653 SPURIA. MONITUM A 651 This oration, says Savile, I have drawn from the faith of a manuscript codex in the library of New College, Oxford, nor was there any other copy available; hence it happens that many things remain to be corrected. But I recognize both the dogmas and the doctrine here as Chrysostomic; however, in the style there is much disparity. Therefore, I leave it among those [a] things which are in doubt. My friend Hales says the oration is certainly very elegant, and one which compensates for the disparity of style with equality of genius and doctrine. He is certainly wrong to call it a very elegant oration, which, especially from the middle to the end, is entirely contorted and full of roughnesses; indeed, it abounds with loquacity and repetitions that occur to the point of nausea. It is entirely alien to the style of Chrysostom.
UPON THE CANAANITE WOMAN, AND UPON PHARAOH, AND THAT IT IS NOT OF HIM WHO WILLS, NOR OF HIM WHO RUNS, BUT OF GOD WHO SHOWS MERCY (Matt. 15. Rom. 9, 16)
1. Even if that evening tumult disturbed us, the eagerness of all has gladdened us. For I was not looking at the disorder of the disturbances, but at the zeal of the listeners; and I was seeing a kind of marketplace and popular noise, but a divine and virtuous zeal. So one might say that the hands were the hands of Esau, but the voice was the voice of Jacob. For the noise was popular, but the zeal was divine. One must not be at all distracted by the clamor of those eager, but look to the zeal of the listeners. For even the Canaanite woman was shouting at the Savior, but He did not look at the turbulence of the shouting, but at the earnestness of her mind. Therefore she cried out, as you have just heard, following in the Lord’s footsteps: "Son of David, have mercy on me" (Matt. 15.22). Oh, the faith of the Gentiles! Oh, the ingratitude of the Jews! The Canaanite, who was cut off from the Israelite race, who was neither reared in the Law nor lived with prophets, preaches the truth, saying: "Son of David, have mercy on me." But those who were reared in the Law, and heard the prophets, denying the truth, uphold falsehood, saying: "We do not know him; he is a Samaritan, and has a demon." Oh, the faith of the Gentiles, or the ingratitude of the Israelites! See how God and Lord of all honors the race. "It is not good to take the bread of the children, and to cast it to the dogs" (Ibid. v. 26). He calls the Gentiles dogs, and the Israelites children. But the honor is turned back by the people; those who are honored bring dishonor, and those who are dishonored worship. Though called children, they do not accept the benefit, but the Canaanite, being named a dog, does not withdraw from the benefactor. B For this reason the Savior called the woman a dog, not to insult her, but to reveal her disposition, that the Gentiles, even while insulted, do not withdraw from the benefactor, whereas Israel, even when benefited, denied the Savior. "Son of David, have mercy on me." And He who hears everyone is silent, not rejecting the supplication, but manifesting the faith more brightly. Canaanite by race, but Abrahamic in faith. "Son of David, have mercy on me." And He who before the shouting of mouths listens to the supplications of souls, is silent and endures; and to the apostles, He seemed to be some harsh person, rejecting such a great supplication. And the disciples said to Him: "Dismiss her, because she is shouting behind us." Are you, then, Peter, or you, Andrew, or Philip, more philanthropic than the Savior? And has the plea bent you, but the supplication not moved Him? Are you judging by appearances, while I judge by thoughts? I am putting off and delaying the grace, so that I may expose this bright faith. "I was not sent except to the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (Ibid. v. 24). Was He, then, a shepherd only of the Israelites, and not Lord, and shepherd, and administrator, and provider of the whole earth? He did not say, "I am not the shepherd of the others," but, "I was not sent for this," not saying this truly, but through this guise revealing her faith. For if you were not sent elsewhere, but only to the sheep of the house of Israel, how is it that you send the apostles to the ends of the habitable world, saying: "Go, make disciples of all nations, baptizing them"? If you were not sent to the other sheep, but only to those of Israel, how were you saying to the apostles, "And I have other sheep, which are not of this fold, and I must gather them, that there may be one flock, and one shepherd" (John 10.16)? C So He is not speaking to her about the reality of the matter for now, but to the testing of her soul. "I was not sent." He denies the matter, and the woman, in her pleading, does not flee; He shakes off her supplication, and she does not shake off her worship. Truly, the Canaanite is an image of the Church, which is tested in dangers and does not deny the Lord, which endures a thousand winters and keeps her eye fixed upon the harbor of faith, which is buffeted by a thousand waves of heretics, and is not shaken from her steady faith. Compare the ecclesiastical faith and the Jewish ingratitude. The Jews, while eating manna, murmured; the Church, while fasting, gives thanks to the Lord. Those who were honored are ungrateful; those who are persecuted for Christ give thanks. Which servant do you accept, if you are a master? Of two servants, which do you accept, the one who is ungrateful after the benefits, or the one who is grateful in his disciplines? Therefore, the Canaanite is an image of this Church, which is dismissed and does not deny the Lord. She worships Him, saying: "Lord, help me." Since she first said, "Son of David, have mercy on me," thinking that she had offered a plea lesser than what was worthy, she recalls the first voice, and covers the first with a second gratitude. For she no longer calls Him "Son of David," but "Lord," saying, "Lord, help me." And not even then does He answer, but the apostles act in a crowd at her voice, saying, "She is shouting behind us." God delays, looking toward faith, and says to her: "It is not good to take the bread of the children, and to cast it to the dogs," calling the Israelites children, not so much honoring them as rebuking them for their ingratitude. For He who today calls the Israelites children is the Son of Him who said, "I have begotten and exalted children, but they have neglected me" (Isa. 1.2). The Canaanite is called a dog, and she bears the insult with grace. Furthermore, I think and believe that in this insult He placed the image of loyalty, the dog, showing the loyal nature of the animal. A dog, suffering a thousand things, does not depart from the master's house; a dog, when it sees the master’s steps, is silent; when it sees the master’s servants, it is quiet; but when it sees strangers, it is torn, it barks, it does not keep still, looking at none of the others. Do you see how the Jews see a thousand blasphemies against God, and are not disturbed? See a Christian hearing the blasphemy of a heretic or another error, and immediately they are moved, barking, shouting against the adversaries. A Christian cannot bear to see an alien face, but like a dog around the master's gate, he barks. And the philosophers outside the faith embraced the name of dogs because of the loyalty of the animal, and they were not ashamed of the name, but looked to the loyalty of the nature. That God accepts the one who barks for the sake of piety, and blames the one who is silent and does not bark for the truth, he says regarding the Israelites: "All their dogs are speechless, unable to bark." A soul that is loyal to the Lord, and barks on behalf of the Lord, is called a dog. D
and it is not imputed as a reproach. A dog that is raging has only this sign of its fury, that it opposes its teeth to its master; for a dog, while it is loyal, never goes mad against its master. Nothing else proves the fury of the Jews except that they barked against the Savior, because they rejected as a stranger the God whom it was proper to acknowledge as Lord. Therefore, He accuses them, saying: "Many dogs have surrounded me." And what kind of dogs? "A gathering of malignant ones has beset me." (Ps. xxii, 16). B But the Canaanite woman, even though she is called a dog, does not bark, but receives it with thanksgiving. "It is not good to take the bread of the children, and to cast it to the dogs." But she, fashioning kindness for herself out of the insult, says: "Yes, Lord; for the puppies also eat of the crumbs which fall from the table of their masters." (Matt. xv, 27). Do not pity me as a daughter, but pity me as a puppy: I accept the insult, Lord. For an insult uttered by You is more precious than any honor, superior to any glory. In order, therefore, that the Savior might finally show that He did not call her a dog by way of abuse, when He exhibited her grateful spirit, He answers: "O woman, great is your faith; be it done to you as you will." (Ibid. v. 28). I do not know how to praise that faith which the Savior called "great." C For what praise could I devise greater than that which the Savior uttered? Let us leave the voice intact, lest we dishonor it with our own praises, lest we make small that which is great: human praise minimizes things, but the voice of God bears witness to the things themselves. Whose praise, he says, is not from men, but from God. (Rom. ii, 29). Why, moreover, did the demon-possessed call the Savior to their help: "Son of David, have mercy on me"? Does the kinship of David have power against demons? Whence that cry to the one prophesying, "Son of David, have mercy on me"? Whence does it come that the Canaanite woman, crying out for her demon-possessed daughter, should say: "Son of David, have mercy on me"? D It is recorded in history that David, playing the lyre, drove the demon away from Saul. Since, therefore, David drove away demons by the power of music—music, I say, not human, but divine, and played by the Holy Spirit—they, nodding to his kinship, say: "Son of David, have mercy on me." But one must not linger on that voice, but from it one must be led to something more worthy. "Her daughter was healed from that hour." (Matt. xv, 28). For the voice of God uttered healed the girl: the voice of the Savior casts out demons; it repels whatever is adverse.
b. But we went off of necessity, not as far as we ought to have said, but as far as we were able. Since we have done as much as we were bound to do, let us proceed to fulfill our promises, so that by delaying we do not render the desire of our listeners more dull. It is time, therefore, that I undertake to pay what was promised, and satisfy my debt to you, my listeners. We began to treat of Pharaoh, how, for instance, God hardened his heart, and also regarding that saying: "He has mercy on whom he will, and whom he will he hardens." (Rom. ix, 18). Consequently, you will say to me: "Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?" (Ibid. v. 19). It is necessary, therefore, both for those who undertake to explain divine sentences and for those who hear them, not to come immediately to an interpretation, lest they seem to force the meaning, but to repeat the argument of evangelical grace from a higher place, and thus, through the connection, to deliver a clear and unconfused speculation of the matter. Therefore, to begin briefly. This saying is contained in the Epistle to the Romans. Paul, writing to the Romans, besides having many other admonitions, especially strives to emend a matter that would produce much perturbation and dissension; but how, lend your ear. A At Rome there were many Jews, and many Gentiles also, who had believed in the Savior; and there was a fight and tumult between them, not out of zeal for piety, but out of a contention for primacy. Those who had come from the Gentiles wished to hold the first places; the Jews claimed the same for themselves. The latter held up their paternal nobility, and said to the Gentiles: "We are superior to you; for our pious religion is more ancient; our patriarchs are Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; the patriarchs, that is, for all, and the prophets: we have our ancient nobility; you have received a recent benefit." The Gentiles who had believed spoke in opposition: "Those who have denied Christ cannot hold the first places, nor can those occupy the first places who fixed the cross and fought against God; you were rejected, and all the nations were called. We snatched the benefit, you insulted the benefactor." B Then the Apostle, seeing much perturbation and a great tumult stirred up at Rome, and thinking that a huge evil had arisen in a great city, which could be poured out through the whole world, suppresses the contention, as if by its root, lest from this dissension creep over the whole earth; and placing himself in the middle, he conducts himself not as a judge, but as a peacemaker, knowing that contention does not build up pious religion, but contention destroys all pious religion. And just as those who wish to settle a fight and tumult do not rebuke one party, lest they irritate the other more; but they repress both, so that from such a correction they might prepare an easier outcome for their counsel: so the divine apostle, constituting himself a medium among the combatants, suppresses the rumor of both the Jews and the Gentiles; and first he lashes the more impudent party, namely, the Jews. C For they were all impudent dogs, who could not bark. The race is certainly impudent; I do not say by race, but by morals. It is not ignoble birth that is impudent, but the morals are ignoble. He attacks this part, therefore, or rather he assails that former part as impudent, to whom Isaiah says: "Your neck is iron, and your forehead is bronze" (Isai. xlviii, 4); he knew them to be so impudent: and the prophet Jeremiah saying: "A harlot's brow was yours, O Israel, because you were impudent against all" (Jer. iii, 3). This impudent part, therefore, the divine apostle strikes first, namely, the Jewish part; and because they brought forward the antiquity of their ancestors Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, he shows them that one ought not to glory in race, but in morals. D For which reason he began this discourse, saying: "Not all those who are from Israel are Israel" (Rom. ix, 6). Because you bring forward race, and do not exhibit morals, "Not all those who are from Israel are Israel." This to the Jews, but "Nor because they are the seed of Abraham are all children; for it is written: 'In Isaac shall your seed be called'" (Ibid. v. 7). If race creates piety, nothing prevented Ismael from being placed before Isaac: for he was the son of Abraham, and prior by birth. "Not all, therefore, who are from Israel, are Israel: nor because they are the seed of Abraham are all children of Abraham: but 'In Isaac shall your seed be called.'" And Paul adds the interpretation thus: "Not the children of the flesh are counted for faith, but the children of the promise, these are the children of God" (Ibid. v. 8). But because the Jews resist the saying, and add another piece of impudence against the divine preaching, and say that Ismael was rejected because he was born from a bondmaid; but that Israel was preferred because he was born from a free and noble woman, finally he introduces the image of Ismael and says: "Not only Isaac, but also Rebecca, having a bed from one father of ours. For when they were not yet born, nor had done anything of good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might remain; not of works, but of the one calling, it was said to her: 'The greater shall serve the lesser'" (Ibid. v. 10-13). Because you bring forward the ignobility of the race to the contention, I show you two branches separated, sent out from one root; I show you the one who had not believed being admitted, but the one who had believed not at all. For nature does not harm him, whom purpose does not harm, so that you may learn it was said: "The greater shall serve the lesser, as it is written: 'Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.'" And Paul brings this forth from the divine voice. For God says through the prophet: "Was not Esau Jacob's brother? Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated" (Malach. i, 2, 3). Because you bring forward race, he says, what did the race profit Esau? Because the nobility of the fathers is held in honor, what more did he derive
A from his father’s nobility? Was he not Abraham's grandson? Was he not Isaac's son? Was he not from the same mother? Was he not from the same freewoman? But the race did not profit him, when his character cast him out. Immediately he adds: "What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? (Rom. ix, 14)." Far from it. He has pursued the history up to this point; further on he arms himself against the contradiction that arises. For since many, while an examination of another theory is taking place, take the things inserted by the way to use for slander, the Apostle looked not only to the contentiousness of those striving then, but also to the strife of those rising up after them, either because of the Manichaeans, or because of the heretics or Gentiles who were destined to be armed against this statement; and having anticipated them, he prepares the weapons B so that he might store up equipment for you for the heat of the war. For God does not only see present things, but much more does He foresee things which are to come. For this reason, the word of God is called a weapon and a sword. Isaiah says, "He made me as a sharp sword, and in his hand he hid me; he made me as a choice arrow, and in his quiver he concealed me (Isai. xlix, 2)." Why a sword and an arrow? The sword is armed against those standing near, but the arrow is sent even against those standing far off. Since, therefore, the word of God both quelled the contentions then and cut off the cavils destined to arise, it is called a sword, fighting against those nearby, and an arrow, sent against the opponents standing far away. But so that we might not cut off the sequence of the subject C, let us first say those things, and we shall come to these. When he had restrained the Jews from thinking highly of themselves because of their race, he immediately touches also upon those who came from the Gentiles, and says to them: "Do not boast against the root. For since you are a wild olive tree, you were cut out of that which is by nature a wild olive tree, and were grafted into a good olive tree (Rom. xi, 18, 17)." For he who reads the Epistle with precision finds great the solution; but let us proceed to the brief points. He calls the Israelite race the good olive tree, and those of the nations, having been cut out of the wild olive tree and grafted into the good olive tree, he restrains. He calls the race of Abraham the good olive tree, and those who came from the nations and tasted of the sweetness of Abraham and the prophets, he restrains from high-mindedness. For has Israel, he says, been grafted D into you? Did you receive Israel? Did he not receive you? And were the apostles not from you? Was the Savior from the Jews, not from the Gentiles? From the Jews. Why then do you ignore the root of good things, and pride yourself? Do you not know that, being a wild olive tree, you were grafted into a good olive tree? But you will say to me by all means: "You take up again the battle of the one resisting, that these were broken off because of unbelief, but I was grafted in because of faith." Well. "Do not be high-minded, but fear. For if God did not spare the natural branches, see that He might not spare you either (Ibid. v. 20, 21)." See the apostolic voice, see the apostolic sinew, see how he cuts out the contention by the roots, both stopping the mouths of those and shaming these. "Do not boast. If you do boast, you do not bear the root, but the root bears you (Ibid. v. 18)." Since those from the Gentiles were boasting against Israel, as if those had been cut off because of their war against God regarding Christ, but they themselves had been called back because of their knowledge, he says to those who were so bold: "You do not bear the root, but the root bears you." But you will say, "They were broken off so that I might be grafted in." I agree with your grateful voice, I accept your grateful answer. Well. But "Do not be high-minded, but fear. For if God did not spare the natural branches, see that He might not spare you either." He cast out the one who had nobility by nature because of unbelief; because you are arrogant, He will cast you out because of the same ingratitude. And see how he casts out contentiousness through fear. "Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on those who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, if you continue in goodness; otherwise you also will be cut off (Ibid. v. 22)." See how by fear he cuts off contention, and establishes the believer not to contend, but to be anxious. Why do you scrutinize an alien race? Contend for your own life, strive how you may please the Benefactor, do not lie against your nobility through your ways. Then he says to those from the Gentiles—for indeed the ones from the Gentiles used to bring this forward: "Paul was sent to us, not to you Jews, but as a herald to the nations." Regarding this voice again Paul fits a medicine of salvation of piety, and says: "Do you boast in me? Yes; I am your teacher, and not of the Jews. But learn the precise fact. For I do not want you to be ignorant, brethren, that insofar as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I glorify my ministry (Rom. xi, 13)." What is, "I glorify"? "I commend my ministry, commending the Gentiles." Why commending? "If by any means I may provoke to jealousy my own flesh, and save some of them (Ibid. v. 14)." I admire you, he says, so that I may provoke those to jealousy. And having used such steps, Paul puts down the contention that is burning, and introduces the truth shining; he cuts off the things of contention and introduces the things of harmony. Let us come to what is proposed. A "What shall we say? Is there unrighteousness with God? Far from it. For He says to Moses: I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion (Rom. ix, 14, 15)." Paul does not make this voice from his own person; for it is a sequence of the argument. Paul, therefore, embodies an objection from the person of those in conflict. "What shall we say? Is there unrighteousness with God? Far from it," saying, "I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion." The objection did not take up the whole sequence; but the "Far from it" is a parenthesis. For before solving the contentiousness, he immediately checked the blasphemy. So that no one, while he examines the meaning, might anticipate and pass judgment on God, like a wise physician he interposes in the middle, "Far from it," so that by the prohibition of the blasphemous, he might stop the truth from being blasphemed. The one resisting says this: "Regarding Jacob he said: 'Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated;' and to Moses He said, 'I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.' B If He has mercy on whom He wills, and hardens whom He wills, why does He still complain? For if He himself works this, and He himself prepares this, why does He demand an account from me, of the things he himself works?" This is the power contained in the whole contradiction. "For He says to Moses: I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion." See then how, as if from another, the one resisting, as if gathering from a syllogism, added: "Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated." And he added also another voice: "Whom He wills, He has mercy, and whom He wills, He hardens." So, as one having gathered the reasoner, the opponent says these things: "So then [it is] not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy (Ibid. v. 16). If therefore whom He wills, He has mercy, and whom He wills, He hardens; if whom He wills, He loves, and whom He wills, He hates, why do you reproach me? Vainly then do I bring piety, vainly do I run towards the truth. For [it is] not of him who runs, nor of him who wills, but of God who shows mercy." All these things are from the person of the one objecting. And the Apostle does not hesitate, therefore, to resist him strongly, not wishing to confirm the contradiction, but to dissolve all the suspicion of the nations. "So then whom He wills, He has mercy, and whom He wills, He hardens. He will say therefore to me: Why then does He still complain? For who has resisted His will (Ibid. v. 19)?" Paul makes the beginning of his answer, saying: "Nay but, O man, who are you that replies against God (Ibid. v. 20)?" Herein there is not a solution of the contradiction, but first indignation against those who dare to dispute with God. For to stop the mouth of the objector was not the act of one solving the question, but of one increasing the difficulty. "If you reproved me for saying just things, I remain silent, and I bear the authority. Why then do you reproach, and [yet] not persuade?" But first he stops the mouth of the boldness of human rashness, and of the one daring and in every way striving to receive an account from God of the things being done. "Nay but, O man, who are you that replies against God?" And taking a common example (for it is necessary also from common custom to establish the thoughts), as if someone saw a master striking his own servant, and stepping into the middle, he said, "Why do you strike?" And he, reaching out the master's authority, said, "And what is it to you? Do I not have power over my own servant? Is he not mine? Is he not subject to my authority?" (These are the deeds of one manifesting authority, not showing the sequence;) and toward the one resisting, the indignant one immediately says, "What is it to you?" Whenever, however, he spends his anger and restrains his own indignation, having come to gentleness, he then makes a defense to the one reproaching: "But so that you may not judge me, O man, that I struck out of season, learn the things that were dared: this
A man represents his own person, but he takes another's as a fellow-combatant, that he may not set a servant's person against his master. And you, being a mortal man, do you compare yourself to the Immortal? Who are you, O man, who answer B back to God? Do you curiously scrutinize the times, you a mortal, the Immortal? You who rot in a grave, [do you challenge] the One who dwells in heaven? You who derive sustenance from the earth and return to the earth, do you demand an account from Him who lives for all time? O man, who are you who answers back to God? Has the potter no power over the clay, to make one part a vessel for honor, and another for dishonor?" (cf. Rom. IX, 20-21). "Yes," he says, "you restrain me well, but the solution to the problem is not in this. For while you restrain, you increase the accusation." For he said: "Has not the potter power to make one vessel for honor, but another for dishonor?" Therefore, He makes those who are dishonorable. Why then do you reproach me? I do not endure this voice; for while you do not solve the accusation, you augment the doubt. Therefore, the Apostle, when he has C checked them as insolent, he then corrects them as erring, and indignantly indeed says: "O man, who are you to answer back to God? Has not the potter power from the same clay to make vessels, some for honor, others for dishonor?" But as he observes that he, while restraining, is augmenting the question, he immediately subjoins: "What if God, desiring to show His wrath, and to make known His power, endured in much patience" (Ibid. v. 22). Let the words be examined one by one; the truth cannot be grasped from simple voices alone. He shows indeed and teaches that it is not fitting to demand an account from God; and Paul used the voice of God speaking through Isaiah. For God says to the ancient people: "Shall the clay say to the potter, Why have you made me?" (Is. XLV, 9). Shall the clay say to the potter, "What are you doing?" And does the work say to the maker, "Why have you made me?" You give commands to me concerning D my works and children. Paul, adopting the voice of Isaiah that restrains, corrects the erroneous sentiments. The correction has already preceded; let the solution follow: so that you may learn, beloved, that Paul did not bring forward that, "Who are you to answer back to God?" for an accurate solution of the questions, but out of indignation. For here he ascribes everything to the maker, and says: "Has not the potter power from the same clay to make vessels, some for honor, another for dishonor?" Here he speaks according to the subject at hand, not to an accurate dogma. Elsewhere, however, to show that a vessel for honor and a vessel for dishonor are not made by God, but from the purpose of those who work, which either declines toward evil or looks toward virtue, he says to Timothy: "I write these things to you, that you may know how it is necessary to conduct oneself in the house of God" (1 Tim. III, 14-15). "But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and silver, but also of wood and earthenware" (2 Tim. II, 20). This is Paul himself. For I shall not bring forward a testimony from elsewhere, lest you say: "Since he cannot find a solution in the Apostle, he has skipped to another Scripture." Paul himself, who was indignant at them, when he speaks without indignation, treats the words accurately. Paul therefore says: "In a great house there are not only vessels of gold and silver, but also of wood and of earthenware, and some for honor, others for dishonor" (Ibid. v. 21). And what does he add? "If anyone therefore shall purify himself, he shall be a vessel for honor, sanctified." He who there ascribed to the potter the vessel for honor and the vessel for dishonor, in another place attributes the whole to the will: "If anyone shall purify himself, he will be a vessel for honor, sanctified, and useful to the Master, prepared for every good work." Notice him speaking in one way when he rebukes, and in another when he teaches: and to be made according to the previously mentioned example of the master, who beats his own servant, he spoke at first harshly to the other, but [did so] in order to draw him to this truth: so in this place he shows that a vessel for honor and a vessel for dishonor are not made by God; but that God creates the common nature, while the will itself makes the division. But that you may learn more accurately that we are not made by nature as vessels of honor and vessels of dishonor, the Scripture teaches this. If a vessel of dishonor were made, why would Scripture teach me to be good? For that which is made according to nature cannot be changed. Why does it teach him to be good who by his own nature is evil? Why does it establish the good, saying, "He who stands, let him see that he does not fall" (1 Cor. X, 12)? If he is good by nature, why do you confirm him who is firm? Hence, continuously to that, "It is not of the one who wills, nor of the one who runs" (Rom. IX, 16); if nothing is placed in my willing, why do you preach? If nothing is in the one who runs, why do you grow weary? If there is nothing in the one who wills, why did God say: "If you are willing, and hear me, you shall eat the good things of the earth" (Is. I, 19)? If there is nothing in the one who wills, why did the Savior say: "How often I would have gathered your children, and you would not" (Matt. XXIII, 37)? "It is not of the one who wills, nor of the one who runs." If there is nothing in the one who runs, why did He say to the Galatians: "You were running well; who hindered you?" (Gal. V, 7)? If it is not of the one who wills, nor of the one who runs, why does Paul say: "I so run, not as though I do not know the end" (1 Cor. IX, 26)? "Forgetting the things that are behind, and reaching forth to those things which are before, I press toward the goal" (Phil. III, 13-14). Why do you labor, or why do you run? You said, "It is not of the one who wills, nor of the one who runs." But Scripture solves the doubt. It is not of the will of Isaac (for he wished to bless the firstborn), nor of the running of Esau into the field; but of God who had mercy on Jacob. Not of the willing of Esau, nor of the running of Isaac; but of God who had mercy on Jacob. Truly, thus is that, "It is not of the one who wills," solved. But why then is it of God who has mercy? For the question still remains, "He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens." Attend studiously, brother. God foreknows all things; He foreknows, however, not as if forming the things that will be, but as seeing them in advance. For other are those things which He predetermined according to His own economy, and other are those which He foreknows from our acts; it is one thing to predetermine, and another to foreknow. If I foreknow a future evil, my foresight does not make that evil. By way of example, if I often see a youth left by his father, an heir and wealthy; and I watch him impatient of discipline, living in luxury, loving spectacles, and addicted to horse races; I immediately foreseeing say: "This man will soon dissipate his wealth, this man will ruin his paternal inheritance"; not because I, foreseeing, affirmed it, but I drew a conjecture from his character. The event, however, is the cause, not the prediction of the one who foresees, but the plan of life of the one who acts badly. Therefore, often, brother, in other matters we speak thus: we see someone walking in a slippery path without a staff, and we immediately say, "This man will fall"; he is ignorant of the nature of the places, he will stumble in the steep areas. Because you predict it, are you the cause of the fall? I speak; but from those things which are yours, I teach you the things which are above you. Apply your mind diligently. For this the adversaries object: "In order to learn," they say, "that it is God who makes the just and the wicked, He Himself said to Jeremiah: 'Before I formed you in the womb I knew you; and before you came out of the womb I sanctified you'" (Jer. I, 5). He Himself says: "Sinners are alienated from the womb, they went astray as soon as they were born: they spoke lies" (Ps. LVII, 4). Do you see that this one was predicted just from the womb, that one wicked? Do you see that it was so from nature? Well did the Savior say to the Jews: "You err, knowing not the Scriptures, nor the power of God" (Matt. XXII, 29). Read correctly, and do not speak perversely. "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you came out of the womb I sanctified you." Not first I sanctified you; but first I knew you, and then I sanctified you. Here He shows foreknowledge, and after foreknowledge, then He determines. And "Before I formed you I knew you, and before you came out of the womb I sanctified you." Because I knew you, I sanctified you. Therefore the Apostle says: "Whom He foreknew, He also predestined" (Rom. VIII, 29). He did not say, first, "He predestined," but, "He foreknew," and then, "He predestined." I pray, contend with me, as my speech is now failing from the fervor of my soul. I do not say these things so that you may applaud; we do not seek this, as God is my witness; but we seek our common profit. Open to me the hearing of your mind. For since, "Before you came out of the womb I sanctified you," is shown by the Apostle to be said at a later time. For does not the Apostle say concerning Jeremiah, "Whom He foreknew, and foreordained"? [index: entries preserved]