the wilderness, with the angel who was speaking to him. The passage at hand shows that it does not happen by locality that men become better or worse. For those of whom we speak, being outside of Egypt in terms of place, still remained in it in their disposition, not having turned their minds away from Egyptian customs, as the Gospel also says: "Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also." Many, therefore, who are still on the earth, by storing up treasure in heaven, have their heart there. ^B The transgressor angels, being there, had their disposition on earth, to which it followed that they were cast down to earth. "Who received living oracles." Living oracles of art, whose end was shown through words, or he speaks of the prophecies. For the prophet says: "I will give them statutes that are not good"—these are what he calls living oracles with respect to them. "Make us gods"—he did not say a God, but gods; "And they made a calf in those days." David says this too: "And they made a calf in Horeb." He does not say Horeb simply, but to show the excess of their madness. For where God appeared to Moses, there they made an idol and offered sacrifices to the idol.

^C VERSE 42. "Then God turned and gave them up to worship the host of heaven. As it is written in the book of the prophets: Did you offer to me slaughtered animals and sacrifices during forty years in the wilderness, O house of Israel?"

VERSE 43. "You also took up the tabernacle of Moloch, and the star of your god Remphan, the images which you made to worship them; and I will carry you away beyond Babylon."

VERSE 44. "Our fathers had the tabernacle of witness in the wilderness, as He appointed, who spoke to Moses, to make it according to the pattern and form which he had seen."

VERSE 45. "Which our fathers, having received by succession, also brought in with Joshua when they took possession of the territories of the nations which God drove out from before the face of our fathers, until the days of David."

VERSE 46. "Who found favor before God, and asked to find a dwelling for the God of Jacob."

VERSE 47. "But Solomon built Him a house."

VERSE 48. "However, the Most High does not dwell in temples made with hands, as the prophet says:"

^A VERSE 49. "Heaven is my throne, and earth is the footstool of my feet. What house will you build for me, says the Lord? Or what is the place of my rest? VERSE 50. Has my hand not made all these things?"

The phrase *paréδoke latreúein* ("gave them over to serve"), which means "he allowed," is used here just as it also is in the Apostle: "God gave them over to a reprobate mind"—which means he allowed them to be given over. He says, therefore: "Since the Jews were possessed by this desire to serve the creature rather than the Creator—although he had often forbidden such a purpose through the prophets—as they persisted in it, he allowed them to do as they wished." And the term *éstrepsen* ("he turned") is used for "having turned away from another will." For the will of God signifies one thing, and that which occurs happens by concession. For it was his will—and he had legislated accordingly—"You shall worship the Lord your God, and him only shall you serve." But as they persisted in their impiety, he allowed and permitted it; for he does not desire to be worshipped by necessity, lest he should do injury to free will and to the power inherent in each person. ^B Furthermore, by the phrase "the host of heaven," some suppose he means the angels, just as in the expression "the law given through angels." But he is not speaking of the angels, but of the stars, to which they also offered worship and reverence: such as to the calf, which stood in the place of Lucifer; and to the moon, as the queen of heaven. For this expression is almost always used where there is a discourse about the luminaries and stars.

"Did you offer me victims and sacrifices for forty years in the wilderness, O house of Israel?" Consider: first he introduces them as having offered sacrifices to him, and then to the idols. For before this, the name of sacrifice had never been heard, but only precepts and living oracles. He brings forward this testimony not simply, not ignorantly, and not without cause, but to show that they also had no need of sacrifices, while he says: "Did you offer me victims and sacrifices?" exactly as if he were saying: "You cannot say that by offering sacrifice to God, you were also sacrificing to them; rather, you sacrificed to them first, and that in the wilderness, where I was especially cherishing and protecting you." ^C Indeed, even if I said that the temple would be destroyed and that the institutions and sacrifices would be changed, I have said nothing new. For Moses, on whose account you seem to hold such high opinions and to be so pleased with yourselves for forty years, neither offered sacrifices nor built a temple; nor indeed did David, although you were already possessing by hereditary right the land partitioned for you by lot; and even the prophets declare concerning these things as not being necessary.

But in what way do you pretend to defend and uphold Moses, whom both your ancestors and you yourselves have rejected? "And you took up the tabernacle of Moloch, and the star of your god Remphan." The divine Moses returned to the mountain to receive the law. But those who were of the blood of Israel stood before Aaron and said, "Make us gods." ^D They made, therefore, a calf in the wilderness; and while the calf was the visible idol, they also contrived many others from the individual person. They were addicted, however, more to the worship of the stars; for in addition to the calf, they also took up the tabernacle of Moloch. Setting up a tent...

they established in it a simulacrum which they called Moloch. ^A Now this is a simulacrum of the Moabites: it had a transparent stone on the summit of its forehead in the likeness of Lucifer; and Moloch is interpreted as "their king." Aquila and Theodotion have indeed rendered it this way. It was, moreover, a skillfully crafted image of Lucifer. You took up, therefore, the tabernacle of Moloch—that is, of your king—and what sort of king was this? The star of your god Remphan, which is interpreted as "darkening," or "blinding." They were worshipping Lucifer, therefore, as appearing before the sun's radiance; but to those who worship him, he has become Remphan, that is to say, blindness—not that the star itself caused the blindness, but because the worship of it became the cause of darkening for them. "And I will remove you beyond Babylon." ^B Although the prophet said, "I will remove you beyond Damascus," he [Stephen] here followed the exposition of the Hebrews, who said "beyond Babylon," either because Babylon is the boundary of the region of Damascus, or because the Seventy said "beyond Damascus."

"The tabernacle of testimony was with our fathers in the desert." They had this for this reason, that they might have God as a witness; and he calls it a "tabernacle of testimony," that is, of miracles and of precepts, "as he who spoke to Moses commanded." And so the design took place on the mountain. And this tabernacle was movable in the desert, and was not in one place. ^C Even if it were an angel who spoke to Moses on the mountain, yet he spoke to him in the person of God. And many such things are found in the Holy Scripture. For he says in Exodus that the angel of the Lord said to Moses: "Moses, Moses, do not approach here," and after other things, the angel says: "I am the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham," and other such things.

"Stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears! You always resist the Holy Spirit; as your fathers did, so do you also." ^D Which of the prophets did your fathers not persecute? And they slew those who foretold the coming of the Just One, of whom you have now become betrayers and murderers; who received the law by the ordinance of angels, and have not kept it.

Why, having spoken mildly up to this point, does he here use harsh language? Because he saw that they were not paying attention to what was being said; for you always resist the Holy Spirit.

^A He shows by this that what he himself was saying proceeded from the Holy Spirit, especially since he was about to die; for it is not likely that he was ignorant of this, being full of the Spirit. He uses great, fearless, and abundant freedom of speech, and even the things he said to them were not his own, but the prophets'. "Always," he says, "you resist." When He did not want there to be sacrifices, you sacrificed; when, again, He wants them, you do not sacrifice. Again, when the temple was standing, you worshipped idols; when He wants you to be separated from the temple, you do the opposite. He did not say, "You resist God," but, "the Spirit," for there is no difference between the Holy Spirit and God. You resist just as your fathers did; you also do the same. He shows that the evil in them is greater, inasmuch as it had persisted with them from an ancient origin. Christ also used to do this, since they always boasted and glorified themselves much in the name of their ancestors. Which of the prophets did your fathers not persecute? If your fathers killed those who had foretold and pre-signified, it is no wonder if I too, who preach the One whom they had foretold would come, should be killed by you, who take on great airs and glory much in the name of your ancestors. "Of the coming of that Just One." "Of the Just One," he says, showing that they had killed Him unjustly. For if He was just, those who killed Him are very unjust. And he calls Him just, which not even they themselves could deny. For nowhere did they ever accuse Him of being unjust; for how could they have accused Him, who had no sin at all? He charges them with two crimes, murder and betrayal; for, he says, you have become traitors and murderers. "You who received the law by the decree of angels, and have not kept it," that is, things decreed by angels, or delivered by the One who appeared in the bush. He shows them to be such that they have never been, nor are, nor will be, people who obey God, the angels, the prophets, or the Holy Spirit. ^B

Verse 54. But when they heard these things, they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed their teeth at him.

Verse 55. But being full of the Holy Spirit, he looked up to heaven, and saw the majesty and glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God.

Verse 56. And he says: Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing at the right hand of God.

If they wanted to kill him, how did it happen that they did not kill him immediately? Because they wanted to cover up the crime with a pretext and a veil consistent with reason. For the insult with which they were being affected was not a sufficiently just cause for killing, and in reality, it was not his insult, but the prophet's accusation against them. At the same time, they did not want to appear to be killing him because of the things he had said to them, just as they did not want to appear to be killing Christ for that reason, but for impiety. For they were not content to stain themselves with murder; they were also eager for, and were meditating on, harming His glory. ^D For they feared that if he were killed because of the insult to them,

^A he might become more esteemed. [[And Jesus standing at the right hand of God.]] By this standing, He indicates stability and immobility; furthermore, it was acceptable and agreeable to them, and they admitted and allowed that He should stand at that time.

[Vers. 57.] *At them with a loud voice shouting, they held their ears, and rushed with one mind upon him.* ^B [Vers. 58.] *And casting him out of the city, they stoned him. And the witnesses laid down their garments at the feet of a young man, who was called Saul.* [Vers. 59.] *And they stoned Stephen, invoking and saying: Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.* [Vers. 60.] *And kneeling down, he cried with a loud voice: Lord, do not lay this sin to their charge. And having said this, he fell asleep.*

What they did in the time of Christ, they did also here. Just as He said, "You shall see the Son of God sitting at the right hand," and they, calling the statement blasphemy, rushed upon Him; so also here. But there indeed they tore their garments; here, however, they stopped their ears. And casting him out of the city, they stoned *him*: they did not even wait to conclude the discourse, but stoned him. And yet, if he were lying, they should have dismissed him as a madman; but if he spoke the truth, they should have admired him more. They cast him out of the city and put him to death, just as they did in the case of Christ. *And the witnesses laid down their garments at the feet of a young man.* He calls those witnesses whom they had suborned to bear false testimony against him. ^C By these things he implies two matters: namely, that even those who were seen to be witnesses were more prepared for the murder, since they even set aside their garments so as to be light and unencumbered for the stoning; and that he who was later to be the herald of the world was also himself then assisting in the murder—such a divine and wondrous change, and one not according to the level of men, occurred in him.

The phrase, "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit," served to teach and to show them that he was not perishing.

[[CYRIL.]] Since human nature has been enriched by justification through faith in Christ, and through Him, the blameless state, He has brought in for us this innovation, that our souls no longer run down into Hades as before, but are sent into the hands of the living God. And knowing this, the holy Stephen said, "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit." And the blessed Paul also writes: "So then, let also those who suffer according to the will of God commend their own souls ^D to a faithful Creator."

*And kneeling down, he cried with a loud voice: Lord, do not lay this sin to their charge.* He does not pray, he says, simply, but with attention; for up to this point God had allowed his soul to be in him. See how,

animas 72 suas committant atque commendent. ^A Positis autem genibus exclamavit voce magna: Domine, ne imputes eis hoc peccatum. Non simpliciter, inquit, precatur, sed cum consideratione atque attentione: Nam tantisper animam ei adesse Deus concedebat. Vide autem vocem, et in malis patientiam immensam. Hinc ostendit, ne illa quidem priora, quæ in illos dixerat, iracundiæ furorisque alicujus fuisse: sed ut exacerbaret, convinceret, attraheret, alliceret.

CAPUT VIII

VERS. 1. Cæterum Saulus erat ex iis, quibus probabatur illum interfici. Orta est autem in illo die persecutio magna adversus Ecclesiam Hierosolymitam, atque omnes dilapsi sunt in fines Judææ atque Samariæ, apostolis exceptis.

VERS. 2. Curaverunt autem una funus Stephani viri religiosi, magnumque plangorem ei fecerunt.

VERS. 3. Porro Saulus vastabat Ecclesiam, et in domos ingrediens, trahensque viros et mulieres, tradebat in custodiam.

VERS. 4. Atque illi quidem, qui dispersi erant, quacunque iter faciebant, verbum Dei annuntiabant.

Ipsi, inquit, apostoli non dilapsi sunt, sed erant Hierosolymis. Ubi enim major belli moles erat, ^B illic stare primarios bellatores, in acie collocari, cæterisque exemplum fortitudinis animique præsentiæ proponi oportebat. Curaverunt autem una funus Stephani viri religiosi, magnumque plangorem ei fecerunt. Si religiosi erant, cur plangorem faciebant? Quia nondum erant perfecti: atque alioqui quis non planxisset, tali doctrina, tali præsidio, talibus signis carere coactus, et illum mansuetum lapidibus obrutum, mortuum jacentem videns? Saulus autem vastabat Ecclesiam. Ingens furor, quod et solus erat, et in ædes irruebat: animam enim suam dederat pro lege.

VERS. 5. Cæterum Philippus cum devenisset in urbem Samariæ, prædicabat Christum.

VERS. 6. Attendebant autem unanimiter turbæ quæ dicebantur a Philippo, quod et audirent et viderent signa, quæ faciebat.

VERS. 7. Ex multis enim, qui ab iis opprimebantur, spiritus impuri magna voce clamantes exibant. Multi item paralytici et claudi curati sunt.

VERS. 8. Fuit ergo gaudium magnum in illa urbe.

Non apostolus Philippus, qui recensebatur inter illos duodenos, sed unus de septenis illis, qui delecti erant ad dispensationem viduarum, hic est qui et Eunuchum baptizavit, et Simoni fidei ^C tradidit rudimenta. Et audi ipsum Lucam dicentem: Interfecto Stephano ingens adversus Ecclesiam persecutio orta est, et omnes dilapsi sunt in partes Judææ et Samariæ, præterquam apostoli. Unde perspicuum est apostolum Philippum una cum aliis ^D

^A cum ceteris Hierosolymis permansisse. Facit autem etiam hoc ad demonstrationem. Nam Philippus quidem baptizavit eos, qui in Samaria verbum Dei didicerant: Petrus autem et Joannes apostoli Hierosolymis ad eos profecti, donum Spiritus sancti illis præstiterunt. Quod si hic unus fuisset apostolorum, habuisset utique auctoritatem dandi Spiritus sancti; sed baptizat duntaxat, tanquam discipulus: donum autem ac gratiam sancti Spiritus tanquam rei perfectionem addunt apostoli, quibus hujusmodi donationis faciendæ auctoritas data erat. Alii autem dicunt, idcirco Philippum non superinduxisse Spiritum sanctum super baptizatos, quod diaconus duntaxat esset, ab Stephano nominatus atque promotus, presbyteri autem vel epi- ^B scopi, sicut discipuli Domini, auctoritatem non haberet. Porro diaconum illum fuisse testatur Paulus in regulis, non modo de hoc ipso loquens, verum etiam de Anania, qui ipsum Paulum baptizavit. Cæterum diaconus cum esset, baptizavit primum quidem, quod penuria presbyterorum esset in Samaria: licet autem in necessitate etiam diacono baptizare, ubi presbyter non est, quemadmodum docuit ipse Spiritus, hortatus ipsum Philippum, ut propius accederet ad Eunuchum. Notandum est autem, post baptisma impositis manibus per precationem super baptizatos in nomine Domini Jesu venire Spiritum sanctum. Quamobrem etiam usque adhuc talis ordo servatur.

VERS. 9. Erat autem jam antea in illa urbe vir quidam nomine Simon artem magicam exercens, et ^C admiratione sui attonitæ et obstupefactæ genti Samariæ imponens, qui diceret se esse quemdam magnum.

VERS. 10. Cui omnes tam summi quam infimi auscultabant, dicentes: Hic est potentia Dei illa magna.

VERS. 11. Attendebant autem eum, propterea quod magicis præstigiis atque ludibriis satis multo jam tempore eis attonitis et obstupefactis imposuisset, animosque eorum ac mentes cepisset.

VERS. 12. Cum autem credidisset Philippo annuntianti atque docenti quæ pertinent ad regnum Dei, et nomen Jesu Christi, baptizabantur tum viri tum mulieres.

VERS. 13. Itaque Simon et ipse credidit, et baptizatus frequens et assiduus erat cum Philippo; cumque videret virtutes et signa fieri, attonitus admirabatur. ^D

VERS. 14. Porro cum audissent apostoli, qui erant Jerosolymis, ab Samaria verbum Dei esse receptum, miserunt ad eos Petrum et Joannem.

VERS. 15. Qui cum descendissent illo, oraverunt pro eis, ut acciperent Spiritum sanctum.

VERS. 16. Nondum enim super quemquam illorum ^A erat delapsus: sed baptizati duntaxat erant in nomine Christi Jesu.

VERS. 17. Tunc manus ei imponebant, et accipiebant Spiritum sanctum.

VERS. 18. Conspicatus autem Simon per impositionem manuum apostolorum dari Spiritum sanctum, attulit eis pecunias,

VERS. 19. Ac dixit: Date mihi quoque istam potestatem, ut cuicunque imposuero manus, accipiat Spiritum sanctum.

VERS. 20. At Petrus dixit ad eum: ^B Tuum argentum tecum sit in perditionem: quoniam donum Dei existimasti per pecuniam comparari.

VERS. 21. Non est tibi pars neque sors in ratione hac atque doctrina. Cor enim tuum non est rectum coram Deo.

Observe yet another temptation, that which happened through Simon. For he says that they also thought he had great power; so much were they in that time deceived by magic arts: until Philip, arriving, freed them from the delusion. For Simon used to say to the Jews, "I am the Father," and to the Samaritans, "I am the Christ." But Simon himself also believed, not for the sake of faith, but so that he himself might perform signs. How then did he seem to perform signs? He was giving the appearance of it; perhaps he was even restraining those who were oppressed and vexed by demons. And just as he considered his own art to be a matter of skill, so he imagined the apostles' work to be likewise; and that is why he was offering money. And so that he would not be driven away, for that reason he was constantly ^C and assiduously with Philip.

VERS. 22. Repent therefore from this wickedness of yours, and pray to God, if perhaps the thought of your heart shall be forgiven you.

VERS. 23. For I see that you are in the gall of bitterness and the bond of iniquity.

VERS. 24. And Simon answering said: Pray you for me to the Lord, that nothing of these things which you have said come upon me.

VERS. 25. And they indeed having testified and spoken the word of the Lord, returned to Jerusalem, and evangelized many villages of the Samaritans.

It would be redundant, the "Repent" which was spoken to Simon, if he were evil by constitution, according to the tales of the heretics. For they say that man, being evil by nature, is not capable of change that comes from a determined will. But not in vain ^D is it said: "Repent therefore, and return to health"; therefore he too was of his own power and will, and "pray to God, if perhaps the thought of your heart shall be forgiven you."

^A Thus, when we do what is good, God does this in us through Jesus Christ, that is, using him as a mediator and one who is active. For he who from the beginning worked our salvation, what wonder is it if he also becomes a mediator in the working of virtues, and fulfills the Father's will in us, confirming and strengthening us for the performance of good deeds? Furthermore, when he had said "that is well-pleasing," he added "before him." For then we are truly well-pleasing when we appear good before God, not when we appear so before men. ^B This is what the prophet David also says: "According to the cleanness of my hands before his eyes," and Isaiah: "Take away the evils from before my eyes."

VERS. 22. "And I beseech you, brethren, suffer the word of consolation." Do you see? What he did not write to anyone else, he writes to these. He does not say "of admonition," but "of consolation," that is, of comfort and of an exhortation toward endurance, because his words were directed toward those who were afflicted.

"For I have written to you in few words." Having said so much, he still calls these things brief in respect to the things he desired to say. He is saying to them, as it were, "Even if you are faint-hearted, suffer me, for no one can complain of the length of the things said," which we see happens in those who are faint-hearted. For such people do not tolerate a long discourse.

VERS. 23. "Know that our brother Timothy has been released." They were not so hostile toward Timothy, and therefore he put him forward first. ^C But released from where? Either he was in prison and was released, or he was released from Athens; for he was there. "With whom, if he comes shortly, I will see you." This is sufficient to persuade them to cease from their hostile spirit toward him, if indeed he is prepared to come with his disciple. Perhaps it is likely that this is what happened, and that he departed for Judea from Rome. For he was released the first time under Nero, just as we said in the preface to this epistle.

VERS. 24. "Salute all them that have the rule over you, and all the saints." Observe here with what honor he treats them, since he salutes those who have the rule through their own people. For it was more fitting that he should write to those who have the rule, and through them salute those who are subject to them; but he most prudently takes care of and fosters the weaker ones.

"They that are of Italy salute you." I am so held by my love for you, he says, that I do not only salute you myself, but I also plant such a longing for you in others, that even though they are separated by such a great distance, they love you and for that reason send you their greetings.

VERS. 25. "Grace be with you all. Amen." Because grace is a common thing, he prays for it in common both for those who have the rule and for the subjects. But what is this grace? The remission of sins, purification, the participation of the Spirit. And how will it be with you? If you do not treat it with injury, if you do not unworthy of it...

Philip said: "If you believe with all your heart, it is allowed." He answered and said: "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." ^A And he ordered the chariot to stop, and they both went down into the water, both Philip and the Eunuch, and he baptized him. And when they had come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip. And the Eunuch saw him no more; for he went on his way rejoicing. Philip was found at Azotus, and passing through, he preached the Gospel to all the cities, until he came to Caesarea.

"I pray you, of whom does he say this?" et cetera. The fact that he knew the prophets speak at one time about different things, or about themselves in the person of another—for this his question declares—was a sign of a man truly thoughtful and prudent. "Behold, water; what prevents me from being baptized?" See how it is managed; he is led and instructed. First he reads and does not understand; then he reads the testimony of Scripture itself, where the suffering, the resurrection, and the gift were; ^B then he asks: the interpretation and explanation follow, since Philip had taken the occasion from the prophecy. Furthermore, since zeal, desire, and longing had given him wings, so to speak, he hastens next to baptism. He did not say, "Baptize me," but, "What prevents me?" demonstrating by his question his great desire to attain baptism. "When they had come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip." The Spirit takes him up, making the event more wonderful, ^C and at the same time delighting Philip that he was judged worthy of things such as the prophets, like Habakkuk, had obtained. It is the Spirit and not an angel that takes him away, as before, because the appearance of the angel occurred then to those who were more carnal, while the Spirit came to those who were more spiritual. Furthermore, it was useful for him to be parted from the Eunuch by the rapture, since the Eunuch might have begged and asked for him to depart with him. And if he, not yet called by opportunity, had refused and declined, he would have sent the Eunuch away sad. Thus all things were divinely ordered. Moreover, the Spirit set him down at Azotus, where he was then required to preach the Gospel.

CAPUT IX

He explains the fury of Paul against the faithful and the Church, showing him in the midst of zeal and ardor

^A for that zeal drew him. For the statement of Christ was being fulfilled in him: "They who kill you will think they offer a service to God." For he did not act as the Jews did. By no means. That he acted out of zeal, that is, a fervent passion for God, is evident from the fact that he went even to outside cities; for they would not have cared even about those in Jerusalem. For they were intent only on one thing, to enjoy honors. But he journeyed to Damascus because it was a great and royal city, and he feared lest it be preoccupied by the preaching. Nor does he go to the governor to make a request, but to the high priest and pontiff, because he intended to do everything in accordance with the law. ^B "In order that if he found any of that Way, both men and women, he might lead them bound to Jerusalem." What is "of that Way"? Perhaps those who had believed called themselves this, because it was their faith alone through which we are carried to heaven. Or perhaps Paul called them "of the Way" at that time, perhaps as though disparaging and mocking them; for people are accustomed to call a worthless man one "of the way." He did not seek authority to punish them there, but leads them to Jerusalem, because he wished to act with greater authority. VERS. 3. "And as he journeyed, it happened that he drew near to Damascus, and suddenly a light from heaven shone round him like lightning." VERS. 4. "And falling to the ground, he heard a voice saying to him: Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?" VERS. 5. And he said: "Who are you, Lord?" And the Lord said: "I am Jesus, whom you persecute." (The things which follow here, ^C up to "but arise," are not found in the ancient Greek manuscript.) "It is hard for you to kick against the goad." VERS. 6. "He trembling and amazed said: Lord, what will you have me do? And the Lord said to him: But arise, and enter the city, and it will be told you what you must do." VERS. 7. "Now the men who were traveling with him stood amazed and stupefied, indeed hearing the voice, but seeing no one." VERS. 8. "Now Saul arose from the earth, and with his eyes opened, he saw no one. And so, leading him by the hand, they brought him into Damascus." VERS. 9. "And he lacked sight for three days, and neither ate nor drank." The vision does not occur in the city, but on the journey, in solitude and away from the crowd, because the common people ^D would not have believed, but would even have mocked it, since even there, when they heard the voice, they said that it was thunder. Here, however, the author was weighty and worthy, to whom faith should rather be given, inasmuch as he was reporting what had happened to him. Therefore, not in Jerusalem, nor in Damascus, but on the journey the light shone round him, so that it might not be possible for others to recount the event in different ways; but he himself...

who both knew the vision and had undergone the affliction, could not have his testimony to the narrative abrogated. ^A For this is also what he says when defending his cause before Agrippa. "Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?" Christ does not say to him, "Believe"; but He accuses him, saying, "Why are you persecuting me?" as if to say: "For what small or great injury received from me do you do these things? I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting," meaning to say: "Do not suppose that your war is against men, but against me, who am your Lord." But why did this not happen from the beginning? That it might be shown that Christ had truly risen. For he who was driving Him and did not believe in His resurrection, and was persecuting the faithful with such insanity and fury, by what reasoning would he have believed, had there not been the great power of the resurrection? And why not immediately after the resurrection? That the war against it might be shown more clearly, and that the conversion might follow more divinely. The men who were traveling with him, ^B however, stood speechless, seeing no one. The light shone around all of them, including those who were with him, so that they might bear witness to the vision; but it did not blind all of them, only Paul, so that it might not be considered a common and, as it were, accidental calamity, but might appear as the work of the divine and truly hidden efficacy and providence. But why did those with him not believe? So that they might be credible witnesses to the things concerning Paul. For if they had believed, they would have been thought to bear witness out of favor. But whose voice did those accompanying Paul hear? That of Paul himself answering; the heavenly one, however, he alone heard. Wherefore, here it is said: "But the men who were traveling with him stood speechless, hearing the voice," that is, of Paul; but seeing no one to whom he was answering. ^C But going further, Paul himself says: "Those who were with me saw the light, and were afraid; but they did not hear the voice of the one speaking to me." When his eyes were opened, he saw no one. Paul's eyesight is injured, because the excess of light is accustomed to cause injury. For the eyes have their limits. It is said, moreover, that the excess of voice can make men deaf, stupefied, and astonished. And he was without sight for three days, and he did not eat nor drink. Why did he do this? Because he was greatly displeased with himself that he had persecuted the Church, and he was exceedingly sad and sorrowful, and was supplicating and praying to God that it might be forgiven him.

^D VERS. 10. There was a certain disciple in Damascus, named Ananias, and the Lord said to him in a vision: "Ananias." And he said: "Behold, I am here, Lord."

VERS. 11. And the Lord said to him: "Arise and go to the street which is called Straight, and seek in the house of Judas a man named Saul of Tarsus; for behold, he is praying."

VERS. 12. And he saw in a vision a man named Ananias entering and laying his hand upon him, that he might regain his sight.

VERS. 13. *And Ananias answered: Lord, I have heard by many of this man, how much evil he hath done to thy saints in Jerusalem.* ^A VERS. 14. *And here he hath authority from the chief priests to bind all that invoke thy name.* VERS. 15. *And the Lord said to him: Go, because this man is to me a vessel of election, to carry my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel.* VERS. 16. *For I will show him how great things he must suffer for my name’s sake.* Why is it that to Ananias, who was not a notable or illustrious disciple, the first instruction and healing of Paul—who was to become so great—is entrusted? It is because he was not to be brought up or taught sublime things by men, but by Christ Himself. For even Ananias indeed baptized and healed him, but he taught him naught. That he was not among the very eminent is clear from the cowardice and fear which are implied by his words. For he so trembled at the persecution by Paul, that upon hearing merely his name from the Lord, he was struck with fear and became amazed; and he did not even attend to what was said immediately after, such as that he is praying, that he has seen a vision, that he is blind, and that a benefactor and savior is being ^B sent to him. *And he saw in a vision a man named Ananias.* For he could not see openly, because he was blind. *And here he hath authority from the chief priests to bind all.* Whence did they know this? It is likely that, being in fear, they were anxious and inquisitive, and had learned what was being decreed against them. Observe, moreover, how great was the terror; for he could not even endure to hear the name of Paul before he knew what the matter was. “I fear,” he says, “that he may eventually bring me to Jerusalem.” *Go, for this man is to me a vessel of election.* Not only, He says, will he be a believer, but also a teacher, and he shall use great boldness before the Gentiles and kings; and he shall stand against the Jews. He encourages Ananias by these words, and at the same time touches him with shame, as if He were to say: “Since that man, who is so possessed by and mad with such fury and desire for murder—as if seized by ^C a disease—will suffer all things for me, do you nevertheless not even wish to baptize him?” For this reason He says, *a vessel of election*, and, *he shall carry my name*; because when Ananias had heard that Paul was blind, he rejoiced, and as good as said this in his own words: “It is well; let him be blind; why dost Thou bid me open his eyes? That he may bind again? Or that he may punish again?” He says: “He will not only do no evil, but he will also suffer many things for me.” Rightly did He call him *a vessel of election*, the word showing that malice is not natural; for we are chosen as that which is approved. ^D

^A VERS. 17. *So Ananias went and entered into the house, and putting his hands upon him, he said: Brother Saul, the Lord hath sent me, he that appeared to thee in the way, as thou camest, that thou mayest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost.*

VERS. 18. *And immediately there fell from his eyes as it were scales, and he received his sight, and rising, he was baptized.*

VERS. 19. *And when he had taken meat, he was strengthened. And he was with the disciples that were at Damascus, for some days.*

Observe the obedience following the greater fear. These were not the words of Ananias as someone unbelieving or diffident or skeptical, but as someone fearing and trembling. "Brother Saul, the Lord sent me, who appeared to thee in the way by which thou camest." Immediately he reconciles him to himself in the name of the Lord. And yet, Christ had not told him that He had appeared to him, but he had learned it from the Spirit; and yet, it was not an appearance, but He appeared ^B truly by the things themselves and in actuality. "He who appeared to thee," he says; he did not say, "He who blinded thee," avoiding even mentioning and declining such an upbraiding. "He sent me," he says; "it is not my action; I am a minister of grace and of the benefit." Thus they were accustomed to regard nothing as their own. "And immediately there fell from his eyes as it were scales." Scales fall, which show both the intensity of the inflammation and the certain and indubitable healing. "And rising, he was baptized, and when he had taken meat, he was strengthened." For he had been weakened, both from the journey, and from fear, and from hunger, and from grief. Observe also that he did not see fit to take food before he had obtained great gifts.

VERS. 20. *And immediately he preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God.*

VERS. 21. *And all that heard were astonished, and said: Is not this he who persecuted and destroyed in Jerusalem those that called upon this name? and came hither to this end, that he might carry them bound to the chief priests?*

VERS. 22. *But Saul increased much more in strength, and confounded and confuted the Jews who dwelt in Damascus, affirming that this is Christ.*

"That this is the Son of God." Not that He rose, nor that He lives; but what? Immediately he delivers the complete doctrine: namely, that He is the Son of God; he was immediately a teacher. For he was not ashamed of the change in those things by which he was famous. "But Saul increased much more in strength, and confuted the Jews." For as one who was learned in the Law, he would stop their mouths with the very things that they themselves brought forward, taking them captive and refuting them. They thought they had seen the end of such argumentation, when Stephen was removed from their midst, and caused them no further trouble; and they obtained another more vehement than Stephen. Furthermore, what he says, "affirming," means reconciling and confirming—that is, teaching, explaining, and expounding from those Scriptures which they themselves knew.

^A to the sick and those possessed by demons, and they were healed. 16. Paul in Troas raised the fallen Eutychus from the loft, who had died, saying, "His soul is in him." 18. Paul in Cyprus rebuked the sorcerer Elymas, and the sorcerer himself became blind. 19. As Paul was sailing to Rome, he and all who were in the ship were storm-tossed for fourteen days and nights. When all were expecting to die, the Lord stood by Paul and said to him, "For your sake I have granted life to these," and they were all saved. After Paul left the ship, a viper bit him, and all thought he would die. But when he remained unharmed, they thought he was a god. 21. Publius, the chief man on the island, was suffering from dysentery; Paul, by laying on of hands, healed him, and cured many other sick people.

Journeys of the holy apostle Paul. He began from Damascus, and came to Jerusalem; thence to Tarsus; and thence to Antioch; and again a second time to Jerusalem; and again a second time to Antioch; and thence after being set apart with Barnabas for the apostolate, he descended to Seleucia; then to Cyprus, where Paul also began to be named; then to Perga; to Antioch of Pisidia; then to Iconium; then to Lystra and Derbe and Lycaonia; then to Pamphylia; then again to Perga; then to Attalia; then again a third time to Antioch of Syria; then again a third time to Jerusalem for the sake of circumcision. Then again a fourth time to Antioch. Then again a second time to Derbe and Lystra, where he circumcised Timothy; then to the Phrygian and Galatian region; then to Mysia; then to Troas; and thence to Neapolis; then to Philippi of Macedonia; then, having traveled through Amphipolis and Apollonia, he came to Thessalonica; then to Beroea; then to Athens; then to Corinth; then to Ephesus; then to Caesarea; then a second time to Antioch of Pisidia; then to the Galatian region and Phrygia; then again a second time to Ephesus; ^B then, having traveled through Macedonia, he came again a second time to Philippi. And from Philippi again to Troas, where he also raised Eutychus who had fallen; then to Assos; then to Mitylene; then opposite Chios. Then to Samos, and thence to Miletus; thence, having sent for those in Ephesus, he spoke with them; then to Cos; then to Rhodes; and thence to Patara; and thence to Tyre; then to Ptolemais, and thence to Caesarea; and thence again a fourth time he went up to Jerusalem; and thence he was conveyed to Rome.

^A

VERS. 27. *Sed Barnabas prehensum eum duxit ad apostolos, et narravit eis quemadmodum in itinere Dominum vidisset, et ut ei Dominus locutus esset, et quemadmodum Damasci libere nomen Jesu praedicasset.* VERS. 28. *Et erat in Jerusalem cum iis, ingrediens et egrediens, et libere praedicans nomen Domini Jesu.* VERS. 29. *Loquebaturque ac disputabat cum Graecanicis. At illi conabantur eum occidere.* VERS. 30. *Quod ubi fratres resciverunt, deduxerunt eum Caesaream, et dimiserunt Tarsum.* VERS. 31. *Et Ecclesiae quidem per totam Judaeam, Galilaeam et Samariam pace fruebantur, aedificabanturque et versabantur in timore Domini, et confirmatione atque consolatione sancti Spiritus replebantur et augebantur.* ^B

Barnabas was a man humane, kind, gentle, and mild; this is shown both by this passage and by the things that were afterwards done by him. Perhaps he also knew Paul beforehand, seeing that he was his friend. But to which of the apostles did he lead him? Perhaps to Peter and James, whom he himself says in the Epistle to the Galatians that he saw. Notice, however, that Paul did not approach the apostles, being restrained by his own modesty and sense of shame; but he went to the disciples, as one who was a disciple. Barnabas, however, leads him even to the apostles and recounts what he had seen and what he had spoken with boldness. ^C He spoke and disputed with the Hellenists—that is, with those Jews who spoke Greek. For those others, who were deep Hebrews, could not even bear to see him; nay, rather they even attempted to kill him. When the disciples learned of this, they escorted him to Caesarea; fearing what had happened in the time of Stephen, they safely brought him to Caesarea, and thence to Tarsus, that he might at once teach and be safe in his own homeland. For the Jews were not inflamed with such fury against others as they were against this man. For the other apostles—because they had broken the edge of the Jews' rage against them by the passage of time, and because they had presented and shown themselves to judgment more often, and were held in admiration by the multitude—the Jews even ^D revered and honored. *And the Churches throughout all Judaea and Galilee and Samaria were enjoying peace.* He is about to say that Peter descends from there; therefore, that you might not suspect that this was done on account of fear, he prefaces that the Churches enjoyed peace. For when there was the heat of war, the apostles were staying in Jerusalem; but with peace established, they traversed the other places as well, preaching.

VERS. 32. *Accidit autem, ut Petrus omnia peragrans, descenderet etiam ad sanctos, qui Lyddam incolebant.* VERS. 33. *Reperit autem illic hominem quemdam nomine Aeneam, qui annos jam octo decumbebat in grabato, quod paralyticus esset.*

^A VERS. 34. And Peter said to him: Aeneas, Jesus Christ heals you; get up and make your bed, and he arose at once. VERS. 35. And all the inhabitants of Lydda and Saron saw him, and they turned to the Lord.

Why did he not wait until the man had faith, nor ask if he wished to be healed? Most of all, and in the first place, the miracle took place for the sake of stirring up, inviting, and summoning the common people; for "All the inhabitants of Lydda and Saron," he says, "saw him, and they turned to the Lord." Furthermore, they had not yet provided here any proofs or demonstrations of his own power. Therefore, it was not consistent or even appropriate to demand faith from them, since they did not demand it from that lame man either. Just as Christ, when he began to perform signs, did not demand faith, so neither did they. For in Jerusalem, it is nothing ^B surprising if faith was required first, so that—as it is said—when Peter came, even his shadow might overshadow some of them; for many signs were performed there. Here, however, it is the first time he approaches and arrives.

VERS. 36. Now in Joppa there was a certain disciple named Tabitha, which being interpreted is called Dorcas, that is, a gazelle. She was full of good works and alms which she did.

VERS. 37. And it came to pass in those days that she became sick and died; and having washed her, they laid her in an upper chamber.

VERS. 38. Since Lydda was near to Joppa, the disciples, having heard that Peter was there, sent ^C two men to him, begging him not to delay coming to them.

VERS. 39. Peter therefore arose, and went with them; and when he had arrived, they brought him into the upper chamber; and all the widows stood around him, weeping and showing the tunics and garments which Dorcas used to make when she was with them.

VERS. 40. But Peter, having cast them all outside, knelt down and prayed, and turning to the body, said: "Tabitha, arise." And she opened her eyes, and having seen Peter, she sat up.

VERS. 41. And he gave her his hand and raised her up; and having called the saints and the widows, he presented her alive. ^D

VERS. 42. And the matter became known throughout all Joppa, and many believed in the Lord.

VERS. 43. And it came to pass that Peter remained for many days in Joppa with a certain Simon, a tanner.

"Nomine Tabitha." He sets down her name, showing...

showing that she was worthy of her name, and her deeds matched her name; for she was vigilant and sober, just as a gazelle is. For God in His providence often imposes such names. They laid her, having died, in the upper room; that is, they performed every ^A due office for a corpse. The disciples who were at Joppa sent, fearing lest he be burdened, to ask him to come to them. See their simplicity and Peter’s soul, his humility and condescension. They do not come themselves, as if to summon him; but they ask for him through two, and he comes. But why did they not send for him before she had died? They thought it was not worth while to bother the disciples for such matters, and to distract and hinder the preaching. Therefore he says "before they were dead." And all the widows stood by him, weeping and showing the tunics and garments which Dorcas used to make. She shows her humility in being with them and living among them as one of all the rest, not as we do now. Peter, by casting everyone out, kneeled down and prayed. Why does he cast ^B them all out? So that they would not be confounded by tears, and might not be disturbed. He knelt down. He makes the prayer with intensity; then he takes her; then gradually life and power are introduced. Having called for the saints and the widows, he presents her alive to them, for their relief. See the lack of pride in Peter, how great a work he performed, and yet he resides not with a noble, nor with anyone else of eminence, but lodges with Simon the tanner; he is not ashamed of the lowly, nor does he allow the great to be puffed up. Living he exhibits her, and indeed for their protection and confirmation. See the humble and lowly mind of Peter, who has done so much, yet lodges neither with her, nor any other man of note, but with Simon the tanner, neither spurning nor holding in contempt the lowly and mean, nor allowing the magnates to be puffed up.

CAPUT X

VERS. 1. There was a certain man in Caesarea named Cornelius, a centurion of the cohort called the Italian, ^C

VERS. 2. A pious and God-fearing man with all his family, and one who gave many alms to the people, and prayed to God continually.

VERS. 3. He saw in a vision clearly at about the hour of the day, an angel of God coming in to him, and saying to him: Cornelius.

VERS 4. But he looked at him and, seized with fear, said: What is it, Lord? He said to him: Your prayers and your ^D alms have ascended in memory before God.

VERS. 5. And now send men to Joppa, and summon Simon, who is called Peter.

VERS. 6. He is a guest with a certain Simon a tanner, whose house is by the sea.

VERS. 7. But when the angel, who was speaking to Cornelius, had departed...

^A having called two of his servants and a pious soldier of those who were in constant attendance upon him, ^B VERS. 8. And having explained all these things to them, he sent them to Joppe.

This man is not a Jew, nor of those who were under the Law; but he had already taken up our manner of life. Two even from among them believe, who were endowed with dignity: the treasurer of the Ethiopian woman, and this man. A godly man and one who feared God with all his house. Let us hear, we who neglect our own family and household, that this man was even concerned for his soldiers. A centurion of the cohort which was called the Italian. For it was a great cohort, he says, which was called the Italian. A *speira* is a cohort, which we now call a "Number." For this reason he makes the man known and clear, lest anyone should say that the history of the Scriptures is told falsely. It should be known that a *speira*, or cohort, consists of two hundred soldiers, but a *custodia* of sixty. ^B He saw in a vision manifestly, about the ninth hour of the day, an angel of God entering unto him. He sees the angel for the full assurance of Peter; or rather, not of him, but of others who were weaker. ^C It was the ninth hour, when he was freed from cares, and was in quiet and contrition. Since the Eye of truth and the great Judge saw that the works were great, but dead if faith be lacking, He sends an angel who might compensate the works with rewards, so that those who contended rightly might be crowned with faith. But from the sight a fear entered, yet it was moderate, only as much as to turn and move him; then the words dispelled the fear. Your prayers and your alms have ascended for a memorial before God. See where the alms proceeds: even to the heaven of heaven, and it stands by the royal throne itself. See also the angel first lifting up his mind and raising it to sublime things, and only then saying what he says. And now send men to Joppe, and fetch Simon, who is called Peter: he is a guest with a certain Simon a tanner. In order that they might not go to another, he identifies the man not only by his surname, but also by the place. Whose house is by the sea. The apostles sought out the remote parts of cities, being lovers of solitude and quiet. For what if it happened that there were another? Behold, there is a sign, namely that he dwelt by the sea. He does not state why, lest he should overwhelm him with joy. ^D Having called two of his servants, and a pious soldier. You see, it is not without reason that he says this, that those who were in constant attendance upon him were such men. And having explained all things to them, he sent them to Joppe. Behold his lack of vainglory. For he did not say, "Call Peter to me," but he explained everything so that he might be persuaded. For he did not wish to summon him by the authority of his own rank. Therefore, he narrates the whole matter.

VERS. 9. But on the morrow, as they were on their journey, and

^A as they were drawing near to the city, Peter went up onto the housetop to pray about the sixth hour.

And he became hungry and wanted to taste some food. But whilst they were preparing it, an ecstasy fell upon him, and he sees heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending to him, as it were a great sheet, bound at the four corners, and being let down onto the earth; in which were all the four-footed animals of the earth, and the wild beasts, and reptiles, and birds of the sky. And a voice came to him: Rise, Peter, kill and eat. But Peter said: By no means, Lord; for I have never eaten anything common or unclean. And the voice came to him again a second time: That which God has cleansed, you must not call common. And this happened three times, and the vessel was again taken up into heaven. ^B

Observe how the Spirit brings together the times, and causes this to happen neither sooner nor later. Peter went up onto the housetop to pray about the sixth hour, that is, in private and in quiet, as in an upper room. An ecstasy fell upon him, and he sees heaven opened. "Ecstasy"—as one might say, an exiting, an emotion—signifies also the consternation due to wonder, and the escape of a man who is being led to spiritual things, out of those things which are perceived by the senses. Thus, a certain spiritual contemplation came to him. And a certain vessel was descending to him, as it were a sheet. The prince of the apostles, Peter, had need of a divine revelation regarding the Gentiles; for he did not know that there ^C is no distinction between circumcision and uncircumcision according to faith, nor did he clearly know that the Lord had said that the Gentiles were to be discipled by means of the worship appearing through faith, until He revealed to him the mystery of His hidden counsel through a revelation; having persuaded him both by the example of the sheet and by the grace of the Holy Spirit which was also given to the Gentiles through faith, that there is, regarding Christ, no discrimination or distinction between Jew and Greek. Bound at the four corners, and being let down onto the earth: the four corners signify the four elements; and the vessel that appeared signifies the grosser world, ^D and the diverse animals are symbols of the condition and constitution of men. Man uncircumcised was a symbol of the whole inhabited world; for he had nothing in common with the Jews, and they were all about to accuse him as a transgressor and a violator of the law. The matter is therefore managed by the Spirit, so that he might have a defense against those who were accusing him, in that he also spoke against it; for it was necessary for him to keep the law strictly. So, that they might not accuse him, this is managed. Perhaps it was while he was lying on his knees that he saw the vision.

And the event was divine, both to see from above, ^A and to be in an ecstasy, and to hear the voice resounding from there, and to confess three times that there were unclean things there, and to have them come from there, and to have them drawn back up to that place: it was a great sign of purity. This happens for the sake of those to whom he is about to explain it later; since he himself had heard, "Do not go into the way of the Gentiles" (Matt. 10:5). If even Paul had need of circumcision and sacrifice, much more so then at the beginning of the preaching, when they themselves were weaker. However, he did not pronounce "common and unclean" about everyone, but about those things which the law called common and unclean. But God, handing down the character and pattern of His holy Church, told him to consider nothing common. For all things are pure to him, being received with thanksgiving and the blessing of God. But even if that enigma and mystery pertained to the calling of the Gentiles, so that he should not consider those born in uncircumcision to be common or unclean, ^B nonetheless Peter's discourse did not have its emphasis regarding men, but regarding those things forbidden by the law. That the forms of animals are transferred to the characters of men, we learned from Peter's vision, because in the vessel that was let down from heaven, every form of animal was present: of reptiles, and birds, and four-footed beasts. For the discourse enigmatically pointed to those who were about to be brought to the faith from various sins, that these were they who were likened either to four-footed beasts because of their beastly nature, or to reptiles because of their poisonous disposition, or to birds because of their lightness and instability. And so, snakes are tropologically and allegorically referred to the Sadducees and Pharisees, and the fox to Herod, and horses burning with an insane appetite for mares to those who are lustful and given over to pleasure; sheep to those men who are simpler than others; kids to those who are accustomed neither to communicate nor to share; hedgehogs to the rich, whom the Lord said choke the word with their own thorns and make it unfruitful. And the voice again for the second time to him: "What God has cleansed, do not you call common." The voice indeed appears to be spoken to him, but in reality, it is all spoken to the Jews. For if the teacher is rebuked, much more so are they. ^C

Vers. 17. Moreover, while Peter was hesitating within himself what the vision he had seen might portend, behold, the men who had been sent from Cornelius, having inquired after the house of Simon, stood at the gate.

Vers. 18. And having called someone out, they asked whether Simon, who is surnamed Peter, was lodging there.

Vers. 19. And while Peter was persevering in thinking about the vision, the Spirit said to him: Behold, men are seeking thee. ^D

^A If this has happened, and they are nevertheless scandalized and offended, if this were not so, what would not have happened? But as to what he says, "That he might arcess thee into his house," he says he did not send as one despising, but he was commanded to do so; do not, therefore, despise or scorn him. Rightly, therefore, he first welcomes the men kindly, as they were weary from the labor of the journey, and receives them with hospitality, and thus wins them over and obliges them to himself. Furthermore, that certain men from Joppa should accompany him happened by divine providence, so that they might be witnesses thereafter, when Peter would have need of clearing and defense.

At Cornelius, having called together his kinsfolk and close friends, was awaiting them.

Vers. 25. And as Peter was about to enter, Cornelius met him, and falling at his feet, worshipped him.

Vers. 26. But Peter raised him up and lifted him, saying: Arise, for I myself am also a man.

Vers. 27. And speaking with him, he entered, and finds many gathered together.

The man was famous, and living in a famous city. "Having called together his kinsfolk and necessary friends." Truly, this was the mark of a God-fearing man, to make his close friends participants and sharers of all such good things offered. He rightly called his "necessary" friends, those whom he always trusted, since the struggle for him was concerning such matters. And his friends and kinsfolk also appear to me to have been entertained and received at a banquet by him. ^B And see how he believed completely that Peter would come, because he did not see the angel in a dream, but while awake and in the daytime. But Peter lifted him up, saying: "Arise, for I myself am also a man." With this voice he was both teaching others, giving thanks to God, and showing the humility of his own soul. But mark, before all else he teaches them this, that they should not conceive or think anything grand about themselves.

Vers. 28. And he said to them: You know how heinous and not lawful it is for a man who is a Jew to join or approach a foreigner; but God has shown me that no man should be called common or unclean.

Vers. 29. Wherefore also I came without refusal when I was sent for. I ask, therefore, for what reason you have sent for me?

Vers. 30. And Cornelius said: Four days ago, he says, ^C until this hour I was fasting, and at the ninth hour I was praying in my house; and behold, a man stood before me in shining raiment.

Vers. 31. And he says: Cornelius, thy prayers are heard, and thy alms have come up in remembrance before God.

Vers. 32. Send therefore to Joppa, and call for Simon, who is surnamed Peter: he is lodging ^D with one Simon a tanner by the seaside: who, when he is come, shall speak unto thee.

^A Ver. 33. Therefore I sent to thee immediately: and thou hast done well in that thou art come. Now therefore all we are present in the sight of God, to hear all things whatsoever are commanded thee by God.

You know that it is not lawful, etc. He discourses concerning the philanthropy of God toward men, and shows what great things God has bestowed upon them. At the same time, he speaks of great things with modesty. For he did not say, "Men, whom we, considering (it) unworthy to associate or join with, come unto you," but, "You know that God has commanded me, that I should not call any man common or unclean, or to approach one of another nation; and God has showed me that I should call no man common or unclean." It is to be noted that the same God permitted the Christian people that they should call no man common or unclean, but live with them, as those who have hope, that they may believe in Christ. Why then do you ask me why you sent for me? Peter had heard the whole thing from the soldiers, but he wishes them to confess it first and to be held accountable to the faith. Being at the ninth hour, he says, praying. ^B This is it: it seems to me that he has fixed the time of life most accurately, and on certain days. For he said, "From the fourth day." See how great a thing is prayer! When he gave himself to prayer, then the angel appears to him. This is one day; and they went that were sent by Cornelius, one; and they came, one; and at the fourth, he appeared, about the third hour after he had prayed. And behold a man stood before me. He does not say, "An angel," but, "A man," and is thus humble. "See how his mind is awakened; see how worthy he was of all these things. Now, therefore, all we are present in the sight of God." He did not say, "In the sight of a man," but, "of God." Thus one must attend to the servants of God.

^C Ver. 34. Then Peter opened his mouth, and said: In truth I perceive, that God is no respecter of persons.

Ver. 35. But in every nation, he that feareth him, and worketh justice, is acceptable to him.

Ver. 36. God sent the word to the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ, who is Lord of all.

Ver. 37. You know the word which hath been published through all Judea: for it began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached,

Ver. 38. Jesus of Nazareth: how God anointed him with the Holy Ghost, and with power, who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him. ^D

BONIFACE FINETTI'S PREFACE TO THE THIRD VOLUME OF THE ORDER OF PREACHERS OF THEOPHYLACTUS

PREFACE. When those who might have compelled me by their almost authoritative command had signified that they wished me to take upon myself the care of editing this third volume, I judged that this labor should by no means be declined, especially since those who could have forced me by their own command chose rather, out of their extraordinary kindness, to persuade me to undertake this duty with reason; saying that it befitted no one more than me, who had undertaken the translation into Latin of the unpublished Works of Theophylactus, of which the greater part of that volume consists.

When, therefore, I had applied my mind to entering upon that which I could scarcely have refused without guilt, I easily understood that a part of the task I had assumed was to write a preface for that same volume, by which I might render to the readers some account of the works it contains and of the labor I have expended upon it. In which matter, this, first of all, seemed to need justification: that this third volume of Theophylactus is perhaps being brought to light much later than had been hoped; unless the things I must say below should relieve me of that labor. For from them it will be made plain and certain that this delay was not caused by anyone's negligence, but by the desire to handle the matter better. For since most of the works which this volume comprises were either very rare or entirely unpublished, and some even discovered very recently, it was necessary that more time should be spent in collecting them (which could only be accomplished through the work of others) and in preparing them for the press than was thought. It was therefore necessary to interrupt the commenced printing of this volume for some time.

But so that the matter might not remain entirely and altogether suspended in the meantime, and so that the expectation of learned men might not be drawn out more than is fair, the skillful managers of this edition have seen to it that the fourth volume, which will also be the last, be submitted to the press, so that the later the scholars receive this third one, the sooner they will be receiving the last volume; the printing of which, since it has already progressed far, we can certainly promise will be brought to light in a few months from now. The benevolent reader will surely bear this short delay with an all the more equitable mind, the more pleasure he is about to perceive from the reading of this volume, both on account of the extraordinary excellence of the works contained in it, and because of their remarkable variety, in which this volume excels those, especially, that have already been published. For whereas those exhibited only exegetical works, this one includes exegetical, oratorical, sacred, profane, historical, political, and dogmatic works in a truly not unpleasing mixture, as is evident from the catalog of the works themselves, which follows. [index: entries preserved] Since, however, some things must be premised about all of these, so that each one may approach their reading better prepared, I will divide this Preface into as many parts as there are sections in this volume.