Super II Epistolam ad Corinthios lectura
Commentary
On the Second Epistle to the Corinthiansby
Saint Thomas AquinasTranslated by Fabian Larcher, O.P.
Html-edited by Joseph Kenny, O.P.CONTENTS
PROOEMIUM PROLOGUE In his verbis congrue tangitur materia huius secundae epistolae ad Corinthios. Nam in prima epistola agit apostolus de ipsis sacramentis, sed in hac secunda agit de ministris ipsorum sacramentorum, tam bonis, quam malis. Ratio autem hanc epistolam scribendi fuit, quod Corinthii, post praedicationem eius, admiserant pseudo-apostolos, quos apostolo praeferebant. Propter hoc scribit eis hanc epistolam, in qua commendat apostolos et ostendit verorum apostolorum dignitatem; ostendit etiam et vituperat falsorum apostolorum falsitatem. 1. – The subject matter of this second epistle to the Corinthians is fittingly touched upon by these words. For in the first epistle the Apostle discussed the sacraments; in this one he discusses the ministers, both good and bad, of these sacraments. The reason he wrote this epistle was that he had preached to the Corinthians, but they had welcomed certain false apostles, whom they preferred to the Apostle. Therefore he writes them this epistle, in which he commends the apostles and the dignity of the true apostles, and discloses and reproves the falseness of the false apostles. Commendat autem verorum apostolorum dignitatem, ex hoc quod sunt ministri Dei. Ministri, inquit, Dei, dicetur vobis, scilicet apostolis, qui quidem dicuntur ministri quantum ad tria. Primo quantum ad dispensationem sacramentorum. I Cor. IV, 1: sic nos existimet homo, ut ministros, et cetera. Christus enim institutor est sacramentorum, sed apostoli et eorum successores ea dispensant, et ideo subditur in praedicta auctoritate et dispensatores mysteriorum Dei. Secundo quantum ad gubernationem, scilicet inquantum gubernant populum Dei. Sap. c. VI, 5: cum essetis ministri, non recte iudicastis, et cetera. Deus enim gubernat omnia per prudentiam. Unde quicumque aliquid gubernat, dicitur minister Dei. Tertio quantum ad humanae salutis operationem, inquantum scilicet eorum ministerio et praedicatione, homines ad salutem conversi sunt: cuius salutis solus Deus est auctor, quia ipse est qui venit salvum facere quod perierat, apostoli vero ministri. I Cor. III, v. 4 s.: quid ergo est Apollo? Quid Paulus? Ministri eius, cui credidistis, et cetera. 2. – He commends the dignity of the true apostles, because they are God’s ministers. Men shall speak of you, i.e., the apostles, as the ministers of God. They are called ministers under three aspects. First, inasmuch as they dispense the sacraments: “This is how one should regard us, as servants of Christ” (1 Cor. 4:1). For Christ instituted the sacraments, but the apostles and their successors dispense them; therefore the text just cited continues: and stewards of the mysteries of God. Secondly, inasmuch as they govern the people of God: “Because, as servants of his kingdom, you did not rule rightly, nor keep the law” (Wis. 6:4). For God governs all things by his wisdom, so that whoever governs any one is called God’s minister. Thirdly, because they labor for the salvation of men, namely, inasmuch as many are converted by their ministry and preaching. But God alone is the author of man’s salvation, because it was he who came to save that which had been lost; the apostles, however, are his ministers: “What then is Apollos? What is Paul? The ministers of him whom you have believed” (1 Cor. 3:5).
1-1
2 Cor. 1:1-2De istis ergo ministris tractat hic apostolus, ostendens in hac epistola eorum dignitatem etiam scribens Corinthiis. In qua quaedam praemittit. Primo salutationem; secundo prosequitur epistolam, ibi benedictus Deus, et cetera. In salutatione autem tria ponit: primo enim describit personas salutantes; secundo personas salutatas, ibi Ecclesiae quae est, etc.; tertio bona optata, ibi gratia vobis, et cetera. Circa primum primo describitur persona salutans principalis, quia Paulus; secundo persona adiuncta, quia Timotheus. 3. – In this epistle to the Corinthians, the Apostle treats of these ministers and points out their dignity: first, he gives his greeting; secondly, he begins his message (v. 3). In the greeting he does three things: first, he mentions the persons who send the greeting; secondly, those who are greeted; thirdly, the good things he wishes them. In regard to the first he does two things: first, he mentions the principal person who sends the greeting, namely Paul; secondly, his companion, Timothy. Persona salutans describitur ab humilitate, quia Paulus, qui Latine dicitur modicus. Iste est ille modicus, de quo Is. LX, 22: minimus erit in mille, et cetera. Vel a doctrina, quia Paulus dicitur os tubae. Ista est illa tuba de qua Zach. IX, 14: dominus in tuba canet, et cetera. Et competit quod dicitur Is. LVIII, 1: quasi tuba exalta vocem tuam, et cetera. A dignitatis auctoritate, quia apostolus, et cetera. Ubi tria ponuntur. Primo quod sit legatus, unde dicitur apostolus, id est principaliter missus. Soli enim duodecim apostoli electi missi sunt a Christo. Lc. VI, 13: elegit duodecim, quos et apostolos, et cetera. Alii autem discipuli non missi sunt principaliter, sed secundario. Et inde est quod apostolis succedunt episcopi, qui habent specialem curam gregis domini. Alii autem sacerdotes succedunt septuaginta duobus discipulis, qui gerunt vices commissas sibi ab episcopis. Est ergo eius dignitas quia apostolus. I Cor. IX, 2: si aliis non sum apostolus, sed tamen vobis sum, et cetera. Gal. II, 8: qui operatus est Petro, et cetera. Sed quare vocat se hic apostolum, dicens Paulus apostolus, cum in epistola ad Romanos scribit se servum? Ratio huius est, quia Romanos reprehendit de dissensione et superbia, quae est mater dissensionis, quia inter superbos semper iurgia sunt. Unde ut eos revocet a dissensione, inducit eos ad humilitatem, vocando se servum. Corinthii vero erant pertinaces et rebelles, et ideo, ut reprimat eorum proterviam, usus est hic nomine dignitatis, dicens se apostolum. Secundo ponitur cuius sit legatus, quia Iesu Christi. Infra V, 20: pro Christo legatione fungimur. Tertio ponitur modus quo adeptus est legationem, quia non iniecit se ut pseudo. Ier. c. XXIII, 21: non mittebam eos, et ipsi currebant. Non est datus populo ex divino furore, iuxta illud Iob XXXIV, 30: qui facit regnare hypocritam, et cetera. Osee XIII, 11: dabo tibi regem, sed in furore meo. Est adeptus apostolatum ex voluntate Dei et beneplacito. Act. IX, 15: vas electionis est mihi iste. Et ideo dicit per voluntatem Dei. 4. – The person who sends the greeting is described by his humility, because it is Paul, which in Latin means ‘humble’. He is that humble person of whom it is said in Is. (60:22): “The least one shall become a clan, and the smallest one a mighty nation.” Or by his doctrine, because Paul is called the mouth of the trumpet. This is the trumpet mentioned in Zechariah (9:14): “The Lord God will sound the trumpet, and march forth in the whirlwinds of the south.” He fits what is said in Isaiah (58:1): “Lift up your voice like a trumpet.” By the authority of his dignity, because he says, an apostle of Jesus Christ. Here he mentions three things: first, that he is a representative; hence, he is called an apostle, i.e., principally sent, for only twelve apostles were sent by Christ: “He chose from them twelve, whom he named apostles” (Lk. 6:13). But the other disciples were not sent principally, but secondarily. That is why the apostles are succeeded by bishops, who have a special care of the Lord’s flock; but other priests succeed the seventy-two disciples and perform duties committed to them by the bishops. His dignity, therefore, is that he is an apostle: “If to others I am not an apostle, at least I am to you” (1 Cor. 9:2); “He who worked through Peter for the ministry to the circumcised worked through me also for the Gentiles” (Gal. 2:8). But why does he call himself an apostle, whereas in the epistle to the Romans he calls himself a servant. The reason for this is that he rebuked the Romans for quarreling and for pride, which is the mother of quarrels, because there are always disputes among the proud. Hence to cure them of quarreling he leads them to humility by calling himself a servant. But the Corinthians were obstinate and rebellious; so in order to curb their boldness, he uses a dignified name here, calling himself an apostle. Secondly, he mentions the one he represents, Jesus Christ: “We are ambassadors for Christ” (2 Cor. 5:20). Thirdly, he mentions how he obtained his ambassadorship, because he is not coming as a false apostle: “I did not send them and they ran” (Jer. 23:21), nor was he given to the people in God’s anger in the sense of Job (34:30): “Who makes a hypocrite to reign”; “I have given you kings, but in my anger” (Hos. 13:11). But he obtained apostleship by God’s will and pleasure: “He is a chosen instrument of mine” (Ac. 9:15). Therefore he says, by the will of God. Persona autem adiuncta est Timotheus. Unde dicit et Timotheus frater. Frater, inquam, propter fidem, Matth. XXIII, 8: omnes vos fratres estis, etc., et propter dignitatem, quia episcopus: et inde est quod Papa vocat omnes episcopos fratres. Connumerat autem sibi Timotheum, quia cum ipse transisset per eos, sicut dixit in I Epist., ult. cap., possent credere quod malitiose retulisset apostolo ea de quibus ipse scribit ad eos. 5. – The other person is Timothy; hence he says, and Timothy our brother. A brother, I say, because of the faith: “You are all brothers” (Matt. 23:8), and because of his dignity, for he was a bishop. This is why the Pope calls all bishops brothers. He mentions Timothy because, since he [Timothy] had visited them, as he said in the first epistle (ch. 16), the people might believe that he had maliciously reported to the Apostle the things he is writing to them. Consequenter ponuntur personae salutatae, et primo principales, secundo adiunctae principalibus, in hoc quod dicit Ecclesiae Dei, quae est totus populus fidelis, tam clerici quam laici. I Tim. III, 15: ut scias quomodo oporteat te conversari. Quae est Corinthi, quia Corinthus erat metropolis Achaiae. Sed adiunctae personae sunt omnes sancti, qui sunt unius spiritus sancti gratia renati. I Cor. VI, 11: sed abluti estis, sed sanctificati, et cetera. Qui sunt in Achaia, cuius metropolis est Corinthus. 6. – Then he mentions the persons greeted: first, the principal ones; secondly, those associated with the principal ones. He says, to the church of God, which includes all believers, both the clergy and the laity: “That you may know how one ought to behave” (1 Tim. 3:15); which is at Corinth, because Corinth was the chief city of Achaia. But those associated with the principal ones are all the saints who are reborn by the grace of the one Holy Spirit: “But you were washed, you were sanctified, in the Spirit of our God” (1 Cor. 6:11); who are in Achaia, whose chief city is Corinth. Istis autem personis salutatis optat apostolus bona. Unde dicit gratia vobis, et cetera. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo ponit ipsa bona; secundo ipsorum auctorem, ibi a Deo patre, et cetera. 7. – The Apostle wishes good things to the persons greeted; hence, he says, grace and peace to you. In regard to this he does two things: first, he mentions the good things; secondly, their author (v. 2b). Ponit autem ista duo extrema bona, ut in eis intelligantur media. Primum enim bonum est gratia, quae est principium omnium bonorum. Nam ante gratiam nihil est nisi diminutum in nobis. Ultimum autem omnium bonorum est pax, quia pax est generalis finis mentis. Nam qualitercumque pax accipiatur, habet rationem finis; et in gloria aeterna et in regimine et in conversatione, finis est pax. Ps. CXLVII, 3: qui posuit fines tuos pacem. 8. – He mentions these two gifts as two extremes, between which are contained all other goods. For the first good is grace, which is the beginning of all good things; because before grace there is only a diminished goodness in us. The last of all goods is peace, because peace is the general end of the mind; for no matter how peace is defined, it has the character of an end. In eternal glory, in government and in the way one lives, the end is peace: “He makes peace in your borders” (Ps. 147:14). Quis autem sit auctor horum bonorum ostendit, subdens a Deo patre, et cetera. Et haec duo possunt dupliciter distingui, quia cum dicit a Deo patre, potest intelligi pro tota Trinitate. Nam, licet persona patris dicatur pater Christi per naturam, tamen tota Trinitas est pater noster per creationem et gubernationem. Is. LXIII, 16: et nunc, domine, pater noster es tu. Ier. III, 19: patrem vocabis me. A Deo ergo patre nostro, id est a tota Trinitate proveniunt bona. Matth. VII, 11: si vos cum sitis mali, et cetera. Sed si Deus pater noster accipiatur pro tota Trinitate, quare additur persona filii, cum dicit et domino Iesu Christo? Numquid est alia persona a Trinitate? Dicendum quod additur non propter aliam personam sed propter aliam naturam, scilicet humanitatis assumptae a filio in personam divinam: quam quidem Trinitati connumerat, quia omnia bona proveniunt nobis a Trinitate per incarnationem Christi; et primo gratia, Io. I, 17: gratia et veritas, etc., secundo pax, Eph. II, 14: ipse est pax nostra, et cetera. 9. – He indicates the author of these goods when he says, from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. These two expressions can be distinguished in two ways, because, when he says, from God our Father, it can be referred to the entire Trinity. For although the person of the Father is called the Father of Christ by nature, the entire Trinity in our Father by creation and governance: “For thou art our Father” (Is. 63:16); “You would call me My Father” (Jer. 3:19). Therefore good things come from God our Father, i.e., from the entire Trinity: “If you, then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him” (Matt. 7:11). But if God our Father is taken for the entire Trinity, why is the person of the Son added, when he says, and the Lord Jesus Christ? Is there another person in the Trinity? I answer that he is added, not as though he were an additional person, but on account of another nature, namely, of the humanity assumed by the Son to the divine person. The reason he lists him along with the Trinity is that all good things come to us from the Trinity through the Incarnation of Christ, first of all grace: “Grace and truth came through Jesus Christ” (Jn. 1:17), and secondly peace: “He is our peace” (Eph. 2:14). Item cum dicit a Deo patre nostro, potest intelligi persona patris solum; et, licet tota Trinitas sit pater noster, ut dictum est, tamen persona patris est pater noster per appropriationem; et sic hoc quod dicit et domino Iesu Christo, intelligitur de persona filii. De persona autem spiritus sancti non fit hic mentio, quia, sicut dicit Augustinus, cum sit nexus patris et filii, ubicumque ponitur persona patris et persona filii, intelligitur persona spiritus sancti. 10. – Again, when he says, from God our Father, it can be taken to mean the person of the Father alone; and although the entire Trinity is our Father, as has been said, the person of the Father is our Father by appropriation. Then the Lord Jesus Christ can be referred to the person of the Son. No mention is made of the Holy Spirit because, as Augustine says, since he is the nexus of the Father and the Son, whenever the person of the Father and the person of the Son are mentioned, the person of the Holy Spirit is also understood.
1-2
2 Cor. 1:3-5Hic incipit epistola in qua apostolus duo facit. Primo enim excusat se de eo quod non iverat ad eos, sicut promiserat; secundo prosequitur intentionem suam, cap. III, ibi incipimus iterum, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo ponit excusationem de mora; secundo morae assignat causam, secundo cap., ibi statui autem, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo enim reddit eos benevolos; secundo excusationem ponit, ibi et hac confidentia, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo captat eorum benevolentiam, recitando quaedam in generali; secundo quaedam in speciali, ibi non enim, et cetera. Benevolentiam autem eorum captat apostolus ostendendo quod quidquid facit, totum facit ad eorum utilitatem. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo praemittit utilitatem quae ex ipso aliis provenit; secundo rationem eorum assignat, ibi quoniam sicut abundant, et cetera. Circa primum tria facit. Primo enim ponitur gratiarum actio; secundo actionis gratiarum modus, ibi qui consolatur, etc.; tertio causa, ibi ut possimus et ipsi consolari. 11. – Here begins the message, in which the Apostle does two things: first, he excuses himself for not visiting them as he had promised; secondly, he begins to follow out his intention (chap. 3). In regard to the first he does two things: first, he wins their good will; secondly, he presents his excuse (v. 15). In regard to the first he does two things: first, he wins their good will be citing some general facts; secondly, some special ones (v. 8). The Apostle wins their good will by showing that whatever he does, it is all for their benefit. In regard to this he does two things: first, he mentions the profit others have obtained from him; secondly, the reason (v. 5). In regard to the first he does three things: first, he gives thanks; secondly, the manner of the thanks (v. 4); thirdly, the cause (b. 4b). Agit ergo gratias toti Trinitati, a qua provenit omne bonum. Et ideo dicit benedictus Deus, id est tota Trinitas. Item personae patris, cum dicit et pater domini nostri Iesu Christi, per quem, scilicet Christum, pater nobis omnia donavit. Sed sciendum quod nos benedicimus Deum, et Deus benedicit nobis, sed aliter et aliter. Nam dicere Dei, est facere. Ps. XXXII, 9: dixit et facta sunt. Unde benedicere Dei est bonum facere, et bonum infundere, et sic habet rationem causalitatis. Gen. I, 28, et XXII, v. 17: benedicens benedicam tibi, et cetera. Dicere autem nostrum non est causale, sed recognoscitivum seu expressivum. Unde benedicere nostrum idem est quod bonum recognoscere. Cum ergo gratias agimus Deo, benedicimus sibi, id est recognoscimus eum bonum et datorem omnium bonorum. Tob. XII, v. 6: benedicite Deum caeli, et cetera. Dan. III, v. 57: benedicite, omnia opera, et cetera. 12. – He gives thanks, therefore, to the entire Trinity, the source of every good; hence he says, Blessed be the God, i.e., the entire Trinity; and to the person of the Father when he says, and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom the Father has given us all things. It should be noted that we bless God and God blesses us, but in different ways. For when God speaks, he accomplishes: “He spoke and they were made” (Ps. 148:5). Hence, for God to bless is to produce something good, and to infuse something good, and so to be a cause: “I will indeed bless you and multiply your descendants” (Gen. 22:17). But our speech does not cause things, but acknowledges or expresses them; hence, our blessing is the same as recognizing good. Therefore, when we thank God, we bless him, i.e., acknowledge that he is good and the giver of all good: “Bless God and acknowledge him in the presence of all the living for the good things he has done for you.” (Tob. 12:6); “Bless the Lord, all you works of the Lord; praise and exalt him above all for ever” (Dan. 3:57). Recte ergo gratias agit patri, quia misericors est, unde dicit pater misericordiarum, et quia consolator, unde dicit et Deus totius consolationis. Et agit gratias de duobus, quibus homines maxime indigent. Primo enim indigent, ut auferantur ab eis mala, et hoc facit misericordia, quae aufert miseriam; et misereri est proprium patri. Ps. CII, 13: quomodo miseretur pater filiorum, et cetera. Secundo indigent ut sustententur in malis quae adveniunt. Et illud est proprie consolari, quia nisi homo haberet aliquid in quo quiesceret cor eius, quando superveniunt mala, non subsisteret. Tunc ergo aliquis consolatur aliquem, quando affert ei aliquod refrigerium, in quo quiescat in malis. Et licet in aliquibus malis homo possit in aliquo consolari et quiescere et sustentari, tamen solus Deus est, qui nos consolatur in omnibus malis. Et ideo dicit Deus totius consolationis; quia si peccas, consolatur te Deus, quia ipse misericors est. Si affligeris, consolatur te, vel eruendo ab afflictione per potentiam suam, vel iudicando per iustitiam. Si laboras, consolatur te remunerando, Gen. XV, 1: ego merces tua, et cetera. Et ideo dicitur Matth. V, 5: beati qui lugent, et cetera. 13. – It is fitting that he thank the Father, because he is merciful; hence he says, the Father of mercies: and because he is a comforter he says, and God of all comfort. He thanks God for the two things men especially need: first, to have evil removed from them, and this is done by mercy which takes away misery, for it is characteristic of a father to have compassion: “As a father pities his children, so the Lord pities those who fear him” (Ps. 103: 13). Secondly, they need to be supported in the face of evils which occur, and that is to receive comfort. Because unless a man had something in which his heart could rest, he would not stand firm when evils come upon him. Therefore a person comforts another by affording him something refreshing, in which he can rest in evil times. And although a man might be comforted by something and find rest and be supported by it in the case of some evils, it is God alone who comforts us in all evils; hence he says, the God of all comfort. For if you sin, God comforts you, because he is merciful; if you are afflicted, he comforts you either by rooting out the affliction by his power or by judging justly; if you labor, he comforts you with a reward: “I am your shield; your reward shall be very great (Gen. 15:1). Therefore, it says in Matthew (5:4): “Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted.” Materiam autem gratiarum actionis subdit dicens qui consolatur, et cetera. Quasi dicat: ideo benedictus, quia consolatur nos in omni tribulatione. Infra VII, 6: qui consolatur, et cetera. 14. – He tells us why he is thankful when he adds, who comforts us in all our affliction. As if to say: He is blessed, because he comforts us in all our affliction: “God who comforts the downcast” (2 Cor. 7:6). Causam autem huius ponit, cum dicit ut possimus et ipsi consolari. Ubi notandum est, quod in donis divinis est ordo. Ad hoc enim Deus dat aliquibus specialia dona, ut ipsi effundant illa in utilitatem aliorum. Non enim dat lumen soli, ut sibi soli luceat sed ut toti mundo. Unde vult quod de omnibus bonis nostris, sive sint divitiae, sive potentia, sive scientia, sive sapientia, accrescat aliqua utilitas aliis. I Petr. c. IV, 10: unusquisque gratiam quam accepit, et cetera. Hoc est ergo quod apostolus dicit consolatur nos in omni tribulatione. 15. – He gives the reason for this when he says, so that we may be able to comfort those who are in any affliction. Here it should be noted that there is an order among God’s gifts. For God gives special gifts to some, that they may pour them out for the benefit of others; for he does not give light to the sun in order that the sun may shine for itself alone, but for the whole world. Hence, God desires that some profit accrue to others from all our gifts, whether they be riches or power of knowledge or wisdom: “As each has received a gift, employ it for one another” (1 Pet. 4:10). This then is what the Apostle says, who comforts us in all our affliction. Sed quare? Non ut solum nobis hoc sit ad bonum, sed etiam ut aliis prosit. Unde dicit ut possimus et ipsi consolari eos, et cetera. Possumus enim consolari alios per exemplum consolationis nostrae. Qui enim non est consolatus, nescit consolari. Eccli. XXXIV, v. 11: qui non est tentatus, qualia scit? Qui sunt in omni, id est in qualibet pressura. Is. c. LXI, 1 s.: spiritus domini misit me, etc., ut consolarer omnes lugentes, etc., Eccli. c. XLVIII, 27: consolatus est lugentes, et cetera. Possumus, dico, consolari per exhortationem ad tolerantiam passionum, promittendo praemia aeterna, qua scilicet exhortamur vos per Scripturas et internas inspirationes, ut patienter sustineamus, et alios exhortemur exemplo nostro, et per ipsas Scripturas. I Cor. c. XI, 23: ego enim accepi a domino, et cetera. Is. XXI, 10: quae audivi a domino, et cetera. 16. – But why? Not only for our benefit, but that it profit others too. Hence, he says, so that we may be able to comfort those who are in any affliction. For we can comfort others by the example of our own comfort. For one who is not comforted does not know how to comfort others: “He who has not been tried, what manner of things does he know” (Sir. 34:9, Vulgate) about any affliction; “The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me to bring good tidings to the afflicted” (Is. 61:1); “He who comforts all who were mourning in Zion” (Sir. 48:27, Vulgate). We are able, I say, to comfort them by exhorting them to endure sufferings by promising eternal rewards, i.e., because we exhort you by the Scriptures and internal inspirations, in order that we may patiently endure and exhort others by our example and by the Scriptures themselves: “For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you” (1 Cor. 11:23); “What I have heard from the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, I announce to you” (Is. 21:10). Posita utilitate quae ex apostolis aliis provenit, dictorum consequenter rationem assignat, dicens quoniam sicut abundant, et cetera. Et quia duo dixerat, scilicet quod Deus consolatur nos in omni tribulatione, et quod possimus et ipsi, etc., hic rationem horum duorum exponit, et primo ostendit quomodo Deus consolatur nos in omni tribulatione; secundo quomodo consolatio nostra convertitur in consolationem aliorum, ibi sive autem tribulamur, et cetera. 17. – Having mentioned the profit which comes to others from the apostles, he gives the reason for what he has said: For as we share abundantly in Christ’s sufferings, so through Christ we share abundantly in comfort too. And because he has said two things, namely, that God comforts us in every affliction and that we ourselves can also comfort others, he explains here the reason for these two things: first, he shows how God comforts us in every affliction; secondly, how our comfort is turned to the comfort of others (v. 6). Dicit ergo: recte dico quod consolatur nos in omni tribulatione nostra, quia secundum quod abundant passiones Christi in nobis, et cetera. Dicit Christi, id est inchoatae a Christo. Ez. IX, 6: a sanctuario meo incipite. In Christo enim inceperunt passiones pro peccatis nostris, quia ipse peccata nostra pertulit in corpore suo super lignum, I Petr. II, v. 24, deinde per apostolos, qui dicebant mortificamur tota die, Ps. XLIII, 22 etc., deinde per martyres qui secti sunt, tentati sunt, etc., Hebr. XI, 37; ultimo ipsi peccatores pro suis peccatis patienter iram domini portabunt, quia peccaverunt ei. Vel passiones Christi, id est quas sustinemus propter Christum: Act. V, 41: ibant apostoli gaudentes, et cetera. Et Ps. XLIII, 22: propter te mortificamur, et cetera. Sicut, inquam, huiusmodi passiones abundant, sic abundat per Christum consolatio nostra. Ps. XCIII, v. 19: secundum multitudinem dolorum, et cetera. 18. – He says, therefore, I am right in saying that he comforts us in every affliction, for as we share abundantly in Christ’s sufferings, so through Christ we share abundantly in comfort too. He says, in Christ’s sufferings, i.e., begun by Christ: “Begin at my sanctuary” (Ez. 9:6). For the sufferings for our sins began in Christ, because ‘he himself bore our sins in his body on the tree” (1 Pet. 2:24); then by the apostles, who said: “We are slain all the day long” (Ps. 44:22; Rom. 8:36); then by the martyrs, who were cut in two and were tempted (Heb. 11:37). Finally, sinners themselves will bear patiently God’s anger for their sins. Or the sufferings of Christ, i.e., what we endure for Christ: “Then they left the presence of the Council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer dishonor for the name” (Ac. 5:41); “For your sake we are slain all the day long, and accounted as sheep for the slaughter” (Ps. 44:22). Just as we share abundantly in these sufferings, so through Christ we share abundantly in comfort too: “When the cares of my heart are many, your consolations cheer my soul” (Ps. 94:19).
1-3
2 Cor. 1:6-11Postquam apostolus ostendit quod Deus consolatur servos suos in tribulationibus, scilicet ministros fidei et praedicatores, hic consequenter manifestat, quod eorum consolatio cedit ad bonum aliorum. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo manifestat qualiter eorum consolatio sit ad aliorum utilitatem et salutem; secundo ordinem huius consolationis et salutis insinuat, ibi quae operatur tolerantiam, et cetera. 19. – After showing that the Lord comforts his servants in their tribulations, i.e., the ministers of the faith and preachers, the Apostle now shows that their comfort redounds to the good of others: first, he shows that their comfort results in the advantage and salvation of others; secondly, he shows the relation of this comfort to salvation (v. 6b). Circa primum advertendum est, quod tria dicit apostolus se recepisse: tribulationem, cum dicit: in omni tribulatione nostra, consolationem, cum dicit: qui consolatur nos, exhortationem, cum subdit: ut possimus et ipsi, et cetera. Accipiendo ergo haec tria passive, dicimus, quod apostoli consolantur, tribulantur et exhortantur. Unde et tria ostendit apostolus cedere ad consolationem aliorum, et hoc in quodam ordine. Et primo eorum tribulationem, cum dicit sive, inquit, tribulamur, et cetera. Quasi dicat: vere quidquid recipimus est in bonum vestrum, quia sive tribulamur, pro vestra exhortatione et salute, quia scilicet nostro exemplo monet vos Deus ad passionum tolerantiam, unde provenit vobis salus aeterna. Unde I Machab. VI, 34 legitur, quod ostenderunt elephantis sanguinem uvae, et mororum, ut acuerent eos ad bellum. Quod fit, quando tepidis et pigris adhibentur passiones sanctorum in exemplum. Secundo ostendit, quod eorum consolatio in aliorum utilitatem cedit, cum dicit sive consolamur. Quasi dicat: ipsa nostra consolatio, qua nos spe praemii consolamur, est ad consolationem vestram, inquantum exemplo nostro vos etiam eamdem spem praemii habentes, gaudetis. Tertio ostendit quod eorum exhortatio passiva est ad bonum aliorum, dicens sive exhortamur, per internam inspirationem vel per flagella, hoc est pro vestra exhortatione, scilicet ut vos ad maiora animemini, et salutem speretis. Unde dicitur II Mach. ult., quod exhortati sermonibus Iudae, et cetera. Adiuvantibus autem vobis, et cetera. 20. – In regard to the first, it should be noted that the Apostle says that he received three things: afflictions, when he says, “In all our afflictions”; comfort, when he says, “who comforts us”; exhortation, when he says, “so that we may be able to comfort those who are in any affliction”. By taking these three things in a passive sense, we say that the apostles are afflicted, comforted and exhorted. Hence, the Apostle also shows that three things result in the comfort of others, and these in a definite order. First, their affliction, when he says, If we are afflicted it is for your comfort and salvation, because by our example God is telling you to endure suffering, from which eternal salvation will come to you. Hence in 1 Maccabees (6:34) we read that “they showed the elephants the juice of grapes and mulberries, to arouse them for battle”. This is done when the lukewarm and lazy are shown the sufferings of the saints as an example. Secondly, he shows that their comfort turns out to the advantage of others, when he says, and if we are comforted, it is for your comfort: as if to say, the very comfort by which we are comforted by the hope of a reward is a comfort to you, for by our example you also rejoice in having the same hope of a reward. Thirdly he shows that the exhortation they receive turns out to the benefit of others, saying, if we are exhorted by an internal inspiration or by scourges, it is for your exhortation, i.e., that you be inspired to greater things and hope for salvation. Hence it says in 2 Maccabees (15:17) that, “exhorted by the word of Judas, they determined to attack bravely.” Huius autem consolationis et salutis ordinem insinuat, cum subdit quae operatur tolerantiam, et cetera. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo ostendit patientiam habitam in adversis; secundo manifestat fructum, qui ex patientia provenit, ibi ut spes firma, et cetera. 21. – He suggests the relationship between this comfort and salvation when he says, which you experience when you patiently endure the same sufferings that we suffer. In regard to this he does two things: first, he shows the patience to be had in adversity; secondly, the fruit which results from patience (v. 7). Dicit ergo: dico quod haec ad vestram salutem cedunt, quae salus est vobis in hoc, inquantum exemplo nostri estis fortes ad tolerantiam passionum, et ut patienter sustineatis passiones quas et nos patimur. Lc. XXI, 19: in patientia vestra possidebitis animas vestras. Iac. V, 10: exemplum accipite, fratres mei, et cetera. 22. – He says, therefore, I say that these things work for your salvation, inasmuch as by our example you are strong enough to endure sufferings and patiently endure the trials which we also suffer: “By your endurance you will gain your lives” (Lk. 21:19); “As an example of suffering and patience, brethren, take the prophets” (Jas. 5:10). Ex qua quidem patientia provenit vobis fructus, quia ex hoc spes nostra firma est pro vobis, quod vos efficiamini haeredes vitae aeternae. Rom. V, 3 s.: tribulatio patientiam operatur, patientia vero spem. Gregorius: tanto spes in Deum solidior surgit, quanto quis graviora pro nomine eius pertulerit. Nam ex passionibus quas sustinent sancti Dei pro Christo, consurgit eis spes vitae aeternae. Et causa spei huius est, quia sumus scientes, quia sicut estis socii nostri in passionibus, eritis socii et consolationis, id est vitae aeternae. II Tim. II, 11: fidelis sermo, nam si commortui sumus, et convivemus, et cetera. I Petr. IV, 13: communicantes Christi passionibus gaudete, et cetera. 23. – You obtain fruit from this patience because from it our hope for you is unshaken by the fact that you are made heirs of eternal life: “Suffering produces endurance, and endurance true hope” (Rom. 5:3-4): “Hope in God becomes firmer to the extent that one suffers more difficult things for his name. For as a result of the sufferings the saints endure for Christ, the hope of eternal life rises in them” (Gregory). And the cause of this hope is knowing that as you share in our sufferings, you will also share in our comfort, i.e., in eternal life: “The saying is sure: If we have died with him, we shall also live with him; if we endure, we shall also reign with him” (2 Tim. 2:11-12); “But rejoice in so far as you share Christ’s sufferings, that you may also rejoice and be glad when his glory is revealed” (1 Pet. 4:13). Consequenter cum dicit non enim volumus vos, captat eorum benevolentiam, recitando quaedam in speciali. Et circa hoc tria facit. Primo enim describit persecutionem quam passus est in Asia; secundo specialem ei consolationem collatam, ibi qui de tantis, etc.; tertio subdit consolationis causam, ibi nam gloria, et cetera. 24. – Then when he says, For we do not want you to be ignorant, brethren, of the affliction we experienced in Asia, he wins their good will by mentioning certain specific things. And he does three things: first, he describes the persecution he suffered in Asia; secondly, the special comfort he received (v. 10); thirdly, the cause of the comfort. Dicit ergo primum: non solum ea quae dicta sunt de tribulationibus in generali, bonum est vos scire, sed non volumus vos ignorare, quia scire est utile vobis, inquantum exemplo nostri patientiores estis. Nolumus, inquam, vos ignorare de tribulatione nostra, et cetera. Thren. III, 19: recordare paupertatis meae, et cetera. Haec est illa persecutio, de qua legitur Act. XIX, 23 ss., quae facta est apostolo ab Asiano quodam argentario concitante plebem contra eum, quam quidem apostolus exaggerat a tribus. Ex loco, quia in Asia, et hoc est quod dicit quae, scilicet tribulatio, facta est in Asia, id est, apud Ephesum, quae est in Asia, ubi debuisset magis honorari et consolari. Ex acerbitate, quia supra consuetudinem humanarum passionum, et ideo dicit quoniam supra modum sumus, et cetera. Item supra posse, et ideo dicit supra virtutem. 25. – He says first, therefore: it is good for you to know not only what we have said about our afflictions in general, but we do not want you to be ignorant, because it is profitable for you to know them, inasmuch as you are more patient because of our example: we do not want you to be ignorant, brethren, of the affliction we experienced; “Remember my affliction and my bitterness, the wormwood and the gall” (Lam. 3:19). This is the persecution mentioned in Acts (19:23ff), which was launched by a certain Asian silversmith, who incited the people against him. The Apostle describes it from three aspects: from the place, because it was in Asia; hence he says, in Asia, i.e., Ephesus, which is in Asia, where he should rather have been honored and comforted; from its bitterness, because it was an extreme suffering; hence he says, for we were so utterly crushed. Also it was beyond his strength, and so he says, unbearably. Sed contra I Cor. X, 13: fidelis Deus, qui non patietur vos tentari supra, et cetera. Respondeo. Dicendum quod pati supra virtutem potest intelligi dupliciter. Vel supra virtutem naturalem, et de hac loquitur hic, supra quam Deus aliquando permittit sanctos tentari; vel supra virtutem gratiae, et de hac intelligitur illud I Cor. X, 13: fidelis Deus, etc., supra quam non permittit aliquem Deus tentari. Et quod apostolus loquatur hic de virtute naturali, ostendit consequenter cum dicit ita ut taederet nos vivere. Constat enim quod inter alia vivere magis desideratur. Quando ergo est tanta persecutio, ut et ipsa vita reddatur taediosa, manifestum est quod est supra virtutem naturae. Et hoc est quod dicit ita ut, etc.; quasi dicat: sic erat gravis persecutio, ut vita esset nobis taediosa. Iob X, 1: taedet animam meam vitae meae. Contra Iac. I, 2: omne gaudium existimate, fratres mei, et cetera. Respondeo. Dicendum quod tribulatio potest considerari dupliciter. Vel secundum se, et sic est taediosa; vel in comparatione ad finem, et sic est iucunda, inquantum propter Deum et spem vitae aeternae sustinetur. Et non solum erat nobis taediosa vita, sed eramus certi de morte. Unde dicit sed ipsi in nobis responsum mortis, id est certitudinem mortis, habuimus; quasi dicat: opinio mea dictabat mihi hoc, quod deberem mori. Vel aliter, responsum mortis, id est ipsa ratio diceret et eligeret mori propter taedium vitae. 26. – But this seems to be contrary to what it says in 1 Corinthians (10:13): “God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your strength.” I answer that to suffer beyond one’s strength can be understood in two ways: first, above one’s natural strength, which the Apostle means here, above which God sometimes permits his servants to be tempted; secondly, above the strength of grace, which the Apostle means in 1 Corinthians (10:13): “God is faithful.” That the Apostle is speaking of natural strength is indicated by what he says next, we despaired of life itself. For it is evident that among all else, life is most desirable. Therefore when a persecution is so great that life itself becomes wearisome, it is obviously above the strength of our nature. And this is what he says, we despaired of life itself, as if to say, this persecution was so cruel that life itself became a burden to us: “I loathe my life” (Jb. 10:1). But against this James (1:2) says: “Count it all joy, my brethren, when you meet various trials.” I answer that affliction can be considered in two ways: either in itself, and then it is wearisome, or in relation to faith, and then it is joyful, inasmuch as it is endured for God and with the hope of eternal life. We were not only weary of life, but we were certain of death; hence, he says, we felt that we had received the sentence of death, i.e., the certainty of death. As if to say: in my opinion I was about to die. Or another way, the sentence of death, i.e., reason itself would say to choose death because of the weariness of life. Exaggerat etiam tribulationem ex causa, unde dicit ut non simus in nobis, etc., scilicet ut reprimatur humana superbia. Ier. XVI, 19: domine, fortitudo mea et robur, et cetera. Sed in omnibus confidamus de Deo. Ier. XVII, 7: benedictus qui confidit in domino, et cetera. Et ideo dicit sed in Deo qui suscitat, et cetera. I Reg. II, 6: dominus mortificat et vivificat. 27. – He amplifies the reason for his affliction when he says, but that was to make us rely not on ourselves, i.e., that human pride should be repressed: “O Lord, my strength and my stronghold” (Jer. 16:19), and that we trust God in all things: “Blessed is the man who trusts in the Lord, whose trust is the Lord” (Jer. 17:7). And therefore he says, but on God who raises the dead: “The Lord kills and brings to life” (1 Sam. 2:6). Sed quia dominus non derelinquit sperantes in se, ideo subdit apostolus consolationem ei factam a domino, dicens qui de tantis periculis, et cetera. Et circa hoc tria facit. Primo describit consolationem praesentem contra mala praeterita; secundo consolationem futuram; tertio causam spei. Dicit ergo: consolati sumus a Deo, qui eripuit nos in praeterito de tantis periculis, et eruit in praesenti, quia non cessat liberare, Is. XLIII, 2: cum transieris per aquas, etc., in quem speramus, quoniam eripiet, et adiecit in futuro, Eccli. II, 9: qui timetis dominum, sperate in illum. Huius autem spei causam nobis praebent orationes vestrae. Unde dicit adiuvantibus vobis nos in orationibus, quas pro nobis facitis. Prov. XVIII, 19: frater qui iuvatur a fratre, et cetera. Rom. XV, 30: obsecro vos, fratres, per dominum Iesum Christum, et per charitatem sancti spiritus, ut adiuvetis me in orationibus vestris, et cetera. Quae quidem orationes necessariae sunt, quia Deus multa bona confert uni ad preces multorum. Cuius ratio est, quia Deus de bonis quae confert, vult exhiberi sibi gratias et quod multi ex hoc teneantur ad gratiarum actiones, hoc autem fit quando ex eo quod dat uni ad preces multorum, obligat sibi omnes, ad quorum preces confert bonum aliquod, ut sic non solum ille cui confert, sed etiam ipsi rogantes, gratias referant Deo. Et hoc est quod dicit ut ex multarum personis. Et dicit ex multarum facierum, vel quantum ad aetatem, vel quantum ad conditionem, vel quantum ad diversitatem gentium vel morum. Eius quae in nobis est donationis, id est pro illa donatione, scilicet fidei, quae in nobis est, per multos agantur gratiae Deo pro nobis. Eph. V, 20: gratias agentes Deo et patri. Vel aliter: ut ex multarum personis facierum, id est conditionum personis. Dico eius donationis, quae est in nobis, id est, quae habent idem donum, scilicet fidei vel charitatis, id est ex multis personis illorum qui sunt in fide Christi, agantur, et cetera. Et sic secundum hanc expositionem per diversas facies intelliguntur diversae virtutes, ut facies unius dicatur illa virtus in qua praeeminet: sicut facies Iob, patientia; facies David, humilitas, et sic de aliis. 28. – But because the Lord does not abandon those who trust in him, the Apostle mentions the comfort he received from the Lord, saying, he delivered us from so deadly a peril. In regard to this he does three things: first, he describes his present comfort against past evils; secondly, the comfort to come; thirdly, the cause of love. He says, therefore: We have been comforted by God, who delivered us in the past from so deadly a peril, and is delivering us in the present, because he does not stop delivering: “When you pass through the waters I will be with you” (Is. 43:2); on him we have set our hope that he will deliver us again, adding in the future: “You who fear the Lord, hope for good things” (Sir. 2:9). Your prayers give us cause for this hope; hence he says, you also must help us by prayer, which you make for us: “A brother helped is like a strong city” (Prov. 18:19); “I appeal to you, brethren, by our Lord Jesus Christ and by the love of the Spirit, to strive together with me in your prayers to God on my behalf” (Rom. 15:30). These prayers are necessary, because God gives many gifts to one person due to the prayers of many. The reason is that God wishes to be thanked for the gifts he gives, and as a result many are bound to give thanks. This happens when, as a result of giving to one person because of the prayers of many, he puts all those at whose prayers he gave some good under an obligation to him. Consequently, not only the one who received the benefit, but those who prayed should give thanks to God. And this is what he says, so that many will give thanks. And he says, from many faces, either as to age or condition or the diversity of nations or customs. On our behalf for the blessing, i.e., for the gift of faith which we have, granted us in answer to many prayers: “Always and for everything giving thanks in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ to God the Father” (Eph. 5:20). Or another way: “from the faces of many persons”, i.e., the condition of persons. I say, “For the blessing granted to us”, i.e., because they have the same gift, namely of faith or of charity; i.e., by means of the many persons who are in the faith of Christ, “thanks may be given on our behalf.” Therefore, according to this explanation, by the many faces are understood the various virtues, so that the predominant virtue in a person is called his face; thus, patience is the face of Job, humility the face of David, and so on.
1-4
2 Cor. 1:12-14Posita consolatione apostolo a Deo facta post persecutionem, hic consequenter consolationis causam assignat, quae est de spe divini auxilii. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo proponit causam spei; secundo adducit ad hoc testimonium eorum quibus scribit, ibi non enim alia, et cetera. 29. – After speaking of the comfort he had received from God following his persecution, the Apostle assigns the cause of this comfort, which is hope in God’s help. In regard to this he does two things: first, he states the cause of hope; secondly, he supports this with the testimony of those to whom he is writing (v. 13). Dicit ergo: dico quod speramus adhuc eripi a domino et consolari, nam gloria, etc., quasi dicat: causa huius est bona conscientia nostra. Spes enim est expectatio futurorum ex gratia et meritis proveniens. Unde et circa hoc tria facit. Primo ostendit gloriam quam habet de testimonio purae conscientiae; secundo causam huius gloriae insinuat, ibi quod in simplicitate; tertio manifestat unde proveniat haec causa, ibi et non in sapientia carnali. 30. – He says, therefore: I say that we still hope to be rescued by God to be comforted, For our boast is this, the testimony of our conscience, as if to say: the cause of this hope is our good conscience, for hope is an expectation of things to come and arises from grace and merits. Hence, in regard to this he also does three things: first, he shows the boast which he has in the testimony of a pure conscience; secondly, he suggests the cause of this boasting (v. 12b); thirdly, he discloses the source of this cause (v. 12c). Dicit ergo: ideo spero et confido de Deo, quia gloria nostra, id est, glorior ex testimonio et puritate conscientiae nostrae, ex quibus secure potest confidere de Deo. I Io. III, 20: si cor nostrum nos reprehenderit, et cetera. Rom. VIII, 16: ipse spiritus testimonium, et cetera. Notandum autem quod conscientiae testimonium verum est, quia non decipit. Multi enim exterius videntur boni, qui in conscientia sua non sunt boni. Et semper durat. Sed non dicit conscientiae aliorum sed nostrae, quia semper homo plus debet stare testimonio conscientiae suae de se, quam testimonio aliorum; quod non faciunt illi qui reputant se bonos ex hoc quod alii sunt mali, non ex hoc quod ipsi in veritate boni sint; et illi qui gloriantur de bonitate alicuius boni viri, qui eis aliqua affinitate coniungitur. 31. – He says, therefore: The reason I hope and trust in God is because our boast is this, the testimony of our conscience, i.e., I glory in the testimony and purity of our conscience: “If our hearts do not condemn us, we have confidence before God” (1 Jn. 3:21): “The Spirit himself bearing witness with our spirit that we are children of God” (Rom. 8:16). It should be noted that the testimony of conscience is true, because it does not deceive; for many appear good outwardly who are not good in their conscience; and conscience always endures. He does not say, “the conscience of others,” but our conscience, because a man should put more trust in the testimony of his own conscience about himself than in the testimony of others; they do not do this who consider themselves good because others are evil rather than because they themselves are truly good. Nor is it done by those who boast in the goodness of a good person, who is joined to them by some bond. Causam autem huius gloriae insinuat, dicens, quod in simplicitate, etc.; quae consistit in duobus. In duobus enim consistit puritas conscientiae, ut scilicet ea quae facit sint bona, et quod intentio facientis sit recta, et ista dicit apostolus de se. Primo quod habet intentionem rectam ad Deum in operibus suis, et ideo dicit quod in simplicitate, id est in rectitudine intentionis. Sap. I, 1: in simplicitate cordis, et cetera. Prov. XI, 3: simplicitas iustorum, et cetera. Secundo quod ea quae facit sunt bona, et ideo dicit et sinceritate operationis, Phil. I, v. 10: ut sitis sinceri et sine offensa. 32. – He suggests the cause of this boast when he says, in simplicity of heart, which consists of two things. For purity of conscience consists of two things, namely, that the things a person does are good and that his intention is right. These two things the Apostle says of himself. First, that he has a right intention towards God in his action; hence he says, in simplicity of heart, i.e., with a right intention: “Seek him with sincerity of heart” (Wis. 1:1); “The integrity of the upright guides them” (Prov. 11:3). Secondly, that the things he does are good; hence, he says, and godly sincerity in his actions: “That you may be pure and blameless” (Phil. 1:10) Unde autem proveniat huius gloriae causa, manifestat subdens sed non in sapientia carnis. Hoc potest dupliciter legi. Primo ut referatur ad hoc quod immediate praecedit, scilicet Dei; et tunc est insinuativum, unde veniat ei sinceritas et simplicitas; quasi dicat: multi antiqui fuerunt sapientes in sapientia terrena, sicut philosophi, et multi Iudaei pure vixerunt confidentes in iustitia legis, sed nos non in sapientia carnali, quae secundum naturas rerum, vel desideria carnis est, sed in gratia Dei conversati sumus in hoc mundo. Rom. VIII, 6: prudentia carnis mors est, et cetera. I Cor. II, 4: non in persuasibilibus humanae sapientiae verbis, et cetera. I Cor. XV, v. 10: gratia Dei sum id quod sum. Vel etiam secundum hunc modum non in sapientia, etc., id est, quasi innixus humanae sapientiae, sed gratiae Dei. Prov. III, 5: ne innitaris prudentiae tuae. Alio modo potest exponi, ut hoc quod dicit in simplicitate, etc., referatur ad puritatem vitae; hoc vero quod dicit non in sapientia, etc., referatur ad veritatem doctrinae, quasi dicat: sicut vita nostra est in simplicitate et sinceritate Dei, sic doctrina non est in sapientia carnali, sed in gratia Dei. Sed tamen duae primae magis valent. Et licet sic bene conversati simus in mundo isto, tamen abundantius quantum ad vos, quia scilicet ab aliis Ecclesiis receperat sumptus, ab eis non. Infra XI, 8: alias Ecclesias expoliavi. Et ratio huius potest esse, quia avari erant, unde, ne contristaret eos, noluit ab eis recipere sumptus. 33. – He discloses the source of the cause of this glory when he says, not by earthly wisdom. This can be taken in two ways. First, as referring to what he had just said, namely, godly sincerity, and then he is suggesting the source of his sincerity and simplicity; as if to say: many of the ancients were wise in earthly wisdom, as the philosophers, and many Jews lived honorably, trusting in the justice of the Law, but we have behaved in the world, not by earthly wisdom, which is according to the nature of things, nor by the desires of the flesh, but by the grace of God: “To set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace” (Rom. 8:6); “not in plausible words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power” (1 Cor. 2:4); “By the grace of God I am what I am” (1 Cor. 15:10). Or even according to this manner, not by earthly wisdom, i.e., as though relying on human wisdom, but by the grace of God: “Do not rely on your own insight” (Prov. 3:5) Or it might be explained in another way, so that in saying, in simplicity of heart and godly sincerity, he is referring to his purity of life; but in saying, not by earthly wisdom, but by the grace of God, he is referring to the truth of his teaching; as if to say: Just as our life is in the simplicity and sincerity of God, so our teaching is not in earthly wisdom, but in the grace of God. But the first two interpretations are more valid. And although we have behaved thus in the world, yet still more toward you, because he had received collections from the other churches, but not from them: “I robbed other churches” (2 Cor. 11:8). The reason for this might be that they were greedy; hence, in order not to sadden them, he refused to take any revenue from them. Consequenter huius sanctae suae conversationis testimonium eorum invocat, dicens non enim alia, etc., quasi dicat: haec quae scribimus vobis, non sunt vobis incognita, quia iam legistis ea in prima epistola, et cognovistis per experientiam operum. I Io. II, v. 7: non mandatum novum. Et licet non perfecte cognoveritis, quia comparastis vobis pseudo-apostolos, spero tamen quod usque in finem, scilicet vitae, cognoscetis, scilicet perfecte, sicut usque modo cognovistis nos ex parte. Cuius ratio est, quia cum quis videt aliquem aliquid bene incipere, debet sperare quod semper bene proficiat. Et quare? Quia qui coepit in vobis opus bonum, etc., ut dicitur Phil. I, 6. Et cognoscetis, quia nos sumus gloria vestra, id est, per nos debetis consequi gloriam aeternam, ad quam homo pervenit per fidem Christi, quam praedicamus vobis. Prov. XVII, 6: gloria filiorum sunt patres eorum. Ita dico sumus gloria vestra, sicut et vos gloria nostra estis, quia per vos a nobis instructos habere speramus praemium aeternae gloriae. I Thess. II, 19: quae est spes nostra aut corona gloriae nostrae? Nonne vos? Et haec gloria erit nobis ex vobis, in die domini nostri Iesu Christi, id est, in die iudicii, qui dicitur Christi, quia tunc faciet voluntatem suam cum peccatoribus, puniendo eos, qui in hoc mundo fecerunt voluntatem suam, contra Christi domini voluntatem peccando. Ps. LXXIV, 3: cum accepero tempus, ego iustitias iudicabo, et cetera. Apoc. XX, v. 12: libri aperti sunt, et cetera. 34. – Then he calls on them to witness to this holy manner of life, saying, For we write you nothing but what you can read and understand. As if to say: these things I write to you are not unknown to you, because you have already read them in the first letter, and you know them by experience: “I am writing you no new commandment, but an old commandment” (1 Jn. 2:7). And although you do not know fully, because you have received false apostles, I hope you will to the end, namely, of your life, understand, namely, perfectly, as you have understood in part. The reason for this is that when we see someone starting well, we should hope that he will always progress well. And why? Because “he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ” (Phil. 1:6) And you will understand, that you can be proud of us, i.e., that through us you should obtain eternal glory, which a person reaches through the faith of Christ, which we preach to you: “The glory of sons is their fathers” (Prov. 17:6). I say that you can be proud of us as we can be of you, because we hope for the reward of eternal glory through you who have been instructed by us: “For what is our hope or joy or crown of boasting? Is it not you?” (1 Th. 2:19). And this boast will be ours from you on the day of the Lord Jesus, i.e., on the day of judgment, which is called Christ’s day, because he will then accomplish his will with sinners by punishing those who in this world did their own will by sinning against the will of Christ the Lord: “At the set time which I appoint I will judge with equity” (Ps. 75:2); “And books were opened . . . and the dead were judged by what was written in the books, by what they had done” (Rev. 20:12).
1-5
2 Cor. 1:15-24Apostolus, captata benevolentia Corinthiorum, consequenter excusationem suam addit, et circa hoc tria facit. Primo enim ponit intentum; secundo sub quaestione accusationem contra eum ab eis factam exponit, ibi cum ergo hoc, etc.; tertio excusat se, ibi fidelis autem Deus. 35. – After winning the good will of the Corinthians, the Apostle adds his excuse. In regard to this he does three things: first, he mentions what he intends; secondly, in the form of a question he answers an accusation they made against him (v. 17); thirdly, he excuses himself. Circa primum sciendum est quod apostolus in prima epistola (quam nos non habemus) missa ab eo Corinthiis, vel per nuntium, promiserat eis quod primo iret ad eos antequam iret in Macedoniam, et per eos iret in Macedoniam, et iterum inde rediret in Achaiam, in qua est Corinthus, et de Achaia in Iudaeam; postmodum, in secunda epistola, quam nos habemus primam, scribit eis quod primo iret in Macedoniam, et postmodum iret in Corinthum. Quia ergo videtur secundum hoc contrarium primae promissioni, apostolus excusat se modo de hoc, ponens primo ipsam promissionem primo factam, et ideo dicit et hac confidentia, quasi dicat: vos scitis puritatem et sinceritatem meam, et estis testes mei, et gloria mea, ideo in hac confidentia, id est in hoc confisus, quia per alterutrum glorificari speramus, volui primo venire ad vos, ut secundam gratiam haberetis, quia secunda visitatio et confirmatio in fide, dicitur secunda gratia respectu conversionis, quam primo habuerunt ministerio et praedicatione ipsius. Et per vos transire in Macedoniam, et iterum a Macedonia venire ad vos, et a vobis deduci in Iudaeam. Iste est ordo primae promissionis, sed in praecedenti epistola est ordo contrarius, sicut dictum est. 36. – In regard to the first it should be noted that in a previous epistle (which we do not have), which the Apostle has sent to the Corinthians by a messenger, he had promised them that he would visit them before going to Macedonia, and that he would return again to Achaia, where Corinth is, and from Achaia to Judea. Then in a second epistle, which we call the first, he wrote them that he would first go to Macedonia and later to Corinth. Therefore, because this seemed contrary to the first promise, the Apostle now excuses himself for this by first mentioning the promise he originally made; hence, he says, Because I was sure of this. As if to say: you know my honesty and sincerity and you are my witnesses and my glory; therefore, because I was sure of this, i.e., relying on this, because we hope to be glorified by you, I wanted to come to you first, so that you might have a double pleasure, because a second visit and strengthening of the faith is called a second grace in relation to the time they were first converted by his ministry and his teaching. I wanted to visit you on my way to Macedonia, and to come back to you from Macedonia, and have you send me on my way to Judea. This is the sequence of the first promise, but in the preceding epistle this is a contrary sequence, as has been said. Consequenter huius mutationis accusationem, qua accusabant eum Corinthii, ponit sub quaestione, dicens cum ergo hoc voluissem, et cetera. Duo imponebant ei ex hoc, levitatem, quia mutaverat propositum, Eccli. XXVII, 12: stultus ut luna mutatur, et carnalitatem, quia visum erat eis, quod ex aliquo carnali et humano affectu hoc fecisset. Unde haec duo tangit, et primo levitatem, unde dicit numquid levitate usus sum, si non feci quod aliquando volui? Absit. Est. XVI, 9: nec putare debetis, si diversa iubeamus, ex animi levitate venire. Ps. XXXIV, 18: in populo gravi, et cetera. Secundo tangit carnalitatem cum dicit aut numquid ea quae cogito, facienda vel dimittenda, secundum carnem cogito, id est secundum aliquem carnalem affectum, ut sit apud me, est et non, id est affirmatio et negatio? Infra X, 2: arbitrantur nos tamquam secundum carnem ambulemus. Iac. c. I, 8: vir duplex animo, et cetera. 37. – Then he puts the accusation for this change, for which the Corinthians accused him, in the form of a question, saying, Was I vacillating when I wanted to do this? For on account of this they charged him with two things: light-mindedness, because he changed his mind: “The fool changes like the moon” (Sir. 27:11); and carnal love, because it seemed to them that he had done this from some carnal and human affection. Hence, he touches on two points: first, light-mindedness, and he says, Was I vacillating, if I failed to do what I once wanted to do? God forbid! “Neither must you think, if we command different things, that it comes from the levity of our mind” (Est. 16:9, Vulgate); “In the mighty throng I will praise you” (Ps. 35:18). Secondly he touches on carnal affection, when he says, Do I make my plans like a worldly man, i.e., according to carnal affection, ready to say Yes and No at once, i.e., to affirm and deny: “Some suspect us of acting in worldly fashion” (2 Cor. 10:2); “A double-minded man is unstable in all his ways” (Jas. 1:7-8). Exposita eorum accusatione, consequenter excusat se, dicens fidelis autem Deus, etc., et circa hoc duo facit. Primo insinuat se non fuisse mentitum; secundo ostendit modum quomodo non fuit mentitus, ibi qui autem confirmat, et cetera. 38. – Having enlarged upon their accusation, he excuses himself, saying, As surely as God is faithful, our word to you has not been Yes and No. In regard to this he does two things: first, he declares that he did not lie; secondly, he shows how he did not lie (v. 21). Quod autem non fuerit mentitus, excusat se dupliciter, scilicet ex consuetudine, et ex causa. Ex consuetudine quidem, quia non debet credi quod aliquis de facili mentiatur, qui numquam inventus est mendax, et secundum hanc expositionem fidelis Deus, etc., accipitur in vi iuramenti, quasi: testis sit mihi Deus, quod sermo meus, scilicet praedicationis, qui fuit apud vos, non est in illo est et non, id est, non est in illo falsitas. Deut. XXXII, 4: Deus fidelis, et absque ulla, et cetera. Si autem sumatur fidelis Deus, etc., pro veritate divinae promissionis, tunc est sensus: fidelis est Deus, id est servat promissa sua. Promiserat autem mittere ad vos praedicatores veritatis, Ier. III, 15: dabo vobis pastores iuxta cor, etc., et ideo cum sim missus ab eo, sermo noster qui fuit, etc., sicut supra. Ex causa excusat se, cum dicit Dei enim filius. Et hoc dupliciter, scilicet motiva et efficiente, ibi qui autem confirmat, et cetera. 39. – He shows in two ways that he had not lied, namely, from his character and from the cause [for his not lying]. From his character, because we should not suppose that a person would easily lie, if he has never been found to be a liar. According to this explanation, As surely as God is faithful, is spoken with the force of an oath. As if to say: God is my witness that my word, namely, my preaching, to you has not been Yes and No, i.e., there is no falsity in it: “A faithful God, without deceit, just and upright is he” (Deut. 32:4). But if God is faithful is taken for the truth of the divine promise, then the sense is: God is faithful, i.e., he keeps his promises, but he had promised to send you preachers of the truth: “I will give you shepherds after my own heart” (Jer. 3:15). Therefore, since I was sent by him, our word to you has not been Yes and No. Causa autem motiva ad non mentiendum est, quia qui assumit aliquod officium, naturaliter movetur ad ea quae congruunt illi officio, et non ad contraria. Sed constat quod officium apostolicum est praedicare veritatem; non ergo movetur ad contrarium veritatis, quod est mentiri. Et circa hoc tria facit. Primo probat veritatem dicti sui per dictum Christi; secundo veritatem Christi per dictum Dei, ibi quotquot autem, etc.; tertio concludit suum propositum, ibi ideo et per ipsum, et cetera. 40. – In regard to the cause, he excuses himself for two reasons, namely, from the motive and the efficient cause. His motive for not lying is that a person who assumes an office is naturally moved to what suits that office and not to what is contrary; but it is obvious that the Apostle’s office is to preach the truth. Therefore, he is not moved to the contrary of the truth, which is to lie. In regard to this he does three things: first, he proves the truth of his word by the word of Christ; secondly, he proves the truth of Christ by the word of God; thirdly, he concludes to what he intended (v. 20b). Dicit ergo primo: dico quod dicta nostra debent reputari vera, et vera sunt, quia praedicavimus Christum in quo non fuit aliqua falsitas. Et hoc est quod dicit Dei enim filius Christus, qui est praedicatus per nos in vobis; per me, scilicet principaliter, et Sylvanum, secundario (iste est Sylas de quo habetur Act. XVIII, 5) et Timotheum, de quo supra. Isti enim duo fuerunt cum apostolo, quando primo convertit eos. In illo, scilicet filio Dei, non fuit est et non, id est, falsitas, vel non fecit quod non convenit. Sed fuit in illo est, id est veritas; nam verum et ens convertuntur. Io. c. XIV, 6: ego sum via, veritas et vita. 41. – He says, therefore: I say that our words should be regarded as true, and true they are, because we have preached Christ, in whom there is no falsehood. And this is what he says, For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, whom we preached among you, Silvanus, by me, i.e. to say principally, and Silvanus, secondarily (he is the Silas of Ac. 18:5), and Timothy mentioned above. For those two were with the Apostle when he first converted them. He, namely, the Son of God, was not Yes and No, i.e., there was not falsity, for he did nothing unbecoming, but in him it is always Yes, i.e., the truth, for truth and being are convertible: “I am the way and the truth and the life” (Jn. 14:6). Sed quia posset videri dubium hoc quod dicit, quod in Christo non fuit falsitas, ideo statim hoc probat, subdens quotquot autem, et cetera. Et probat hoc modo. Constat quod in illo quod est manifestativum divinae veritatis non potest esse falsitas; filius Dei venit ad manifestandum divinam veritatem in promissionibus a Deo factis complendis per ipsum; ergo in ipso non est falsitas. Et hoc est quod dicit: non est in filio Dei est et non, sed est, quia quotquot promissiones Dei, scilicet sunt factae hominibus, in illo, id est in Christo, est, id est in Christo verificantur et complentur. Rom. XV, 8: dico Iesum Christum ministrum fuisse, et cetera. Ad confirmandas, et cetera. 42. – But because there might be some doubt about his statement that there was no falsity in Christ, he at once proves this, saying, For all the promises of God find their Yes in him. He proves this in the following way: it is obvious that there can be no falsity in that which is the manifestation of the divine truth; but the Son of God came to manifest the divine truth in the promises made by God to be fulfilled through him. Therefore there is no falsity in him. And that is what he says: there is not in the Son of God Yes and No, because all the promises of God, namely made to men, find their Yes in him, i.e., in Christ, i.e., they are verified and fulfilled in Christ: “I tell you that Christ became a servant to the circumcised to show God’s truthfulness, in order to confirm the promises given to the patriarchs” (Rom. 15:8) Ex his ergo concludit, quod postquam dicta sua vera sunt, quia praedicat filium Dei, in quo est veritas, ideo et per ipsum, scilicet Christum, dicimus, amen Deo, id est verum. Apoc. III, 14: haec dicit, amen testis fidelis, et cetera. Is. LXV, 16: qui benedictus est in terra, benedicetur in Deo, amen, et cetera. Et istam veritatem dicimus Deo, id est, ad honorem Dei, scilicet manifestantes eius veritatem et gloriam nostram, quia gloria nostra est conversio vestra. Vel gloria nostra, quia gloria nostra est ostendere et praedicare verbum Dei. 43. – From this, therefore, the Apostle concludes that his words are true, because he preaches the Son of God, in whom is the truth. That is why through him, namely, Christ, we utter the Amen, i.e., that which is true: “The words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness” (Rev. 3:14); “He who blesses himself in the land shall bless himself by the God of truth, amen” (Is. 65:16). This truth we say to God, i.e., to the honor of God, namely, manifesting his truth to the glory of God and our glory, because our glory is to show and preach the word of God. Consequenter cum dicit qui autem confirmat, etc., probat apostolus quod non est mentitus, per causam efficientem. Licet enim homo ex libero arbitrio possit uti lingua sua ad verum vel ad falsum loquendum, nihilominus tamen Deus potest confirmare hominem sic in vero, ut non nisi vera loquatur. Si ergo Deus aliquem confirmaret in vero, manifestum est quod non diceret falsum; sed Deus confirmat nos in veritate; ergo, et cetera. Et ideo dicit quod Deus est qui confirmat vos nobiscum in Christo, id est, in vera praedicatione Christi, quasi dicat: si Christus esset extra nos, possemus mentiri, sed ex quo est nobiscum, et nos sumus in Christo, non mentimur. Ps. LXXIV, 4: ego confirmavi columnas eius, et cetera. Sumus ergo in Christo dupliciter, scilicet per gratiam et per gloriam. Per gratiam quidem sumus inquantum uncti sumus spiritus sancti gratia, et effecti sumus membra Christi, et iuncti sibi. Qua etiam gratia Christus unctus est secundum quod homo. Ps. XLIV, v. 8: unxit te Deus, et cetera. Et ex plenitudine istius unctionis redundavit in omnes suos, sicut unguentum in capite, scilicet Christo, quod descendit, et cetera. Et ideo dicit quod unxit nos Deus. Unxit, inquam, in reges et sacerdotes. Apoc. V, 10: fecisti nos Deo, et cetera. I Petr. II, 9: vos autem genus electum, et cetera. 44. – Then when he says, but it is God who establishes us with you in Christ, and has anointed us, the Apostle proves that he has not lied by the efficient cause. For although a man by his free will can employ his tongue for speaking truth or falsity, God can establish a man so well in the truth, that he would speak nothing but the truth. Therefore, if God established someone in the truth, it is obvious that he could not say anything false; but God establishes us in the truth. And therefore he says, it is God who establishes us with you in Christ, i.e., in the true preaching of Christ. As if to say: if Christ were outside us, we could lie, but because he is with us and we in Christ, we do not lie: “It is I who keep steady its pillars” (Ps. 75:3). Therefore we are in Christ in two ways, namely, by grace and by glory: by grace, inasmuch as we have been anointed with the grace of the Holy Spirit and made members of Christ and joined to him; by which grace Christ as man was also anointed: “God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness above your fellows” (Ps. 45:7). And from the fullness of that anointing it has overflowed to all of us as “the precious oil on the head”, namely of Christ, “has flowed down on the beard, the beard of Aaron” (Ps. 133:2). Therefore, he says that God has anointed us. He anointed us, I say, as kings and priests: “You made them a kingdom and priests to our God” (Rev. 5:10); “You are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation” (1 Pet. 2:9). Unionem autem quae est per gloriam, non habemus in re, sed in spe certa, inquantum habemus firmam spem vitae aeternae. Et habemus duplicem certitudinem spei huius unionis consequendae. Una est per signum, alia per pignus. Per signum evidens, quia fidei. Unde dicit signavit nos signo fidei Christi. Item signum crucis. Ez. IX, 4: signa thau, id est signum crucis. Apoc. VII, 3: quoadusque signemus servos Dei nostri, et cetera. Et hoc per spiritum sanctum. Rom. VIII, 9: si quis spiritum Christi non habet, et cetera. Et ideo speciale et certum signum est vitae aeternae consequendae configurari Christo. Cant. VIII, 6: pone me ut signaculum, et cetera. Vel signavit signo vitae. Per pignus vero maximum, quia spiritus sancti, et ideo dicit dedit pignus spiritus in cordibus nostris. De quo certum est quod nullus potest eum accipere a nobis. 45. – But the union which is according to glory we do not yet have in reality, but in sure hope, inasmuch as we have a firm hope of attaining to this union. And we have a twofold certainty of hope resulting from the hope of this union. One is by a sign, the other by a pledge. [The first is] by an evident sign, which is of faith. Hence he says, he has put his seal upon us with the sign of Christian faith: “Put a mark on their foreheads” (Ez. 9:4), i.e., the sign of the cross: “Till we have sealed the servants of our God upon their foreheads” (Rev. 7:3). And this is done through the Holy Spirit: “Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him” (Rom. 8:9). Therefore the special and certain sign of obtaining eternal life is configuration to Christ: “Set me as a seal upon your heart” (Sg. 8:6). Or he sealed us with the sign of life. [The second is] by the greatest pledge, i.e., of the Holy Spirit; and so he says and given us his Spirit in our hearts as a guarantee, and we are certain that no one can take him from us. Sed nota, in pignore duo sunt consideranda, scilicet quod faciat spem habendae rei, et quod valeat tantum, quantum valet res, vel plus; et haec duo sunt in spiritu sancto. Quia si consideremus substantiam spiritus sancti, sic valet tantum spiritus sanctus quantum vita aeterna, quae est ipse Deus, quia scilicet valet quantum omnes tres personae. Si vero consideretur modus habendi, sic facit spem, et non possessionem vitae aeternae, quia nondum perfecte habemus ipsum in vita ista. Et ideo non perfecte beati sumus, nisi quando perfecte habebimus in patria. Eph. I, 13: signati estis spiritu. 46. – But note that there are two things to be considered in a pledge, namely, that it produces a hope of obtaining the reality, and that it is as valid as the reality or more so. And these two things are in the Holy Spirit, because if we consider the substance of the Holy Spirit, he is as valid as eternal life, which is God, because he is as valid as the three persons. But if we consider the manner in which [he] is possessed, then it produces the hope but not the possession of eternal life, because we do not yet have him perfectly in this life. Therefore we are not perfectly happy until we have him perfectly in heaven: “You were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit” (Eph. 1:13). Consequenter cum dicit ego autem testem, etc., excusat se de eo quod non venit: et hoc per iuramentum quod maius est. Et circa hoc tria facit. Primo ponit suam excusationem; secundo respondet tacitae quaestioni, ibi non quia dominamur; tertio exponit quod dicit, ibi nam fide statis. Excusat se autem per iuramentum duplex. Unum attestationis, cum dicit ego autem testem Deum invoco, aliud execrationis, cum dicit in animam meam, id est, contra animam meam. Rom. I, 9: testis est mihi Deus, et cetera. Testem, inquam, invoco Deum, quia non veni ultra, id est, post primam vicem, vel postquam discessi a vobis; et hoc feci, parcens vobis, scilicet quia ipse sciebat eos incorrigibiles. Unde si ivisset tunc, aut punivisset, et sic forte recessissent totaliter a fide; aut non punivisset, et sic dedisset occasionem magis peccandi. Sed quia aliquis posset dicere: quare dicis parcens vobis? Numquid dominus noster es? Ideo consequenter hoc removet, dicens non, dico, quia dominamur fidei vestrae, sed adiutores, etc., quasi dicat: non dico hoc ut dominus, sed ut coadiutor. I Petr. V, v. 3: non enim dominantes in cleris, et cetera. Adiutor, inquam, gaudii vestri, vel emendationis vestrae. Quare autem dicat, fidei vestrae, exponit consequenter, dicens nam fide statis, id est, statis in gratia ista Christi per fidem. 47. – The when he says, but I call God to witness, he gives his excuse for not coming; and this is by oath which is greater. In regard to this he does three things: first, he states the excuse; secondly, he answer a tacit question (v. 24a); thirdly, he explains what he says (v. 24b). He excuses himself with a double oath: one of attestation, when he says, I call God to witness; the other of execration, when he says, against me, i.e., against my soul: “For God is my witness” (Rom. 1:9). As witness, I say, I call upon God, because I refrained from coming, i.e., after the first time or after I departed from you; and this I did to spare you, namely, because he knew that they were incorrigible. Hence, if he had gone then, he would either have punished them, and they perhaps would have left the faith altogether, or he would not have punished them, and then he would have been giving them occasion to sin more. But because someone could say, Why do you say spare us? Are you our lord? He removes this, saying, not that we lord it over your faith; we work with you for your joy. As if to say: I do not say this as a lord, but as a helper: “Not as those domineering over those in your charge, but being examples to the flock” (1 Pet. 5:3). A helper, I say, for your joy, or for your improvement. Why he says, of your faith, he explains, saying, for you stand firm in your faith, i.e., you stand in that grace of Christ by faith.
2-1
2 Cor. 2:1-4Apostolus supra posuit excusationem in generali de mora eundi ad Corinthios, hic vero insinuat causam tantae morae, et quomodo eis pepercit. Circa hoc autem duo facit. Primo enim insinuat unam causam dilationis fuisse ne in adventu suo tristitiam inferret eis; secundo ostendit aliam causam fuisse ne fructus quem apud alios sperabat, et inceperat facere, impediretur, ibi cum venissem autem, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo ostendit causam dilationis esse in communi, ne tristitiam inferret; secundo loquitur in speciali de quodam, qui eum contristaverat, ibi si quis autem contristavit me. Circa primum tria facit. Primo assignat rationem quare venire distulit; secundo causam dicti assignat si enim ego contristatus, etc.; tertio manifestat quae dixit, ibi nam ex multa tribulatione. 48. – After giving a general excuse for his delay in visiting the Corinthians, the Apostle now gives the cause of his delay and how he spared them. In regard to this he does two things: first, he mentions that one cause of his delay was that he might not pain them by coming; secondly, he shows that another cause was that the fruit he hoped for from others and which was beginning to ripen, might not be hindered (v. 12). In regard to the first he does two things: first, he shows that the cause of his delay in general was to avoid paining them; secondly, he speaks in particular about a certain person who had grieved him (v. 5). In regard to the first he does three things: first, he tells why he postponed his visit; secondly, he gives the reason for his statement (v. 2); thirdly, he explains what he said (v. 4). Dicit ergo: dixi quod non veni ad vos parcens vobis, in hoc scilicet quia nolui vos contristari, ideo statui, id est firmiter disposui, hoc ipsum apud me, quod proposui, cum aliam epistolam misi, Eccli. XXXVII, v. 20: ante omnia verbum verum, et cetera. Ne iterum, id est alia vice, in tristitia venirem ad vos, id est vos contristem. Et ratio quare noluit eos contristare est illa qua dominus noluit ieiunare discipulos suos, scilicet ad hoc, ut amore et non timore afficerentur ad Christum, et iungerentur sibi. Voluit enim eos dominus firmare et nutrire in fide, in omni dulcedine et desiderio cordis, et sic, firmati ex amore, non de facili avellerentur propter tribulationes, quia aquae multae non potuerunt extinguere charitatem, Cant. VIII, 7. Similiter apostolus non vult eos propter hoc contristare. 49. – He says, therefore: I have said that it was in order not to grieve you that I did not come to you. Therefore, I made up my mind, i.e., about what I mentioned when I sent the other letter: “Reason is the beginning of every work, and counsel precedes every undertaking” (Sir. 37:16); not to make you another painful visit, i.e., not to cause you pain. The reason he did not wish to grieve them is the same one whereby the Lord did not wish his disciples to fast, namely, in order that they be drawn to Christ and be joined to him not by fear but by love. For the Lord wished to strengthen and nourish them in the faith in all sweetness and heartfelt desire, so that, being thus established in love, they would not easily turn away from him because of tribulations, for “many waters cannot extinguish love” (Sg. 8:7). For the same reason the Apostle does not want to pain them on this account. Rationem huius dicti, scilicet quod non vult eos contristare, assignat cum dicit si enim ego contristo, et cetera. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo assignat causam quare noluit eos contristare; secundo manifestat quare hoc significet eis, ibi et hoc ipsum scripsi. 50. – He assigns the reason for what he says, namely, that he does not want to pain them, when he says, for if I cause you pain, who is there to make me glad but the one whom I have pained? In regard to this he does two things: first, he deals with the reason why he did not wish to pain them; secondly, he shows why he tells them this (v. 3). Dicit ergo: ratio quare nolui in tristitia venire est quia tristitia vestra redundat in tristitiam meam, et de consolatione vestra gaudeo, et solum vos consolamini me, cum sum apud vos; unde, si venirem et contristarem vos, ego ex tristitia vestra tristarer, et sic nullus esset qui laetificaret me inter vos, qui contristamini ex me, quia contristatus non de facili alium consolatur. Prov. c. X, 1: filius sapiens, et cetera. Prov. XXIX, 3: vir qui amat sapientiam, et cetera. Vel aliter: est duplex tristitia. Una secundum mundum; alia secundum Deum, quae poenitentiam in salutem operatur. Apostolus non loquitur de prima, sed de secunda. Et dicit: ex hoc ipso ego consolabor, si contristo vos, id est, si increpando reduco ad poenitentiam; sed si venirem, et viderem vos non poenitere de peccatis, tunc nullam consolationem haberem, quia nullus contristatur et poenitet ex me, id est, mea correctione et increpatione. 51. – He says, therefore: the reason why I did not wish you to fall into sadness was that your sadness pains me, and I rejoice in your consolation; and you only console me when I am with you. Hence, if I had come and pained you, I would be sad at your sadness; then there would be no one among you to gladden me, because you would be sad on my account. For one who is sad does not easily console another person: “A wise son makes a glad father, but a foolish son is a sorrow to his mother” (Prov. 10:1); “He who loves wisdom makes his father glad” (Prov. 29:3). Or in another way, there are two kinds of sadness. One is according to the world, and the other according to God who produces repentance leading to salvation. The Apostle is not speaking of the first, but of the second. He says: I will be consoled if I cause you pain, i.e., if by scolding you I bring you to repentance; but if I had come and seen you unrepentant of your sins, I would have had no consolation, because no one is sad and repentant because of me, i.e., because of my correction and rebuke. Causa autem quare hoc scribo vobis est ut ita disponatis vos quod, quando venero, non habeam tristitiam de eo quod viderim vos incorrectos, super tristitiam quam habui, quando audivi vos peccasse. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo ponit admonitionem; secundo spem de impletione admonitionis ostendit, ibi confidens in omnibus vobis, et cetera. Admonitio est ista: ideo scripsi vobis hoc, scilicet quod tristor de peccato vestro commisso, II Petr. II, 8: iniquis operibus animam iusti cruciabant, etc., ut paretis et disponatis vos corrigendo, ut cum venero ad vos, non habeam tristitiam de peccatis, de quibus, scilicet vobis, oportuerat me gaudere, id est, debebam laetari et congratulari, scilicet de praesentia vestra. Lc. XV, 10: gaudium est Angelis Dei, et cetera. Qualem autem spem habeat de impletione suae admonitionis, subdit, dicens: confidens de omnibus vobis, etc.; quasi dicat: hanc fiduciam habeo de vobis taliter disponi vos, ut cum venero, omnes detis mihi materiam gaudii. Et hoc debetis libenter facere, quia gaudium meum, etc., id est cedit ad gaudium vestrum, vel est propter gaudium vestrum, quod habetis de recuperatione gratiae. I Tim. II: quod est gaudium meum et cetera. Rom. XII, 15: gaudere cum gaudentibus, et cetera. 52. – But the reason I write this to you is that you so adjust yourselves, that when I come, I will not be sad at seeing you uncorrected, in addition to the sadness I experienced when I heard that you had sinned. In regard to this he does two things: first, he gives his admonition; secondly, he shows that he is confident it will be obeyed (v. 3b). The admonition is this: I wrote as I did, namely, that I am pained at the sin you committed: “he was vexed in his righteous soul day after day with their lawless deeds” (2 Pet. 2:8), in order that you might prepare and arrange yourselves by correction, so that when I came I might not suffer pain at your sins from those who should have made me rejoice, i.e., I ought to rejoice and be glad in your presence: “There is joy before the angels of God over one sinner who repents” (Lk. 15:10). The confidence he had that they would follow his admonition is indicated when he says, for I felt sure of all of you. As if to say: I have this confidence in you, that you will be so disposed, that when I come, all of you will give me reason for joy; and you should do this cheerfully, that my joy would be the joy of you all, i.e., it would contribute to your joy, or it is for the sake of your joy, which you have from the recovery of grace: “Rejoice with those who rejoice” (Rom. 12:15) Sed quia posset aliquis dubitare de hoc, quod dicit ne, cum venero, tristitiam super tristitiam habeam, et quaerere quam tristitiam habuit de eis, ideo consequenter hoc exponit, dicens nam ex multa tribulatione, et cetera. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo manifestat tristitiam iamdudum habitam; secundo respondet cuidam tacitae quaestioni, ibi non ut contristemini, et cetera. 53. – But because someone might be in doubt at his saying, so that when I came I might not suffer pain, and ask what sort of pain he had for them, he explains this saying, for I wrote you out of much affliction and anguish of heart. In regard to this he does two things: first, he mentions the pain he has already suffered; secondly, he answers a tacit question (v. 4b). Dicit ergo primo: quia haberem tristitiam, si non invenirem vos correctos, super tristitiam quam habui quando peccastis, et oportuit me contristare vos redarguendo dure. Nam ex multa tribulatione et angustia cordis scripsi primam epistolam, per multas lacrymas, quas fudi pro vobis iam mortuis per peccatum. Ier. IX, 1: quis dabit capiti meo aquas, et cetera. Eccli. XXII, v. 3: confusio est patri de filio indisciplinato. Is. LVII, 1: iustus perit, et non est qui recogitet, et cetera. Sciendum est autem quod duo ponit ad exaggerationem tristitiae, tribulationem scilicet et angustiam, quia unum additum alteri aggravat tristitiam. Nam aliquando quis tribulatur, sed sine angustia, tunc scilicet quando aliqua adversitate quasi acutissimo tribulo pungitur, et tamen videt sibi patere vias evadendi, quia si non pateat, tribulationi angustia iungitur. Dicit ergo ex multa tribulatione, qua pungebar de facto et malo vestri, et angustia cordis, quia non videbam unde de facili posset poni remedium, scripsi, et cetera. Ps. CXVIII, 143: tribulatio et angustia invenerunt me. 54. – First, therefore, he says: I would be pained if I found you uncorrected—a greater pain than I had when you sinned and I was obliged to sadden you with a sharp rebuke: for I wrote you in the first epistle out of much affliction and anguish of heart and with many tears, which I shed for you when you were already dead in sin: “O that my head were waters, and my eyes a fountain of tears” (Jer. 9:1); “It is a disgrace to be the father of an undisciplined son” (Sir. 22:3); “The righteous man perishes and no one lays it to heart” (Is. 57:1). But it should be noted that he mentions two things that amplify his pain, namely, affliction and anguish, because one added to the other increases sadness. For sometimes a person is sad but without anguish, namely, when he is pricked by some adversity as though by a very sharp thorn; and yet various ways of escape seem open to him, because if no way is open, anguish is joined to affliction. He says, therefore, for I wrote you out of much affliction, with which he was pricked by your deeds and your evil, and anguish of heart, because he could not see where a remedy could easily be found: “Trouble and anguish have come upon me” (Ps. 119:143). Sed quia possent dicere: o apostole, etiam haec scribis nobis ut tristemur, et ideo hoc removet, dicens non ut contristemini, scilicet scribo vobis illa, sed ut sciatis quam charitatem habeam in vobis. Duo enim sunt signa dilectionis, scilicet quod gaudeat quis de bono alterius, et tristetur de malo eius, et haec ego habeo ad vos. Infra V, v. 14: charitas Christi urget nos. Abundantius, quam credatis, vel abundantius quam ad alios. 55. – But because they could say, O Apostle, you even write these things to pain us, he anticipates this, saying, not to cause you pain do I write these things to you, but to let you know the abundant love that I have for you. For there are two signs of love, namely, to rejoice in the good of another and to be pained at his evil; and I have these toward you: “For the love of Christ controls us” (2 Cor. 5:14). More abundantly than you think, or more abundantly than toward others.
2-2
2 Cor. 2:5-11Postquam apostolus insinuavit causam dilationis, ne scilicet tristitiam inferret, et de eius contristatione tractavit, hic consequenter tractat de contristante. Et circa hoc tria facit. Primo enim exaggerat culpam contristantis; secundo poenam eius pro culpa inflictam, ibi sufficit illi, etc.; tertio hortatur eos habere misericordiam ad contristantem, ibi ita ut e contrario, et cetera. 56. – After giving the reason for his delay, namely, to avoid paining them, and after telling them of his sadness, the Apostle then treats here of the one causing his sadness. In regard to this he does three things: first, he speaks more fully of the guilt of the one who causes this sadness; secondly, of his punishment for the injury he inflicted (v. 6); thirdly, he urges them to have mercy on this person (v. 7). Dicit ergo primo: scripsi vobis per multas lacrymas, quas fudi propter tristitiam conceptam et propter poenam infligendam peccanti, sed si quis contristavit me, ille scilicet fornicarius enormis, de quo dicitur I Cor. V, 1: omnino auditur inter vos fornicatio, et cetera. Iste, inquam, et si contristavit, non contristavit me, sed ex parte, id est, non contristavit me, scilicet solum, sed vos et nos. Non omnes, sed ex parte. Et hoc dico, non ut onerem vos omnes, id est, ut vobis hoc onus omnibus non imponam derisorie loquendo, quasi dicat: non ita estis boni et diligitis me, quod pro tristitia mea, et pro peccato fratris omnes doleatis. Vel ut non onerem omnes vos, non tantum illos qui non doluerunt de peccato. 57. – He says, therefore: I have written to you with many tears, which I shed because of the sadness I fell and because of the punishment to be inflicted on the sinner, but if any one has caused me pain, he, namely, the heinous fornicator of whom he writes in 1 Corinthians (5:1): “It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and of a kind that is not found even among pagans”: that one, I say, even if he has caused sorrow, he has caused it not to me, but in some measure, i.e., he has caused it not to me alone, but you and us. Not all, but in some measure. And I say this, not to put it too severely to you all, i.e., that I may not lay this burden on all of you by speaking derisively. As if to say: you are not so good or love me so much that all of you would weep over my sadness and over the sin of a brother. Or, not to put it too severely to you all, not only those who did not grieve over the sin. Vel aliter dicendum, et melius, non me contristavit, sed ex parte, et cetera. Sciendum est enim quod aliquis aliquando tristatur totaliter, et aliquando non totaliter. Totaliter quidem tristatur quis, quando prae tristitia absorbetur a dolore; et haec tristitia est quae mortem operatur, ut dicitur infra, c. VII, 10, quae quidem, secundum philosophum, non cadit in sapientem. Non totaliter autem tristatur quis quando licet ex aliquo malo quod patitur seu videt fieri, tristatur, tamen ex aliis causis bonis gaudet, et ista tristitia est secundum Deum et cadit in sapientem. Quia ergo apostolus dicit se contristatum, ne credatur totaliter a tristitia absorptus, quod non est sapientis, dicit se contristatum ex parte, quasi non totaliter. Et secundum hoc legitur sic: contristavit me, scilicet fornicarius, propter peccatum suum sed non me contristavit totaliter, quia licet in ipso propter peccatum habuerim tristitiam, tamen in vobis propter multa bona quae facitis, et in ipso propter poenitentiam quam fecit, habeo gaudium. Et dico ex parte, ut non onerem omnes vos, id est, ut non imponam vobis hoc onus, quod scilicet contristaveritis me. 58. – Or it could be said and better: he has caused it not to me, but in some measure. For it should be noted that sometimes a person is completely saddened and sometimes not. He is completely saddened when he is engrossed by pain with his grief. This is the sadness that works death, as he says below (7:10), but that, according to the Philosopher, does not happen to a wise man. He is not completely sad when, although he is sad about some evil he is suffering or seems to be on its way, he nevertheless rejoices for other good reasons. This sadness is according to God and does happen to a wise man. Therefore, because the Apostle says that he was very sad, he adds that he was sad in some measure, as though not entirely, lest they suppose that he was altogether engrossed by sadness, which does not befit a wise man. According to this, the meaning is: He, i.e. the fornicator, has pained me on account of his sin, but he has not pained me entirely. For although I grieved for him because of his sin, yet I take joy in you because of the many good things you do, and in him because of his repentance. I say, in some measure, that I may not burden you all, i.e., that I may not lay this burden on you, namely, that you should grieve me. Sed ne isti propter tristitiam apostoli adhuc vellent eum magis punire, ostendit eis poenam sufficientem fuisse, dicens sufficit illi qui eiusmodi est, quod scilicet contristavit me, tam graviter peccando, obiurgatio quae fit a pluribus, id est tam manifesta et publica correctio, quae fuit, quod separatus fuit ab omni communione, id est excommunicatus ab Ecclesia et traditus Satanae, ut habetur I Cor. V, 5. Est ergo sufficiens haec poena propter dictas causas. Vel potest dici sufficiens, non quantum ad Dei iudicium, sed quantum expediebat tempori et personae. Melius enim est sic servare lenitatis spiritum in corrigendo, ut per poenitentiam correctionis fructus sequatur, quam si durius corrigatur, et desperet peccans et maioribus peccatis immergatur. Et ideo dicitur Eccli. XXI, 5: obiurgatio et iniuriae annullabunt substantiam. 59. – But lest they should wish to punish him more on account of the Apostle’s sadness, he shows them that the punishment was sufficient, saying, for such a one, namely, he who pained me so much by sinning, this punishment by the majority is enough, i.e., such a harsh public correction that he was excommunicated from the Church and delivered to Satan (1 Cor. 5:5). Therefore this punishment is enough for the above reasons. Or it can be called sufficient, not as to God’s judgment, but as was expedient for the time and the person. For it is better to observe such a spirit of leniency in correcting, that the fruit of correction follows on the penance, than to correct so harshly that the sinner despairs and falls into worse sins. Therefore is says in Sirach (21:4): “Terror and violence will lay waste riches.” Quia ergo poena sufficiens fuit et poenitentiam egit, ideo consequenter inducit eos ad miserendum, dicens ita ut e contrario magis, etc., ubi tria facit. Primo mandat ut ei, scilicet peccanti, parcant; secundo huius rationem assignat, ibi ne forte, et cetera. Tertio inducit eos ad observantiam huius monitionis, ibi propter quod, et cetera. 60. – Therefore, because that punishment was sufficient and he did penance, he urges them to show mercy, saying, so you should rather turn to forgive and comfort him. Here he does three things: first, he commands them to spare the sinner; secondly, he gives the reason (v. 7); thirdly, he urges them to observe this admonition (v. 8). Dicit ergo primo: dico quod sufficiens poena est illi, et intantum ut velim ut e contrario magis donetis, id est remittatis. Lc. VI, 37: dimittite, et dimittetur vobis. Eph. IV, 32: donantes invicem, sicut et Deus in Christo donavit vobis. Et non solum donetis, sed, quod plus est, consolemini. Et hoc proponendo sibi exempla peccantium, qui restituti sunt ad statum gratiae, sicut dicitur de David, Petro, Paulo, et Magdalena, et per verba Dei: Ez. XVIII, v. 32: nolo mortem peccatoris, et cetera. I Thess. c. ult.: corripite inquietos, consolamini pusillanimes, et cetera. 61. – He says first, therefore: I say that the punishment is sufficient for him, so much that you should rather turn to forgive him: “Forgive, and you will be forgiven” (Lk. 6:37); “Forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you” (Eph. 4:32). You should not only forgive, but what is more, you should comfort him, and this by recalling to themselves the example of sinners who were restored to the state of grace, such as David, Peter, Paul and Magdalene, and through the Word of God: “For I have no pleasure in the death of any one, says the Lord GOD; so turn, and live” (Ez. 18:32); “Admonish the idlers, encourage the fainthearted, help the weak, be patient with them all” (1 Th. 5:14). Rationem autem huius admonitionis subdit ne forte abundantiori tristitia absorbeatur qui eiusmodi est. Aliquis enim propter peccatum et poenam peccati, aliquando sic mergitur tristitia, quod absorbetur, dum nullum habet consolatorem; et hoc est malum, quia non sequitur ex hoc poenitentiae fructus, qui speratur, scilicet correctio, sed potius desperans tradit se omnibus peccatis, sicut Cain, cum dixit: maior est iniquitas, etc., Gen. IV, 13; et Eph. IV, 19: qui desperantes tradiderunt se, et cetera. Et propter hoc dicitur II Reg. II, 26, quod periculosa res est desperatio. Et ideo dicebat David in Ps. LXVIII, 16: neque absorbeat me profundum, et cetera. Et ideo ne hoc contingat, dicit consolamini, ut scilicet cesset a peccato. Is. XXVII, v. 9: hic est omnis fructus, ut auferatur peccatum. 62. – He gives the reason for this admonition, saying, or he may be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow. For some are sometimes so steeped in sorrow because of sin and punishment of sin, that they are overcome, when they have no one to comfort them; and this is bad, because it does not result in the hope for the fruit of repentance, namely reformation, but in despair he delivers himself over to all sins, as Cain, when he said: “My punishment is greater than I can bear” (Gen. 4:13); “Who, despairing, have given themselves up to licentiousness, greedy to practice every kind of uncleanness” (Eph. 4:19). For this reason, despair is called a dangerous thing in 2 Samuel (2:26), so that David said in Psalm 69 (v. 15): “Let not the flood sweep over me, or the deep swallow me up, or the pit close its mouth over me.” Therefore, in order to prevent this, he says, comfort him, so that he will cease sinning: “This will be the full fruit of the removal of his sin” (Is. 27:9). Contra apostolus, non solum per rationem sed ex aliis causis, inducit eos ad hoc cum dicit propter quod obsecro, et cetera. Et inducit eos a tribus modis. Primo precibus, dicens propter quod, scilicet ne absorbeatur, obsecro, qui possum praecipere. Phil. v. 8: multam fiduciam habens in Christo Iesu imperandi tibi, et cetera. Contrarium faciunt mali praelati. Ez. XXXIV, 4: cum austeritate imperabatis eis, et cetera. Ut confirmetis in illum charitatem. Quod fit si ostenditis charitatem vestram ad eum, et non abominamini eum propter peccata, nec contemnitis, sed propter consolationem vestram facitis eum habere odio peccatum suum, et diligere iustitiam. Lc. XXII, 32: et tu conversus confirma fratres tuos, et cetera. 63. – Then the Apostle urges them not only by reason, but from other causes to do this, when he says, so I beg you to reaffirm your love for him. And he urges them in three ways: first, by his appeal, saying, so, i.e., that he not be overwhelmed, I, who can command, beg you: “Though I am bold enough in Christ to command you to do what is required, yet for love’s sake I prefer to appeal to you” (Phlm. 1:8-9). Evil prelates do the opposite: “With force and harshness you have ruled them” (Ez. 34:4). To reaffirm your love for him, which happens if you show your charity for him and not hate him for his sins, or despise him, but for your consolation make him hate his sin and love justice: “Strengthen your brethren” (Lk. 22:32). Secundo inducit eos praecepto, dicens ideo enim scripsi hoc, scilicet ut cognoscam experimentum vestrum, an in omnibus obedientes sitis. Et dicit in omnibus, scilicet sive in his quae placent vobis, sive in his quae displicent. Primo enim mandaverat eis quod excommunicarent eum, et sic fecerunt mandatum apostoli: nunc vero secundo mandat eis quod parcant. Et ideo dicit an in omnibus obedientes sitis. 64. – Secondly, he urges them with a command, saying, for this is why I wrote, namely, that I might test you and know whether you are obedient in everything. He says, in everything, namely, whether they are pleasing or displeasing to you. For he had first commanded them to excommunicate him, and they obeyed the Apostle’s command. But now he commands them to be sparing; hence he says, whether you are obedient in everything. Tertio ex commemoratione beneficii, cum dicit cui autem aliquid donastis, etc., quasi dicat: vos debetis hoc facere, quia etiam ego feci. Sic enim vos remisistis alicui et rogastis me quod ego remitterem, et ego remisi. Et hoc est quod dicit cui autem aliquid donastis vos, et ego, scilicet donavi. 65. – Thirdly, he urges them by reminding them of a gift, when he says, any one whom you forgive, I also forgive. As if to say: you should do this because I also have done it. For if you have forgiven someone and asked me to forgive, I have forgiven. And this is what he says: any one whom you forgive, I also forgive. Et hoc patet. Nam et ego, quod donavi, etc.; ubi quatuor tanguntur ad huiusmodi donationem seu remissionem necessaria. Primum est discretio, ut scilicet non passim et temere remittatur. Et ideo dicit si quid, scilicet in debito modo. Prov. IV, 25: palpebrae tuae praecedant, et cetera. Secundum est finis, quia non propter amorem vel odium debet fieri, sed propter utilitatem aliquam Ecclesiae vel aliquorum. Et ideo dicit propter vos. Tertium est auctoritas, quia non debet fieri auctoritate propria, sed Christi, qui remittit peccata auctoritate; alii vero, quibus commissum est, ministerio, et sicut membra Christi. Et ideo dicit in persona Christi, scilicet non mea auctoritate. Et tamen quodcumque remittitur, Christus remittit. Io. XX, v. 23: quorum remiseritis peccata, et cetera. Quartum est necessitas; unde dicit ut non circumveniamur a Satana. Diabolus enim multos decepit, quosdam scilicet trahendo ad peccatorum perpetrationem, quosdam vero ad nimiam rigiditatem contra peccantes, ut si non potest eos habere per perpetrationem facinorum, saltem perdat quos iam habet per praelatorum austeritatem, qui eos non misericorditer corrigentes in desperationem inducunt, et sic hos perdit, et illos Diaboli laqueus includit. Eccle. VII, 17: noli esse nimis iustus, et cetera. I Petr. V, 8: adversarius vester Diabolus, et cetera. Et hoc continget nobis, si non remittamus peccantibus. Et ideo, ut non circumveniamur a Satana, ego donavi, si quid donavi. Non enim ignoramus cogitationes eius, scilicet Satanae. Verum est in generali, sed in speciali nullus potest scire eius cogitationes, nisi solus Deus. Iob XLI, 4: quis revelavit faciem indumenti eius? et cetera. 66. – And this is obvious, for what I have forgiven, if I have forgiven anything, has been for your sake in the [person] of Christ. In this he touches four things required for such pardon or forgiveness. The first is discernment, so that pardon is not granted indiscriminately and rashly; hence he says, if I have forgiven anything, namely, in the proper way: “Let your eyes look directly forward” (Prov. 4:25). The second is the end, because it should be done not for love or hatred, but for some benefit to the Church or others; hence he says, it has been for your sake. The third is authority, because it should not be done on one’s own authority, but Christ’s, who forgives sin by authority, but the others to whom it has been entrusted, forgive as ministers and members of Christ; hence he says, in the [person] of Christ, namely, not by my own authority. Yet whatever is forgiven, Christ forgives: “If you forgive the sins of any they are forgiven” (Jn. 20:23). The fourth is need; hence he says, to keep Satan from gaining the advantage over us. For the devil had deceived many: some by leading them to commit sins, and others by excessive rigor against sinners; so that if Satan cannot get them for having committed sin, he at least destroys those he already has by the severity of prelates who drive them to despair by not correcting them in a compassionate way. Hence, he destroys these, and the others he puts in the snare of the devil: “Be not righteous overmuch” (Ecc. 7:16); “Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour” (1 Pet. 5:8). And this will happen to us if we do not forgive sinners. Therefore that we might not be deceived by Satan, to keep Satan from gaining the advantage over us, I have forgiven, if I have forgiven anything, for we are not ignorant of his designs, namely, those of Satan. This is true in general, but in particular no one can know his thoughts but God alone: “Who can strip off his outer garment? Who can penetrate into the midst of his mouth?” (Jb. 41:13, Vulgate).
2-3
2 Cor. 2:12-17Posita prima causa suae dilationis, ne scilicet cum tristitia iret ad eos, hic ponit causam secundam quae est ex fructu quem alicubi faciebat. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo ponit sui itineris processum; secundo ipsius processus effectum, ibi Deo autem gratias, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo ostendit impedimentum fructificandi, quod habuit in Troade; secundo subiungit processum suum in Macedoniam, ibi sed valefaciens, et cetera. 67. – Having stated the first reason for his delay, namely, that he might avoid coming to them in sadness, he now states the second reason, which is the fruit he was producing elsewhere. In regard to this he does two things: first, he mentions his travels; secondly, their result (v. 14). In regard to the first he does two things: first, he mentions the obstacle he met at Troas; secondly, his journey into Macedonia (v. 13b). Dicit ergo cum venissem Troadem propter Evangelium, id est ad praedicandum Christum, Io. XV, 16: posui vos ut eatis, etc., et ostium mihi apertum esset, id est mentes hominum paratae et dispositae essent ad recipiendum praedicationis verba et Christum. I Cor. XVI, 9: ostium mihi apertum est, et cetera. Apoc. III, 20: ecce sto ad ostium, et cetera. Sed non in quocumque, imo in domino, quia ipsa praeparatio mentis humanae est ex virtute divina. Nam licet facilitas qua mentes praeparantur, sit causa conversionis, tamen ipsius facilitatis et praeparationis causa est Deus. Thren. ult.: converte nos, domine, ad te, et convertemur. Cum, inquam, ita esset apertum mihi ostium in domino, non habui requiem spiritui meo, id est non potui facere quod spiritus meus volebat, id est dictabat. Tunc enim dicitur habere spiritus requiem, quando efficit quod vult, sicut tunc dicitur caro requiescere, quando habet quod concupiscit. Lc. c. XII, 19: anima mea, habes multa bona, et cetera. Apostolus non dicit: non habui requiem carni meae vel corpori sed spiritui meo, id est voluntati meae spirituali, quae est ut Christum firmem in cordibus hominum. Et impediebar, quia videbam corda parata et disposita, et non poteram praedicare. 68. – He says, therefore: When I came to Troas to preach the gospel of Christ, i.e., to preach Christ: “But I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit” (Jn. 15:16), a door was opened for me, i.e., men’s minds were prepared and disposed to receive the words of preaching and Christ: “for a wide door for effective work has opened to me” (1 Cor. 16:9); “Behold, I stand at the door and knock” (Rev. 3:20). But not in anyone, but in the Lord, because this preparation of the human mind is accomplished by God’s power. For although the ease with which minds are prepared is the cause of conversion, God is the cause of that ease and of the preparation: “Convert us to yourself, O Lord, that we may be converted” (Lam. 5:21, Vulgate). When, I say, a door was thus opened for me in the Lord my mind [spirit] could not rest, i.e., I was unable to do what my spirit wished, i.e., dictated. For the spirit is said to have rest, when it achieves what it wishes, just as the flesh is said to rest when it has what it desires: “Soul, you have ample goods laid up for many years; take your ease” (Lk. 12:19). The Apostle does not say, I had no rest in my flesh or my body, but in my mind, i.e., in my spiritual will, which is to establish Christ in the hearts of men. And I was hindered because I saw hearts prepared and disposed, and was unable to preach. Sed quare non habuit requiem spiritui suo, subdit eo quod non inveni Titum fratrem meum, id est propter absentiam Titi, et hoc duplici de causa. Una causa est, quod licet apostolus sciret omnes linguas, ita ut diceret: gratias ago Deo meo, quod omnium vestrum lingua loquor, tamen magis expeditus et edoctus erat in lingua Hebraea, quam in Graeca; Titus autem magis in Graeca. Et ideo volebat eum habere praesentem, ut praedicaret in Troade. Et quia erat absens, nam Corinthii detinuerant eum, dicit non habui requiem spiritui meo. Sed quia dona Dei non sunt imperfecta, et donum linguarum fuit specialiter apostolis collatum ad praedicandum per totum mundum, Ps. XVIII, 5: in omnem terram exivit sonus eorum, etc., et ideo alia causa est melior, quae est, quia apostolo imminebant in Troade multa facienda. Nam ex una parte imminebat ei praedicare his qui parati erant recipere Christum per fidem; ex alia parte imminebat ei resistere adversariis qui impediebant; et ideo quia ipse non poterat solus ista facere, angustiabatur de absentia Titi, qui institisset praedicationi et conversioni bonorum, et apostolus restitisset adversariis. Et specialiter etiam hoc scribit eis, ut innuat, quod non solum prima causa dilationis suae fuit ex eis, sed etiam secunda. Nam ipsi propter duritiam et dissensionem eorum detinuerant tanto tempore Titum, et ideo dicit eo quod non inveni Titum fratrem, vel in Christo, vel coadiutorem. Prov. XVIII, 19: frater qui iuvatur a fratre, et cetera. 69. – Then he tells why he had no rest in his spirit, when he adds, because I did not find my brother Titus there, i.e., because of Titus’ absence. And this for two reasons. One reason was that although the Apostle knew all their languages, so that he could say: “I thank God that I speak in tongues more than you all” (1 Cor. 14:18), he was more skilled in Hebrew than in Greek, but Titus more in Greek. Therefore, he wanted to have him present to preach in Troas. And because he was absent, for the Corinthians had detained him, he says, my spirit could not rest. But because God’s gifts are not imperfect, and the gift of tongues was specifically given to the apostles for preaching throughout the whole world: “Their voice goes out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world” (Ps. 19:4), the other reason is better, namely, that many things remained for the Apostle to do in Troas. For on the one hand, he had to preach to those who were prepared to receive Christ by faith; and on the other, he had to resists the adversaries who opposed him; therefore, because he could not do these things alone, he was grieved by the absence of Titus, who could concentrate on preaching and converting the good, while the Apostle withstood the adversaries. And he is at pains to write this to them in order to suggest that not only the first, but also the second reason for his delay was due to them. For on account of their hardness and quarreling, they delayed Titus for a long time. Hence he says, because I did not find my brother Titus there, either in Christ or in my co-worker: “A brother helped is like a strong city” (Prov. 18:19). Et quia non inveni Titum in Troade, non remansi ibi, sed valefaciens eis, qui erant conversi, et in quibus ostium apertum erat, profectus sum in Macedoniam, ubi credebam eum invenire. Causa autem essendi in Macedonia legitur Act. XVI, 9, ubi dicitur quod vir Macedo, et cetera. 70. – Because I did not find Titus in Troas, I did not stay there; I took leave of them who were converted and in whom a door had been opened, and I went on to Macedonia, where I expected to find him. But his reason for going into Macedonia is given in Acts (16:9), where it says: “A man of Macedonia was standing beseeching him and saying, ‘Come over to Macedonia and help us.’” Consequenter cum dicit gratias autem Deo, etc., ponit profectum sui processus, et circa hoc duo facit. Primo enim describit ordinem sui processus; secundo excludit ab isto processu pseudoapostolos, ibi ad hoc quis tam idoneus, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo insinuat profectum quem faciebat; secundo exponit quoddam quod dixerat, ibi Christi bonus odor, et cetera. 71. – Then when he says, But thanks be to God, he describes the progress of his journey, and does two things: first, he describes the order of his progress; secondly, he excludes the false apostles from that progress (v. 16b). In regard to the first he does two things: first, he hints at the progress he made; secondly, he explains something he had said (v. 15). Circa primum sciendum quod apostolus profectum et fructum quem faciebat, non attribuit sibi, neque propriae virtuti, sed Deo. I Cor. XV, 10: abundantius omnibus laboravi non ego, sed gratia, et cetera. Et ideo dicit gratias autem Deo, scilicet ago. I Thess. c. V, 18: in omnibus gratias agite. Eph. V, v. 20: gratias agentes, et cetera. Qui semper triumphat nos in Christo Iesu, id est triumphare nos facit in praedicatione Christi contra adversarios. Ubi sciendum est quod praedicatores veritatis duo debent facere, scilicet exhortari in doctrina sacra et contradicentem devincere. Et hoc dupliciter: disputatione haereticos, patientia vero persecutores. Unde per ordinem ista tangit hic apostolus, et ideo dicit qui triumphat nos, quantum ad contradicentes. Rom. VIII, 37: in his omnibus superamus. Et I Mac. III, 19: non in fortitudine exercitus victoria belli, sed de caelo, et cetera. 72. – In regard to the first it should be noted that the Apostle did not attribute to himself the progress and fruit he had produced, or to his own power, but to God: “On the contrary, I worked harder than any of them, though it was not I, but the grace of God which is with me” (1 Cor. 15:20): “Give thanks in all circumstances” (1 Th. 5:18); “Always and for everything giving thanks in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ to God the Father” (Eph. 5:20). Who in Christ always leads us in triumph, i.e., makes us triumph in preaching Christ against our adversaries. Here it should be notes that preachers of truth should do two things: namely, to exhort in sacred doctrine and to refute those who contradict it. This they do in two ways: by debating with heretics and by practicing patience toward persecutors. The Apostle touches on these in order; hence he says, who leads us in triumph, as to those who contradict: “We are more than conquerors” (Rom. 8:37); “It is not on the size of the army that victory in battle depends, but strength comes from Heaven” (1 Macc. 3:19); and through us spreads the fragrance of the knowledge of him everywhere, as to exhorting in sacred doctrine. Et odorem notitiae suae manifestat per nos in omni loco, quantum ad exhortationem sacrae doctrinae. Sed odorem notitiae suae exponit Glossa, id est filium suum; sed melius est ut hoc dicatur ad differentiam notitiae de Deo, quam faciunt aliae scientiae et quam facit fides. Nam notitia de Deo quae habetur per alias scientias, illuminat intellectum solum, ostendens quod Deus est causa prima, quod est unus et sapiens, et cetera. Sed notitia de Deo quae habetur per fidem et illuminat intellectum et delectat affectum, quia non solum dicit quod Deus est prima causa, sed quod est salvator noster, quod est redemptor, et quod diligit nos, quod est incarnatus pro nobis: quae omnia affectum inflammant. Et ideo dicendum quod odorem notitiae suae, id est notitiam suae suavitatis, credenti per nos in omni loco manifestat, quia iste odor longe lateque diffunditur. Eccli. XXIV, 23: ego quasi vitis fructificavi, et cetera. Gen. XXVII, v. 27: ecce odor filii, et cetera. 73. – A Gloss explains the fragrance of the knowledge of him, i.e., of his Son; but it is better to suppose that this is said to distinguish between knowledge of God obtained by other sciences and that obtained by faith. For the knowledge of God obtained by other sciences enlightens the intellect only by showing that God is the first cause, that he is one and wise and so on. But the knowledge of God obtained by faith both enlightens the intellect and delights the affections, because it not only says that God is the first cause, but that he is our Savior, that he is our Redeemer, that he loves us and that he became incarnate for us: all of which inflame the affections. Therefore is should be said that the fragrance of the knowledge of him, i.e., the knowledge of his sweetness, he spreads to those who believe by everywhere, because that fragrance is diffused far and wide: “Like a vine I cause loveliness to bud” (Sir. 24:17); “See, the smell of my son is as the smell of a field which the Lord has blessed” (Gen. 27:27). Quia vero aliqui possent dicere: quid est odor Dei in omni loco? Nam multa loca sunt in quibus non recipitur praedicatio nostra. Ideo apostolus exponit, dicens: non curo, quia sive recipiant praedicationem, sive non, tamen notitia Dei manifestatur ubique per nos, quia sumus bonus odor Christi Deo, id est ad honorem Dei. Et loquitur ad similitudinem legis, ubi dicitur quod sacrificium fiat in odorem suavitatis suavissimum Deo; quasi dicat: nos sumus holocaustum quod offertur Deo in odorem suavitatis. Et tam in his qui salvi fiunt, ut scilicet non pereant, quod est eis a Deo, quam in his qui pereunt, quod est eis ex seipsis. Unde Osee XIII, 9: perditio tua, Israel, ex te, et cetera. Sed estne odor bonis et malis eodem modo? Non, sed aliis quidem est odor mortis in mortem, id est, invidiae et malitiae occasionaliter ducentis eos in mortem aeternam, illis scilicet qui invidebant bonae famae apostoli et impugnabant praedicationem Christi et conversionem fidelium. Lc. II, 34: positus est hic in ruinam, et in resurrectionem, et cetera. Aliis autem odor vitae, dilectionis et bonae opinionis ducentis eos in vitam aeternam scilicet illis qui gaudent et convertuntur ad praedicationem apostoli. I Cor. I, 18: verbum crucis pereuntibus, et cetera. His autem qui salvi, et cetera. Sic ergo ex odore apostoli boni vivunt, mali moriuntur, sicut legitur quod ad odorem vinearum florentium moriuntur serpentes. 74. – But because some might say, What is the fragrance of God in every place? For there are many places in which our preaching is not accepted. The Apostle explains this, saying: I do not care, because whether they accept our preaching or not, the knowledge of God is manifest everywhere through us, because we are the aroma of Christ to God, namely, to the honor of God. He says this in a likeness to the Law, where it is said that a sacrifice becomes the sweetest fragrance of sweetness to God. As if to say: we are a holocaust offered to God as a fragrance of sweetness among those who are being saved, namely, that they not perish, which is theirs from God; and among those who are perishing, which is theirs from themselves. Hence, it is written in Hosea (13:9, Vulgate): “Destruction is your own, O Israel, your help is only in me”. But is that fragrance related to the good and the wicked in the same way? No, but to one a fragrance from death to death, i.e., of envy and malice, which are the occasion of bringing them to eternal death, i.e., those who envy the good reputation of the Apostle and strive against the preaching of Christ and the conversion of the faithful: “This child is set for the fall and rising of many in Israel, and for a sign that is spoken against” (Lk. 2:34). To the other a fragrance from life to life, of love and good opinion leads them to eternal life, namely, to those who rejoice and are converted by the preaching of the Apostle: “For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God” (1 Cor. 1:18). Thus, from the fragrance of the Apostle the good live and the wicked die, as it is read that serpents die from the smell of flourishing vines. Consequenter cum dicit: sed ad haec quis tam idoneus, etc., excludit ab isto profectu pseudo-apostolos, dicens quis illorum pseudo-apostolorum est tam idoneus ad ista, scilicet quae nos apostoli veri facimus? Quasi dicat: nullus. Ps. CXXXVIII, 17: nimis honorati sunt amici tui, Deus. Sed contra Prov. XXVII, 2: laudet te alienus, et cetera. Ad hoc respondet Gregorius super Ezech., quod sancti duplici ex causa seipsos laudant, et non propter gloriam suam et vanitatem. Prima causa est, ut non desperent in tribulationibus, sicut Iob, quando amici nitebantur eum ad desperationem inducere, reduxit ad memoriam sua bona quae fecerat, ut confortatus non desperaret. Unde dicebat: pepigi foedus cum oculis meis, et cetera. Legitur etiam de quodam sancto patre, quod quando tentabatur de desperatione, reducebat ad memoriam bona quae fecerat, ut confortaretur; quando tentabatur de superbia, reducebat ad memoriam mala, ut humiliaretur. Secunda causa est propter utilitatem, ut scilicet haberetur in maiori fama, et citius crederetur doctrinae suae. Et propter hanc causam hic apostolus laudat se. Nam Corinthii praeferebant sibi pseudo-apostolos, et condemnabant eum, et ideo non sic obediebant sibi. Ut ergo non vilipenderent eum, sed obedirent sibi, praefert se eis et laudat se, et dicit sed ad haec quis tam idoneus, sicut nos? Non pseudo-apostoli, quia licet ipsi praedicent, tamen adulterant verbum Dei, quod nos non facimus. 75. – Then when he says, Who is sufficient for these things? He excludes the false apostles from the progress, saying, Who of those false apostles is sufficient for these things? which we true apostles accomplish. As if to say: None: “But to me your friends, O God, are exceedingly honorable” (Ps. 138:17, Vulgate). But on the other hand, it says in Proverbs (27:2): “Let another praise you, and not your own mouth; a stranger, and not your own lips.” Gregory, in his commentary on Ezekiel, answers this by saying that the saints praise themselves for two reasons, and not for their own glory and vanity. The first reason is that they not despair in tribulations, as Job, when his friends tried to bring him to despair, recalled to his mind the good things he had done, in order to comfort himself and not despair. Hence, he said: “I have made a covenant with my eyes; how then could I look upon a virgin?” (31:1). We read of a holy father, that when he was tempted to despair, he recalled to mind the good things he had done, in order to comfort himself; when he was tempted to pride, he recalled the evil he had done, in order to be humbled. The second reason is for profit, namely, that he obtain a greater reputation and that his teaching be believed more readily. This is the reason why the Apostle praises himself here. For the Corinthians had preferred false apostles to him and disdained him. As a result they were not ready to obey him. Therefore, to assure that they would not disdain but obey him, he prefers himself to them and praises himself, saying, Who is sufficient for these things? as we are. Not the false apostles, because even though they preach, they adulterate God’s word—which we do not do. Unde dicit non sumus sicut plurimi, scilicet pseudo-apostoli, adulterantes verbum Dei, admiscendo contraria, sicut haeretici, qui licet confiteantur Christum, tamen non dicunt eum esse verum Deum. Sic faciunt pseudo-apostoli, qui dicunt cum Evangelio debere observari legalia. Item non adulterantes verbum Dei, id est, praedicantes vel propter quaestum, vel propter favorem laudis. Sic enim mulieres adulterae dicuntur quando recipiunt semen ex alio viro ad propagationem prolis. In praedicatione autem semen nihil aliud est quam finis seu intentio tua, vel favor gloriae propriae. Si ergo finis tuus est quaestus, si intentio tua est favor gloriae propriae, adulteras verbum Dei. Hoc faciebant pseudo-apostoli, qui propter quaestum praedicabant. Infra IV, 2: neque adulterantes verbum Dei, et cetera. Apostoli autem praedicabant neque propter quaestum, neque gloriam propriam, sed propter laudem Dei et salutem proximi. Et ideo subiungit sed ex sinceritate, id est, sincera intentione, non pro quaestu et sine admixtione corruptionis. Supra I, 12: ex sinceritate, et cetera. 76. – Hence, he says, for we are not, like so many, namely, the false apostles, peddlers of God’s word, mingling contrary doctrines, as the heretics, who although they confess Christ, do not admit that he is true God. This is what the false apostles do, who say that along with the Gospel the legal observances must be kept. Hence he says, for we are not, like so many, peddlers [adulterers] of God’s word, i.e., preaching for gain or for praise. For thus are women called adulteresses, when they receive seed from another man for the propagation of children. In preaching, the seed is nothing less than your end or intention. Therefore, if your end is gain, if your intention is your own glory, you adulterate God’s word. This the false apostles were doing who were preaching for gain: “We refuse to practice cunning or to tamper with God’s word, but by the open statement of the truth we would commend ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God” (2 Cor. 4:2). But the apostles preached neither for monetary gain nor their own glory, but for the praise of God and the salvation of their neighbor. Hence, he adds, but as men of sincerity, i.e., with a sincere intention; not for gain and without corrupted admixtures: “We have behaved in the world, and still more toward you, with holiness and godly sincerity” (2 Cor. 1:12). Ponit autem triplicem rationem huius sinceritatis. Prima ratio sumitur ex dignitate mittentis. Nuntium enim veritatis decet vera loqui. Et ideo dicit ex Deo, id est, illa sinceritate quae est digna nuntiatio Dei. I Petr. IV, 11: si quis loquitur quasi sermones Dei. Secunda sumitur ex auctoritate praesidentis cui astat. Ideo dicit coram Deo, coram quo ex sinceritate loqui debemus. III Reg. c. XVII, 1: vivit dominus, in cuius conspectu sto, et cetera. Tertia sumitur ex dignitate materiae de qua loquitur. Nam praedicatio apostolorum est de Christo, et ideo debet esse sincera, sicut et ipse Deus et Christus. Et ideo dicit in Christo solum, non de legalibus, ut pseudo-apostoli faciunt. I Cor. II, 2: neque existimavi me scire aliquid inter vos, nisi Christum, et hunc crucifixum. 77. – He points out three aspects of this sincerity: the first is taken from the dignity of the one who sent them. For it is expected of a messenger of the truth to speak the truth; hence he says, as commissioned by God, i.e., with that sincerity which befits a messenger of God: “Whoever speaks as one who utters oracles of God” (1 Pet. 4:11). The second is taken from the authority of the one presiding, before whom he stands. Hence he says, in the sight of God, in whose presence we should speak with sincerity: “As the Lord the God of Israel lives, before whom I stand” (1 Kg. 17:1). The third is taken from the dignity of the subject of which he speaks. For the preaching of the apostles is about Christ; therefore, it should be sincere, as also Christ and God are. Hence, he says, we speak in Christ alone, and not in the ceremonies of the Law, as false apostles do: “For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified” (1 Cor. 2:2).
3-1
2 Cor. 3:1-5Postquam apostolus suam excusationem posuit, in qua benevolentiam captavit auditorum, hic consequenter prosequitur suam intentionem, scilicet tractans de ministris novi testamenti. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo enim commendat dignitatem bonorum ministrorum; secundo vero exaggerat malitiam malorum ministrorum, et hoc a X cap. et deinceps. Circa primum duo facit. Primo enim commendat ministerium novi testamenti; secundo commendat usum huius ministerii in aliis, exhortando eos ad hoc, ibi VI cap. adiuvantes autem, et cetera. Circa primum commendat huiusmodi ministerium novi testamenti ex tribus. Primo ex dignitate in isto capite; secundo ex usu, cap. IV, ibi ideo habentes, etc.; tertio ex praemio, cap. V, ibi scimus autem quoniam si, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo removet quamdam obiectionem; secundo commendat ministros novi testamenti, ibi qui et idoneos nos fecit, et cetera. Circa primum sciendum est quod apostolus intendit commendare ministros novi testamenti, quorum ipse erat unus. Et ideo ne Corinthii obiicerent sibi quod in hoc vellet commendare seipsum, statim excludit, dicens incipimus iterum nosmetipsos, et cetera. Ubi duo facit. Primo movet quaestionem; secundo respondet, ibi scilicet aut numquid egemus, et cetera. 78. – After presenting his excuse, by which he won the good will of his hearers, the Apostle continues toward his main intention, namely, to treat about the ministers of the New Testament. In regard to this he does two things: first, he commends the dignity of the good ministers; secondly, he expands on the guilt of the evil ministers (chap. 10ff.). In regard to the first he does two things: first, he commends the ministry of the New Testament; secondly, he commends the exercise of this ministry in others by exhorting them to this (chap. 6). In regard to the first he commends the ministry of the New Testament from three aspects: first, in this chapter, from its dignity; secondly, from its exercise (chap. 4); thirdly, from its reward (chap. 5). In regard to the first he does two things: first, he removes an objection; secondly, he commends the ministers of the New Testament (v. 6). In regard to the first it should be noted that the Apostle intended to commend the ministers of the New Testament, of which he is one. Therefore, lest the Corinthians object that in doing this he wishes to commend himself, he at once removes this, saying, Are we beginning to commend ourselves again? Here he does two things: he first raises the question and then he answers it. Quaestio sua talis est: dico quod non sumus adulterantes verbum Dei, sicut pseudo, sed ex sinceritate, sicut ex Deo. Sed numquid hoc dicendo, incipimus iterum nos commendare, id est, dicimus ista ut velimus nostram gloriam quaerere et non Dei? Et dicit iterum, quia in epistola prima commendaverat se satis, cum dixit: ut sapiens architectus, et cetera. Non ergo hoc dicimus, ut quaeramus gloriam nostram, sed Dei. Prov. XXVII, 2: laudet te alienus, et cetera. 79. –The question is this: I say that we do not adulterate the Word of God as the false apostles do, but we speak with sincerity as from God. But in saying this, are we beginning to commend ourselves again?, i.e., are we saying this because we want to procure our glory and not that of God? And he says, again, because in the first epistle he had commended himself enough, when he said (3:10): “Like a skilled master builder I laid a foundation.” Therefore, we are not saying this to seek our own glory, but God’s: “Let another praise you, and not your own mouth; a stranger, and not your own lips” (Prov. 27:2). Huic autem quaestioni respondet, cum dicit aut numquid egemus, et cetera. Et ostendit, quod non libenter commendat se. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo ostendit quod non indiget commendatione hominum; secundo quod neque etiam hoc requirit ipse ab eis, ibi fiduciam autem talem, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo ostendit, quod non indiget commendatione eorum ad gloriam propriam; secundo huius causam assignat, ibi epistola nostra vos estis, et cetera. 80. – He answers this when he says, Or do we need? Here he shows that he is not happy to commend himself. In regard to this he does two things: first, he shows that he does not need man’s commendation; secondly, that he does not require it of them (v. 4). In regard to the first he does two things: first, he shows that he does not need their commendation; secondly, he assigns the cause of this (v. 2). Dicit ergo: dico quod non incipimus commendare nosmetipsos, quia non indigemus commendatione. Et hoc est, quod dicit aut numquid egemus nos, veri ministri, sicut quidam, scilicet pseudo, commendatitiis epistolis, id est laudibus missis, ad vos, ab aliis, aut ex vobis, aliis missis? Sed contra Col. IV, 10 dicitur: Marcus consobrinus Barnabae, de quo accepistis mandatum, et cetera. Etiam legati Papae semper portant litteras commendatitias. Non est ergo malum. Respondeo. Dicendum, quod accipere litteras huiusmodi a personis famosis, ut solum per illas commendentur et honorentur, quousque ipsi ex bonis operibus suis veniant in notitiam, hoc non est malum, hoc faciunt legati Papae. Apostolus vero ita iam erat notus et commendatus apud istos per opera sua, quod non indigebat litteris commendatitiis. 81. – He says, therefore: I say that we do not begin to commend ourselves, because we do not need commendation. And this is what he says: Do we, the true ministers, need as some do, namely the false apostles, letters of recommendation, i.e., praise, to you by others, or from you to others? But on the other hand, he says in Colossians (4:10): “Mark, the cousin of Barnabas, greets you.” Even papal legates always carry letters of recommendation. Therefore it is not an evil. I answer that to accept such letters from famous persons, who are commended and honored by reason of them alone, until they become known by their good works, is not evil: that is what papal legates do. But the Apostle was already so well known and recommended among them by his works, that he did not need letters of recommendation. Et ideo statim causam huius assignans, subdit epistola nostra vos estis. Quasi dicat: ego habeo bonas litteras, non indigeo aliis. Et ideo circa hoc duo facit. Primo enim ostendit quae sit ista littera quam habet; secundo exponit hoc idem, ibi manifestati, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo ostendit quae sit illa littera; secundo ostendit eam esse sufficientem ad commendationem propriam, ibi scripta, et cetera. Dicit ergo sic epistola nostra vos estis, id est epistola per quam manifestatur dignitas nostra, qua nos commendamur, ita ut epistolis aliis non indigeamus. Supra II: gloria nostra vos estis. Gal. c. IV, 19: filioli mei quos iterum parturio, et cetera. Sed haec epistola estne sufficiens? Ita, quia scripta, et cetera. Ubi duo tangit, sufficientiam litterarum huiusmodi causantia. Unum est, quod intelligatur et sciatur ab eo pro quo mittitur, alias adhuc quaereret, nisi sciret se eam habere. Et quantum ad hoc dicit scripta in cordibus nostris, quia semper vos habemus in memoria, habentes de vobis specialem curam. Phil. I, 7: eo quod habeam vos, et cetera. Secundum est, quod ille cui mittitur, legat et sciat eam, alias non curaret de commendatione eius. Et quantum ad hoc dicit quae scitur et legitur ab omnibus hominibus. Scitur, inquam, quia per nos instituti estis et conversi. Legitur autem, quia exemplo nostri etiam alii imitantur vos. Hab. II, 2: scribe visum, et explana eum super tabulas, ut percurrat qui legerit eum. 82. – Therefore he at once gives the reason for this, saying, you yourselves are our letter of recommendation; as if to say: I have a good letter; I do not need others. In regard to this, he does two things: first, he shows what that letter is which he has; secondly, he explains this (v. 3). In regard to the first he does two things: first he shows what that letter is; secondly, he shows that it is sufficient for commending him (v. 3b). He says, therefore, you are our letter, i.e., the letter through which our dignity is made manifest, by which we are commended, so that we do not need other letters: “You are our glory” (1 Th. 2:20); “My little children, with whom I am again in travail, until Christ be formed in you” (Gal. 4:19). But is this letter sufficient? Yes, because it is written on your hearts. Here he touches on two things causing the sufficiency of such letters. One is that it should be understood and known by the one for whom it is sent; the other that he still seeks, and not that he knows himself to have it. As to this he says, written on our hearts, because we always have you in mind, having a special care for you: “I hold you in my heart” (Phil. 1:7). The other is that he to whom it is sent may read and know it; hence, he says, to be known and read by all men. To be known, I say, because you have been instructed and converted by us; but it is read, because by our example even others imitate you: “Write the vision; make it plain upon tablets, so he may run who reads it” (Hab. 2:2). Quomodo autem scitur haec epistola, exponit dicens manifestati, et cetera. Et circa hoc tria facit. Primo exponit cuius sit haec littera; secundo quomodo sit scripta, et tertio in quo. Cuius autem sit, sic ostendit, quia Christi. Et ideo dicit manifestati quoniam estis Christi, id est a Christo informati et inducti, scilicet principaliter et auctoritative. Matth. XXIII, 8: unus est magister vester. Sed a nobis secundario et instrumentaliter. Et ideo dicit ministrata a nobis. I Cor. c. IV, 1: sic nos existimet homo, et cetera. I Cor. c. III, 4: quid igitur Cephas, et cetera. Quomodo autem sit scripta, ostendit, quia non atramento, id est non admixta erroribus, sicut pseudo-apostoli; non mutabilis et imperfecta, sicut vetus lex, quae neminem ad perfectum adduxit, Hebr. VII, 19. Nam atramentum nigrum est per quod intelligitur error, et delebile per quod intelligitur mutabilitas. Non, inquam, atramento est scripta, sed spiritu Dei vivi, id est spiritu sancto, quo vivitis, et quo docente instructi estis. Eph. I, 13: in quo signati estis. Ubi autem sit scripta insinuat, subdens non in tabulis lapideis, sicut lex vetus, ut excludat duritiem, quasi dicat: non in lapideis cordibus habentibus duritiem, sicut Iudaei. Act. VII, 51: dura cervice, et cetera. Sed in tabulis cordis carnalibus, id est, in cordibus latis ex charitate, et carnalibus, id est, mollibus ex affectu implendi et intelligendi. Ez. XXXVI, 26: auferam a vobis cor lapideum, et cetera. 83. – Then he explains how this letter is known, saying, you show that you are a letter from Christ, and in regard to this he does three things. First, he explains whose letter it is; secondly, how it was written; thirdly, on what. He shows whose it is when he says, from Christ. Hence, he says, you show that you are a letter from Christ, i.e., informed and led by Christ, principally and authoritatively: “For you have one teacher” (Matt. 23:8), but by us secondarily and instrumentally. Hence he adds, delivered by us: “This is how one should regard us, as servants of Christ” (1 Cor. 4:1); “What then is Apollos? What is Paul? Servants through whom you believed” (1 Cor. 3:5) He shows how it was written, not with ink, i.e., not mixed with errors, as the letters of the false apostle; not changeable and imperfect as the Old Law, which led no one to perfection (cf. Heb. 7:19); for black ink is that by which error is understood, and delible by which changeableness is understood. It is written not with ink, I say, but with the Spirit of the living God, i.e., by the Holy Spirit, by whom you live and by whose teaching you have been instructed: “In whom you were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit” (Eph. 1:13). He suggests where it is written, when he says, not on tablets of stone, as the Old Law, to exclude hardness; as if to say: not in the stony hearts of the hard-hearted, as the Jews: “You stiff-necked people, uncircumcised in heart and ears, you always resist the Holy Spirit” (Ac. 7:51); but on tablets of human hearts, i.e., hearts opened by charity, and human, i.e., made receptive as a result of filling and understanding: “I will take out of your flesh the heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh” (Ez. 36:26). Fiduciam autem talem, et cetera. Apostolus supra excusavit se, quod non quaerebat gloriam suam quia non indigebat ea, hic vero probat quia ipse non quaerit gloriam propriam, imo omnia bona quae facit, non attribuit sibi, sed Deo. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo enim attribuit omnia bona, quae habet et facit, Deo; secundo causam huius assignat, ibi non quod sufficientes, et cetera. 84. – Such is the confidence that we have through Christ toward God. Above, the Apostle excused himself, that he was not seeking his own glory, because he did not need it; here he proves that he is not seeking his own glory. Indeed, everything good he does he attributes not to himself but to God. In regard to this he does two things: first, he attributes all the good he has and does to God; secondly, he gives the reason for this. Dicit ergo primo: dico quod non egemus epistolis commendatitiis, et quod vos estis epistola nostra ministrata a nobis. Nec etiam quaerimus gloriam nostram, sed Christi. Et fiduciam talem, id est dicendi talia, habemus ad Deum, id est referimus in Deum. Vel fiduciam tendentem in Deum, ex cuius viribus hoc dico, quia ipse in me operatur. Quam quidem fiduciam habemus per Christum, per quem accessum habemus ad patrem, ut dicitur Rom. V, 2, qui univit nos Deo. Ier. XVII, 7: benedictus vir, et cetera. Et quia unitus Deo per Christum habeo hanc fiduciam. Ps. XI, 6: fiducialiter agam, et cetera. 85. – He says, therefore: I say that we do not need letters of recommendation and that you are our letter ministered by us. Nor do we seek our glory, but Christ’s. Such is the confidence, i.e. to say such things, that we have through Christ toward God, i.e., we refer it to God. Or I have such confidence in God, by whose power I say these things, because he works in me, and the confidence we have through Christ, through whom we have access to the Father, as it says in Romans (5:2), who unites us to God: “Blessed is the man who trusts in the Lord, whose trust is the Lord” (Jer. 17:7). And I have this confidence because I am united to God through Christ: “I will act confidently in him” (Ps. 11:6, Vulgate). Causa autem huius fiduciae est, quia quidquid ego facio, etiam ipsum principium operis, Deo attribuo. Et ideo dicit non quod simus sufficientes cogitare, saltem non dicere, vel implere. Nam in quolibet processu operis primo est assensus, qui fit cogitando, deinde collatio per verbum, et postmodum impletio per opus; unde fit, ut sic nec cogitare quis a se habeat, sed a Deo; non est enim dubium, quod non solum perfectio operis boni est a Deo, sed etiam inchoatio. Phil. I, 6: qui coepit in vobis opus bonum, et cetera. Et hoc est contra Pelagianos dicentes, quod inchoatio boni operis est ex nobis, sed perfectio est a Deo. Is. XXVI, 12: omnia opera nostra, et cetera. Sed ex hoc, ne videatur tollere libertatem arbitrii, dicit a nobis, quasi ex nobis, quasi dicat: possum quidem aliquid facere, quod est liberi arbitrii, sed hoc, quod facio, non est ex me, sed a Deo, qui hoc ipsum posse confert; ut sic, et libertatem hominis defendat cum dicit a nobis, id est a nostra parte, et divinam gratiam commendet, cum dicit quasi ex nobis scilicet procedat, sed a Deo. 86. – But the cause of this confidence is that whatever I do, I attribute to the very beginning of the work to God. Therefore, he says, not that we are competent of ourselves to claim anything as coming from us, much less say and accomplish. For in the pursuit of any work there is first an assent, which is done by thinking, then discussion by word, and finally accomplishment by work. Hence if a person does not have the thinking from himself but from God, there is no doubt that not only the completion of a good work is from God, but even the very beginning: “He who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ” (Phil. 1:6). This is contrary to the Pelagians, who say that the beginning of a good work is from us, but its completion is from God: “O Lord, you have wrought for us all our works” (Is. 26:12). But lest this seem to take away free will, he says, of ourselves, i.e., on our part, and commends divine grace when he says, as coming from us, i.e., as though it came from us, rather than God. Hoc etiam philosophus vult, quod numquam homo per liberum arbitrium potest quoddam bonum facere, sine adiutorio Dei. Et ratio sua est, quia in his, quae facimus, quaerendum est illud propter quod facimus. Non est autem procedere in infinitum, sed est devenire ad aliquid primum, puta ad consilium. Sic ergo bonum facio, quia consilium mihi inest ad hoc, et hoc est a Deo. Unde dicit, quod consilium boni est ab aliquo, quod est supra hominem, movens eum ad bene operandum. Et hoc est Deus, qui et homines movet et omnia, quae agunt ad actiones suas, sed aliter et aliter. Cum enim huiusmodi motus sit quoddam receptum in moto, oportet quod hoc fiat secundum modum suae naturae, id est, rei motae. Et ideo omnia movet secundum suas naturas. Ea ergo, quorum natura est ut sint liberae voluntatis, dominium suarum actionum habentia, movet libere ad operationes suas, sicut creaturas rationales et intellectuales. Alia autem non libere, sed secundum modum suae naturae. Licet autem non simus sufficientes cogitare aliquid a nobis, tamquam ex nobis, tamen habemus aliquam sufficientiam, qua scilicet bonum possumus velle et credere incipiamus, et hoc a Deo est. I Cor. IV, 7: quid habes, quod non accepisti? 87. – The Philosopher also teaches that a man can never do any good through his free will without God’s help. The reason is that in the things we do it is necessary to seek that for which we do it. But there can be no infinite process, for we must come to something which is first, e.g., to counsel. Thus, therefore, I do good, because there is in me the counsel to do so, and this is from God. Hence, he says that the counsel of something good is from something above man, moving him to act well; and this is God, who moves men and all things that act to their actions; but men are moved in one way, and other things in another. For since motion of this kind is something received into the thing moved, it is necessary that this be done according to the mode of its nature, i.e., of the thing moved. And therefore he moves all things according to their natures. Therefore, those things whose nature is to have free will and have dominion over their actions, he moves in such a way that they act freely, as rational and intellectual creatures. But others not freely, but according to the mode of their nature. But although we are not sufficient to think anything of ourselves as coming from ourselves, yet we have a certain sufficiency, namely that by which we are able to will the good, and to begin to believe, and this is from God: “What have you that you did not receive?” (1 Cor. 4:7).
3-2
2 Cor. 3:6-11Commendato ministerio novi testamenti, hic consequenter commendat ministros eius. Et primo ponit duo quae respondent verbis praemissis. Praemiserat enim donum a Deo acceptum, cum dixit: sufficientia nostra, etc.; et fiduciam ex dono conceptam, cum dixit: fiduciam talem, et cetera. Primo ergo determinat ea quae pertinent ad donum perceptum; secundo ea quae ad fiduciam conceptam, ibi habentes igitur talem, et cetera. Circa primum tria facit. Primo ostendit donum a Deo susceptum, scilicet ministerium novi testamenti; secundo describit novum testamentum, ibi non littera, sed spiritu; tertio ex dignitate novi testamenti ostendit dignitatem ministrorum eius, ibi si ministratio, et cetera. 88. – Having commended the ministry of the New Testament, the Apostle then commends its ministers. First, he stipulates two things, which correspond to the above words. For he had mentioned a gift received from God when he said, our competence is from God, and the confidence born of this gift when he said, such is the confidence that we have through Christ toward God. First, therefore, he determines the things pertaining to the gift received; secondly, those pertaining to the confidence born of it (v. 12). In regard to the first he does three things: first, he discloses the gift received from God, namely, the ministry of the New Testament; secondly, he describes the New Testament (v. 6b); thirdly, from the dignity of the New Testament he shows the dignity of its ministers (v. 9). Dicit ergo: dico quod sufficientia nostra ex Deo est, qui et fecit nos idoneos ministros novi testamenti, Is. LXI, 6: ministri Dei nostri, dicetur vobis. Et in hoc tenemus locum Angelorum. Ps. CIII, 4: qui facit Angelos, et cetera. Sed non solum fecit nos ministros, sed idoneos. Deus enim cuilibet rei dat ea per quae possit consequi perfectionem suae naturae. Unde, quia Deus constituit ministros novi testamenti, dedit et eis idoneitatem ad hoc officium exercendum, nisi sit impedimentum ex parte recipientium. Supra II, 16: et ad haec quis tam idoneus, scilicet sicut apostoli a Deo instituti? 89. – He says, therefore: I say that our sufficiency is from God who has made us competent to be ministers of a new covenant: “Men shall speak of you as the ministers of our God” (Is. 61:6). And in this we hold the place of angels: “Who make angels your messengers, fire and flame your ministers” (Ps. 104:4). But he not only made us ministers, but fit ones. For God gives to each being the things through which it can attain to the perfection of its nature. Hence, because God constituted ministers of the New Testament, he made them fit to exercise this office, unless he was impeded on the part of the receivers: “Who is sufficient for these things” (2 Cor. 2:16), namely, as are the Apostles instituted by God. Hoc autem novum testamentum quid sit, describit, subdens non littera, et cetera. Et describit ipsum quantum ad duo, scilicet quantum ad illud in quo consistit, et quantum ad causam propter quam datum est, ibi littera enim occidit, et cetera. Circa primum sciendum est quod apostolus loquitur profunde. Dicitur enim Ier. c. XXXI, 31 ss.: feriam domui Israel et domui Iuda foedus novum, non secundum pactum quod pepigi cum patribus vestris. Et post: dabo legem meam in visceribus eorum, et in corde eorum superscribam eam, et cetera. Vetus ergo testamentum scribitur in libro, postmodum sanguine aspergendo, ut dicitur Hebr. IX, 19: accepit sanguinem et aspersit librum, etc., dicens: hic est sanguis, et cetera. Et sic patet, quod vetus lex est testamentum litterae. Sed novum testamentum est testamentum spiritus sancti, quo charitas Dei diffunditur in cordibus nostris, ut dicitur Rom. V, 5. Et sic dum spiritus sanctus facit in nobis charitatem, quae est plenitudo legis, est testamentum novum, non littera, id est per litteram scribendum, sed spiritu, id est per spiritum qui vivificat. Rom. VIII, 2: lex spiritus vitae, id est vivificantis. 90. – He describes what this New Testament is when he continues, not in a written code but in the Spirit. He describes it in regard to two things, namely, as to that in which it consists and as to its cause for which it has been given: for the written code kills. In regard to the first it should be noted that the Apostle speaks profoundly, for it is stated in Jeremiah (31:31): “I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah, not like the covenant which I made with their fathers”; and later on (v. 33): “I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts; and I will be their God and they shall be my people.” The Old Testament, therefore, is written in a book, later to be sprinkled with blood, as it says in Hebrews (9:19): “He took the blood of calves and goats and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people, saying: ‘This is the blood of the covenant which God commanded you.’” So it is clear that the Old Law is a covenant of words, but the New Covenant is a covenant of the Holy Spirit, by whom the love of God is poured out in our hearts [Et sic patet, quod vetus lex est testamentum litterae. Sed Novum Testamentum est testamentum Spiritus Sancti, quo charitas Dei diffunditur in cordis nostris], as it says in Rom. 5:5. Consequently, when the Holy Spirit produces charity in us, which is the fulness of the Law, it is a New Covenant, not in a written code, i.e., not written down, but in the Spirit, i.e., through the Spirit who gives life: “The law of the Spirit of life” (Rom. 8:2), i.e., life-giving. Causa autem quare datum sit novum testamentum per spiritum, subditur quia littera occidit occasionaliter. Nam littera legis dat solam cognitionem peccati. Rom. III, 20: per legem autem cognitio peccati. Ex hoc autem, quod cognosco peccatum, solum duo sequuntur. Nam lex dum per eam cognoscitur, non reprimit concupiscentiam: sed magis occasionaliter auget, inquantum concupiscentia ferventius fertur in rem prohibitam. Unde huiusmodi cognitio, nondum destructa causa concupiscentiae, occidit; hinc vero addit praevaricationem. Nam gravius est peccare contra legem scriptam et naturalem simul, quam contra legem naturalem solum. Rom. VII, 8: occasione accepta non data, peccatum, et cetera. Licet autem occasionaliter occidat, inquantum scilicet auget concupiscentiam, et addit praevaricationem, non tamen est mala lex vetus, quia ad minus prohibet mala. Est tamen imperfecta, inquantum non removet causam. Est ergo lex sine spiritu interius imprimens legem in corde, occasio mortis. Et ideo necessarium fuit dare legem spiritus, qui charitatem in corde faciens, vivificet. Io. VI, 64: spiritus est, qui vivificat. 91. – The reason why the New Testament was given by the Spirit is indicated when he says, for the written code kills, not as a cause but as an occasion. For the written Law only gives knowledge of sin: “For through the Law comes knowledge of sin” (Rom. 3:20). But as a result of merely knowing sin, two things follow. For the Law, although sin is known by it, does not repress concupiscence, but is the occasion of increasing it, inasmuch as concupiscence is enkindled the more by something forbidden. Hence such knowledge kills, when the cause of concupiscence has not yet been destroyed. As a result it adds to the sin. For it is more grievous to sin against the written and natural law than against the natural law only: “But sin, finding opportunity in the commandment, wrought in me all kinds of concupiscence” (Rom. 7:8). But although it is the occasion of killing inasmuch as it increases concupiscence and increases the sin, the Law is not evil, because at least it forbids evil; nevertheless, it is imperfect, inasmuch as it does not remove the cause. Therefore, the Law without the Spirit inwardly impressing the Law on the heart is the occasion of death; hence, it was necessary to give the Law of the Spirit, who gives life by producing charity in the heart: “It is the Spirit that gives life” (Jn. 6:63). Consequenter ex his ostendit dignitatem sui ministerii. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo ostendit, quod ministerium novi testamenti praefertur ministerio veteris testamenti; secundo quod non solum praefertur, sed quod ministerium veteris testamenti quasi nihil habet de gloria in comparatione ad novum, ibi nam nec glorificatum, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo ostendit quod ministerium novi testamenti praefertur veteri; secundo rationem huius assignat, ibi nam si ministratio, et cetera. 92. – From these, therefore, he shows the dignity of his ministry. He does two things in this regard. First, he shows that the ministry of the New Testament is preferred to the Old; secondly, that it is not only preferred, but that in comparison to the Old Testament, the latter has, as it were, nothing of glory (v. 10). In regard to the first, he does two things. First, he shows that the ministry of the New Testament is preferred to the Old; secondly, he assigns the reason for this (v. 9). Circa primum sciendum est, quod apostolus argumentatur ex hoc quod habetur Exodi XXIV, ubi littera nostra habet, quod Moyses habebat faciem cornutam, ita quod non possent, et cetera. Alia littera habet faciem splendidam, quod melius dicitur. Non enim intelligendum est eum habuisse cornua ad litteram, sicut quidam eum pingunt; sed dicitur cornuta propter radios, qui videbantur esse quasi quaedam cornua. Arguitur autem ex hoc sic. Et primo per unum simile, et est locus a minori. Constat enim quod si aliquid quod minus est, habet aliquid de gloria, quod multo magis illud quod est maius. Sed vetus testamentum est minus quam novum; cum ergo illud fuerit in gloria, ita ut non possent, etc., videtur quod multo magis novum est in gloria. 93. – In regard to the first, it should be noted that the Apostle argues from a statement in Exodus (34:24), where our text says that Moses had his face horned, so that the people of Israel could not come near. Another version says that his face shone, and this is better. For it should not be supposed that he literally had horns, as some depict him, but he is described as horned because of the rays which seemed to be like horns. He argues from this in the following way: first, by a similarity and by arguing from the lesser. For it is obvious that if something less has glory, then much more something which is greater. But the Old Testament is less than the New: therefore, since the former was in glory, so that the Israelites could not look at Moses’ face, it seems that the New is much more in glory. Quod autem vetus testamentum minus sit novo, probat tripliciter. Primo quantum ad effectum, quia illud est testamentum mortis, istud vitae, ut dictum est. Et quantum ad hoc dicit, quod si ministratio mortis, id est vetus, quae est occasio mortis. Et hoc respondet ei quo dicitur littera occidit, et cetera. Secundo quantum ad modum tradendi, quia vetus fuit tradita litteris in tabulis lapideis, nova vero fuit impressa spiritu in cordibus carnalibus. Et hoc innuit, cum dicit litteris deformata, id est perfecte formata, in lapidibus, id est in tabulis lapideis. Et hoc ei respondet, quo dicitur: non littera, sed spiritu, et cetera. Tertio quantum ad perfectionem, quia gloria veteris testamenti sine fiducia est, quia neminem ad perfectum adduxit lex. In novo vero est gloria cum spe melioris gloriae, scilicet sempiternae. Is. LI, 6: salus mea in sempiternum erit. Et hoc innuit, cum dicit quae evacuatur, Gal. V, 2: quod si circumcidamini, Christus nihil, et cetera. Conclusio ponitur, cum dicit quomodo non magis, quod planum est. 94. – That the Old Testament is less than the New he proves in three ways. First, from its effect, because the former is a covenant of death, but the latter of life, as has been said. In regard to this he says, If the dispensation of death, i.e., the Old, which is the occasion of death; and this corresponds to what he said, namely, that the written code kills, but the Spirit gives life. Secondly, as to the way it was delivered, for the Old was delivered written on stone tablets, but the New was impressed by the Spirit on human hearts. He suggests this when he says, carved in letters, i.e., perfectly formed, on stone, i.e., on tablets of stone. This corresponds to his statement, not in a written code but in the Spirit. Thirdly, as to perfection: for the glory of the Old Testament is without assurance, because the Law brought no one to perfection. But in the New there is glory with the hope of a better glory, i.e., eternal: “My salvation will be forever” (Is. 51:6). This is suggested when he says, fading as this was: “If you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you” (Gal. 5:2). He states the conclusion when he says, will not the dispensation of the Spirit be attended with greater glory? which is plain. Horum autem rationem assignat consequenter, cum dicit nam si ministratio, et cetera. Et est ratio sua talis: gloria magis debetur iustitiae, quam damnationi, sed ministerium novi testamenti est ministerium iustitiae, quia iustificat interius vivificando. Ministerium autem veteris testamenti est ministerium damnationis occasionaliter. Supra eodem: littera occidit, spiritus autem vivificat. Cum ergo ministratio damnationis, id est, ministratio veteris testamenti, quae occasionaliter est causa damnationis, ut dictum est, est in gloria, quae apparuit in facie Moysi, constat quod multo magis abundat in gloria, id est, dat abundantem gloriam ministris eius, ministerium iustitiae, id est, novi testamenti, per quod datur spiritus, per quem est iustitia et consummatio virtutum. Prov. III, 35: sapientes gloriam possidebunt. 95. – Then he assigns the reason for all these when he says, For if there was glory in the dispensation of condemnation, the dispensation of justice must far exceed it in glory. This is his reasoning: Glory is owed more to justice than to condemnation, but the ministry of the New Testament is a ministry of justice, because it justifies by giving life within. The ministry of the Old Testament is a ministry of condemnation, as being its occasion: the written code kills, but the Spirit gives life. Therefore, since the dispensation of condemnation, i.e., the ministry of the Old Testament, is the occasional cause of condemnation, as has been said, is in glory, which appeared on the face of Moses, it is obvious that much more abundant in glory, i.e., gives an abundance of glory to its ministers, is the dispensation of justice, i.e., of the New Testament, by which the Spirit is given through whom is given justice and the fulfillment of the virtues: “The wise shall possess glory” (Prov. 3:35). Consueverunt hoc in loco fieri quaestiones de comparatione Moysi et Pauli, sed, si recte considerentur verba apostoli, non sunt necessariae, quia hic non fit comparatio personae ad personam, sed ministerii ad ministerium. 96. – It is customary here to compare Moses and Paul; but if the Apostle’s words are considered carefully, this is not necessary, because ministries not persons are being compared. Sed quia possent pseudo-apostoli dicere quod licet maius ministerium sit novi testamenti quam ministerium veteris testamenti non tamen est multo maius, et ideo bonum est quod illi ministerio, et isti intendamus, quod et faciebant, quia simul servabant legalia cum Evangelio. Ideo hic consequenter apostolus hoc improbat, cum dicit nam nec glorificatum, et cetera. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo enim ostendit, quod ministerium novi testamenti absque aliqua comparatione excedit ministerium veteris; secundo causam huius assignat, ibi si enim quod evacuatur, et cetera. 97. – But because the false apostles could say that even though the ministry of the New Covenant is greater than that of the Old, it is not much greater. Therefore, it is good for us to continue in that ministry, which they did, because they observed the ceremonies of the Law along with the Gospel. Therefore the Apostle rejects this when he says, indeed, in this case, what once had glory has come to have no glory at all, because of the glory that surpasses it. In regard to this he does two things. First, he shows that the ministry of the New Testament exceeds that of the Old beyond all comparison. Secondly, he assigns the reason for this (v. 11). Dicit ergo: dixi quod ministerium iustitiae abundat in gloria, et intantum quod gloria veteris ministerii non est dicenda gloria, quia nec glorificatum, etc.: quod dupliciter exponitur. Primo modo sic quia nec, etc., id est illa gloria nihil est in comparatione ad istam novi testamenti, quia illa gloria non est omnibus ministris collata, sed solum Moysi, et non claruit in toto Moyse, sed in parte, id est in facie solum particulariter. Et ideo nec glorificatum est, id est nec glorificari debet, propter excellentem gloriam, id est comparatione excellentis gloriae novi testamenti, quae abundat gratia, ut per eam purificati homines possent videre non gloriam hominis, sed Dei. Secundo modo ut punctetur sic: nec glorificatum est quod claruit; quasi dicat: nam in hac parte, id est in respectu huius naturae particularis, qui sumus servi, non est glorificatum, id est non gloriosum illud quod claruit in veteri testamento; et hoc propter excellentem gloriam, quae est in novo, quia illa est gloria Dei patris. 98. – He says, therefore, I have said that the ministry of justice abounds in glory to such a degree that the glory of the Old Testament should not be called glorious, for what once had glory has come to have no glory at all by reason of the glory that surpasses it. This is explained in two ways. First, that that glory is nothing in comparison to that of the New Testament, because such glory was not conferred on all the ministers, but on Moses alone, and it did not shine on Moses entirely, but in part, i.e., on his face alone. Therefore, it has come to have no glory at all, i.e., should not be glorified because of the glory that surpasses it, i.e., in comparison to the excelling glory of the New Testament, which abounds in grace, so that men purified by it might not see the glory of a man but of God. It is explained in a second way by punctuating it thus: that which was glorious in this part has come to have no glory: as if to say, for in this part, i.e., in respect to this particular nature, that we are servants, has come to have no glory, i.e., that was not glorious which shone in the Old Testament: and this by reason of the glory that surpasses it, which is in the New, because it is the glory of God the Father. Huius autem causam assignat consequenter, cum dicit si enim quod evacuatur, et cetera. Et est ratio sua talis: illud quod datur ut transeat, nihil est in respectu ad illud quod datur ut semper maneat. Si ergo testamentum vetus, quod evacuatur, tollitur, I Cor. c. XIII, 10: cum venerit quod perfectum est, evacuabitur quod ex parte est, et cetera. Per gloriam enim Moysi ministratum saltem per particularem gloriam. Constat quod testamentum novum manet, quia hic inchoatur, et perficitur in patria. Lc. XXI, 33: caelum et terra transibunt, verba autem mea non transibunt. Erit multo magis in gloria aeterna, in qua perficietur. Erit, inquam, nobis, qui sumus eius ministri. 99. – Then he assigns the cause of this when he says, For if what faded away came with glory, what is permanent must have much more glory. His reasoning is thus: that which was given to pass away is nothing in relation to that which is given to remain always. If, therefore, the Old Testament, which is rendered void, is done away with: “But when the perfect comes, the imperfect will pass away” (1 Cor. 13:10). For with glory the ministry of Moses came, at least with a particular glory. And it is obvious that the New Testament remains, because it is begun here and completed in heaven: “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away” (Lk. 21:33). It will be much more in eternal glory, in which it will be perfected; it will be, I say, for us who are its ministers.
3-3
2 Cor. 3:12-18Positis his quae pertinent ad commendationem doni percepti a Deo, hic consequenter ponit ea quae pertinent ad commendationem fiduciae de ipso dono conceptae. Circa hoc autem duo facit. Primo ponit fiduciam ex dono conceptam; secundo vero comparat fiduciam veteris et novi testamenti, ibi et non sicut Moyses. 100. – Having laid down what pertains to commending the gift received from God, he now lays down what pertains to commending the confidence born of that gift. In regard to this he does two things: first, he mentions the confidence born of the gift; secondly, he compares the confidence in the Old and in the New Testament (v. 13). Dicit ergo primo: habentes igitur talem spem, ex hoc scilicet quod nobis dictum est, scilicet videndi gloriam Dei, Rom. c. VIII, 24: spe enim salvi facti sumus, multa fiducia utimur, id est, confidenter operamur ea quae pertinent ad usum huius ministerii, ex quo crescit nobis spes. Prov. XXVIII, v. 1. Iustus quasi leo confidens absque terrore erit. Ier. XVII, 7: benedictus vir qui confidit in domino. 101. – He says, therefore, Since we have such a hope, because of what has been said to us, namely, of seeing the glory of God: “In this hope we were saved” (Rom. 8:24), we are very bold [multa fiducia utimur], i.e., we confidently do the things which pertain to the use of this ministry, from which our hope grows: “The righteous are bold as a lion” (Prov. 28:1); “Blessed is the man who trusts in the Lord” (Jer. 17:7). Consequenter, sicut praetulit donum dono, ita praefert fiduciam novi testamenti fiduciae veteris testamenti, cum dicit et non sicut Moyses, et cetera. Et circa hoc duo facit: primo proponit factum in veteri testamento; secundo exponit, ibi quod evacuatur, et cetera. 102. – Then as he preferred the one gift to the other, so he prefers the confidence [fiducia] of the New Testament to that of the Old (v. 13). In regard to this he does two things: first, he mentions a fact about the Old Testament; secondly, he explains it (v. 13b). Factum autem quod proponit legitur Exodi XXXIV, 34, ubi dicitur quod Moyses quando loquebatur ad populum, velabat faciem suam, quia propter claritatem vultus eius non poterant respicere in eum filii Israel. Et ideo dicit et non sicut Moyses, etc., quasi dicat: dico quod utimur multa fiducia, et tanta, quod non accidit nobis, sicut Moyses faciebat eis, scilicet non revelando faciem suam populo, quia nondum venerat tempus revelandi claritatem veritatis. Habemus ergo nos fiduciam absque velamine. 103. – The fact he proposes is mentioned in Exodus (34:33), where it says that when he spoke to the people, Moses veiled his face, because the children of Israel could not look upon him because of the splendor of his face. Hence he says, not like Moses, who put a veil over his face. As if to say: I say that we are very bold, and such as did not happen to us as Moses did to them, namely, not revealing his face to the people, because the time to reveal the splendor of truth had not yet come. Therefore, we have confidence [fiduciam] without the veil. Consequenter exponit hoc quod dixerat, de velamine, dicens quod evacuatur, et cetera. Velamen enim illud erat obscuritas figurarum, quae per Christum evacuata est. Et circa hoc tria facit. Primo enim ponit evacuationem huius velaminis; secundo quomodo haec evacuatio habet locum in Iudaeis, ibi sed obtusi, etc.; tertio quomodo non habeat locum in ministris novi testamenti, ibi nos vero revelata, et cetera. 104. – Then he explains what he had said about the veil, saying, which is made void, for that veil was the dimness of the figures, which was made void by Christ. In regard to this he does three things. First, he mentions the voiding of this veil; secondly, how this voiding still prevails among the Jews (v. 14); thirdly, how this has no place among the ministers of the New Testament (v. 18). Dicit ergo quod Moyses ponebat velamen, scilicet figurae, super faciem suam, quod, scilicet velamen, evacuatur, id est tollitur per Christum, scilicet implendo in veritate quod Moyses tradidit in figura, quia omnia in figura contingebant illis. Sic enim Christus per mortem suam removit velamen de occisione agni paschalis, et ideo statim cum emisit spiritum, velum templi scissum est. Item, in mittendo spiritum sanctum in corda credentium, ut intelligerent spiritualiter quod Iudaei carnaliter intelligunt. Et hoc velamen removit, cum aperuit eis sensum, ut intelligerent Scripturas, Lc. ult. 105. – He says, therefore, that Moses put a veil, namely, of the figure, over his face; this veil is made void, i.e., is taken away by Christ, namely, by fulfilling in truth what Moses delivered in figure, because all things happened to them in a figure. For thus Christ by his death removed the veil of the killing of the paschal lamb. Therefore, as soon as he gave up his spirit, the veil of the Temple was rent. Likewise by sending the Holy Spirit into the hearts of believers so that they might understand spiritually what the Jews understood carnally. He removed the veil, when he opened their mind to understand the Scriptures (Lk. 24:45). Qualem autem effectum habeat in Iudaeis haec evacuatio, ostendit, dicens sed obtusi, et cetera. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo ostendit, quod remotum ab illis non fuit in statu infidelitatis; secundo ostendit, quod removebitur in eorum conversione, ibi cum autem conversus fuerit, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo ostendit rationem quare haec evacuatio non habet locum in Iudaeis; secundo, ex hoc ostendit eos adhuc habere velamen, ibi sed usque in hodiernum diem, et cetera. 106. – What effect this voiding had on the Jews is shown (v. 14). In regard to this he does two things. First, he shows that it was not removed from them in the state of unbelief; secondly, he shows that it will be removed when they are converted (v. 16). In regard to the he does two things: first, he shows why this voiding has no place among the Jews; secondly, from this he shows that they still have the veil (v. 15). Dicit ergo quod evacuatur in his qui credunt, sed non quantum ad Iudaeos infideles. Et ratio huius est, quia obtusi sunt sensus eorum, id est ratio eorum hebes est, et sensus eorum imbecilles et obtusi sunt, nec possunt videre claritatem divini luminis, id est divinae veritatis, absque velamine figurarum. Et huius ratio est quia claudunt oculos, ut non videant, quia velum templi scissum est. Et ideo est ex eorum culpa infidelitatis, non ex defectu veritatis, quia, remoto velamine, omnibus aperientibus oculos mentis per fidem clarissime veritas manifestatur. Rom. XI, 25: caecitas ex parte contigit in Israel. Io. IX, 39: in iudicium veni in hunc mundum, et cetera. Sic enim prophetaverat Isaias VI cap.: excaeca cor populi huius, et cetera. Et vere intantum obtusi sunt sensus eorum, ut veritatem nobis manifestatam usque in hodiernum diem non intelligant. Sed idipsum velamen, quod erat in veteri testamento, antequam velum templi scissum esset in lectione veteris testamenti, quia non aliter intelligunt illud, quam ante, quia adhuc innituntur figuris, ut veritatem non revelent, id est non intelligant: sic velamen Dei, non figuram, sed veritatem credunt, quod scilicet evacuatur quantum ad fideles, et quantum in se est omnibus per Christum, id est in fide Christi, sed in eis non manet, quia non credunt venisse Christum. 107. – He says, therefore, that it is removed for those who believe, but not for the unbelieving Jews. The reason for this is that their minds were hardened, i.e., their reasoning power is dull and their senses weak and clouded, so that they cannot see the brightness of the divine light, i.e., of divine truth, without the veil of figures. The reason for this is that they close their eyes so as not to see, because the veil of the Temple was rent. Therefore, this is due to their sin of unbelief, and not to a weakness in the truth; because with the removal of the veil the truth is manifested very clearly to all who open the eyes of their mind through faith: “A hardening has come upon part of Israel” (Rom. 11:25); “For judgment I came into this world, that those who do not see may see, and that those who see may become blind” (Jn. 9:39). For this was foretold by Isaiah (6:10): “Make the heart of this people fat, and their ears heavy, and shut their eyes, lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed.” And indeed their minds are so dulled to the truth that to this day they do not understand the truth manifested to us. But the same veil remains which was in the Old Testament before the veil of the Temple was rent, when they read the Old Testament, because they understand it no differently than before. For they still rely on figures, so as not to reveal the truth, i.e., not understand. Thus they still believe that the veil of God is not a figure, but the truth, which namely is lifted as to believers through Christ, i.e., in the faith of Christ. But it remains in them, because they do not believe that Christ has come. Consequenter cum dicit sed usque in hodiernum diem, etc., ostendit quomodo adhuc apud Iudaeos est velamen quantum ad infideles, licet remotum sit per Christum. Circa quod sciendum est, quod velamen dicitur apponi alicui dupliciter: aut quia apponitur rei visae ne possit videri, aut quia apponitur videnti ne videat. Sed Iudaeis in veteri lege utroque modo appositum erat velamen. Nam et corda eorum excaecata erant, ne cognoscerent veritatem propter eorum duritiem, et vetus testamentum nondum completum erat, quia nondum veritas venerat. Unde in signum huius velamen erat in facie Moysi et non in faciebus eorum, sed, veniente Christo, velamen remotum est a facie Moysi, id est a veteri testamento, quia iam impletum est, sed tamen non est remotum a cordibus eorum. Et hoc est quod dicit sed usque in hodiernum diem, quasi dicat: amotum est a fidelibus veteris testamenti velamen, sed adhuc cum legitur Moyses, id est, cum exponitur eis vetus testamentum, Act. c. XV, 21: Moyses a temporibus antiquis habet in singulis civitatibus, qui eum praedicent in synagogis, etc., velamen, id est caecitas, est positum super cor eorum. Rom. XI, 25: caecitas ex parte contigit, et cetera. 108. – Then when he says, Yes, to this day whenever Moses is read a veil lies over their minds, he shows how even among the Jews the veil remains, as to unbelievers, although it has been removed by Christ. In regard to this it should be noted that a veil is said to be put on something in two ways: either because it is put on the thing seen, so that it cannot be seen; or because it is put on the one seeing, so that he may not see. But the veil was put on the Jews of the Old Law in both ways. For their eyes have been blinded not to see the truth because of their hardness; and the Old Testament had not yet been fulfilled, because the truth had not yet come. As a sign of this the veil was on Moses’ face and not theirs. But with the coming of Christ the veil was removed from the face of Moses, i.e., from the Old Testament, because it was not fulfilled: but it has not been removed from their hearts. Hence, he says, to this day the veil remains. As if to say: the veil has been removed from the believers of the Old Testament, but still when Moses is read, i.e., when the Old Testament is explained to them: “For from early generations, Moses has had in every city those who preach him, for he is read every sabbath in the synagogues” (Ac. 15:21), the veil, i.e. blindness, lies over their hearts: “A hardening has come upon part of Israel” (Rom. 11:25). Quando autem et quomodo removetur ab eis illud velamen, ostendit consequenter, cum dicit cum autem conversus, et cetera. Et primo describit modum removendi hoc velamen; secundo rationem huius reddit, ibi dominus autem spiritus, et cetera. 109. – But when and how that veil shall be removed from them is shown when he says, but when a man turns to the Lord the veil is removed. First he describes how to remove this veil; secondly, the reason for this (v. 17). Dicit ergo, quod illud velamen adhuc est in eis, sed non quod vetus testamentum sit velatum, sed quia corda eorum velata sunt. Et ideo, ad hoc ut removeatur, nihil restat, nisi quod convertantur, et hoc est quod dicit cum autem conversus fuerit, scilicet aliquis eorum ad Deum per fidem in Christum, ex ipsa conversione auferetur velamen. Is. X, 21: reliquiae convertentur, et cetera. Et hoc idem habetur Rom. IX, 27. Et nota, quod cum ageret de caecitate, loquitur in plurali, unde dicit super corda eorum, cum vero loquitur de conversione, loquitur in singulari dicens cum autem conversus, ut ostendat eorum facilitatem ad malum, et difficultatem ad bonum, quasi pauci convertantur. 110. – He says, therefore, that this veil is still upon them; not that the Old Testament is veiled, but because their hearts are veiled. Therefore if it is to be removed, nothing remains but that they be converted. Hence, he says, but when a man turns, namely, some of them, to God through faith in Christ, the veil is removed by their conversion: “A remnant will return, the remnant of Jacob, to the mighty God” (Is. 10:21); and this is also stated in Romans (9:27). And note that when he treated of blindness, he spoke in the plural, saying over their hearts; but when he speaks of conversion, he speaks in the singular, saying, but when a man turns, to show how easy evil is and how difficult the good, as though few will be converted. Ratio autem quare convertantur, et velamen removeatur, hoc modo est, quia Deus vult. Posset enim dicere, quod velamen illud appositum est ex praecepto domini, et ideo non potest removeri. Sed apostolus ostendit, quod non solum potest removeri, imo quia removetur per eum, qui est dominus. Et hoc est, quod dicit dominus enim, et cetera. Quod potest dupliciter legi. Uno modo, ut spiritus teneatur ex parte subiecti, ut dicatur: spiritus, id est spiritus sanctus, scilicet qui est auctor legis, est dominus, id est operatur ex proprio libertatis arbitrio. Io. III, 8: spiritus ubi vult spirat. I Cor. XII, 11: dividens singulis prout vult. Ubi autem spiritus domini, ibi libertas; quasi dicat: quia spiritus est dominus, potest dare libertatem, ut possimus libere uti Scriptura veteris testamenti absque velamine. Et ideo, qui non habent spiritum sanctum, non possunt libere uti. Gal. V, 13: vos in libertatem vocati estis. I Petr. II, 16: quasi liberi, et non quasi velamen habentes malitiae libertatem. Alio modo, ut per dominum intelligatur Christus, et tunc legitur sic dominus, id est Christus, est spiritualis, id est spiritus potestatis, et ideo ubi est spiritus domini, id est lex Christi spiritualiter intellecta, non scripta litteris, sed per fidem cordibus impressa, ibi est libertas, ab omni impedimento velaminis. 111. – But the reason why they are converted and the veil removed in this manner is because God wills it. For they could claim that God put the veil on them and therefore it cannot be removed. But the Apostle shows that it cannot only be removed, but even that it is removed by him who is the Lord. Hence, he says, now the Lord is the Spirit. This can be understood in two ways. In one way, so that Spirit is taken as the subject, as though saying: the Spirit, i.e., the Holy Spirit, namely who is the author of the Law, is the Lord, i.e., works by his own free will: “The Spirit blows where it wills” (Jn. 3:8); “The Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills” (1 Cor. 12:11). And where the Spirit of the Lord is there is freedom; as if to say: because the Spirit is the Lord, he can give freedom to enable us freely to use the writings of the Old Testament without a veil. Therefore, those who do not have the Holy Spirit cannot use it freely: “You were called to freedom” (Gal. 5:13); “Live as free men, yet without using your freedom as a pretext for evil” (1 Pet. 2:16). It can be understood another way so that by the Lord is meant Christ, as though saying: the Lord, i.e., Christ, is Spirit, i.e., has spiritual power. Therefore, where the Spirit of the Lord is, i.e., the law of Christ spiritually understood, not in a written code, but impressed on the heart by faith, there is freedom from every obscurity of the veil. Sciendum autem, quod occasione istorum verborum, scilicet ubi spiritus domini, ibi libertas, et illorum, scilicet iusto lex non est posita, aliqui erronee dixerunt quod viri spirituales non obligantur praeceptis legis divinae. Sed hoc est falsum; nam praecepta Dei sunt regula voluntatis humanae. Nullus autem homo est, nec etiam Angelus, cuius voluntatem non oporteat regulari et dirigi lege divina. Unde impossibile est aliquem hominem praeceptis Dei non subdi. Hoc autem quod dicitur iusto lex non est posita, exponitur, id est, propter iustos, qui interiori habitu moventur ad ea quae lex Dei praecipit, lex non est posita: sed propter iniustos, non quin etiam iusti ad eam teneantur. Et similiter ubi spiritus domini, ibi libertas, intelligitur, quia liber est, qui est causa sui: servus autem est causa domini; quicumque ergo agit ex seipso, libere agit; qui vero ex alio motus, non agit libere. Ille ergo, qui vitat mala, non quia mala, sed propter mandatum domini, non est liber; sed qui vitat mala, quia mala, est liber. Hoc autem facit spiritus sanctus, qui mentem interius perficit per bonum habitum, ut sic ex amore caveat, ac si praeciperet lex divina; et ideo dicitur liber, non quin subdatur legi divinae, sed quia ex bono habitu inclinatur ad hoc faciendum, quod lex divina ordinat. 112. – It should be noted that by occasion of these words, namely, where the Spirit of the Lord is there is freedom, and of those found in 1 Timothy (1:9): “The law is not laid down for the just”, some have erroneously said that spiritual men are not bound by the precepts of the divine law. But this is false, for God’s precepts are the rule of the human will. But there is no man or angel whose will does not need to be ruled and directed by divine law. Hence, it is impossible for any man not to be subject to God’s precepts. But the statement that “the law is not laid down for the just” means that the law was not laid down “for the just” who are led by an internal habit to do what the law of God commands, but because of the unjust. Nevertheless, this does not mean that the just are not bound to it. Similarly, where the Spirit of the Lord is there is freedom, is explained thus: the free man is one who exists for himself, but the servant exists for the sake of the master. Therefore, whoever acts of himself acts freely, but one who is moved by another does not act freely. Therefore, one who avoids evils, not because they are evil, but because of God’s commandment, is not free. But one who avoids evils because they are evils is free. But this is done by the Holy Spirit who perfects man inwardly with a good habit, so that from love he avoids evil, as if the divine law had commanded. Consequently, he is called free, not as though he is not subject to the divine law, but because he is inclined by a good habit to do what the divine law ordains. Deinde, cum dicit nos vero omnes, etc., ostendit quomodo Christi fideles sunt omnino liberi ab hoc velamine. Dicit ergo: dico quod ab illis aufertur velamen hoc, cum aliquis conversus fuerit sicut nos, non aliquis, sed omnes, qui sumus Christi fideles. Lc. VIII, 10: vobis datum est, et cetera. Revelata facie, non habentes velamen supra cor, sicut illi. Et intelligitur per faciem, cor, seu mens, quia sicut per faciem videt quis corporaliter, ita per mentem spiritualiter. Ps. CXVIII, 18: revela oculos meos, et cetera. Gloriam domini, non Moysi: gloria enim significat claritatem, ut dicit Augustinus. Iudaei autem videbant quamdam gloriam in facie Moysi ex hoc, quod locutus est cum Deo. Sed haec gloria est imperfecta, quia non est claritas ex qua ipse Deus est gloriosus; et hoc est cognoscere ipsum Deum. Vel gloriam domini, id est, filium Dei. Prov. X: gloria patris, filius sapiens, et cetera. 113. – Then when he says, and we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being changed into his likeness from one degree of glory to another, he shows how the faithful of Christ are altogether free of this veil. He says, therefore: I say that this veil will be removed from them, when a person may be converted as we are; not a particular one, but we all who are Christ’s faithful: “To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of God; but for others they are in parables” (Lk. 8:10). With unveiled face, not having a veil upon the heart, as they. By face is meant the heart or the mind, because just as a person sees bodily with the face, so spiritually with the mind: “Open my eyes that I may behold wondrous things out of your law” (Ps. 119:18). The glory of the Lord, not of Moses: for glory signifies brightness, as Augustine says. But the Jews saw some glory on the face of Moses as a result of his speaking with God. But this glory is imperfect, because it is not the glory with which God is glorious: and this is to know God himself. Or the glory of the Lord, i.e., the Son of God: “The glory of a father is a wise son” (Prov. 10:1, Vulgate). Speculantes non sumitur hic a specula, sed a speculo, id est ipsum Deum gloriosum cognoscentes per speculum rationis, in qua est quaedam imago ipsius. Et hunc speculamur quando homo ex consideratione sui ipsius assurgit in cognitionem aliquam de Deo, et transformatur. Cum enim omnis cognitio sit per assimilationem cognoscentis ad cognitum, oportet quod qui vident, aliquo modo transformentur in Deum. Et siquidem perfecte vident, perfecte transformantur, sicut beati in patria per fruitionis unionem, I Io. III, 2: cum autem apparuerit, et cetera. Si vero imperfecte, imperfecte, sicut hic per fidem, I Cor. XIII, 12: videmus nunc per speculum in aenigmate. 114. – Beholding, i.e., speculating, which is not taken from the word which means “watch tower” (specula), but from “mirror” (speculum), i.e., knowing the glorious God himself by the mirror of reason, in which there is an image of God. We behold him when we rise from a consideration of ourselves to some knowledge of God, and we are transformed. For since all knowledge involves the knower’s being assimilated to the thing known, it is necessary that those who see be in some way transformed into God. If they see perfectly, they are perfectly transformed, as the blessed in heaven by the union of enjoyment: “When he appears we shall be like him” (1 Jn. 3:2); but if we see imperfectly, then we are transformed imperfectly, as here by faith: “Now we see in a mirror dimly” (1 Cor. 13:12). Et ideo dicit in eamdem imaginem, id est sicut videmus, transformamur, inquam, a claritate in claritatem, in quo distinguit triplicem gradum cognitionis in discipulis Christi: primus est a claritate cognitionis naturalis in claritatem cognitionis fidei. Secundus est a claritate cognitionis veteris testamenti, in claritatem cognitionis gratiae novi testamenti. Tertius est a claritate cognitionis naturalis et veteris et novi testamenti, in claritatem visionis aeternae. Infra IV, 16: licet is qui foris est, et cetera. Sed unde est hoc? Non ex littera legis, sed tamquam a spiritu domini. Rom. VIII, v. 14: quicumque spiritu Dei aguntur. Ps. CXLII, 10: spiritus tuus bonus deducet, et cetera. 115. – Therefore he says, into his likeness, that is, as we see, we are transformed, I say, from one degree of glory to another. In this he distinguishes a triple degree of knowledge in Christ’s disciples. The first is from the clarity of natural knowledge to the clarity of the knowledge of faith. The second is from the clarity of the knowledge of the Old Testament to the clarity of the knowledge of the grace of the New Testament. The third is from the clarity of natural knowledge and of the Old and New Testaments to the clarity of eternal vision: “Though our outer nature is wasting away, our inner nature is being renewed every day” (2 Cor. 4:16). But how does this come about? Not by the letter of the law, but from the Lord who is the Spirit: “For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God” (Rom. 8:14); “Let your good Spirit lead me on a level path” (Ps. 143:10).
4-1
2 Cor. 4:1-2Ostensa dignitate ministerii novi testamenti, hic consequenter apostolus determinat de usu ministerii. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo enim ostendit usum huius ministerii, qui debet esse in agendis bonis; secundo illum, qui debet esse in malis patienter tolerandis, ibi habemus autem thesaurum, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo ponit huius ministerii usum; secundo obiectionem excludit, ibi quod si, et cetera. 116. – Having shown the dignity of the New Testament ministry, the Apostle now discusses the exercise of this ministry. In regard to this he does two things. First, he shows that the exercise of this ministry should consist in doing good; secondly it should consist also in enduring evils patiently (v. 7). In regard to the first he does two things. First, he lays down the use of this ministry; secondly, he excludes an objection (v. 3). Dicit ergo: quia igitur huiusmodi ministerium est tantae dignitatis in se et in ministris, ideo habentes hanc administrationem, idest hanc dignitatem administrandi spiritualia. I Cor. IV, 1: sic nos existimet homo, ut ministros, et cetera. Rom. XI, 13: quamdiu sum gentium apostolus, ministerium, et cetera. Habentes, inquam, non ex nobis, seu ex meritis nostris, sed iuxta quod misericordiam consecuti sumus a Deo, id est ex misericordia Dei, quam in hoc consecuti sumus a Deo. I Tim. I, 13: misericordiam consecutus sum, et cetera. 117. – He says, therefore: because this ministry is of such great dignity in itself and in its ministers, therefore having this ministry, i.e., this dignity of administering spiritual things: “This is how one should regard us, as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God” (1 Cor. 4:1); “Inasmuch then as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry” (Rom. 11:13); having it, I say, not from ourselves or from our merits, but by the mercy of God which we have obtained from God for this: “I received mercy” (1 Tim. 1:13). Consequenter cum dicit non deficimus, etc., describit usum huius ministerii, qui debet esse circa bona agenda, et hoc quantum ad duo. Primo quantum ad vitationem malorum; secundo quantum ad operationem bonorum in manifestatione, et cetera. 118. – Then when he says, we do not lose heart, he describes the exercise of this ministry, which should be engaged in doing good; and this in regard to two things: first, as to avoiding evil; secondly, as to doing good (v. 2b). Docet autem vitari mala in usu huius ministerii, et quantum ad vitam, et quantum ad doctrinam. Sed quantum ad vitam dupliciter, scilicet quantum ad operationem, et quantum ad intentionem. Nam si quis vitat mala operari et bona intentione, perfecte vitat mala. In operatione autem vitatur malum, in adversitate patienter mala sustinendo, et ideo dicit non deficimus, per impatientiam. Gal. VI, 9: bonum autem facientes non deficiamus. II Cor. XII, v. 10: cum infirmor, tunc fortior sum et potens. Vitatur etiam in prosperitate, temperate utendo eis quae prospere succedunt, et ideo dicit sed abdicamus occulta dedecoris, id est amovemus a nobis quae hominem turpem et dedecorosum faciunt, scilicet immunda et turpia, et etiam occulta, non solum manifesta. Iac. I, 21: abiiciamus omnem immunditiam. Eph. V, 12: quae in occulto ab eis fiunt, turpe, et cetera. In intentione autem vitatur malum vitae, si est intentio recta, et quantum ad hoc dicit non ambulantes in astutia, id est in astutia et simulatione et hypocrisi, quod faciunt pseudo, qui aliud praetendunt exterius, et aliud gerunt interius in corde. Iob XXXVI, 13: simulatores et callidi provocant iram Dei. In doctrina autem vitatur malum quando verbum domini debito modo proponitur, et quantum ad hoc dicit non adulterantes verbum. Quod dupliciter exponitur, ut patet supra. Et primo non permiscentes doctrinae Christi falsam doctrinam, quod faciebant pseudo dicentes legalia debere servari cum Evangelio. Secundo non praedicantes propter lucrum, vel gloriam propriam. Et istorum primus est lupus, secundus mercenarius. Sed qui vera praedicat, et propter gloriam Dei, est pastor. Unde Augustinus: pastor est amandus, lupus vitandus, sed mercenarius ad tempus tolerandus. 119. – He teaches us to avoid evil both in conduct and in doctrine, when we exercise this ministry. As to conduct in two ways, namely in our actions and in our intentions. But if a person avoids doing evil and has a good intention, he avoids evil completely. But evil is avoided in our activity by enduring evils patiently in adversity. Hence, he says, we do not lose heart by impatience: “Let us not grow weary in well-doing” (Gal. 6:9); “For when I am weak, then I am strong” (2 Cor. 12:10). It is also avoided in prosperity by making moderate use of the things that are going well for us. Hence he says, we have renounced disgraceful, underhanded ways, i.e., we remove from ourselves whatever makes a man base and dishonorable, namely, things unclean and foul and not only open but even hidden: “Therefore put away all filthiness” (Jas. 1:21); “For it is a shame even to speak of the things that they do in secret” (Eph. 5:12). Evil conduct is avoided in our intention, if it is a right intention. In regard to this he says, we refuse to practice cunning, i.e., fraud and pretense and hypocrisy. That is what the false apostles do, who pretend one thing outwardly, but do something else inwardly in the heart: “Dissemblers and crafty men provoke the wrath of God” (Job 36:13, Vulgate). Evil is avoided in doctrine when the Lord’s word is proposed in the proper way. In regard to this he says, or to tamper with God’s word. This is explained in two ways. First, not mixing false doctrine with the doctrine of Christ, as the false apostles do when they teach that the ceremonies of the Law must be observed along with the Gospel. Secondly, not preaching for gain and for one’s own glory. The first of these is a wolf and the second a hireling, but one who preaches the truth and for the glory of God is a shepherd. Hence Augustine says: “The shepherd should be loved and the wolf avoided, but the hireling must be tolerated for the present.” Sed quia non sufficit ad perfectam iustitiam solum vitare mala, sed requiritur operatio bona, ideo consequenter subiungit de operatione bonorum in ipso usu huius ministerii. Et ponitur triplex bonum, quod facit contra triplex malum. Primum bonum contra malum doctrinae; secundum contra malum operationis; tertium contra malum intentionis. Contra malum doctrinae, quod debet vitari, facit bonum manifestae veritatis. Et quantum ad hoc dicit in manifestatione veritatis, quasi dicat: non deficimus sed, vitantes mala, ambulamus et proficimus in manifestatione veritatis, id est veritatem puram manifestamus. Io. XVIII, 37: ad hoc natus sum, ut testimonium perhibeam veritati. Eccli. XXIV, v. 31: qui elucidant me, vitam aeternam habebunt. Contra malum operationis faciunt bona opera, et quantum ad hoc dicit commendantes nosmetipsos, et cetera. Et hoc non facimus dicendo de nobis bona, quia non de facili creditur ei qui seipsum commendat, sed operando bona, quia talia opera facimus, ut ex ipsis operibus reddamus nosmetipsos commendabiles, ad omnem conscientiam hominum. I Petr. II, 12: conversationem vestram inter gentes, et cetera. Contra malum intentionis facimus bonum reddendo nos commendabiles, non solum ad omnem conscientiam hominum, sed etiam coram Deo, qui intuetur corda. Infra X, 18: non enim qui seipsum commendat, ille probatus est, et cetera. Rom. XII, 17: providentes bona, non solum coram, et cetera. 120. – But because perfect justice requires more than avoiding evil, but doing good, he says something about doing good in the exercise of this ministry. The first good is against evil teachings; the second against evil conduct; the third against an evil intention. Against evil teaching, which must be avoided, they perform the good of manifesting the truth. In regard to this he says, by the open statement of the truth: as if to say, we do not lose heart but, avoiding evil, we walk and act in the manifestation of the truth, i.e., we manifest the pure truth: “For this I have come into the world, to bear witness to the truth” (Jn. 18:37); “Those who show me forth shall have everlasting life” (Sir. 24:31, Vulgate). Against evil conduct they perform good works. In regard to this he says, we would commend ourselves to every man’s conscience. We do not do this by saying good things about ourselves, because it is not easy to believe a person who recommends himself, but by doing good, because we do such works, so that by the works themselves we make ourselves commendable to every man’s conscience: “Maintain good conduct among the Gentiles” (1 Pet. 2:12). Against an evil intention we do good by making ourselves commendable not only to every man’s conscience, but even in the sight of God, who sees the heart.: “For it is not the man who commends himself that is accepted, but the man whom the Lord commends” (2 Cor. 10:18); “Providing good things not only before God but before all men” (Rom. 12:17, Vulgate). Et, secundum Augustinum in Glossa, apostolus implet in hoc mandatum domini, Matth. V, 16: sic luceat, etc., item c. VI, 1: attendite ne iustitiam, etc., primum in hoc quod dicit commendantes nos, etc.; secundum vero in hoc quod dicit coram Deo, Rom. II, 28: non enim, qui in manifesto, et cetera. Vel potest totum hoc magis secundum continuationem litterae, legi sic, ut dicatur: ideo habentes hanc administrationem, iuxta quod, etc., non deficimus, supple a bene operando, sed abdicamus, etc., et iterum, in manifestatione veritatis; servato tamen eodem modo exponendi, sicut in prima lectura. 121. – According to Augustine in a Gloss, the Apostle fulfills God’s commandment in this: “Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven” (Matt. 5:16); “Beware of practicing your piety before men” (Matt. 6:1): the first by saying, we would commend ourselves to every man’s conscience; but the second by saying, in the sight of God: “For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly” (Rom. 2:28). Or this whole passage can be read in the following manner without interrupting the text: Therefore, having this ministry by the mercy of God, we do not lose heart, namely in doing good. But we have renounced disgraceful, underhanded ways. Furthermore by the open statement of the truth, keeping the same method of explanation as already given.
4-2
2 Cor. 4:3-6Hic consequenter apostolus respondet cuidam tacitae obiectioni. Posset enim dici sibi ab aliquo: tu dicis, quod non deficis in manifestatione veritatis Christi, sed hoc non videtur, quia multi contradicunt tibi. Huic ergo quaestioni respondet. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo enim respondet quaestioni praedictae; secundo excludit quoddam dubium, quod videtur ex responsione sua sequi, ibi non enim nosmetipsos, et cetera. Circa primum tria facit. Primo ostendit quibus occultatur veritas Christi; secundo occultationis causam assignat, ibi in quibus Deus huius saeculi; tertio ostendit quod hoc non est ex defectu veritatis Evangelii, ut occultetur, ibi ut non fulgeat, et cetera. 122. – Here the Apostle answers a tacit objection. For someone could say to him: you say that you do not grow faint in manifesting the truth of Christ. But this does not seem true, because many people contradict you. To this question, therefore, he responds. And in regard to it he does two things: first, he responds to this question; secondly, he removes a doubt which seems to follow from his answer (v. 5). In regard to the first he does three things. First, he shows from whom Christ’s truth is hidden; secondly, the reason for this hiding (v. 4); thirdly, he shows that it is not due to a deficiency in the truth of the Gospel that it is hidden (v. 4b). Dicit ergo: dixi quod non deficimus in manifestatione, quod, idest sed, si Evangelium nostrum, quod scilicet nos praedicamus, est opertum, id est occultum, non est opertum omnibus, sed illis tantum, qui pereunt, scilicet praebendo impedimentum ne eis manifestetur. I Cor. I, 18: verbum crucis pereuntibus stultitia est, et cetera. 123. – He says therefore: I have said that we do not faint in manifesting the truth; but even if our gospel, which we preach, is veiled, it is not veiled from all, but it is veiled only to those who are perishing, namely, who offer an obstacle to its manifestation to them: “For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God” (1 Cor. 1:18). Causa ergo huius occultationis est non ex parte Evangelii, sed propter eorum culpam et malitiam. Et hoc est quod subdit in quibus Deus huius saeculi, et cetera. Et hoc potest exponi tribus modis. Primo modo sic: Deus huius saeculi, id est Deus qui est dominus huius saeculi et omnium rerum creatione et natura, iuxta illud Ps. XXIII, 1: domini est terra, et plenitudo eius, orbis terrarum, excaecavit mentes infidelium, non inducendo malitiam, sed merito, imo demerito praecedentium peccatorum subtrahendo gratiam. Is. VI, 10: excaeca cor populi huius, et cetera. Unde et praecedentia peccata insinuat, cum dicit infidelium, quasi infidelitas eorum fuerit causa huius excaecationis. Secundo modo sic: Deus huius saeculi, id est Diabolus, qui dicitur Deus huius saeculi, id est saeculariter viventium, non creatione sed imitatione, qua saeculares eum imitantur. Sap. II, 25: imitantur eum, qui sunt, et cetera. Et hic excaecat suggerendo, trahendo et inclinando ad peccata. Et sic quando iam sunt in peccatis, operiuntur in tenebris peccatorum ne videant. Eph. IV, 18: tenebris obscuratum habentes intellectum, et cetera. Tertio modo sic: Deus habet rationem ultimi finis, et complementum desideriorum totius creaturae. Unde quidquid aliquis sibi pro fine ultimo constituit in quo eius desiderium quiescit, potest dici Deus illius. Unde cum habes pro fine delicias, tunc deliciae dicuntur Deus tuus; similiter etiam si voluptates carnis, vel honores. Et tunc exponitur sic: Deus huius saeculi, id est illud quod homines saeculariter viventes sibi pro fine constituunt, ut puta voluptates, vel divitiae et huiusmodi. Et sic Deus excaecat mentes, inquantum impedit ne homines lumen gratiae hic, et gloriae in futuro, videre possint. Ps. LVII, v. 9: supercecidit ignis, scilicet concupiscentiae, ut non viderent solem. Sic ergo excaecatio infidelium non est ex parte Evangelii, sed ex culpa infidelium. 124. – The cause of this concealment is not on the part of the Gospel, but on account of their own guilt and malice; and this is what he adds: in their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers. This can be explained in three ways: in one way so that the god of this world, i.e. God, who is the Lord of this world and of all things by creation and nature: “The earth is the Lord’s and the fullness thereof, the world and those who dwell therein” (Ps. 24:1), has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, not by producing malice, but by the merit, or rather demerit of preceding sins, by withdrawing his grace: “Make the heart of this people fat, and their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed” (Is. 6:10). Therefore he hints at their preceding sins when he says, of unbelievers, as though their unbelief is the cause of this blindness. In a second way, so that the god of this world, i.e., the devil, who is called the god of this world, i.e., of those who live in a worldly manner, not by reason of creation but by imitation, because worldly persons imitate him: “They follow him that are on his side” (Wis. 2:25, Vulgate). Here he blinds them by suggesting, by attracting and by inclining to sins. And so, when they are already in sin, they work in the darkness of sin, lest they see: “Darkened in their understanding, alienated from the life of God” (Eph. 4:18). In the third way thus: God has the nature of the ultimate end and fulfillment of the desires of every creature. Hence, whatever a person assigns to himself as an ultimate end in which his desire rests, can be called his god. Hence, when you have pleasure as end, pleasure is called your god, and the same for pleasures of the flesh and for honors. Then it is explained so that the god of this world, i.e., that which men living in a worldly way set up as their end, say pleasure or riches and the like. And God blinds their minds, inasmuch as he prevents them from seeing the light of grace here, and the light of glory in the future: “Fire”, namely of concupiscence, “has fallen on them, and they shall not see the sun” (Ps. 57:9, Vulgate). Thus, therefore, the blindness of unbelievers is not on the part of the Gospel, but from the sin of unbelievers. Et ideo subdit ut non fulgeat, et cetera. Ubi sciendum est, quod Deus pater est fons totius luminis. I Io. I, 5: Deus lux est, et tenebrae in eo non sunt, et cetera. Ex hoc autem fontanoso lumine derivatur imago huius luminis, scilicet filius verbum Dei. Hebr. c. I, 3: qui cum sit splendor, et cetera. Hic ergo splendor gloriae, imago fontanosae lucis, carnem nostram accepit et multa gloriosa et divina in hoc mundo opera fecit. Declaratio igitur huius lucis est Evangelium, unde et Evangelium dicitur notitia claritatis Christi, quae quidem notitia virtutem habet illuminativam. Sap. VI, 13: clara est et quae numquam marcescit sapientia, et cetera. Et quidem, quantum est de se, in omnibus refulget et omnes illuminat, sed illi qui praebent impedimentum, non illuminantur. Et hoc est quod dicit: ideo excaecavit mentes infidelium, ut scilicet non effulgeat in eis, scilicet in mentibus infidelium, licet in se effulgens sit, illuminatio Evangelii illuminantis. Quod quidem est illuminans, quia est gloria Christi, id est claritas. Io. I, 14: vidimus gloriam, et cetera. Quae quidem gloria provenit Christo ex eo quod est imago Dei. Col. I, 15: qui est imago invisibilis Dei. 125. – Therefore, he adds, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ. Here it should be noted that God the Father is the source of all light: “God is light and in him is no darkness at all” (1 Jn. 1:5). From this fountain of light is derived the image of this light, namely the Son, the Word of God: “He reflects the glory of God and bears the very stamp of his nature” (Heb. 1:3). Therefore, this brightness of glory and image of the fountain of light took our flesh and accomplished many glorious and divine works in this world. The disclosing of this light is the Gospel. Hence, the Gospel is also called the knowledge of the glory of Christ, which knowledge has the power to enlighten: “Wisdom is radiant and unfading” (Wis. 6:12). As far as it is concerned, it shines upon all and enlightens all. But those who place an obstacle are not enlightened. And this is what he says: the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing, namely, with their unbelieving minds, the light of the gospel, which enlightens because it is the glory of Christ, i.e. his brightness: “We have beheld his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father” (Jn. 1:14). This glory is Christ’s, inasmuch as he is the likeness [image] of God: “He is the image of the invisible God” (Col. 1:15). Nota, secundum Glossam, quod Christus perfectissima imago Dei est. Nam ad hoc quod aliquid perfecte sit imago alicuius, tria requiruntur, et haec tria perfecte sunt in Christo. Primum est similitudo, secundum est origo, tertium est perfecta aequalitas. Si enim inter imaginem et eum, cuius est imago, esset dissimilitudo, et unum non oriretur ex alio, similiter etiam si non sit aequalitas perfecta, quae est secundum eamdem naturam, non esset ibi perfecta ratio imaginis. Nam similitudo regis in denario, non perfecte dicitur imago regis, quia deest ibi aequalitas secundum eamdem naturam; sed similitudo regis in filio dicitur perfecta imago regis, quia sunt ibi illa tria quae dicta sunt. Cum ergo ista tria sint in Christo filio Dei, quia scilicet est similis patri, oritur a patre, et aequalis est patri, maxime et perfecte dicitur imago Dei. 126. – Note, according to a Gloss, that Christ is the most perfect image of God. For in order that something be perfectly an image of something, three things are necessary, and these three are perfectly in Christ. First, a likeness; second, origin; third, perfect equality. For if there is unlikeness between the image and that of which it is the image, and one does not arise from the other, or even if there is not perfect equality according to the same nature, then the notion of perfect image would not be there. For the likeness of a king on a coin is not called a perfect image of the king, because equality according to the same nature is lacking; but the likeness of a king in his son is called a perfect image of the king, because it possesses the three marks mentioned Therefore, since those three are present in Christ, the Son of God, because namely he is similar to the Father, arises from the Father and is equal to the Father, he is in the highest degree and perfectly called the image of God. Consequenter cum dicit non enim nosmetipsos, etc., removet apostolus quoddam dubium. Posset enim aliquis, contra praedicta, dicere apostolo: supra dixisti Evangelium vestrum esse opertum, modo dicis Evangelium Christi illuminare; si ergo detur quod Evangelium Christi sit illuminans, non potest hinc sequi quod opertum sit Evangelium vestrum. Et ideo ad hoc removendum, duo facit. Primo, ostendit quod idem est Evangelium suum et Christi; secundo, ostendit unde sit quod Evangelium suum sit illuminativum, ibi quoniam Deus qui dixit, et cetera. 127. – Then when he says, For what we preach is not ourselves, the Apostle settles a doubt. For some could say to the Apostle, contrary to what was said here: above you said that your Gospel was hidden; now you say that the Gospel of Christ enlightens. Therefore, if it is granted that the Gospel of Christ enlightens, it cannot follow that your Gospel is hidden. To settle this he does two things. First he shows that his own Gospel and Christ’s are the same; secondly, he shows how it is that his own Gospel enlightens (v. 6) Dicit ergo primo: dico quod manifestatio claritatis Christi est Evangelium Christi et nostrum. Nostrum quidem tamquam per nos praedicatum; Christi vero, tamquam in ipso Evangelio praedicati. Et hoc est quod non praedicamus nosmetipsos, id est non commendamus nos, nec ad nos, id est ad laudem, vel lucrum nostrum convertimus praedicationem nostram, sed ad Christum totum referimus et laudem eius. I Cor. c. I, 23: nos autem praedicamus Christum, et cetera. Ps. LXXII, 28: ut annuntiem omnes praedicationes tuas, non meas, in portis, et cetera. Sed Iesum dominum nostrum, nos autem servos vestros per Iesum. Quasi dicat: Iesum praedicamus ut dominum, nos autem servos. Et huius ratio est quia principaliter quaerimus laudem Christi et non nostram. Nam servus est, qui est propter utilitatem domini. Et inde est, quod minister Ecclesiae, qui non quaerit honorem Dei et utilitatem subditorum, non dicitur verus rector, sed tyrannus. Nam quicumque bene regit, debet esse sicut servus, quaerens honorem et utilitatem subditorum. Gen. XXV, 23: maior serviet minori. I Cor. IX, 19: cum essem liber, omnium vestrum me servum feci. 128. – He says, therefore: I say that the manifestation of the brightness of Christ is the Gospel of Christ and our Gospel. It is ours as preached by us; it is Christ’s truly as the one preached in the Gospel. Hence it is that what we preach is not ourselves, i.e., we do not commend ourselves nor for ourselves, i.e., we do not use our preaching for our praise or gain, but we refer it all to Christ and his praise: “We preach Christ crucified” (1 Cor. 1:23); “That I may tell of all your works,” not mine, “in the gates of the daughter of Zion” (Ps. 73:28). But Jesus Christ as Lord, with ourselves as your servants for Jesus’ sake. As if to say: we preach Jesus as Lord, but ourselves as servants, the reason being that we principally seek the praise of Christ and not our own. For a servant is one who exists for the profit of the master. That is why a minister of the Church, who does not seek the honor of God and the welfare of his subjects, is not a true ruler, but a tyrant. For whoever rules well should be as a servant seeking the honor and profit of his subjects: “The elder shall serve the younger” (Gen. 25:23); “For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a slave to all” (1 Cor. 9:19). Consequenter cum dicit quoniam Deus qui dixit, etc., ostendit unde Evangelium suum habet virtutem illuminativam. Ubi nota ordinem procedendi servatum ab apostolo, qui talis est: nos aliquando, scilicet antequam conversi essemus ad Christum, eramus tenebrosi sicut et vos et alii in quibus non fulget claritas gloriae Christi. Nunc vero, postquam Christus vocavit nos per gratiam suam ad se, tenebrae istae remotae sunt a nobis, et iam fulget in nobis virtus gloriae claritatis Christi; et intantum refulget in nobis, quod non solum illuminamur ad hoc quod videre possimus, sed etiam quod alios illuminemus. Ex spirituali ergo gratia et abundanti refulgentia claritatis gloriae Christi in nos, habet Evangelium nostrum virtutem illuminativam. 129. – Then when he says, For it is the God who said, he shows the source of his Gospel’s power to enlighten. Here we should note the order of the Apostle’s procedure. It is this: at one time, namely, before being converted to Christ, we were darkness, just as you and the others, upon whom the brightness of Christ’s glory did not shine. But now, after Christ has called us to himself by his grace, that darkness has been taken away from us, and now the power of the glory of Christ’s brightness shines in us, and it shines on us in such a way that not only are we enlightened so that we can see, but we enlighten others. Therefore, from the spiritual grace and abundant splendor of the brightness of the glory of Christ in us, our Gospel has the power to enlighten. Et hoc est quod dicit: dico quod ideo illuminat Evangelium nostrum, quoniam Deus, qui dixit, id est praecepto solo fecit, lucem splendescere, quod fuit in separatione elementorum, quando chaos tenebrosum illuminavit per lucem quam fecit. Gen. I, 3: dixit, fiat lux. Eccli. XXIV, 6: ego feci, ut in caelis oriretur lux, et cetera. Iste, inquam, Deus, illuxit in cordibus, id est in mentibus, nostris, prius tenebrosis per absentiam luminis gratiae et obscuritatem peccati. Lc. I, 79: illuminare his qui in tenebris, et cetera. Illuxit, inquam, non solum ut nos illuminaremur, sed ad illuminationem, id est ut et alios illuminemus. Eph. III, 8: mihi omnium sanctorum minimo data est, et cetera. Matth. V, v. 14: vos estis lux, et cetera. Ad illuminationem dico, scientiae, id est ut faciamus alios scire. Dico, claritatis Dei, id est clarae divinae visionis, in facie Iesu Christi. Glossa: id est per Iesum Christum, qui est facies patris, quia sine ipso non cognoscitur pater. Sed melius dicitur sic: ad illuminationem sanctae claritatis Dei, quae quidem claritas fulget in facie Christi Iesu, id est ut per ipsam gloriam et claritatem, cognoscatur Christus Iesus. Quasi dicat: in summa, ad hoc Deus illuxit nobis ad illuminationem, ut ex hoc Iesus Christus cognoscatur et praedicetur in gentibus. 130. – And this is what he says: I say that our Gospel enlightens, for it is the God who said, i.e., who made by a single command, let light shine out of darkness, by separating the elements, when he enlightened the dark chaos by the light he made: “He said, ‘let there be light’” (Gen. 1:3): “I made an unfailing light to rise in the heavens” (Sir 24:6). He, I say, has shone in our hearts, i.e., in our minds, previously darkened by the absence of the light of grace and by the obscurity of sin: “To enlighten those that sit in darkness and in the shadow of death” (Lk. 1:79). He has shone, I say, not only to enlighten us, but to give the light, i.e., that we might enlighten others: “To me, though I am the very least of all the saints, this grace was given” (Eph. 3:8); “You are the light of the world” (Matt. 5:4). To give the light, I say, of the knowledge, i.e., that we make others know of the glory of God, i.e., of the clear vision of God, in the face of Christ. A Gloss: i.e., “through Jesus Christ”, who is the face of the Father, because without him the Father is not known. But it is said better thus: to illumine the holy brightness of God, which indeed shines in the face of Jesus Christ, i.e., so that by that glory and brightness Jesus Christ may be known. As if to say: in summary, God has shone upon us to enlighten us, so that Jesus Christ may be known and preached among the Gentiles.
4-3
2 Cor. 4:7-10Supra tractavit de usu ministerii novi testamenti quantum ad bona agenda, hic consequenter tractat de usu eius quantum ad tolerantiam malorum. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo enim ostendit tolerantiam malorum, quae patiebantur; secundo vero hoc manifestat, ibi semper enim nos, qui vivimus, et cetera. Circa primum tria facit. Primo ponit causam quare tribulationibus exponantur a Deo; secundo ostendit, quod in istis tribulationibus patienter se habeant, ibi in omnibus tribulationem patimur, etc.; tertio vero rationem huius patientiae assignat, ibi semper mortificationem Iesu, et cetera. 131. – Above, he discussed the use of the ministry of the New Testament in regard to doing good; here he discusses its use in regard to enduring evil. In regard to this he does two things: first, he points to the endurance of the evils they suffered; secondly, he explains this (v. 11). In regard to the first he does three things: first, he shows the reason why they are exposed to tribulations by God; secondly, he shows that they should act patiently under these tribulations (v. 8); thirdly, he gives the reason for this patience (v. 10). Dicit ergo, Deus illuxit mentibus nostris ad illuminationem aliorum, quae quidem lux est maximus thesaurus. Sap. VII, 14: infinitus enim thesaurus, et cetera. Is. XXXIII, 6: divitiae salutis sapientia, et cetera. Istum autem maximum thesaurum non habemus in pretioso loco, sed in re vili et fictili: et ratio huius est, ut scilicet Deo efficacia eius tribuatur. Et hoc est quod dicit habemus thesaurum istum, id est lucem illam qua alios illuminamus, in vasis fictilibus, id est in corpore fragili et vili. Ps. CII, 14: ipse cognovit figmentum nostrum. Ier. XVIII, 6: sicut lutum in manu figuli, sic et vos in manu, et cetera. Is. LXIV, 8: et nunc, domine, pater noster es tu, nos vero lutum. Ideo habemus in vasis fictilibus, ut sublimitas, istius lucis, sit virtutis Dei, id est Deo attribuatur, et non ex nobis credatur esse. Nam si essemus divites, si potentes, si nobiles secundum carnem, quidquid magnum faceremus, non Deo, sed nobis ipsis attribueretur. Nunc vero, quia pauperes et contemptibiles sumus, huiusmodi sublimitas Deo, et non nobis, attribuitur. Et ideo vult nos Deus contemptui haberi, et tribulationibus exponi. Deut. XXXII, 27: ne dicerent: manus nostra excelsa, et cetera. Et I Cor. I, 29: ut non glorietur omnis caro, et cetera. Sap. XII, 8: misisti antecessores tuos ne dicerent, et cetera. 132. – He says, therefore: God has shone on our minds to give light to others, and this light is our greatest treasure: “It is an unfailing treasure for men” (Wis. 7:14); “Abundance of salvation, wisdom and knowledge” (Is. 33:6). But we do not have that greatest treasure in a precious place, but in a lowly fragile thing, in order that its power may be attributed to God. Hence, he says, We have this treasure, i.e., that light by which we enlighten others, in earthen vessels, i.e., in our frail and lowly body: “For he knows our frame; he remembers that we are dust” (Ps. 103:14); “Like the clay in the potter’s hand, so are you in my hand, O house of Israel” (Jer. 18:6); “Yet, O Lord, you are our Father, we are the clay” (Is. 64:8). Therefore we have it in earthen vessels to show that the transcendent power of that light belongs to God, i.e., attributed to God, and not believed to belong to us. For if we were rich or powerful or noble according to the flesh, any great good we did would be attributed not to God but to ourselves. But now, because we are poor and contemptible, such excellence is attributed to God and not to ourselves. Therefore, God wants us to be held in contempt and to be exposed to tribulations: “Lest they should say, ‘Our hand is triumphant, the Lord has not wrought all this’” (Deut. 32:27); “That no human being might boast in the presence of God” (1 Cor. 1:29); “You sent them as your forerunners not to speak” (Wis. 12:8). Consequenter cum dicit in omnibus tribulationem patimur, etc., ostendit eorum patientiam in iis, quae patiuntur. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo ostendit mala, quae patiuntur in generali; secundo enumerat ea in speciali, ibi aporiamur, sed non destituimur, et cetera. 133. – Then when he says, we are afflicted in every way, he shows their patience in the things they suffer. In regard to this he does two things: first, he points out the evils they suffer in general; secondly, he mentions them in particular (v. 8b). Dicit ergo. Vere habemus hunc thesaurum in vasis fictilibus, quia in omnibus tribulationem patimur; quasi dicat: nullus modus tribulandi deest nobis. Act. XIV, v. 21: per multas tribulationes, et cetera. Nec mirum, quia, ut dicitur Lc. ult.: oportuit Christum pati, et sic intrare, et cetera. Et licet sic tribulemur, non tamen angustiamur. Et loquitur ad similitudinem viatoris, qui quando non patet ei via, qua exeat de aliquo arcto loco, angustiatur. Quasi dicat: homines, qui solum in mundo confidunt, angustiantur, si undique a mundo tribulantur, quia non patet eis via remedii, cum non sperent nisi de mundo. Sed nos, licet tribulemur in mundo, quia tamen confidimus de Deo et speramus in Christo, patet nobis via evasionis et auxilii a Deo, et ideo non angustiamur. 134. – He says, therefore: truly we have this treasure in earthen vessels, because we are afflicted in every way. As if to say: no type of tribulation has missed us: “Through many tribulations we must enter the kingdom of God” (Ac. 14:22). Nor is this strange, for it says in Luke (24:26): “Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory?” And although we suffer in this way, we are not crushed. He speaks as a traveler who becomes distressed, when he cannot find a way out of a narrow place. As if to say: men who trust only in the world are distressed, if they are troubled on all sides by the world, because no way of relief is open to them, since they trust only in the world. But we, although we are troubled in the world, yet because we trust in God and hope in Christ, escape by the help of God. That is why we are not distressed. Consequenter cum dicit aporiamur, etc., enumerat tribulationes in speciali. Sunt autem quatuor in quibus homines consueverunt tribulari, et in istis tribulati sunt apostoli, scilicet in rebus exterioribus, in inquietudine status, in laesione famae, et in afflictione proprii corporis. Quantum ergo ad primum dicit aporiamur, id est depauperamur. Aporos enim Graece, Latine dicitur pauper; quasi dicat: adeo pauperes sumus, ut necessaria desint. I Cor. IV, v. 11: usque in hanc horam esurimus, et cetera. Sed non destituimur a Deo, qui est thesaurus noster. Divitiae enim non quaeruntur propter se, sed propter sufficientiam vitae. Unde homines, qui sine Dei auxilio et spe sunt, si careant divitiis, destituuntur; sed qui solum de Deo confidunt et sperant, quantumcumque aporiantur, non destituuntur. Infra VI, 10: tamquam nihil habentes, et omnia possidentes. Sed nec sufficit, imo cum hoc inquietamur, persecutionem patimur, scilicet de loco ad locum. Matth. X, 23: persequentur vos. Sed non derelinquimur a Deo, quin praebeat auxilium. Hebr. ult.: non te deseram, et cetera. Ps. IX, 11: sperent in te, qui noverunt te, et cetera. Sed et cum hoc laedimur in fama, quia humiliamur, id est contemnimur et pro nihilo reputamur. Io. XVI, 2: venit hora, ut omnis qui interficit vos, et cetera. Matth. V: beati eritis cum vos oderint, et cetera. Sed quia quando quis contemnitur, et causa contemptus subest, ille qui contemnitur, consuevit confundi; quando vero causa non subest, non confunditur, et istis non suberat causa contemptus, ideo dicit non confundimur. Quasi dicat: quia non subest causa, non curamus. Ps. XXX, 2: in te, domine, speravi, non confundar, et cetera. Sed quasi haec pauca sint, addit ad tribulationis exaggerationem, dicens deiicimur ad mortis pericula, sed non perimus, id est a bono non cessamus, vel non perimus quia Deus sustentat nos. Iob XI, 17: cum te consumptum putaveris, et cetera. I Cor. IV, 13: tamquam purgamenta huius mundi, et cetera. Ps. XLIII, v. 22: aestimati sumus sicut oves, et cetera. 135. – Then when he says, perplexed, but not driven to despair, he lists the tribulations in particular. Now there are four things by which men are wont to be troubled; and the apostles were also troubled by them, namely, by external things, by the disquiet of their state, by injury to their reputation, and by affliction of their body. Therefore, in regard to the first he says, we are perplexed, i.e., impoverished. As if to say: we are so poor that we lack necessities: “To the present hour we hunger and thirst” (1 Cor. 4:11). But we are not driven to despair, i.e., abandoned by God, who is our treasure. For riches are no sought for their own sake, but for a sufficiency of life. Hence, men who live without God’s help and without hope, are destitute, if they lack riches. But those who trust and hope in God alone, no matter how perplexed they be, are not destitute: “As having nothing and possessing everything” (2 Cor. 6:10). But this is not all, for along with this we are disquieted: persecuted, namely, from place to place: “When they persecute you in one town, flee to the next” (Matt. 10:23), but not forsaken by God, because he offers help: “I will never fail you nor forsake you” (Heb. 13:5): “You, O Lord, have not forsaken those who seek you” (Ps. 9:10). Along with this we are injured in our reputation, because we are humiliated, i.e., scorned and regarded as nothing: “The hour is coming when whoever kills you will think he is offering service to God” (Jn. 16:2); “Blessed are you when men hate you” (Lk. 6:22). But because when a man is scorned and there is reason for it, the scorned one is usually ashamed. But when there is not cause, he is not ashamed. And there was no reason for their being scorned, hence he continues, but not ashamed. As if to say: since there is no reason, we do not care: “In you, O Lord, have I hoped; let me never be put to shame” (Ps. 31:2). But as though these were trifles, he adds to the amount of tribulation, saying: struck down into the dangers of death, but not destroyed, i.e., we do not cease doing good; or we are not destroyed because God sustains us: “We have become, and are now, as the refuse of the world, the offscouring of all things” (1 Cor. 4:13); “When you shall think yourself consumed, you shall rise as the daystar” (Job 11:17, Vulgate); “We are accounted as sheep for the slaughter” (Ps. 44:22). Consequenter cum dicit semper mortificationem, etc., subdit rationem huius patientiae. Circa quod sciendum est quod in Christo talis fuit processus. Nam a principio suae conceptionis carnem habens passibilem, et passus mortuus fuit, sed tamen interius vivebat spirituali vita. Post resurrectionem vero, illa spiritualis et gloriosa vita usque ad corpus derivata est, et factum est ipsum corpus gloriosum et immortale, quia: Christus resurgens ex mortuis, iam non moritur, et cetera. Unde ex hoc accipitur duplex status in corpore Christi, scilicet mortis et gloriae. 136. – Then when he says, always carrying in the body the death of Jesus, he gives the reason for this patience. Here it should be noted that in Christ the process was this: having from the beginning of his conception a flesh that could suffer, he both suffered and died, yet within he was leading a spiritual life. But after the resurrection that spiritual and glorious life flowed into the body, so that his body became glorious and immortal, because “Christ being raised from the dead will never die again” (Rom. 6:9). Hence we can think of two states in the body of Christ, namely, of death and of glory. Hence, he says that we endure the perils of death and suffering patiently, in order to attain to the glorious life. Et ideo dicit: quod ideo pericula mortis et passiones patienter sustinemus, ut perveniamus ad gloriosam vitam. Et hoc est quod dicit: ita sustinemus semper, id est in omnibus et ubique, mortificationem Iesu, id est propter Iesum, vel ad similitudinem mortis Iesu, Gal. ult.: stigmata domini Iesu, et cetera. Quia propter veritatem passi sumus, sicut et Iesus. In corpore nostro, non solum in mente, Ps. XLIII, 22: propter te mortificamur tota die. Ut vita Iesu, id est vita gratiae quam Iesus dat; vel vita gloriae ad quam Iesus per passiones pervenit, Lc. XXIV, 26: nonne oportuit Christum pati, et ita intrare in gloriam, id est manifeste appareat etiam inimicis. Dicit ergo in futura, scilicet resurrectione, vel etiam nunc vita gloriae, in corporibus nostris, non solum in animabus, Iudic. VII: fractis lagunculis apparuerunt lucernae. Et idcirco dicit Ambrosius: non timebat mori propter resurrectionem promissam. Circumferentes, id est ubique portantes et sustinentes, quia quocumque eamus patimur et non caedimus. Et hoc ideo ut vita Iesu, quae latet nunc in corde nostro, in corporibus nostris manifestetur, quando scilicet reformabit corpus humilitatis nostrae, etc., Phil. c. III, 21. Col. III, 3: mortui estis, et vita vestra, et cetera. II Tim. II, 11: si commortui sumus, et convivemus. 137. – And this is what he says: always carrying, i.e., in all things and everywhere, the death of Jesus, i.e., for Jesus, or in the likeness of Jesus’ death: “I bear on my body the marks of Jesus” (Gal. 6:19), because we have suffered for the truth, as Jesus did. In our body, not only in our mind: “For your sake we are slain all the day long” (Ps. 44:23). That the life of Jesus, i.e., the life of grace which Jesus gives, or the life of glory which Jesus reached by his sufferings: “Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory?” (Lk. 24:26), may also be manifested, i.e., be evident even to enemies. He says therefore, in the future, namely, in the resurrection, or even now the life of grace, in our bodies, and not only in our souls: “When they had broken the wine jars, the lamps appeared” (cf. Jdg. 7:20). Therefore Ambrose says: “They did not fear to die on account of the promised resurrection.” Bearing about, i.e., carrying it about and enduring, because wherever we go, we suffer and do not give up. And this so that the life of Jesus, which is now hidden in our hearts, may be manifested in our bodies, namely, when “He will change our lowly body to be like his glorious body” (Phil. 3:21); “You have died and your life is hid with Christ in God” (Col. 3:3); “If we die with him, we shall also live with him” (2 Tim. 2:11).
4-4
2 Cor. 4:11-15Posita patientia apostolorum in malis, et causa patientiae ostensa, hic apostolus consequenter manifestat ea; et primo manifestat id quod dixit de spe gloriae; secundo vero id quod dixit de sua patientia, ibi propter quod non deficimus, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo manifestat spem gloriae quam habet; secundo ostendit unde haec spes sibi proveniat, ibi habentes autem eundem, et cetera. 138. – Having mentioned the patience of the apostles in the midst of evils, and revealed the cause of their patience, the Apostle now explains them. First, he explains what he said about the hope of glory; secondly, what he said about his own patience (v. 16). In regard to the first he does two things. First, he shows the hope of glory that he has; secondly, he shows the source of this hope (v. 13). Circa primum tria facit. Primo ostendit quomodo mortificationem Iesu in corpore suo portet; secundo vero manifestat quomodo portet vitam Iesu, ibi ut et vita, etc.; tertio manifestat quid ex hoc sibi et aliis proveniat, ibi ergo mors, et cetera. Dicit ergo primo: dico quod portamus mortificationem in corporibus nostris, non quod moriamur, sed quia nos qui vivimus, corporali vita vel virtutibus, semper tradimur in mortem, vel in pericula mortis. Et hoc quidem, propter Iesum. Ps. XLIII, 22: aestimati sumus sicut oves, et cetera. Qualiter autem vitam Iesu portemus in corpore exponit subdens: ita, scilicet ut vita Iesu immortalis et impassibilis, manifestetur in carne nostra nunc mortali, ita ut caro nostra mortalis recipiat immortalitatem in resurrectione. I Cor. XV, 53: oportet autem mortale hoc induere, et cetera. Sed ex hoc quid proveniat, subdit, dicens ergo mors operatur, id est exercet dominium suum in nos, vita autem, scilicet praesens, operatur in vobis, quia estis in prosperitate, iuxta illud I Cor. IV, 10: nos stulti, et cetera. Ut mors operetur in nobis magnum bonum, scilicet consecutionem vitae spiritualis. Ps. CXV, v. 15: pretiosa est in conspectu domini mors sanctorum eius, et cetera. Sed vita terrena quam amatis, operatur in vobis magnum malum, scilicet mortem aeternam. Prov. X, 16: opus iusti ad vitam, et cetera. Io. XII, 25: qui amat animam suam in hoc mundo, et cetera. Vel aliter: duo fuerunt in Christo, mors corporalis et vita spiritualis. Dicit itaque ergo mors, etc., quasi dicat: in nobis non solum vita spiritualis operatur, inquantum imitamur spiritualiter, sed etiam mors operatur, id est propter spem resurrectionis, et propter amorem Christi, vestigia mortis Christi in nobis apparent, inquantum passionibus mortis exponimur, Ps. XLIII, 22: propter te mortificamur tota die; sed in vobis operatur solum vita Christi, per quam vitam fides plantatur in vobis et vita spiritualis. 139. – In regard to the first he does three things. First, he shows how he bears the mortification of Jesus in his body; secondly, how he bears the life of Jesus (v. 11b); thirdly, what he and others have obtained from this (v. 12). He says therefore: I say that we bear the death of Jesus in our bodies; not that we might die, but because while we live with bodily life or powers, we are always being given up to death or dangers of death; and this for Jesus’ sake: “We are accounted as sheep for the slaughter” (Ps. 44:22). But how we carry the life of Jesus in our body is explained when he says, so that the immortal and incorruptible life of Jesus may be manifested in our now mortal flesh, so that our mortal flesh may put on immortality at the resurrection: “This mortal nature must put on immortality” (1 Cor. 15:53). What results from this is mentioned when he continues, so death is at work, i.e., exercises its sway, in us, but life, namely, the present one, works in you, because you live in prosperity: “We are fools for Christ’s sake, but you are wise in Christ. We are weak, but you are strong” (1 Cor. 4:10). And death works in us a great good, namely, the attainment of spiritual life: “Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of his saints” (Ps. 116:15). But the earthly life that you love works in you a great evil, namely, eternal death: “The wage of the righteous leads to life, the gain of the wicked to sin” (Prov. 10:16): “He who loves his life loses it, and he who hates his life in this world will keep it for eternal life” (Jn. 12:25). Or another way: there were two things in Christ, namely, bodily death and spiritual life. He says therefore, so death is at work in us. As if to say: not only does spiritual life work in us, inasmuch as we imitate him spiritually, but death is at work, i.e., because of the hope of the resurrection and for the love of Christ, the marks of Christ’s death appear in us, inasmuch as we are exposed to the sufferings of death: “For your sake we are slain all the day long” (Ps. 44:22). But in you, only the life of Christ works, through which faith and the spiritual life are planted in you. Unde autem proveniat apostolo haec spes certitudinis, subdit, dicens habentes autem, et cetera. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo ponit causam certitudinis; secundo concludit ipsam certitudinem, ibi scientes quoniam qui, et cetera. 140. – Then (v. 13) the Apostle shows how he acquired this hope of certainty. In regard to this he does two things. First, he states the cause of the certainty; secondly, he concludes to the certainty itself (v. 14). Causa autem huius certitudinis est spiritus, infundens fidem in cordibus eorum. Unde primo ponit causam hanc; secundo vero manifestat eam per exemplum, ibi sicut scriptum est, et cetera. Dicit ergo: ex hoc speramus et non deficimus, quia sumus habentes eumdem spiritum fidei, quem antiqui habuerunt, quia, licet tempora mutata sint, spiritus tamen et fides non est mutata, nisi quod illi credebant Christum venturum et passurum, nos autem credimus ipsum venisse et passum fuisse. Et hic spiritus est spiritus sanctus, qui est spiritus fidei. I Cor. XII, 11: haec autem omnia operatur unus atque idem spiritus, et cetera. Et ibidem: alteri fides in eodem spiritu. Hunc ergo spiritum habentes, quem antiqui habuerunt, facimus eadem quae illi, et credimus. Illi autem quid fecerint, dicit Ps. CXV, 10: credidi, scilicet Deo et perfecte. Et hoc omnes antiqui fecerunt. Hebr. XI, 39: hi omnes testimonio fidei, et cetera. Propter quod, scilicet credidi, locutus sum, id est confessus sum fidem. Rom. X, 10: corde creditur ad iustitiam, et cetera. Quod etiam nos facimus, quia propter hoc quod credimus, loquimur et confitemur fidem et praedicamus. Act. IV, 20: non enim possumus quae vidimus et audivimus non loqui. Spiritus ergo sanctus est causa huius certitudinis. 141. – Now the cause of this certainty is the Spirit instilling faith into their hearts. First, therefore, he mentions this cause; secondly, he explains it with an example (v. 13b). He says therefore: the reason we hope and do not faint is that we have the same spirit of faith which the ancients had, because although the times have changed, the Spirit and the faith have not changed, except that they believed that the Christ would come and suffer, whereas we believe that he has already come and suffered. And this Spirit is the Holy Spirit, who is the Spirit of faith: “All these are inspired by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills” (1 Cor. 12:11). Having, therefore, this Spirit that the ancients had, we do the same things as they did and we believe. But what they did is described in Ps. 116:20, “I have believed”, namely, God perfectly. And this is what the ancients did: “And all these, though well attested by their faith, did not receive what was promised” (Heb. 11:39). And so, namely, for believing, I spoke, i.e., I confessed the faith: “For man believes with his heart and so is justified, and he confesses with his lips and so is saved” (Rom. 10:10). But we do this because, since we believe, we speak and confess the faith and preach: “We cannot but speak of what we have seen and heard” (Ac. 4:20). Therefore the Holy Spirit is the cause of this certitude. Ultimo ergo concludit conclusionem intentam, scilicet ipsam certitudinem. Et primo de salute propria; secundo de salute aliorum, ibi et constituet vobiscum, et cetera. Dicit ergo scientes, id est certam scientiam habentes, quoniam qui suscitavit Iesum, id est Deus pater, vel tota Trinitas, et nos cum Iesu suscitabit, ut scilicet sumamus eamdem gloriam cum Iesu, quia cum simus membra eius, debemus esse cum capite. Io. XII, 26: volo, pater, ut ubi ego sum, illic sit et minister meus, et cetera. Rom. VIII, v. 11: qui suscitavit dominum Iesum a mortuis, suscitabit, et cetera. Et non solum sum certus de salute nostra, sed etiam de vestra, quia constituet nos vobiscum, id est simul erimus; quia sicut nos sumus membra Christi, ita et vos per nos. I Thess. IV, 16: et sic semper cum domino erimus. Matth. XXIV, 28: ubicumque fuerit corpus, et cetera. Et ideo dicit vobiscum, ut animet eos ad bonum, inquantum ostendit eos non esse inferiores, sed pares. 142. – Finally, therefore, he reaches the intended conclusion, namely, the certitude itself. First, in regard to his own salvation; secondly, in regard to the salvation of others (v. 14b). He says therefore, knowing, i.e., having certain knowledge, that he who raised Jesus, i.e., God the Father or the entire Trinity, will raise us also with Jesus, namely, to put on the same glory as Jesus, because since we are his members, we should be with the head: “Where I am, there shall my servant be also” (Jn. 12:26); “He who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will give life to your mortal bodies also through his Spirit which dwells in you” (Rom. 8:11). And I am certain not only of our salvation but of yours also, because he will bring us with you, i.e., we will be together. For just as we are members of Christ, so you are also through us: “And so we shall always be with the Lord” (1 Th. 4:17); “Wherever the body is, there the eagles will be gathered together” (Matt. 24:28). Therefore he says, with you, to urge them to good, inasmuch as he shows that they are not inferiors but equals. Et bene hoc possum certe dicere, quia omnia sunt propter utilitatem vestram. Nam omnia, quae sustinemus, omnes gratiae quas recipimus a Deo, sunt propter vos, scilicet instruendos nostro exemplo. Et hoc ideo ut gratia abundans a nobis, in vos abundet per multos in gloriam Dei, id est multi agant gratias Deo super beneficio tanto. Eph. V, v. 20: gratias agentes Deo et patri, et cetera. 143. – And well can I say this with certainty, because all things are for your benefit. For all things, the sufferings we endure, the graces we receive from God, are for your sake, namely, that you be instructed by our example. And this, therefore, so that as grace extends from us, in you to more and more people it may increase thanksgiving to the glory of God, i.e., that many may thank God for so great a favor: “Always and for everything giving thanks in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ to God the Father” (Eph. 5:20).
4-5
2 Cor. 4:16-18Posita patientia quam apostoli habebant in tribulationibus, et praemio quod expectabant manifestato, hic consequenter agit de patientiae causa et patientiae modo, seu ratione. Et circa hoc tria facit. Primo enim insinuat sanctorum patientiam; secundo patientiae causam, ibi non contemplantibus nobis, etc.; tertio patientiae remunerationem, ibi id enim, et cetera. 144. – Having mentioned the patience which the Apostle showed in tribulations and manifested the reward they expected, he then treats of the cause of patience and the mode or reason for patience. In regard to this he does three things. First, he hints at the patience of the saints; secondly, the cause of patience (v. 16b); thirdly, the reward of patience (v. 17). Circa primum intendit ostendere, quod sanctorum patientia est invincibilis. Et hoc est quod dicit propter quod, scilicet quia sumus scientes quod qui suscitavit Iesum a mortuis, suscitabit nos et constituet vobiscum, ideo non deficimus, scilicet in tribulationibus, id est non deducimur ad hoc quod non possimus propter Christum amplius ferre et sustinere. Nam deficere idem est quod ferre non posse. Ier. XX, 9: defeci, ferre non sustinui. 145. – In regard to the first he intends to show that the patience of the saints is unconquerable. Hence, he says, so, i.e., because we know that he who raised Jesus from the dead will raise us and place us with you; therefore we do not lose heart, namely, in our tribulations, i.e., we are reduced to the state in which we cannot bear and endure more for Christ. For to lose heart is the same as not being able to bear: “I was wearied, not being able to bear it” (Jer. 20:9). Causa autem quare non deficimus est quia licet quantum ad aliquid deficiamus, scilicet quantum ad exteriorem hominem, tamen quantum ad aliquid semper renovamur, scilicet quantum ad interiorem hominem. Et hoc est quod dicit sed licet is qui foris est, et cetera. Ubi sciendum est, quod occasione istorum verborum haereticus, Tertullianus nomine, dixit quod anima rationalis, quae est in hominis corpore, habet corpoream figuram et membra corporea, sicut et corpus habet: et hoc dicitur homo interior; corpus vero, cum sensibus suis, dicitur homo exterior. Quod quidem falsum est. Unde, ad intellectum huius verbi, sciendum est quod etiam secundum philosophum in Ethic., et secundum consuetudinem loquendi, unumquodque dicitur esse illud quod est principalius in ipso, puta, quia in civitate principalius est potestas et Concilium, id quod facit potestas et Concilium, dicitur tota civitas facere. Principalius autem in homine potest aliquid iudicari et secundum veritatem et secundum apparentiam. Secundum veritatem quidem principalius in homine est ipsa mens, unde secundum iudicium spiritualium virorum mens dicitur homo interior. Secundum apparentiam vero principalius in homine est corpus exterius cum sensibus suis; unde secundum iudicium illorum, qui tantum corporalia et sensibilia considerant et terrena sapiunt, quorum Deus venter est, corpus cum sensibus dicitur homo exterior. 146. – But the reason why we do not fail is that although we fail as to the outward man, we are always renewed as to the inward man. Hence, he says, though our outer nature is wasting away, our inner nature is being renewed every day. Here it should be noted that by occasion of these words a certain heretic, Tertullian by name, said that the rational soul, which is in the body of a man, has a bodily shape and bodily members, just as the body has; and this is called the inward man. This, of course, is false. Hence, to understand the passage, it must be known that even according to the Philosopher in Ethics 9.9, and according to the way we speak, each thing is said to be that which is most important in it. For example, the most important thing in the city is the power and the council, so that whatever the power and council do, the city is said to do. Now something can be judged the most important thing in man either in truth or according to appearance. In truth the most important thing in man is the mind. Hence, according to the judgment of spiritual men, the mind is called the inward man. But according to appearance, the most important thing is the outward body with its senses. Hence, according to the judgment of those who consider only bodily and sense-perceptible things and savor earthly things, and whose god is the belly, the body with the sense is called the outward man. Et ideo, secundum hunc modum, loquitur hic apostolus, dicens licet homo noster, scilicet corpus cum natura sensitiva, corrumpatur, in tribulationibus, ieiuniis et abstinentiis et vigiliis, Rom. VI, 6: vetus homo noster simul, et cetera. Habac. III, 16: ingrediatur putredo, etc., tamen is homo, qui intus est, scilicet mens, seu ratio munita spe futuri praemii et firmata munimine fidei, renovatur. Quod sic intelligendum est: vetustas enim est via ad corruptionem. Hebr. VIII, v. 13: quod antiquatur et senescit, et cetera. Natura autem humana fuit in integritate condita et, si in illa integritate permansisset, semper esset nova: sed per peccatum incepit corrumpi; quo fit, quod quidquid consecutum est, sicut ignorantia, difficultas ad bonum, et pronitas ad malum, poenalitas et alia huiusmodi, totum pertinet ad vetustatem. Cum ergo natura humana huiusmodi peccatum sequentia deponit, tunc dicitur renovari. Quae quidem depositio hic incipit in sanctis, sed perfecte consummabitur in patria. Hic enim deponitur vetustas culpae: nam spiritus deponit vetustatem peccati et subiicitur novitati iustitiae. Hic intellectus deponit errores et assumit novitatem veritatis; et, secundum hoc, is, qui intus est homo, scilicet anima, renovatur. Eph. IV, 23: renovamini spiritu mentis vestrae. Sed in patria tolletur etiam vetustas poenae. Unde ibi erit consummata renovatio. Ps. CII, 5: renovabitur ut aquilae, et cetera. Sed quia sancti quotidie proficiunt in puritate conscientiae et in cognitione divinorum, ideo dicit de die in diem. Ps. LXXXIII, 6: ascensiones in corde suo. Sic ergo patientia est invincibilis, quia renovatur de die in diem. 147. – Therefore, it is according to this manner that the Apostle is speaking here when he says, though our outer nature, i.e., the body with its sentient nature, is wasting away, in tribulations, fasts, abstinences and watchings: “Our old self was crucified with him” (Rom. 6:6); “Rottenness enters into my bones” (Hab. 3:16), yes this man, who is inner, namely, the mind or reason strengthened with the shield of faith, is being renewed. This should be understood in the following way: oldness is the road to corruption: “And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away” (Heb. 8:13). But human nature was established in wholeness, and if it had continued in that wholeness, it would have always been new. But through sin it began to be corrupted. As a result, whatever followed, such as ignorance, difficulty in doing good, inclination to evil, punishment, and so on, all pertain to oldness. Therefore, when such a human nature gets rid of the results of sin, it is said to be renewed. Such riddance begins in the saints here, but is perfectly completed in heaven. For here the oldness of sin is put off; for the spirit removes the oldness of sin and is subjected to the newness of justice. Here the intellect removes errors and assumes the newness of truth. It is according to this that the inner man, namely, the soul, is renewed: “Be renewed in the spirit of your minds” (Eph. 4:23). But in heaven, even the oldness of punishment is removed. Hence, there will be a complete renewal there: “Your youth is renewed like the eagle’s” (Ps. 103:5). But because the saints advance daily in purity of conscience and knowledge of divine things, he says, every day: “Ascending in his heart” (Ps. 84:7, Vulgate). Consequently, patience is unconquerable, because it is renewed from day to day. Tertium principale, scilicet huius patientiae causa, est recogitatio praemii, quae est efficacissima, quia, secundum Gregorium, recogitatio praemii, diminuit vim flagelli. Et hoc est quod dicit id enim quod, etc., quasi dicat: nihil sunt tribulationes quas hic patimur, si respiciatur ad gloriam, quam ex eis consequimur. Unde comparat statum sanctorum, qui sunt in vita ista, ad statum eorum, qui sunt in patria, et ponit quinque in utroque statu correspondentia sibi invicem. icit tribulationis. Mich. VII, 9: iram domini portabo, et cetera. 148. – The third point, namely, the cause of this patience, is recognition of a reward. This recognition is most efficacious, because, according to Gregory, it lessens the force of a scourge. And this is what he says: For this [present], slight momentary affliction is preparing for us an eternal weight of glory beyond all comparison. As if to say: the tribulations we suffer here are nothing, if we look to the glory we obtain from them. Hence, he compares the condition of the saints in this life to the condition of those in heaven and mentions five things in each state that correspond. Nam primo status istius vitae in sanctis est status, quantum in se est, parvus et quasi imperceptibilis. Unde dicit id, id est minimum. Is. LIV, 7: ad punctum, in modico dereliqui te. Item transitorium. Unde dicit in praesenti, id est in vita ista, quae est in afflictionibus et aerumnis. Iob VII, 1: militia est vita hominis, et cetera. Item temporis brevitas. Unde dicit momentaneum. Is. LIV, 8: in momento indignationis abscondi faciem meam parumper a te, et cetera. Nam totum tempus huius vitae comparatum ad aeternitatem, non est nisi momentaneum. Item est levis. Unde dicit leve. Nam licet supra I, 8 dicatur: gravati sumus supra modum, quia scilicet grave est corpori, tamen spiritui charitate ferventi levissimum est. Augustinus: omnia gravia et immania facilia et prope nulla facit amor. Item est poenosus. Et ideo d 149. – First, the condition of the present life in the saints is of itself slight and, as it were, imperceptible. Hence, he says, this, i.e., the least: “For a brief moment I forsook you” (Is. 54:7). Likewise it is transitory; hence he says, present, i.e., in this life, which is one of affliction and toil: “The life of man is warfare” (Job 7:1, Vulgate). Likewise it lasts a short time; hence he says, momentary: “For a moment I hid my face from you” (Is. 54:8). For the whole time of this present life compared to eternity is only momentary. Likewise it is light; hence he says, slight. For although he said above (1:8): “We were crushed,” because the body is heavy, yet it is very light to a spirit on fire with charity. Hence Augustine says: “All that is heavy and huge love makes easy and almost nothing.” Likewise it is penal; hence he says, [of our] affliction: “I will bear the indignation of the Lord because I have sinned against him” (Mic. 7:9). Sed quantum ad statum beatitudinis ponit quinque, quia contra hoc, quod dicit, id, ponit supra modum, id est supra mensuram. Rom. VIII, 18: existimo quod non sunt condignae passiones, et cetera. Sed contra Matth. XVI, 27: reddet unicuique iuxta opera sua. Non ergo supra mensuram. Respondeo. Dicendum est, quod ly sed, non designat aequalitatem quantitatis, ut scilicet quantum quis meruit, tantum praemietur, sed designat aequalitatem proportionis, ut scilicet qui plus meruit, plus praemii accipiat. Item contra id quod dicit in praesenti, ponit in sublimitate, id est in statu sublimi absque perturbatione. Is. LVIII, 14: sustollam te super altitudinem nubium, et cetera. Contra id quod dicit momentaneum, ponit aeternum, Is. XXXV, 10: laetitia sempiterna super capita eorum, et cetera. Contra id quod dicit leve, ponit pondus. Et dicit pondus, propter duo. Pondus enim inclinat et trahit ad motum suum quae subsunt sibi. Sic gloria aeterna erit tanta, quod totum hominem faciet gloriosum, et in anima et in corpore; nihil erit in homine, quod non sequatur impetum gloriae. Vel dicitur pondus, propter pretiositatem. Nam pretiosa solum ponderari consueverunt. Contra hoc, quod dicit tribulationis, ponit gloriae. Vel hoc quod dicit gloriae, potest esse commune ad alia quatuor, quae de statu patriae dicuntur; hoc vero quod dicit tribulationis, ad quatuor quae de statu praesentis vitae dicta sunt. Operatur supra id, scilicet quod tribulationes patimur, nam haec sunt causa et meritum, quare Deus istam gloriam nobis conferat. Est ergo sanctorum patientia invincibilis, eorum remuneratio ineffabilis, sed, remunerationis eorum recompensatio, recta et delectabilis. 150. – But as to the state of happiness, he lays down five things, because in contrast to what is this, he places beyond all measure: “I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing to the glory that is to be revealed to us” (Rom. 8:18). But on the other hand: “He will give to each one according to his works” (Matt. 16:27). Therefore it will not be beyond all measure. I answer that the word “according” does not denote an equality of amount, as though a person will be rewarded so much for so much merit, but an equality of proportion, so that one who merits more will receive more reward. Likewise, against that which is in the present he places exceedingly, i.e., in an excellent state without disturbance: “I will make you ride upon the heights of the earth” (Is. 58:14). Against that which is momentary, he places eternal: “Everlasting joy shall be upon their heads” (Is. 35:10). Against that which is light he places a weight. He says, weight for two reasons: first, because a weight inclines and draws to its motion all things under it. In the same way eternal glory will be so great that it will make the whole man glorious in soul and in body. There will be nothing in man that does not follow the impulse of glory. Or it is called weight, because it is precious, for only precious things are weighed. Against that which is called tribulation he places of glory. Or of glory can be common to the other four, which are said of the state of glory, so that of tribulation is common to the four which are said of the present life. It is preparing, namely, above the tribulations we suffer, for these are the cause and merit for which God confers that glory on us. And so the patience of the saints is unconquerable, their reward ineffable, and the recompense of their reward right and delightful. Unde dicit non contemplantibus nobis, etc., quasi dicat: licet haec, quae speramus, sint futura, et interim corpus nostrum corrumpatur, nihilominus tamen renovamur, quia non attendimus ad ista temporalia, sed ad caelestia. Et hoc est quod dicit: operatur in nobis pondus gloriae, nobis dico, non contemplantibus, id est non attendentibus ad ea quae videntur, id est ad terrena, sed ad ea quae non videntur, scilicet caelestia. Phil. III, 13: quae retro sunt obliviscens, et cetera. I Cor. II, 9: oculus non vidit, et cetera. Et quare caelestia contemplamur? Quia ea quae videntur, id est terrena, sunt temporalia, et transitoria, ea autem quae non videntur, scilicet caelestia, sunt aeterna. Is. LI, v. 8: salus autem mea in sempiternum erit. 151. – Hence he says, because we look not to the things that are seen but to the things that are unseen. As if to say: although the things we hope for are still to come, and in the meantime our body is corrupted, nevertheless, we are renewed, because we do not pay attention to those temporal things, but to eternal. And this is what he says: it works in us a weight of glory. In us, I say, not looking, i.e., not paying attention, to the things that are seen, i.e., earthly things, but to the things that are unseen, namely, heavenly things: “Forgetting what lies behind and straining forward to what lies ahead” (Phil. 3:13); “Eye has not seen nor ear heard, nor the heart of man conceived, God has prepared for those who love him” (1 Cor. 2:9). And why do we look on heavenly things? Because the things that are seen, i.e., earthly things, are transient and temporal, but the things that are unseen, namely, heavenly things, are eternal: “My salvation will be forever” (Is. 51:6).
5-1
2 Cor. 5:1-4Postquam apostolus commendavit ministerium novi testamenti, et quantum ad dignitatem, et quantum ad usum, consequenter hic commendat illud quantum ad praemium, licet de praemio, quantum ad aliquid aliqualiter et incomplete supra tractavit, hic tamen de hoc complete tractat. Circa quod tria facit. Primo enim agit de praemio; secundo vero de praeparatione et praemii susceptione, ibi et ideo contendimus sive, etc.; tertio vero de causa utriusque, scilicet praeparationis et praemii quod expectatur, ibi omnia autem ex Deo, qui reconciliavit, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo ponit praemium, quod expectatur; secundo exprimit desiderium praemii expectati, ibi nam in hoc ingemiscimus, et cetera. 152. – After commending the ministry of the New Testament, both as to its dignity and its use, the Apostle now commends it as to its reward. For although he had already said something about the reward, it was partial and incomplete; so now he deals with it at greater length. In regard to this he does three things: first, he treats of the reward; secondly, of the preparation for and reception of the reward (v. 9); thirdly, the cause of each, namely, of the preparation and of the reward that is expected (v. 18). In regard to the first he does two things: first, he mentions the reward expected; secondly, he expresses a desire for the expected reward (v. 2) Sed quia praemium quod expectatur est inaestimabile, scilicet gloriae caelestis, et ideo dicit scimus quoniam, etc., quasi dicat secundum Glossam vere operatur in nobis pondus gloriae, quia in corporibus erit haec gloria, non tantum in animabus. Enim, id est quia, scimus, id est certi sumus, quia iam habemus in spe, quoniam si terrestris domus nostra, id est, corpus. Homo enim, ut dictum est, dicitur mens, cum sit principalius in homine; quae quidem mens se habet ad corpus, sicut homo ad domum. Sicut enim destructa domo, non destruitur homo eam inhabitans sed manet, sic, destructo corpore, non destruitur mens seu anima rationalis, sed manet. Corpus ergo terrestre dicitur domus habitationis, id est, in qua habitamus. Iob IV, 19: qui habitant domos luteas, et cetera. Dissolvatur, id est destruatur. Scimus, inquam, quod habemus aedificationem, id est aedificium, ex Deo, id est paratum a Deo. Aedificium, dico, domum non manufactam, id est non opere hominis, nec opere naturae, sed corpus incorruptibile, quod assumemus; quod quidem non est manufactum, quia incorruptibilitas in corporibus nostris provenit solum ex operatione divina. Phil. III, 21: reformabit corpus humilitatis nostrae, et cetera. Domum aeternam, id est domum ab aeterno praeparatam. Is. XXXIII, v. 20: tabernaculum quod nequaquam destruetur in caelis. Matth. V, 12: merces vestra copiosa est in caelis. Hanc autem commutationem, ut scilicet pro terrestri domo habeant caelestem, desiderabat Iob, dicens c. XIV, 14: cunctis diebus quibus nunc milito. 153. – Since the awaited reward is inestimable, namely, of heavenly glory, he says, For we know. As if to say according to a Gloss [Lombard]: indeed he works in us a weight of glory, because this glory will be not only in our souls, but in our bodies. For, i.e., because we know, i.e., are certain, because we already have it in hope, that if our earthly tent, i.e., the body. For as has been said, man is called a mind, since that is the most important thing in man. Now this mind is to the body as a man is to a house. For just as the man living in a house is not destroyed, when the house is destroyed, but he continues to exist, so when the body is destroyed, the mind, i.e., the rational soul, is not destroyed, but continues to exist. The body, therefore, is called the earthly tent we live in: “Those who dwell in houses of clay, whose foundation is in the dust, who are crushed before the moth” (Job 4:19). Is Destroyed, i.e., dissolved. We know, I say, we have a building from God, i.e., prepared by God; a building, I say, a house not made with hands, i.e., not a work of man or of nature, but an incorruptible body, which we shall assume. It is not made with hands, because incorruptibility in our bodies is the result of a divine action alone: “He will change our lowly body to be like his glorious body” (Phil. 3:21). Eternal in the heavens, i.e., a house prepared for us from all eternity: “A tabernacle that shall never be destroyed in heaven” (Is. 33:20, Vulgate); “Your reward shall be great in heaven” (Matt. 5:12). This exchange, namely, to get a heavenly home for an earthly one, is what Job desired: “All the days of my service I would wait, till my release should come” (Job 14:14). Expositio est secundum Glossam. Sed tamen non est secundum intellectum apostolicum, nec praecedentibus, nec sequentibus concordat. Nam ipse cum habeat unam materiam continuam de qua loquitur, non interponit aliam. Et ideo videamus quid intendat apostolus dicere. Sciendum est autem, quod apostolus vult hic ostendere quod sancti rationabiliter sustinent tribulationes, ex quibus vita praesens corrumpitur, quia ex hoc statim perveniunt ad gloriam, non ad gloriosum corpus, ut dicitur in Glossa. Et ideo dicit: ideo sustinuimus enim, id est quia, scimus, id est, pro certo habemus, quoniam si terrestris domus nostra huius habitationis, id est, corpus, dissolvatur, id est, corrumpatur per mortem, habemus, statim, non in spe sed in re, meliorem domum, scilicet aedificationem, domum non manufactam, id est, gloriam caelestem, non corpus gloriosum. De hac autem domo dicitur Io. XIV, 2: in domo patris mei mansiones multae, et cetera. Quae quidem est ex Deo non manufacta, quia gloria aeterna est ipse Deus. Ps. XXX, 3: esto mihi in Deum protectorem et in domum, et cetera. Et aeternam, ad litteram, quia ipse Deus est aeternus. In caelis, id est, in excelsis, quia statim corrupto corpore, anima sancta consequitur hanc gloriam non in spe, sed in re. Nam et antequam corpus dissolvatur, habemus hanc domum in spe. 154. – The explanation is based on a Gloss, but it does not agree with the Apostle’s meaning, nor with what preceded and what follows. For when he is dealing with one continuous subject, he does not interject another. Therefore, let us see what the Apostle really means, for he wants to show that the saints are reasonable in enduring the tribulations by which the present life is destroyed, because this results in obtaining glory at once, and not a glorified body, as the Gloss says. Therefore he says: the reason we endure these things is that we know, i.e., we hold it as certain, that if the earthly tent we live in, i.e., the body, is destroyed, i.e., corrupted by death, we have at once, not in hope but in reality, a better house, namely, a building, a house not made with hands, i.e., heavenly glory, not a glorified body. Of this house it says in John (14:2): “In my Father’s house are many rooms.” This house is from God, not made with hands, because eternal glory is God himself: “Be a rock of refuge for me, a strong fortress to save me” (Ps. 31:2), and eternal in the literal sense, because it is the eternal God. In the heavens, i.e., on high, because as soon as the body is dead, the holy soul obtains this glory, not in hope but in reality. For thus even before the body is dissolved, we have this home in hope. Sic ergo praemium sanctorum est admirabile et desiderabile, quia gloria caelestis est. Ideo consequenter subiungit desiderium sanctorum ad ipsum praemium, dicens nam in hoc ingemiscimus, et cetera. Ubi tria facit. Primo exprimit desiderium gratiae ad praemium ipsum; secundo ostendit quod desiderium gratiae retardatur ex desiderio naturae, ibi nam et qui sumus in hoc tabernaculo, etc.; tertio ostendit quomodo desiderium gratiae vincit desiderium naturae, ibi audentes igitur, et cetera. 155. – Thus, the reward of the saints is wonderful and desirable, because it is heavenly glory. Hence, he links the desire of the saints with this reward, saying: Here indeed we groan, and long to put on our heavenly dwelling. Here he does three things. First, he expresses the desire of grace for its reward; secondly, he shows that the desire of grace is retarded by the desire of nature (v. 4); thirdly, he shows that the desire of grace overcomes the desire of nature (v. 6). Sed desiderium gratiae est cum fervore. Nam in hoc ingemiscimus, etc., quasi dicat: haec est vera probatio, quod habemus domum non manufactam, quia si desiderium naturae non est frustra, multo minus desiderium gratiae frustra est. Cum igitur nos habeamus ferventissimum desiderium gratiae de gloria caelesti, impossibile est, quod sit frustra. Et hoc est, quod dicit ingemiscimus, id est, ingemendo desideramus, in hoc, scilicet animae desiderio retardati. Ps. CXIX, 5: heu mihi, quia incolatus meus, et cetera. In hoc enim quod cupientes sumus, id est cupimus, superindui habitationem nostram, id est fruitionem gloriae, quae de caelo est, id est caelestis; quae dicitur habitatio, quia in ipsa gloria sancti habitant sicut in suo consolatorio. Matth. XXV, 21-23: intra in gaudium domini tui. Per hoc autem quod dicit superindui, dat intelligere quod illa domus caelestis, de qua supra dixerat, non est aliquid ab homine separatum, sed aliquid homini inhaerens. Non enim dicitur homo induere domum sed vestimentum, domum autem dicitur aliquis inhabitare. Haec ergo duo coniungit, dicens superindui habitationem, per quod ostendit, quod illud desiderium est aliquid inhaerens, quia induitur, et aliquid continens et excedens, quia inhabitatur. 156. – The desire of grace is fervent: Here indeed we groan, and long to put on our heavenly dwelling. As if to say: this is the real proof that we have a house not made with hands, because if the desire of nature is not in vain, much less is the desire of grace in vain. Therefore, since we have a most fervent desire of grace for heavenly glory, it is impossible for it to be in vain; and this is what he says, we groan, i.e., groaning we desire, namely with our soul’s desire that we are delayed: “Woe is me that I sojourn in Meshech” (Ps. 120:5). We groan, I say, and long to put on our dwelling, i.e., the enjoyment of glory, which is from heaven, i.e., heavenly. It is called a dwelling because the saints dwell in that glory as their place of consolation: “Enter into the joy of the Lord” (Matt. 25:21). In saying, to put on, he is stating that the heavenly home of which he spoke above is not something separated from man, but something inhering in him. For a man is not said to put on a house, but clothes, but he inhabits a house. In this way he shows that the desire is for something that inheres, because it is put on, and something which contains and exceeds because it is inhabited. Sed quia non simpliciter dixit: indui, sed superindui, rationem sui dicti subdit, dicens si tamen vestiti, et non nudi inveniamur. Quasi dicat: si anima indueretur habitatione caelesti, quod non exueretur habitatione terrena, id est non corrumperetur corpus nostrum per mortem, sed caelestis adeptio illius habitationis esset superinduitio. Sed quia oportet quod evacuetur habitatione terrena, ad hoc quod induatur caelesti, non potest dici superinduitio, sed induitio simplex. Et ideo dicit si tamen vestiti et non nudi inveniamur, quasi dicat: superindueremur quidem, si inveniremur induti, et non nudi. Nudus enim non dicitur superindui, sed indui tantum. Glossa vero aliter exponit de vestimento spirituali, dicens: cupimus superindui, quod utique fiet, tamen hac conditione, si nos inveniamur vestiti, scilicet virtutibus, et non nudi, scilicet virtutibus. De istis vestibus dicitur Col. III, 12: induite vos sicut electi Dei, et cetera. Quasi dicat: nullus ad illam gloriam perveniet, nisi habeat virtutes. Quae quidem expositio non videtur concordare intentioni apostoli. 157. – But because he did not merely say, “put on” (indui), but “put on over” (superindui), he gives the reason for this, when he says, so that by putting it on we may not be found naked. As if to say: if the soul were to put on a heavenly dwelling, in such a way that the earthly dwelling were not taken off, i.e., in such a way that our body were not dissolved by death, the attainment of that heavenly dwelling would be “to be put on over”. But because it is necessary to be divested of that earthly dwelling, if the heavenly is to be put on, it cannot be a “putting on over”, but simply a “putting on.” Hence he says, so that by putting it on we may not be found naked. As if to say: we would indeed be putting on over, if we were found clothed and not naked. For a naked person is not said to be clothed over, but to be clothed. But a Gloss [Lombard] explains it as a spiritual dress, saying: “We desire to be clothed over, and this will indeed be done, but under this condition, that we be found clothed, namely, with the virtues, and not naked, namely, of the virtues.” Of this clothing it says in Colossians (3:12): “Put on then, as God’s chosen ones, holy and beloved, compassion, kindness, lowliness, meekness, and patience.” As if to say: no one will attain to this glory, unless he has the virtues. But this explanation does not seem to agree with the Apostle’s intention. Sic ergo desiderium gratiae fervet ad praemium, sed tamen retardatur a desiderio naturae, quod ostendit cum dicit nam dum sumus in tabernaculo isto, et cetera. Ubi primo ponit conditionem desiderii naturalis; secundo ostendit, quod etiam hic status desiderii naturalis est a Deo, ibi qui autem efficit nos, et cetera. 158. – Thus, therefore, the desire of grace burns for a reward, but it is retarded by the desire of nature. He shows this when he says: For while we are still in this tent, we sigh with anxiety. Herein, therefore, he first shows the condition of the natural desire; secondly, he shows that even this condition of the natural desire is from God (v. 5). Conditio autem desiderii est naturalis retardans desiderium gratiae, quia vellemus inveniri vestiti et non nudi, id est ita vellemus quod anima perveniret ad gloriam, quod corpus non corrumperetur per mortem. Cuius ratio est quia naturale desiderium inest animae esse unitam corpori, alias mors non esset poenalis. Et hoc est quod dicit nam, nos, qui sumus in hoc tabernaculo, id est, qui habitamus in isto mortali corpore, II Petr. c. I, 14. Scio quod velox sit depositio tabernaculi mei, ingemiscimus, id est intus in corde, non solum extra in voce, gemimus, Is. LIX, 11: ut columbae meditantes gememus, quia durum est cogitare mortem. Et tamen gravati, quasi aliquo existente contra desiderium nostrum, eo quod non possumus pervenire ad gloriam, nisi deponamus corpus, quod est ita contra naturale desiderium, ut dicit Augustinus, quod nec ipsa senectus a Petro timorem mortis auferre potuit. Et ideo dicit eo quod nolumus spoliari, scilicet tabernaculo terreno, sed supervestiri, gloria supercaelesti, vel, secundum Glossam, corpore glorioso. Sed quia posset videri indecens, quod corpus ex una parte esset corruptibile ex sui natura, si non fuisset ante dissolutum, et ex parte gloriae esset gloriosum, subdit modum quomodo fieri vellet, dicens ut absorbeatur quod mortale est, etc., quasi dicat: non sic supervestiri volumus, quod corpus remaneat mortale, sed ita quod gloria auferat ex toto corruptionem corporis, absque corporali dissolutione. Et ideo dicit absorbeatur quod mortale est, id est ipsa corruptio corporis, a vita, scilicet gloriae. I Cor. XV, 54: absorpta est mors in victoria, et cetera. 159. – The condition of the desire is natural, delaying the desire of grace, because we would prefer to be found clothed and not naked, i.e., we would prefer that the soul attain to glory without the body’s being dissolved by death. The reason for this is that there is a natural desire in the soul to be united to the body; otherwise, death would not be a punishment. And this is what he says: For while we are still in this tent, i.e., who live in this mortal body: “Since I know that the putting off of my body (tent) will be soon” (2 Pet. 1:14), we sigh, i.e., inwardly in the heart, and not outwardly with our voice: “We moan and moan like doves” (Is. 59:11), because it is hard to think of death, and yet burdened as with something against our desire, in that we cannot attain to glory without the putting off of the body. This is so much against our natural desire that, as Augustine says, not even old age itself could remove the fear of death from Peter. And so he says, not that we would be unclothed, namely, of our earthly tent, but that we would be further clothed with super-heavenly glory, or, according to a Gloss, with a glorified body. But because it could seem unbecoming that the body, on the one hand should be corruptible of its very nature, if it had not been dissolved before, and, on the other hand, glorified, he mentions the way in which he would like this to happen, saying, so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life. As if to say: we do not desire to be clothed over in such a way that the body remains mortal, but so that the glory take away corruption altogether from the body without its dissolution. Hence he says, so that what is mortal, i.e., the very corruption of the body, may be swallowed up by life, i.e., glory: “Death is swallowed up in victory” (1 Cor. 15:54).
5-2
2 Cor. 5:5-10Hic ostendit auctorem supernaturalis desiderii de habitatione caelesti. Causa enim naturalis desiderii quod nolumus expoliari est quia scilicet anima naturaliter unitur corpori, et e converso. Sed hoc, quod caelestem inhabitationem superindui cupiamus, non est ex natura, sed ex Deo. Et ideo dicit qui autem efficit nos in hoc, etc., quasi dicat: volumus superinduere caelestem habitationem, ita tamen quod non spoliemur terrena, et tamen, hoc ipsum quod volumus sic supervestiri, efficit in nobis Deus. Phil. II, 13: Deus est qui operatur in nobis, et cetera. Cuius ratio est, quia quamlibet naturam consequitur appetitus conveniens fini suae naturae, sicut grave naturaliter tendit deorsum, et appetit ibi quiescere. Si autem sit appetitus alicuius rei supra naturam suam, illa res non movetur ad illum finem naturaliter, sed ab alio quod est supra naturam suam. Constat autem quod perfrui caelesti gloria et videre Deum per essentiam, licet sit rationalis creaturae, est tamen supra naturam ipsius, non ergo movetur rationalis creatura ad hoc desiderandum a natura, sed ab ipso Deo, qui in hoc ipsum efficit nos, et cetera. 160. – Here he discloses the author of the supernatural desire for a heavenly dwelling. For the cause of a natural desire that we be not despoiled is that the soul is naturally united to the body, and vice versa. But the desire to be clothed upon with a heavenly dwelling is not from nature but from God. Hence, he says, he who has prepared us for this very thing is God. As if to say: we wish to put on the heavenly dwelling, but in such a way as not to lose the earthly one. And yet it is God who effects in us the desire to be thus clothed over: “God is at work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure” (Phil. 2:13). The reason for this is that upon every nature follows a desire suited to the end of that nature, as something heavy naturally tends downward and seeks to rest there. But if a thing’s desire is above its nature, that thing is not moved to that end naturally, but by something else, which is above its nature. Now it is evident that to enjoy eternal glory and to see God by his essence, although it is appropriate to a rational creature, is above its nature. Therefore, the rational creature is not moved to desire this by nature, but by God himself, who prepared us for this very thing. Sed quomodo hoc efficit subdit, dicens qui dedit pignus, et cetera. Circa quod sciendum est, quod Deus efficit in nobis naturalia desideria et supernaturalia. Naturalia quidem quando dat nobis spiritum naturalem convenientem naturae humanae. Gen. II, 7: inspiravit in faciem eius, et cetera. Supernaturalia vero dat quando infundit in nobis supernaturalem spiritum, scilicet spiritum sanctum. Et ideo dicit dedit nobis pignus spiritus, id est spiritum sanctum causantem in nobis certitudinem huius rei, qua desideramus impleri. Eph. I, 13: signati estis spiritu promissionis sancto, et cetera. Dicit autem pignus, quia pignus debet tantum valere, quantum valet res pro qua ponitur. Sed in hoc differt a re pro qua ponitur, quia pleniori iure possidetur res, quando iam habetur, quam pignus, quia res possidetur ut quid suum, pignus vero servatur et tenetur quasi pro certitudine rei habendae. Ita est de spiritu sancto, quia spiritus sanctus tantum valet quantum gloria caelestis, sed differt in modo habendi, quia nunc habemus eum quasi ad certitudinem consequendi illam gloriam; in patria vero habebimus, ut rem iam nostram, et a nobis possessam. Tunc enim habebimus perfecte, modo imperfecte. Sic ergo retardatur desiderium gratiae a desiderio naturae. 161. – How this is accomplished he adds, saying, who has given us the Spirit as a guarantee [pledge]. In regard to this it should be noted that God produces natural desires and supernatural desires in us: the natural, when he gives us a natural spirit suited to human nature: “God breathed into his nostrils the breath of life” (Gen. 2:7); but he gives the supernatural desires when he infuses in us the supernatural spirit, i.e., the Holy Spirit. Therefore he says, who has given us the Spirit as a guarantee, i.e., the Holy Spirit producing in us the certainty of this thing, with which we desire to be filled: “You were sealed with the Holy Spirit, which is the guarantee of our inheritance” (Eph. 1:13-14). He says, pledge, because a pledge has as much value as the thing for which it is given; but it differs from the thing for which it is given in this way, namely, that the thing is possessed with a fuller right, when it is already had, than the pledge is. For the thing is possessed as one’s own, but the pledge is kept and held as though giving assurance that the thing will be possessed. So it is with the Holy Spirit: because the Holy Spirit has as much value as heavenly glory. But there is a difference in the way he is possessed, because now we have him as a surety of obtaining that glory; but in heaven we shall have him as something now possessed by us. For then we shall have him perfectly, but now imperfectly. In this way, therefore, is grace’s desire deferred by a natural desire. Sed numquid impeditur? Non, sed desiderium gratiae vincit. Et hoc est quod dicit audentes igitur, etc., quasi dicat: duo desideria sunt in sanctis: unum quo desiderant caelestem habitationem, aliud quo nolunt expoliari. Et si haec duo essent compossibilia, non essent contraria et unum non retardaretur ab alio. Sed apostolus ostendit ea esse incompossibilia et quod oportet quod unum vincat alterum. Unde circa hoc tria facit. Primo enim ostendit incompossibilitatem dictorum desideriorum; secundo interponit quamdam probationem, ibi per fidem enim, etc.; tertio ostendit quod horum vincat, ibi audemus autem, et cetera. 162. – But is it hindered? No, but grace’s desire conquers. Hence, he says, so we are always of good courage, knowing that while we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord. As if to say: there are two desires in holy men, one by which they desire a heavenly dwelling, the other by which they do not wish to be despoiled. If these were compatible, they would not be contrary, and one would not be delayed by the other. But the Apostle shows that they are incompatible and that one must prevail over the other. In regard to this he does two three things: first, he shows the incompatibility of these desires; secondly, he enters a proof (v. 7); thirdly, he shows which of them conquers (v. 8). Incompossibilitatem ostendit cum dicit audentes igitur, et cetera. Audere, proprie est immiscere se in pericula mortis, et non cedere propter timorem. Licet autem sancti naturaliter timeant mortem, tamen audent ad pericula mortis et non cedunt timore mortis. Prov. XXVIII, 1: iustus quasi leo confidens. Eccli. XLVIII, 13: in diebus suis non pertimuit principem. Et scientes, scilicet sumus hoc quod confirmat in nobis audaciam, ut pro Christo mori non timeamus, quoniam dum sumus in hoc corpore mortali, peregrinamur, id est elongamur, a Deo. Ps. CXIX, 5: heu mihi, quia incolatus meus, et cetera. Peregrinamur, inquam, quia sumus extra patriam nostram, qui Deus est, alias non diceremur peregrinari ab eo. Et hoc non est ex natura nostra, sed ex eius gratia. 163. –He shows their incompatibility when he says, so we are always of good courage [always daring], knowing that while we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord. Properly speaking, to dare is to involve oneself in dangers of death and not to yield through fear. But although the saints naturally fear death, yet they dare to face the dangers of death and not yield because of a fear of death: “The righteous are bold as a lion” (Prov. 28:1); “In his days he feared not the prince” (Sir. 48:13, Vulgate). Knowing this, namely, that he strengthens our boldness not to fear death for Christ, that while we are at home in the body we are away, i.e., far away from God: “Woe to me because my stay has been prolonged” (Ps. 120:5, Vulgate). We are absent inasmuch as we are outside our native land, which is God. Otherwise, we would not be described as away from him. And this is not from our nature, but from his grace. Quod autem peregrinamur a domino, probat cum dicit per fidem enim ambulamus, id est procedimus in vita ista per fidem, et non per speciem, id est non per perfectam visionem. Fidei enim verbum est sicut lucerna a qua illuminamur ad ambulandum in vita ista. Ps. CXVIII, 105: lucerna pedibus meis verbum, et cetera. In patria autem non erit huiusmodi lucerna, quia ipsa claritas Dei, id est ipse Deus, illuminabit illam. Et ideo tunc per speciem, id est per essentiam, videbimus eum. Dicit autem per fidem ambulamus, quia fides est de non visis. Est enim fides substantia sperandarum rerum, argumentum non apparentium, Hebr. XI, 1 s. Quamdiu autem anima corpori mortali unitur, non videt Deum per essentiam. Ex. XXXIII, 20: non videbit me homo, et cetera. Unde inquantum assentimus, credendo his, quae non videmus, dicimur ambulare per fidem et non per speciem. Sic ergo patet duorum desideriorum incompossibilitas, quia non possumus cum hoc corpore superindui caelestem habitationem: et probatio huius, quia per fidem ambulamus. 164. – That we are absent from the Lord is proved, when he says, for we walk by faith, i.e., we pass through this life in faith, and not by sight: because faith deals with things not seen. For the word of faith is as a lamp with which the road is lit in this life: “Your word is a lamp to my feet, and a light for my steps” (Ps. 119:105). But in heaven there will be no such lamp, because the radiance of God, i.e., God himself, has enlightened it (Rev. 21:23). Therefore, we shall then see him by sight, i.e., in his essence. But he says, we walk by faith, because faith is concerned with things unseen: “Faith is the substance of things hoped for; the conviction of things not seen” (Heb. 11:1). But as long as the soul is united to the body, it does not see God in his essence: “No man shall see me and live” (Ex. 33:20). Hence, inasmuch as we assent by believing the things we do not see, we are said to walk by faith and not by sight. Thus, therefore, the incompatibility of the two desires is plain, because we cannot, along with this body, be clothed over by the heavenly habitation, the proof of this being that we walk by faith. Sequitur consequenter victoria unius desiderii de duobus, scilicet desiderium gratiae, cum dicit audemus, et cetera. Et debet resumi scientes supra positum, quia littera suspensiva est, ut dicatur sic: hoc, inquam, scientes, quia dum sumus in hoc corpore, etc., audemus et bonam voluntatem habemus, et cetera. Duo dicit, quorum unum importat repugnantiam, quam habet in volendo, quae fit per timorem mortis. Ubi enim est timor, non est audacia. Nam ex appetitu naturae surgit timor mortis, ex appetitu gratiae surgit audacia. Ideo dicit audemus. Aliud importat imperfectionem animi in desiderando, quia nisi bene desideraretur, non vinceretur timor mortis, cum sit valde naturalis. Et ideo, non solum oportet audere, sed bonam voluntatem habere, id est cum gaudio velle. Licet enim, secundum philosophum in actu fortitudinis non requiratur gaudium ad perfectionem virtutis, sicut in aliis virtutibus, sed solum non tristari, tamen quia fortitudo sanctorum perfectior est, non solum non tristantur in periculis mortis, sed etiam gaudent. Phil. I, 23: habens desiderium dissolvi, et cetera. Sed quid audemus? Magis peregrinari a corpore, id est removeri a corpore, per corporis dissolutionem, quod est contra desiderium naturae, et praesentes esse ad dominum, id est ambulare per speciem, quod est desiderium gratiae. Hoc desiderabat Psalmista XLI, 3, qui dicebat: sitivit anima mea ad Deum, et cetera. 165. – He follows with the victory of the one desire, namely, of grace, when he says, we are of good courage and would rather be away from the body. This should be read as follows: knowing what was said above, i.e., that while we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord [we dare and have a good will]. He says two things: one implies the repugnance he has in willing, a repugnance caused by the fear of death. For where there is no fear, there is no daring. For the fear of death springs from our nature’s desire, but the daring of grace’s desire. Therefore, he says, we dare. The other implies an imperfection of the soul in desiring, because unless we desired properly, the fear of death would not be overcome, since it is quite natural. Therefore, it is not only necessary to dare, but also to have a good will, i.e., to will gladly. For although, according to the Philosopher, in the act of courage, joy is not required for the perfection of the virtue as it is in the other virtues, but only not to be sad. Yet because the courage of the saints is more perfect, they are not only not sad at the dangers of death, but they rejoice: “My desire is to depart and be with Christ” (Phil. 1:23). But what do we dare? Rather to be away from the body, i.e., to be separated from the body by its dissolution, which is contrary to the desire of nature, and at home with the Lord, i.e., to walk by sight, which is the desire of grace. He desired this who said in Psalm 42 (v. 5): “My soul thirsts for God, for the living God.” Et nota, quod hic concludit eadem duo, quae proposuit in principio, supra secundo, scilicet quod si terrestris domus nostra huius habitationis dissolvatur, quod idem est, quod hic dicit peregrinari a corpore, et quod habemus habitationem in caelis non manufactam, et hoc quod idem est praesentes esse ad Deum. 166. – Note that he concludes to the same two things he proposed at the beginning, namely, that if the earthly tent we live in is destroyed, which is the same as what he says here, namely, to be away from the body; and that we have a building from God, not made with human hands, in heaven, which is the same as being at home with the Lord. Confutatur per haec verba error dicentium animas sanctorum decedentium non statim post mortem deduci ad visionem Dei et eius praesentiam, sed morari in quibusdam mansionibus usque ad diem iudicii. Nam frustra sancti auderent et desiderarent peregrinari a corpore, si separati a corpore non essent praesentes ad Deum. Et ideo dicendum est quod sancti statim post mortem vident Deum per essentiam, et sunt in caelesti mansione. Sic ergo patet quod praemium, quod sancti expectant, est inaestimabile. 167. – By these words is refuted the error of those who say that the souls of dead saints are not at once after death brought to the vision of God and into his presence, but they reside in mansions until the day of judgment. For the saints dared and desired in vain to be away from the body, if they would not be present to God when separated from the body. Therefore, the answer is that the saints see the essence of God immediately after death and dwell in a heavenly mansion. Thus, therefore, it is plain that the reward which the saints await is inestimable. Sequitur de praeparatione ad praemium, quae fit per pugnam contra tentationes et per exercitium bonorum operum, et hoc est quod dicit ideo contendimus, et cetera. Praeparantur autem sancti ad hoc praemium tripliciter, scilicet primo placendo Deo; secundo proficiendo proximo, ibi scientes autem timorem Dei; tertio abdicando a se carnales affectus, ibi itaque nos, et cetera. 168. – He follows this with an account of the preparation for the reward which is accomplished by the struggle against temptations and by exercising good works (v. 9). But the saints are prepared for this reward in three ways. First, by pleasing God; secondly, by helping their neighbor (v. 11); thirdly, by removing carnal affections from themselves (v. 16). Deo autem placent resistendo malis, et ideo dicit ideo, quia scilicet totum desiderium nostrum est quod simus praesentes Deo, contendimus, id est cum conatu nitimur, seu studemus cum pugna et lucta, contra tentationes Diaboli, carnis et mundi. Lc. XIII, 24: contendite intrare per angustam portam, et cetera. Placere illi, scilicet Deo ad quem desideramus esse praesentes; et hoc sive absentes, sive praesentes illi sumus: quia nisi studeamus ei placere in vita ista dum sumus absentes, non poterimus ei placere, nec esse ei praesentes in alia vita. Sap. c. IV, 10: placens Deo factus dilectus, et cetera. 169. – They please God by resisting evil. Hence he says, so, namely, because our whole desire is to be present with God, we contend, i.e., we make great effort, i.e., we strive and fight against the temptations of the devil, the flesh and the world: “Strive to enter by the narrow gate” (Lk. 13:24). To please him, namely, God, with whom we desire to be present, whether we are at home or away: because unless we strive to please him in this life, while we are absent, we shall not be able to please him or be present with him in the other life: “There was one who pleased God and was loved by him” (Wis. 4:10). Consequenter cum dicit omnes enim nos manifestari, etc., subdit causam quare sancti contendunt placere Deo, quae quidem causa sumitur ex consideratione futuri iudicii, ubi nos omnes manifestari oportet. Ponit autem apostolus quinque conditiones futuri iudicii. Primo enim ponit ipsius universalitatem, quia nullus excipietur ab illo iudicio. Et ideo dicit omnes nos, id est omnes homines, bonos et malos, magnos et parvos. Rom. XIV, 10: omnes stabimus ante tribunal Christi. Apoc. XX, 12: vidi mortuos pusillos et magnos stantes in conspectu agni, et cetera. 170. – Then when he says, For we must all appear, he adds the cause for why the saints strive to please God. This cause is taken from a consideration of the future judgment, when we must all be manifested. Here the Apostle mentions five marks of the future judgment. The first is its universality, because no one will be exempted from that judgment; hence he says, we must all, i.e., all men, good and bad, great and small: “So each of us shall give account of himself to God” (Rom. 14:12); “And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened” (Rev. 20:12). Sed contra hoc obiicitur dupliciter. Primo quia videtur quod infideles non venient ad iudicium, nam qui non credit iam iudicatus est, ut dicitur Io. III, 18. Secundo quia quidam erunt ibi ut iudices, Matth. XIX, 28: sedebitis super sedes, et cetera. Non ergo omnes erunt ante tribunal, ut iudicentur. Responsio. Dicendum quod in iudicio duo erunt, scilicet prolatio sententiae, et discussio meritorum, et quantum ad hoc non omnes iudicabuntur, quia illi qui totaliter abrenuntiaverunt Satanae et pompis eius, et per omnia adhaeserunt Christo, non discutientur, quia iam dii sunt. Illi vero, qui in nullo adhaeserunt Christo, nec per fidem, nec per opera, similiter non indigent discussione, quia nihil habent cum Christo; sed illi qui cum Christo aliquid habent, scilicet fidem, et in aliquo recesserunt a Christo, scilicet per mala opera et prava desideria, discutientur de his quae contra Christum commiserunt. Unde quantum ad hoc, soli Christiani peccatores manifestabuntur ante tribunal Christi. Item, erit in iudicio prolatio sententiae, et quantum ad hoc omnes manifestabuntur. Sed de pueris non videtur, quia dicitur ut referat unusquisque propria corporis prout gessit; sed pueri nihil gesserunt in corpore, ergo, et cetera. Sed hoc solvit Glossa, quia non iudicabuntur pro his, quae ipsi gesserunt per se, sed de his quae gesserunt per alios, dum per eos crediderunt vel non crediderunt, baptizati vel non baptizati fuerunt. Vel damnabuntur pro peccato primi parentis. 171. – But there are two objections against this. First, because it does not seem that unbelievers will come to judgment, for one who does not believe has already been judged, as it says in John (3:18). Secondly, because some will be there as judges: “You who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Matt. 19:28). Therefore, not all will be before the tribunal to be judged. I answer that there are two things in a judgment, namely, a discussion of merits, and as to this not all will be judged, because those who have completely renounced Satan and all him pomps, and have clung to Christ in all things, will not be judged, because they are gods already. But those who did not adhere to Christ in any way, neither by faith nor works, will also not need discussion. But those who have something with Christ, namely, faith, and in something have withdrawn from him, namely by evil works and wicked desires, will be discussed as to the things they committed against Christ. Hence, as to this, only sinful Christians will be manifested before the judgment seat of Christ. But sentence will also be pronounced during the judgment; and as to this, all will be manifested. But it seems that children will be exempt, because he says, so that each one may receive good or evil according to what he has done in the body. But children have done nothing in the body. This is answered by a Gloss [Lombard]: for they will not be judged for the things they did by themselves, but for the things they did through others, when they believed or did not believe, were baptized or not baptized through them. Or they will be condemned for the sin of their first parents. Secundo vero ponit iudicii certitudinem. In iudicio hominum multi decipi possunt, dum quidam iudicantur mali, qui tamen sunt boni, et e converso. Et huius ratio est, quia non manifestantur corda, sed in illo iudicio perfectissima certitudo erit, quia erit ibi manifestatio cordium. Unde dicit manifestari. I Cor. IV, 5: nolite ante tempus iudicare, et cetera. 172. – Secondly, he mentions the certainty of the judgment. For in human judgment many can be deceived, when they are judged evil, whereas they are good; or good, whereas they are evil. The reason for this is that hearts are not manifest. But in that judgment there will be absolutely perfect certainty, because there will be a manifestation of hearts. Hence, he says, be manifested: “Therefore do not pronounce judgment before the time, before the Lord comes, who will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart” (1 Cor. 4:5). Tertio ponit iudicii necessitatem, quia nec per interpositam personam, nec per contumaciam poterit quis effugere iudicium illud. Unde dicit oportet, id est necessarium est. Iob XIX, 29: scitote esse iudicium. Eccle. ult.: cuncta quae fiunt adducet Deus, et cetera. Thirdly, he tells why the judgment will be necessary, because no one shall be able to escape that judgment either by another’s intercession or by contumacy: “That you may know that there is a judgment” (Job 19:29); “For God will bring every deed into judgment, with every secret thing, whether good or evil” (Ec. 12:14). Quarto ponit iudicis auctoritatem. Unde dicit ante tribunal Christi, ut scilicet veniat ad iudicandum homines in eadem forma, in qua iudicatus est ab hominibus, ut existens in forma humana videatur a bonis et malis. Mali enim non possunt videre gloriam Dei. Io. V, 27: potestatem dedit ei iudicium facere, et cetera. Tribunal autem dicit iudiciariam potestatem, et sumptum est ab antiqua consuetudine Romanorum, qui elegerunt tres tribunos plebis, ad quorum officium pertinebat diiudicare excessus consulum et senatorum, et loca istorum vocabantur tribunalia. Fourthly, he discloses the authority of the judge; hence, he says, before the judgment seat [tribunal] of Christ, who will come to judge men in the same form in which he was judged by men, so that appearing in human form, he may be seen by the good and by the evil; for the wicked cannot see the glory of God: “And has given him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of man” (Jn. 5:27). “Tribunal” implies juridical power, and is taken from an ancient custom of the Romans, who chose three tribunes of the people, whose function was to pass judgment on the excesses of consuls and senators. Their places were called tribunals. Quinto ponit iudicis aequitatem, quia secundum merita propria erunt praemia vel poenae. Unde dicit ut referat unusquisque, et cetera. Rom. II, 6: reddet unicuique secundum opera sua. Et dicit corporis, non solum pro his quae fecit motu corporis, sed pro his quae mente gessit, alias infideles non punirentur. Et ideo cum dicit corporis, intelligendum est, id est pro his quae gessit dum vixit in corpore. Fifthly, he speaks of the equity of the judge, because there will be rewards or punishments according to one’s merits. Hence, he says, so that each one may receive good or evil, according to what he has done: “He will render to each one according to his works” (Rom. 2:5). He says, in the body, not only for things accomplished with bodily movement, but for those accomplished by the mind; otherwise, unbelievers would not be punished. Therefore, when he says, in the body, it is understood to mean things performed while he lived in the body.
5-3
2 Cor. 5:11-15Ostenso qualiter sancti se praeparant ad praemium aeternae gloriae placendo Deo, hic ostendit consequenter quomodo praeparant se ad hoc proficiendo proximo. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo ostendit sollicitudinem suam, quam habet de salute proximorum; secundo vero huius sollicitudinis causam assignat, ibi charitas Christi, et cetera. Circa primum tria facit. Primo ponit curam quam habet de salute proximorum persuadendo eis; secundo excludit quamdam falsam suspicionem, ibi non iterum nos, etc.; tertio ostendit quod etiam in modo docendi proximorum utilitatem intendat, ibi sive enim mente, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo, ponit studium suum de utilitate proximorum; secundo, manifestat hoc, ibi Deo autem, et cetera. 173. – Having shown how the saints prepare themselves for the reward of eternal glory by pleasing God, the Apostle now shows how they prepare themselves for this by helping their neighbor. In regard to this he does two things. First, he shows his own solicitude for the salvation of his neighbor; secondly, he assigns the cause of this solicitude (v. 14). In regard to the first he does three things. First, he mentions the care he has for the salvation of his neighbor by persuading them; secondly, he excludes a false opinion (v. 12); thirdly, he shows that even in the way he teaches he intends the welfare of his neighbor (v. 13). In regard to the first he does two things. First, he mentions his zeal to benefit his neighbor; secondly, he explains this (v. 11b). Dicit ergo: dico quod oportet nos manifestari ante tribunal, etc., et haec consideratio inducit homines ad timendum iudicium. Et ideo dicit scientes ergo timorem domini, id est quam pure et caste timendus sit dominus Iesus Christus, suademus hominibus, ut timeant et credant. Iob XXIII, 15: considerans eum timore sollicitor. Ier. X, 7: quis non timebit te, o rex gentium? Is. VIII, v. 13: dominum exercituum, ipsum sanctificate, et cetera. 174. – He says therefore: I say that we must be manifested before the tribunal of Christ, and this consideration induces men to fear the judgment. Hence, he says, therefore, knowing the fear of the Lord, i.e., how purely and chastely the Lord Jesus should be feared, we persuade men to fear and believe: “When I consider, I am in dread of him” (Job 23:15); “Who would not fear you, O King of the nations” (Jer. 10:7); “But the LORD of hosts, him you shall regard as holy; let him be your fear, and let him be your dread” (Is. 8:13). Sed quia aliquis posset dicere quod non ex conscientia bona, sed ex commodo suo suadebat hominibus, et ideo manifestat hoc esse falsum duplici testimonio, scilicet Dei, unde dicit Deo autem manifesti sumus, quod scilicet ex timore Dei loquimur. Deus enim videt intentionem cordis nostri. Ier. c. XVII, 9: pravum est cor hominis et inscrutabile, et quis cognoscet illud? Ego dominus, et cetera. Io. II, 25: ipse sciebat, et cetera. Item testimonio conscientiarum ipsorum, unde dicit spero autem in conscientiis vestris, et cetera. Et vere spero, quia sic me exhibui ut vos scire possitis nos esse probatos, et firmiter hoc tenere etsi non confiteamini ore. Supra IV, 2: commendantes nosmetipsos ad omnem conscientiam, et cetera. 175. – But because someone could say that it is not from a good conscience, but for his own advantage that he persuades men, he shows that this is false by appealing to two testimonies, namely, of God, when he says, but what we are is known to God, i.e., that he is speaking from fear of God, for God sees the intention of our heart: “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately corrupt; who can understand it? I the LORD search the mind and try the heart” (Jer. 17:9-10); “For he himself knew what was in man” (Jn. 2:25). And by the testimony of their consciences; hence he says, I hope it is known also to your conscience. Truly I hope, because I have shown myself to you in such a way that you might know we are approved and might firmly hold this, even though you do not admit it by mouth: “Commending ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God” (2 Cor. 4:2) Consequenter, quia possent credere quod hoc dixerit apostolus ad commendationem propriam, removet hanc suspicionem falsam dicens non iterum nos commendamus vobis, id est non dicimus hoc ad commendationem nostram ut quasi iterum velimus nos commendare: supra enim, III, et etiam I Cor. III, aliqua dixerat ad commendationem suam. Et ideo dicit iterum. Infra X, 18: non enim qui seipsum commendat, et cetera. Sed hoc dicimus propter utilitatem vestram, quasi dicat damus vobis occasionem gloriandi, id est materiam gloriandi. Pseudo-Apostoli enim per elationem gloriabantur, dicentes se fuisse doctos ab apostolis, qui fuerunt a domino, scilicet a Petro et Iacobo, qui erant columnae fidei, detrahentes in hoc apostolo, quasi non fuerit cum domino Iesu, et volentes eius doctrinam destruere. Ut ergo et Corinthii haberent in quo gloriarentur contra ipsos pseudo-apostolos, scilicet de gratia apostolo data, ut eos et refellant et non seducantur ab eis, ideo dicit hoc. Unde subdit ut habeatis ad eos, id est contra eos, vel ad eos reprimendos, quid possitis dicere. 176. – Then because they might suppose that the Apostle said this to commend himself, he removes this false supposition, saying, we are not commending ourselves to you again, i.e., we are not saying this for our commendation, as though trying to commend ourselves again. For above (in chapter three and in 1 Corinthians 3) he said certain things for his commendation: “For it is not the man who commends himself that is accepted, but the man whom the Lord commends” (2 Cor. 10:18). But we say this for your benefit. As if to say, but giving you cause to be proud of us, i.e., matter for glorifying. For the false apostles took glory in elation, saying that they were taught by the apostles, who were from the Lord, namely, by Peter and James, who were pillars of the faith, thus detracting from the Apostle, as though he had not been with the Lord Jesus, and wishing to destroy his teaching. Therefore, in order that the Corinthians, too, might have something in which to glory against those false apostles, namely, the grace given to the Apostle, so as to refute them and not be seduced by them, he said this. Hence, he continues, so that you may be able to answer those, i.e., against them, or to those reprimanding, what you can speak. Ad eos, dico, qui in facie gloriantur, et non in corde. Quod tripliciter exponitur sic: in facie gloriantur, id est exterioribus observantiis legalibus, quia ad litteram docebant servare legalia. Et non in corde, id est in virtute Christi, quae est in corde, quia in spiritualibus, sicut apostolus, qui in virtute crucis Christi dicebat: mihi autem absit gloriari, et cetera. Item in facie gloriantur, id est in conspectu hominum, sicut hypocritae faciunt, et non in corde, id est in testimonio conscientiae, sicut apostolus. Unde dicit: gloria nostra haec est, et cetera. Vel in facie gloriantur, quia aliqua praetendebant exterius, quae tamen non ita sentiebant interius in corde, scilicet quod dicebant se doctos ab apostolis, et quod sequerentur eorum doctrinam, quam tamen nitebantur destruere. 177. – To them, I say, who pride themselves on a man’s position and not on his heart [who glory in face and not in heart]. This can be explained in three ways. First, they glory in face, i.e., in the external observances of the Law, because that is what they taught, and not in heart, i.e., in the virtue of Christ, which is in the heart, unlike the Apostle, who in virtue of the cross of Christ, said: “Far be it from me to glory except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Gal. 6:14). Likewise they glory in face, i.e., in the presence of men, as hypocrites do, and not in heart, i.e., in the testimony of conscience, as the Apostle says above (2 Cor. 1:12): “For our boast is this, the testimony of our conscience.” Or they glory in face, because they pretend some things outwardly, which they do not feel in the heart, namely, that they claimed to have been instructed by the apostles and were following their doctrine, which on the contrary they were trying to destroy. It is clear, therefore, how the Apostle procured the salvation of his neighbor by teaching. Patet ergo qualiter apostolus in docendo proximorum salutem procurabat. Sequitur videre quomodo ipsorum salutem procurabat etiam in modo docendi. Unde dicit sive enim mente, etc., quod exponitur dupliciter. Uno modo sic, ut apostolus dicat se excedere, quando loquitur eis, commendando se sobrium esse; quando non loquitur de commendatione propria. Secundum hoc dicit: quocumque modo doceamus, vel est honor Dei vel utilitas proximi, quia si excedimus mente, id est commendamus nos, Deo, scilicet est, id est ad honorem Dei, vel de servando iudicio Dei: sive sobrii sumus, id est non alta dicamus de nobis, hoc est vobis, id est, ad utilitatem vestram. 178. – Now we must see how he procured their salvation even in the way he taught. Hence he says, for if we are beside ourselves, it is for God; if we are in our right mind [if we are sober], it is for you. This is explained in two ways: in one way so that the Apostle calls himself transported when he speaks to them by commending himself, and sober when he is not speaking of his own commendation. According to this he is saying: no matter how we teach, it is either for the honor of God or the benefit of his neighbor; for if we are beside ourselves, i.e., commend ourselves, it is for God, i.e., for the honor of God or for observing God’s judgment; if we are in our right mind [if we are sober], i.e., not saying great things about ourselves, this is for you, i.e., for your profit. Sed aliter, et est magis litteralis sensus. Dico quod damus vobis occasionem gloriandi pro nobis, quia nos, in omnibus quae facimus et etiam in modo faciendi, intendimus bonum vestrum. Unde sciendum quod apostoli sunt medii inter Deum et populum. Deut. V, 5: ego sequester et medius fui, et cetera. Oportebat ergo quod haurirent a Deo quod effunderent populo. Et ideo necessarium erat quod quandoque elevarent se per contemplationem in Deum ad percipiendum caelestia, quandoque conformarent se populo ad tradendum quae a Deo perceperant, et hoc totum in eorum utilitatem cedebat. Et ideo dicit sive enim excedimus mente, id est elevamur ad hoc quod percipiamus dona gratiarum, et hoc ut Deo scilicet uniamur, quod fit per excessum rerum temporalium. Ps. CXV, 11: ego dixi in excessu meo. Dionysius: est enim extasim faciens divinus amor, et cetera. Sive sobrii simus, id est commensuremus nos vobis, tradendo divina praecepta, hoc est vobis, id est ad utilitatem vestram. Sobrietas enim idem est, quod commensuratio. Bria enim in Graeco idem est quod mensura. Haec sobrietas non opponitur ebrietati, quae est de vino, quae ad bella trahit in terra, sed opponitur ebrietati quae est a spiritu sancto, quae rapit hominem ad divina, de qua dicitur Cant. V, 1: bibite, amici, et inebriamini, charissimi. Nam illa scilicet sobrietas est propter utilitatem proximi, sed haec ebrietas est propter amorem Dei. Huiusmodi autem descensus, signatus est per descensum Angelorum per scalam quam vidit Iacob Gen. XXVIII, 12, et Io. I, 51: videbitis caelum apertum, et cetera. 179. – But there is another and more literal sense. I say that we give you opportunity for glorying in us, because in everything we do and even in the way we do it, we intend your good. Hence it should be noted that the apostles were midway between God and the people: “While I stood between the Lord and you at that time” (Deut. 5:5). Therefore, they were required to draw from God whatever they poured out upon the people. Hence it was necessary that sometimes they raised themselves to God by contemplation to obtain heavenly things, and sometimes conformed themselves to the people to deliver what they had received from God; and all this tended to their profit. Hence he says, for if we are beside ourselves, i.e., raised to the state of receiving gifts of graces, and this in order to be united to God, which is done by means of temporal things: “I said in my vision” (Ps. 116:11, Vulgate); Dionysius: “Divine love causes ecstasy.” If we are in our right mind, i.e., adapt ourselves to you by delivering God’s precepts, it is for you, i.e., for your benefit. This sobriety is not opposed to inebriation in wine, which brings wars on earth, but to that inebriation which is from the Holy Spirit and draws men to divine things and about which Song of Songs (5:1) says: “Eat, O friends, and drink: drink deeply, O lovers!” For that sobriety is for the benefit of our neighbor, but the inebriation is for the love of God. Such a descent was signified by the descent of the angels on the ladder which Jacob saw (Gen. 28:12): “You will see heaven opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man” (Jn. 1:51). Consequenter cum dicit charitas autem Christi, etc., subiungit apostolus causam praemissae sollicitudinis, quae quidem est charitas Christi. Circa hoc autem duo facit. Primo ostendit se urgeri a charitate Christi ad procurandam salutem proximorum; secundo ostendit unde provocetur charitas Christi in ipso, ibi aestimantes hoc, et cetera. 180. – Then when he says, For the love of Christ, the Apostle indicates the cause of his solicitude, namely, the love of Christ. In regard to this he does two things. First, he shows that he is pressed by the charity of Christ to procure the salvation of his neighbor; secondly, he indicates the source from which the charity of Christ is kindled (v. 14b). Dicit ergo: dico quod sive excedimus Deo sive sobrii sumus vobis, est ad utilitatem vestram. Et huius causa est quia charitas Christi urget nos ad hoc. Et dicit urget, quia urgere idem est quod stimulare; quasi dicat: charitas Christi, quasi stimulus, stimulat nos ad faciendum ea, quae charitas imperat, ut scilicet procuremus salutem proximorum. Hic est effectus charitatis. Rom. c. VIII, 14: qui spiritu Dei aguntur, id est agitantur, et cetera. Cant. VIII, 6: lampades eius, ut lampades ignis, et cetera. 181. – He says, therefore: I say that whether we be beside ourselves, it is for God; or whether we be sober, it is for you, i.e., for your benefit. The reason for this is that the love of Christ controls [presses] us to this. He says, presses, because it is the same as stimulates. As if to say: the love of God, as a goad, stimulates us to do what charity commands, namely, to procure the salvation of our neighbor: “Those who are led,” i.e., stirred, “by the Spirit of God are sons of God” (Rom. 8:14); “Its flashes are flashes of fire” (Song 8:6). Unde autem proveniat iste stimulus charitatis, ostendit consequenter, subdens aestimantes hoc, quoniam si unus, etc., et primo assignat rationem huius; secundo exponit, ibi et pro omnibus mortuus est, et cetera. 182. – Then he indicates the cause of his solicitude, namely, the love of Christ, adding, because we are convinced that one has died for all. First, he assigns the reason for this; secondly, he explains it (v. 15). Dicit ergo: dico quod omnia pro vobis facimus, quia urget nos charitas Christi, quia aestimamus, quod si unus, scilicet Christus, pro omnibus mortuus est, quod etiam nos ita vivamus, id est ad utilitatem vestram, quod etiam nobis mortui simus, id est nihil curemus de nobis, sed de Christo et de his quae Christi sunt. Et hoc est quod dicit si unus. Rom. V, 8: commendat Deus suam charitatem in nobis, et cetera. I Petr. c. II, 21: Christus passus est pro nobis, et cetera. 183. – He says, therefore: I say that we do all things for you, because the love of Christ controls us, because we are convinced that one, namely Christ, has died for all, then we ourselves should so live, i.e., for your benefit, that we are even dead to ourselves, i.e., we care nothing about ourselves, but about Christ and the things of Christ: “God shows his love for us” (Rom. 5:8); “Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps” (1 Pet. 2:21). Quod ergo infertur ergo omnes mortui sunt, exponitur tribus modis. Primo ut dicatur omnes mortui sunt, morte peccati in Adam. Non enim esset necessarium quod Christus pro omnibus moreretur, nisi omnes mortui fuissent morte peccati in Adam. I Cor. XV, 22: sicut in Adam omnes, et cetera. Secundo ut dicatur omnes mortui sunt, scilicet veteri vitae. Christus enim mortuus est ad delenda peccata, ergo omnes debent mori veteri vitae, scilicet peccati, et vivere vita iustitiae, Rom. VI, 10: quod enim mortuus est peccato, etc., ita et vos aestimate vos mortuos esse, et cetera. Tertio, et magis litteraliter, ergo mortui sunt omnes, id est ita debet se quilibet reputare ac si esset mortuus sibi ipsi. Col. III, 3: mortui estis, et cetera. 184. – What follows from this, namely, therefore all have died, is explained in three ways. First, as if to say that all have died with the death of sin in Adam. For it would not have been necessary for Christ to suffer for all, if all were not dead with the death of Adam’s sin: “For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive” (1 Cor. 15:22). Secondly, as if to say: all have died, namely, to the old life. For Christ died to remove sins; therefore, all should die to the old life, namely, of sin, and live the life of justice: “The death he died he died to sin, once for all, but the life he lives he lives to God. So you also must consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus” (Rom. 6:10-11). Thirdly, and more literally, all have died, i.e., each person should regard himself as though dead to himself: “You have died and your life is hid with Christ in God” (Col. 3:3). Et hunc modum exponit consequenter cum dicit et pro omnibus mortuus est Christus, I Io. II: mortuus est ut vivamus Christo. Unde subdit ut et qui vivit, scilicet vita naturali, iam non sibi vivat, id est non propter seipsum et propter bonum suum tantum, sed ei qui pro ipsis mortuus est et resurrexit, scilicet Christo, id est totam vitam suam ordinet ad servitium et honorem Christi. Gal. II, 20: vivo ego, iam non ego, et cetera. Eccli. XXIX, 20: gratiam fideiussoris tui ne obliviscaris, et cetera. Et horum ratio est quia unusquisque operans sumit regulam operis sui a fine. Unde si Christus est finis vitae nostrae, vitam nostram debemus regulare non secundum voluntatem nostram, sed secundum voluntatem Christi. Sic enim et Christus dicebat Io. VI, v. 38: descendi de caelo, non ut facerem voluntatem meam, et cetera. 185. – He explains this interpretation when he says, and he died for all: “He died that we might live to Christ” (see 2 Cor. 5:15; 1 Th. 5:10; 1 Jn. 4:9)). Hence he continues, that those who live might live, namely, with a natural life, no longer for themselves, i.e., solely for themselves and their own good, but for him who for their sake died and was raised, namely, for Christ, i.e., he should direct his whole life to the service and honor of Christ: “It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me” (Gal. 2:20); “Forget not the kindness of your surety, for he has given his life for you” (Sir. 29:20, Vulgate). The reason for these things is that everyone who acts takes the rule of his work from the end. Hence, if Christ is the end of our life, we should regulate our life not according to our will but according to Christ’s will. For this is what Christ himself said: “For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me” (Jn. 6:38) Nota autem quod duo dicit, scilicet quod mortuus est Christus et quod resurrexit pro nobis; ubi duo exiguntur a nobis. Quia enim mortuus est pro nobis et nos debemus mori nobis ipsis, id est pro ipso abnegare nos ipsos. Unde dicebat Lc. IX, 23: qui vult venire post me, abneget semetipsum, et cetera. Quod idem est ac si diceret: moriantur sibi ipsis. Quia vero Christus resurrexit pro nobis, et nos debemus ita mori peccato et veteri vitae et nobis ipsis, quod tamen resurgamus ad novam vitam Christi. Rom. VI, 4: quomodo Christus surrexit a mortuis per gloriam patris, ita et nos in novitate, et cetera. Et propter hoc dominus non dixit solum: abneget semetipsum et tollat crucem suam, sed addidit et sequatur me, scilicet in novitate vitae, proficiendo in virtutibus. Ps. LXXXIII, 8: ibunt de virtute in virtutem, et cetera. 186. – But note that he says two things, namely that Christ died and that he rose for us; wherein two things are required of us. For since he dies for us, we, too, should die to ourselves, i.e., deny ourselves for him: “If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me” (Lk. 9:23). This is the same as saying: let him die to himself. But because Christ rose for us, we should so die to sin and to the old life and to ourselves that we might rise to the new life of Christ: “So that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life” (Rom. 6:4). This is why the Lord not only said, “Let him deny himself and take up his cross,” but added, “and follow me,” namely, in newness of life, by advancing in the virtues: “They shall go from virtue to virtue” (Ps. 84:7, Vulgate).
5-4
2 Cor. 5:16-17Posito quomodo sancti praeparant se ad susceptionem gloriae caelestis, placendo Deo et proficiendo proximo, hic consequenter ostendit quomodo praeparant se ad hoc idem, abdicando a se carnalem affectum. Et circa hoc tria facit. Primo ponit abdicationem carnalis affectus; secundo excludit instantiam, ibi et si cognovimus, etc.; tertio concludit intentum, ibi si qua ergo in Christo, et cetera. 187. – Having indicated how the saints prepare themselves for receiving heavenly glory by pleasing God and helping their neighbor, the Apostle then shows how they prepare themselves for the same thing by giving up carnal affection. In regard to this he does three things. First, he mentions the putting off of carnal affection; secondly, he excludes an objection (v. 16b); thirdly, he concludes to what he intended (v. 17). Dicit ergo primo: ex quo ergo adeo certi sumus de gloria aeterna, ita quod nos ex hoc neminem secundum carnem novimus. Ubi nota, quod secundum carnem est quaedam determinatio, et potest dupliciter exponi, secundum quod dupliciter constructio fieri potest. Uno modo, ut ly secundum carnem, construatur cum hoc accusativo neminem, et sic exponit Glossa: neminem secundum carnem, id est carnaliter viventem, approbamus. Ex quo enim quilibet debet mori, non approbamus eum, qui carnaliter vivit. Et hoc modo accipitur caro Rom. VIII, 9: vos autem in carne non estis, et cetera. Alio modo: neminem secundum carnem, id est secundum carnales legis observantias viventem, novimus, id est approbamus. Et hoc modo accipitur caro Phil. III, 4: qui confidunt in carne, id est, in carnalibus legis observantiis, et cetera. Tertio: neminem secundum carnem, id est secundum carnis corruptionem, novimus, id est reputamus. Licet enim fideles adhuc carnem corruptibilem gerant, tamen in spe iam habent corpus incorruptibile. Unde non reputant se secundum quod modo carnem corruptibilem habent, sed secundum quod habituri sunt corpus incorruptibile. Hoc modo accipitur caro I Cor. XV, 50: caro et sanguis regnum Dei non possidebunt. Alio modo potest construi, ut ly secundum carnem, construatur cum hoc verbo novimus. Et sic est sensus: dico quod ex quo non debemus nobis vivere, sed ei qui pro nobis mortuus est, itaque nos ex hoc neminem secundum carnem novimus, id est non sequimur in aliquo carnalem affectum, nec aliquem hoc modo reputamus. Et hoc modo accipitur illud Deut. XXXIII, 9: qui dixerit patri suo et matri: nescio vos, et cetera. Et sic ly secundum carnem, refertur ad cognoscentem; sed in prima expositione referebatur ad cognitum. 188. – He says therefore: inasmuch as I am so certain of eternal glory, From now on, therefore, we regard no one from a human point of view [according to the flesh]. Here it should be noted that according to the flesh is a restriction and can be explained in two ways according to the possible connections that can be made. In one way, so according to the flesh is connected with no one. In this case, a Gloss explains it thus: we regard, i.e., approve of no one according to the flesh, i.e., living carnally. This is the way “flesh” is taken in Romans (8:9): “You are not in the flesh, you are in the Spirit.” In another way, we regard, i.e., approve of, no one according to the flesh, i.e., living according to the carnal observances of the Law. This is the way “flesh” is taken in Philippians (3:4): “Who have confidence in the flesh,” i.e., the carnal observances of the Law. In a third way, we regard, i.e., consider, no one according to the flesh, i.e., according to the corruption of the flesh. For although the faithful still have corruptible flesh, yet in hope they already have an incorruptible body. Hence, they do not consider themselves from the point of view that they have corruptible flesh now, but that they shall have an incorruptible body. This is the way “flesh” is taken in 1 Corinthians (15:50): “Flesh and blood shall not inherit the kingdom of God.” But according to the flesh can be taken in another way, namely, as connected with the verb, we regard. Then the sense is this: I say that inasmuch as we should not live for ourselves but for him who died for us, then from now on, we regard no one according to the flesh, i.e., we do not follow carnal affection in anyone or regard him in this light. This is the way Deuteronomy (33:9) should be understood: “Who said of his father and mother, ‘I regard them not’; he disowned his brothers, and ignored his children.” In this way, according to the flesh is referred to the knower, but in the first explanation to the object known. Quia vero aliquis posset dare instantiam de Christo, quod saltem cognovisset eum secundum carnem, ideo consequenter hoc removet dicens quod si cognovimus, et cetera. Circa hoc sciendum est quod Manichaeus adducebat verba ista pro se in fulcimentum sui erroris. Ipse enim dicebat Christum non habuisse verum corpus, nec fuisse ex semine David natum. Et sic Augustinus dicit in libro contra Faustum: si quis contra eum allegaret verbum apostoli ad Rom. I, 3: qui factus est ei ex semine David secundum carnem, et illud I Tim. III, 16: et manifeste magnum est pietatis sacramentum, quod manifestatum est in carne, etc., et II Tim. II, 8: memor esto dominum Iesum Christum resurrexisse a mortuis ex semine David, etc., respondebat, quod apostolus aliquando fuerat huius opinionis, scilicet quod fuisset ex semine David et quod verum corpus habuisset, sed postea hanc opinionem mutavit et correxit se hic. Unde dicebat et si cognovimus secundum carnem Christum, id est si fuerimus aliquando huius opinionis, quod Christus habuisset veram carnem, sed nunc iam non novimus, id est modo mutavimus illam opinionem et non credimus ita. Quod quidem dupliciter improbat Augustinus. Primo quia de eo, quod falso putamus, nullus dicit novimus, sed opinamur. Cum ergo apostolus utatur hic hoc verbo cognovimus, videtur quod non aliquando falso putaverit. Secundo quia supra apostolus dicit neminem novimus secundum carnem. Si ergo verum esset quod dicit Manichaeus, apostolus nullum cognosceret habere verum corpus, quod est falsum. Est ergo falsum quod Manichaeus dicit. 189. – But because someone might insist that he at least knew Christ according to the flesh, he excludes this, saying: even though we once regarded Christ from a human point of view, we regard him thus no longer. In regard to this it should be noted that Manicheus appealed to those words to support his error. For he said that Christ did not have a true body and was not born of the seed of David. This is the way Augustine puts it in the book, Against Faustus: If anyone alleged against him the words of the Apostle to the Romans (1:3), “Who was descended from David according to the flesh,” and to Timothy (1 Tim. 3:16), “Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of our religion, which was manifested in the flesh” (and 2 Tim 2:8), “Remember Jesus Christ, risen from the dead, descended from David, as preached in my gospel,” he answered that the Apostle was first of the opinion that he was of the seed of David and that he had a true body, but he changed that opinion later to correct himself; that is why he said, even though we once regarded Christ from a human point of view, we regard him thus no longer, i.e., we have changed our opinion and no longer believe that. But Augustine disproves this in two ways. First, because no one says, “we regarded,” but “we are of the opinion,” when speaking of something he falsely held. Therefore, when the Apostle uses the words, “we regarded” it does not seem that he once held something false. Secondly, because the Apostle says, we regard no one from a human point of view. Therefore, if what Manicheus says were true, the Apostle would have known no one to have a true body, which is false. Therefore what Manicheus says is false. Et ideo aliter exponendum secundum veritatem, et dupliciter. Uno modo, ut sumatur hic caro pro corruptione carnis, I Cor. XV, 50: caro et sanguis, etc., et tunc est sensus: et si cognovimus aliquando Christum secundum carnem, id est habere eum carnem corruptibilem ante passionem, sed nunc iam non novimus, scilicet eum habere carnem incorruptibilem, quia Rom. VI, 9 dicitur: Christus resurgens ex mortuis iam non moritur, et cetera. Alio modo secundum Glossam, ut ly si aliquando secundum carnem Christum cognovimus, referatur ad statum Pauli ante conversionem ad Christum; quod vero sequitur sed nunc iam non novimus, referatur ad statum eius post conversionem. Et sic est sensus: et ego et alii Iudaei infideles aliquando, id est ante conversionem meam, cognovimus Christum secundum carnem, id est secundum quod carnaliter opinati sumus de Christo, scilicet eum esse tantum hominem et quod venit tantum ad carnales observantias legis; sed iam, id est postquam conversus sum, non novimus, id est haec opinio cessavit, immo credo quod sit verus Deus et quod non sit colendus per carnales observantias. Unde dicebat Gal. V, v. 2: si circumcidimini, Christus nihil vobis proderit. 190. – Consequently, it must be explained otherwise according to the truth, and this in two ways. In one way so that flesh is taken for the corruption of the flesh: “Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable” (1 Cor. 15:50). Then the sense is this: if we once regarded Christ from a human point of view, i.e., to have corruptible flesh before the passion, we regard him thus no longer, namely, that he has corruptible flesh, because it says in Romans (6:9): “Christ being raised from the dead will never die again; death no longer has dominion over him.” In another way according to a Gloss [Lombard], so that the clause, even though we once regarded Christ from a human point of view, is referred to Paul’s condition before his conversion; then what follows, we regard him thus no longer, refers to his state after conversion. Then the sense is this: both I and other Jews once, i.e., before my conversion, knew Christ according to the flesh, i.e., according to what we thought of Christ in the Law. But now, i.e., after I was converted, we regard him thus no longer, i.e., this opinion ceased. Indeed I believe that he is true God and that he should not be worshipped with carnal observance. Hence, he said to the Galatians (5:2): “If you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you.” Potest et aliter exponi, ut hoc quod dicit et si cognovimus, etc., dicat apostolus in persona omnium apostolorum Christi; et sic videtur respondere ultimae expositioni huius, quod dicitur neminem cognovimus. Unde sciendum est quod Augustinus, exponens illud Io. XVI, 7: expedit vobis, ut ego vadam, ubi ratio domini ad hoc subditur: si enim non abiero, Paracletus non veniet ad vos, dicit, quod hoc ideo erat, quia discipuli carnaliter amantes Christum afficiebantur ad ipsum, sicut carnalis homo ad carnalem amicum, et sic non poterant elevari ad spiritualem dilectionem, quae etiam pro absente multa facit pati. Ut ergo radicaretur in eis affectus spiritualis, qui est a spiritu sancto, et cessaret carnalis, dixit eis dominus: pax vobis, et cetera. Hoc ergo apostolus, in persona omnium discipulorum, commemorans dixit et si cognovimus, id est si adhaesimus Christo aliquando, scilicet quando nobiscum erat praesentia corporali, secundum carnem, id est secundum carnalem affectum, sed iam non novimus, id est iam iste affectus cessavit a nobis per spiritum sanctum, qui datus est nobis. 191. – It can also be explained another way, so that the statement, even though we once regarded Christ from a human point of view, is made by the Apostle in the person of all the apostles of Christ. In this way it seems to correspond to the last explanation of the statement, we regard no one from a human point of view. Hence it should be noted that when Augustine explains John (16:17): “It is to your advantage that I go away,” where the Lord’s reason is given as being, “For if I do not go away, the Counselor will not come to you,” he says that this was because the disciples were attracted toward him as a man in the flesh to a friend in the flesh. As a result, they could not be raised to a spiritual love, which causes one to suffer many things even for a person who is absent. Therefore, in order to plant in them a spiritual affection, which is from the Holy Spirit, and root out the carnal one, the Lord said to them: “Peace be with you” (Jn. 20:21). Therefore, the Apostle in the person of all the disciples recalled this and said, even though we once regarded, i.e., if we have clung to Christ at one time, namely, when he was present with us in his bodily presence, according to the flesh, i.e., with carnal love, we regard him thus no longer, i.e., that affection ceased in us by the Holy Spirit, who has been given to us. Consequenter cum dicit si qua igitur in Christo, etc., ex praemissis concludit quemdam effectum esse consecutum, scilicet novitatis in mundo. Et ideo dicit si qua igitur, id est si aliqua, in Christo, id est in fide Christi, vel per Christum, nova creatura est facta. Gal. V, 6: in Christo Iesu neque praeputium, neque circumcisio, et cetera. Ubi notandum quod innovatio per gratiam dicitur creatura. Creatio enim est motus ex nihilo ad esse. Est autem duplex esse, scilicet esse naturae et esse gratiae. Prima creatio facta fuit quando creaturae ex nihilo productae sunt a Deo in esse naturae, et tunc creatura erat nova, sed tamen per peccatum inveterata est. Thren. III, 4: vetustam fecit pellem meam, et cetera. Oportuit ergo esse novam creationem, per quam producerentur in esse gratiae, quae quidem creatio est ex nihilo, quia qui gratia carent, nihil sunt. I Cor. XIII, v. 2: si noverim mysteria omnia, etc., charitatem autem non habeam, et cetera. Iob XVIII, v. 15: habitent in tabernaculo illius socii eius, qui non est, id est peccati. Augustinus dicit: peccatum enim nihil est, et nihili fiunt homines cum peccant. Et sic patet, quod infusio gratiae est quaedam creatio. 192. – Then when he says, Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he concludes from the foregoing that a certain effect follows, namely, newness in the world. Hence he says, if anyone is in Christ, i.e., in the faith of Christ, or through Christ, he is a new creation [creature]: “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love” (Gal. 5:6). Here it should be noted that renewal by grace is called a creature. For creation is a change from nothing to existence. But there are two kinds of existence, namely, of nature and of grace. The first creation was made when creatures were produced by God from nothing to exist in nature; and then the creature was new, but became old by sin: “He has made my flesh and my skin waste away” (Lam. 3:4). Therefore, a new creation was required by which we would be produced to exist in grace. This, too, is a creation from nothing because those who lack grace are nothing: “And if I understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing” (1 Cor. 13:2); “In his tent,” i.e., of sin, “dwells that which is none of his” (Job 18:15). Augustine says: “For sin is nothing, and men become nothing, when they sin.” So it is clear that the infusion of grace is a creation. Si ergo aliqua creatura facta est nova per ipsum, vetera transierunt ei. Hoc quidem sumptum est Lev. XXVI, 10, ubi dicitur: novis supervenientibus vetera proiicietis. Ex quo sic argumentatur: si omnia nova facta sunt et secundum legem novis supervenientibus vetera sunt proiicienda, ergo si qua creatura est, vetera transierunt ei, id est transire debent ab eo. Vetera autem quae transire debent sunt legalia. Rom. VII, 6: serviamus in novitate spiritus, et non in vetustate litterae. Item errores gentilium. Is. c. XXVI, 3: vetus error abiit. Item corruptiones peccati. Rom. VI, 6: vetus homo noster, et cetera. Quibus quidem in nobis transeuntibus, virtutes contrariae his vitiis debent in nobis innovari. Apoc. XXI, 5: et dixit qui sedebat in throno: ecce nova facio omnia. 193. – If then any creature is made new through him, the old has passed away, behold, the new has come. This of course was taken from Leviticus (26:10), where it says: “And you shall clear out the old to make way for the new.” From this he argues thus: if all things have been made new, and according to the Law when new things come, the old things shall be cast away, then if there be any new creature, the old has passed away, i.e., they should pass away from it. But the old things that should pass away are the legal observances: “So that we serve not under the old written code but in the new life of the Spirit” (Rom. 7:6), and in the errors of the Gentiles: “The old error is gone” (Is. 26:3, Vulgate); likewise the corruption of sin: “We know that our old self was crucified with him so that the sinful body might be destroyed, and we might no longer be enslaved to sin” (Rom. 6:6). When such things pass from us, the virtues contrary to these vices should be renewed: “And he who sat upon the throne said, ‘Behold, I make all things new’” (Rev. 21:5).
5-5
2 Cor. 5:18-21Postquam apostolus in superioribus tractavit de praemio sanctorum et de praeparatione ad susceptionem eius, hic consequenter agit de causa utriusque. Et circa hoc tria facit, quia primo, ostendit auctorem omnium praedictorum esse Deum; secundo, commemorat beneficium a Christo collatum, ibi qui reconciliavit, etc.; tertio, beneficii usum, ibi pro Christo ergo legatione, et cetera. 194. – After discussing the saints’ reward and how they prepared themselves to receive it, the Apostle now treats of the cause of both and does three things. First, he shows that the Author of all these things is God; secondly, he recalls the benefit conferred by Christ (v. 18b); thirdly, the use of the benefit (v. 20) Dicit ergo: dixi quod intendimus salutem proximorum, et vetera transierunt, sed haec omnia sunt nobis ex Deo patre, vel ex Deo auctore. Rom. XI, 36: ex ipso, et in ipso, et per ipsum sunt omnia. Iac. I, v. 17: omne datum optimum, et cetera. 195. – He says therefore: I have said that we intend the salvation of our neighbor and that the old things have passed away; but all this is from God the Father, or from God as author: “For from him and through him and to him are all things” (Rom. 11:36); “Every good endowment and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights” (Jas. 1:17). Sequitur beneficium susceptum a Deo, ibi qui reconciliavit, etc., ubi primo, ponit ipsum beneficium collatum; secundo exponit, ibi quoniam quidem Deus, et cetera. 196. – Then he mentions the benefits received from God (v. 18): first, he mentions the benefit received; secondly, he explains it (v. 19). Commemorat autem duplex beneficium per Christum collatum: unum commune, aliud speciale. Commune quidem toti mundo, scilicet reconciliationis ad Deum, et hoc est quod dicit: qui, scilicet Deus pater, reconciliavit, id est pacificavit, nos sibi, et hoc per Christum, id est per incarnatum verbum. Homines enim erant inimici Dei propter peccatum, Christus autem hanc inimicitiam abstulit de medio, satisfaciens pro peccato. Et fecit concordiam. Col. I, 20: pacificans per sanguinem crucis eius, sive quae in terris, sive quae in caelis, et cetera. Et ideo dicit per Christum. Rom. V, 10: reconciliati sumus Deo per mortem, et cetera. Speciale autem beneficium est apostolis collatum, scilicet quod ipsi sint ministri huius reconciliationis. Unde dicit et dedit nobis, apostolis, vicariis Christi, ministerium huius reconciliationis. Supra III, 6: ministros nos elegit, et cetera. Ps. LXXI, 3: suscipiant montes, id est apostoli, pacem populo, scilicet a domino. 197. – He recalls two benefits conferred by Christ: one is common and the other is special. Common to the whole world was reconciliation to God. And this is what he says, all this is from God, namely, God the Father, who reconciled us to God, i.e., made peace between us and God. And this is by Christ, i.e., by the Incarnate Word. For men were enemies of God because of sin, but Christ removed this enmity from their midst, satisfying for sin and producing harmony: “Whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross” (Col. 1:20). Therefore he says, through Christ: “We were reconciled to God by the death of his Son” (Rom. 5:10). But a special gift was conferred on the apostles, namely, that they are ministers of this reconciliation. Hence he says, and gave us, the apostles and vicars of Christ, the ministry of reconciliation: “Who has made us competent to be ministers of a new covenant” (2 Cor. 3:6); “Let the mountains,” i.e., the apostles, “bear prosperity for the people” (Ps. 72:3), namely, from the Lord. Consequenter cum dicit quoniam, etc., exponit quae dixit: primo, primum; secundo, secundum, ibi posuit in nobis, et cetera. Dicit ergo. Dico quod Deus reconciliavit nos sibi, hoc modo: inimicitiae enim inter Deum et hominem erant propter peccatum, ut dictum est, secundum illud Is. LIX, 2: peccata vestra diviserunt, et cetera. Destructo ergo peccato per mortem Christi, inimicitiae iam solutae sunt. Et hoc est quod dicit quoniam quidem Deus erat in Christo, per unitatem essentiae, Io. XIV, 10, 11: ego in patre, et pater in me est. Vel Deus erat in Christo per Christum mundum sibi reconcilians, Rom. c. V, 10: reconciliati sumus Deo, et cetera. Et hoc non reputans illis delicta ipsorum, id est non habens in memoria illorum delicta, tam actualia quam originalia, ad puniendum, pro quibus Christus plene satisfecit. Et secundum hoc dicitur nos reconciliasse sibi, inquantum non imputat delicta nostra nobis. Ps. XXXI, v. 2: beatus vir cui non imputavit dominus peccatum. Consequenter cum dicit et posuit in nobis, etc., exponit secundum, scilicet de beneficio apostolis collato. Quasi dicat: hoc modo dedit nobis ministerium reconciliationis, quia posuit in nobis verbum reconciliationis, id est dedit virtutem et inspiravit in cordibus nostris, ut annuntiemus mundo hanc reconciliationem esse factam per Christum. Et hoc faciendo inducimus homines, ut conforment se Christo per Baptismum. Ier. I, 9: ecce dedi verba mea, et cetera. 198. – Then when he says, that is, he explains what he has said. First, the first thing; secondly, the second (v. 19b). He says therefore: I say that God reconciled us to himself in this way. For there were enmities between God and man on account of sin, as has been said: “But your iniquities have made a separation between you and your God” (Is. 59:2). Therefore, sin being destroyed by the death of Christ, the enmities were dissolved. And this is what he says: That is, in Christ God by oneness of essence: “I am in the Father and the Father in me” (Jn. 14:11). Or in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself through Christ: “We were reconciled to God by the death of his Son” (Rom. 5:10). This he did, not counting their trespasses against them, i.e., not retaining in his memory their sins, actual or original, to punish them, for which Christ fully satisfies., According to this he is said to have reconciled us to himself, inasmuch as he does not impute our sins to us: “Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputes no iniquity (Ps. 32:2). Then when he says, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation, he explains the second thing, namely, the benefit conferred on the apostles. As if to say: he has given us the mystery of reconciliation in this way, namely, that he has entrusted to us the message of reconciliation, i.e., he has given the power and has inspired in our hearts to announce to the world that this reconciliation was made by Christ. By doing this we induce men to conform themselves to Christ by baptism: “Behold, I have put my words in your mouth” (Jer. 1:9). Consequenter cum dicit pro Christo ergo legatione, etc., ostendit usum beneficii. Et primo quantum ad secundum beneficium collatum apostolis; secundo, quantum ad primum collatum omnibus, ibi obsecramus pro Christo, et cetera. Dicit ergo: ex quo Deus posuit verbum reconciliationis, debemus eo uti. Et hoc est ergo quod fungimur legatione pro Christo, id est sumus legati Christi. Eph. VI, 20: pro quo legatione fungimur in catena ista, et cetera. Et idoneitas ad hanc legationem est nobis ex virtute Dei, quae est in me. Et ideo dicit tamquam Deo exhortante per nos, quia Deus, qui in nobis loquitur, dat nobis idoneitatem ad hanc legationem. Matth. X, 20: non vos estis qui loquimini, et cetera. Infra XIII, v. 3: an experimentum quaeritis eius, qui in me, et cetera. 199. – Then when he says, So we are ambassadors for Christ, he indicates the use of the benefit. First, as to the second benefit conferred on the apostles; secondly, as to the first benefit conferred on all (v. 20b). He says therefore: since God has established the word of reconciliation, we ought to use it. This is why we are ambassadors for Christ: “For which I am an ambassador in chains; that I may declare it boldly, as I ought to speak” (Eph. 6:20). Our fitness for this ambassadorship is from God’s power, which is in me. Hence he says, God making his appeal through us, because God, who speaks in us, makes us fit for this ambassadorship: “For it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you” (Matt. 10:20); “Since you desire proof that Christ is speaking in me” (2 Cor. 13:3). Consequenter cum dicit obsecramus, etc., subdit quantum ad usum primi beneficii. Et primo inducit ad usum; secundo ostendit unde adsit nobis facultas ad ipsum usum, ibi eum qui non, et cetera. Dicit ergo: ex quo Deus fecit reconciliationem, et nos sumus legati Dei in hoc, obsecramus, et cetera. Blande alloquitur, cum posset imperare. II Tim. ult.: argue, obsecra, increpa, et cetera. Ad Philem. 8: potestatem habens imperandi, et cetera. Obsecramus, inquam, pro Christo, id est propter amorem Christi, reconciliamini Deo. Videtur autem hoc esse contrarium ei quod dicit, quod Deus reconciliavit nos sibi. Si ergo ipse reconciliavit, quid necesse est ut nos reconciliemur? Iam enim reconciliati sumus. Ad hoc dicendum quod Deus reconciliavit nos sibi, ut causa efficiens, scilicet ex parte sua, sed, ut sit nobis meritoria, oportet etiam quod fiat reconciliatio ex parte nostra. Et hoc quidem in Baptismo et in poenitentia, et tunc cessamus a peccatis. 200. – The when he says, we beseech you, he describes the use of the first benefit. First, he exhorts to its use; secondly, he shows the source of his power to reconcile to God (v. 21). He says therefore: inasmuch as God has produced a reconciliation and we are ambassadors of God in this, we beseech you on behalf of Christ. He speaks gently, even though he could have commanded: “Convince, rebuke, and exhort, be unfailing in patience and in teaching” (2 Tim. 4:2); “Accordingly, though I am bold enough in Christ to command you to do what is required, yet for love’s sake I prefer to appeal to you” (Phm. 1:8-9). We beseech you, I say, on behalf of Christ, i.e., for the love of Christ, to be reconciled to God. But this seems contrary to his statement that God has reconciled us to himself. Therefore, if he reconciled us, what need is there to be reconciled? For we are already reconciled. I answer that God reconciled us to himself as efficient cause, namely, on his part, but in order that it be meritorious for us, it is necessary that reconciliation be made on our part, namely, in baptism and in penance. And then we cease from sins. Unde autem adsit nobis huiusmodi facultas reconciliandi Deo, ostendit ex hoc scilicet quod dedit nobis potestatem iuste vivendi, qua possumus abstinere a peccatis, et, hoc faciendo, reconciliamur Deo. Et ideo dicit eum qui non, et cetera. Quasi dicat: bene potestis reconciliari, quia Deus, scilicet pater, eum, scilicet Christum, qui non noverat peccatum, I Petr. II, 22: qui peccatum non fecit, etc.; Io. VIII, 46: quis ex vobis arguet me, etc., pro nobis fecit peccatum. Quod tripliciter exponitur. Uno modo, quia consuetudo veteris legis est ut sacrificium pro peccato, peccatum nominetur. Os. c. IV, 8: peccata populi mei comedent, id est oblata pro peccato. Tunc est sensus fecit peccatum, id est hostiam, vel sacrificium pro peccato. Alio modo, quia peccatum aliquando sumitur pro similitudine peccati, vel pro poena peccati. Rom. VIII, 3: misit Deus filium suum in similitudinem peccati, etc., id est de similitudine peccati damnavit peccatum. Et tunc est sensus fecit peccatum, id est fecit eum assumere carnem mortalem et passibilem. Tertio modo, quia aliquando dicitur hoc esse hoc vel illud, non quia sit, sed quia opinantur homines ita esse. Et tunc est sensus fecit peccatum, id est fecit eum reputari peccatorem. Is. LIII, 12: cum iniquis reputatus est. 201. – Where we get the faculty to reconcile to God is indicated by the fact that he gave us the power to live justly and abstain from sins. By doing this we are reconciled to God. Hence he says, for our sake, he made him to be sin who knew no sin. As if to say: you can be reconciled to God, because he, namely, Christ, who knew no sin: “He committed no sin; no guile was found on his lips” (1 Pet. 2:22); “Which of you convicts me of sin?” (Jn. 8:46). For our sake, he made him to be sin. This can be explained in three ways. In one way because it was the custom of the Old Law to call a sacrifice for sin “sin”: “They feed on the sin of my people” (Hos. 4:8), i.e., the offerings for sin. Then the sense is: he made him to be sin, i.e., the victim of sacrifice for sin. In another way, because sin is sometimes taken for the likeness of sin, or the punishment of sin: “God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh” (Rom. 8:3). Then the sense is: he made him to be sin, i.e., made him assume mortal and suffering flesh. In a third way, because one thing is said to be this or that, not because it is so, but because man considers it such. Then the sense is: he made him to be sin, i.e., made him regarded a sinner: “He was numbered with the transgressors” (Is. 53:12). Et hoc quidem fecit, ut nos efficeremur iustitia, id est ut nos, qui peccatores sumus, efficeremur non solum iusti, imo ipsa iustitia, id est iustificaremur a Deo; vel iustitia, quia non solum nos iustificavit, sed etiam voluit quod per nos alii iustificarentur. Iustitia, dico, Dei, non nostra. Et in Christo, id est per Christum. Vel, aliter, ut ipse Christus dicatur iustitia. Et tunc est sensus ut nos efficeremur iustitia, id est ut inhaereremus Christo per amorem et fidem, quia Christus est ipsa iustitia. Dicit autem, Dei, ut excludat iustitiam hominis, quae est qua homo confidit de propriis meritis. Rom. X, 3: ignorantes Dei iustitiam, etc. in ipso, scilicet Christo, id est per Christum, quia ipse factus est nobis iustitia, I Cor. I, 30. 202. – He did this, so that in him we might become the righteousness [justice] of God, i.e., justified by God. Or justice, because he not only justified us, but also willed that others be justified by us. The justice, I say, of God, not ours. And in Christ, i.e., through Christ. Or another way, that Christ himself be called justice. Then the sense is this: that we might become the righteousness [justice], i.e., cling to Christ by love and faith, because Christ is justice itself. But he says, of God, to exclude man’s justice, by which a man trusts in his own merits: “For, being ignorant of the righteousness that comes from God, and seeking to establish their own, they did not submit to God’s righteousness” (Rom. 10:3). In him, namely, in Christ, i.e., by Christ, because he was made justice for us (1 Cor. 1:30).
6-1
2 Cor. 6:1-5Supra apostolus commendavit ministerium apostolatus, hic consequenter ipsum ministerium, sibi commissum ad utilitatem subditorum, exequitur. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo hortatur eos in generali ad omnia, quae communiter sunt necessaria ad bonam vitam; secundo hortatur eos de quodam speciali suffragio fiendo sanctis in Ierusalem, et hoc VIII cap., ibi notum autem vobis facimus, fratres, et cetera. Circa primum autem duo facit. Primo hortatur eos ad bona praesentia; secundo commendat eos de bonis in praeterito factis, et hoc VII cap., ibi has igitur habentes promissiones, et cetera. Circa primum tria facit. Primo hortatur in generali, quod gratia Dei non utantur in vanum; secundo ostendit gratiam Dei eis esse collatam, ibi ait enim: tempore accepto, etc.; tertio docet eos in speciali modum utendi dicta gratia, ibi nemini dantes ullam offensionem, et cetera. 203. – Having commended the ministry of the apostleship, the Apostle now carries out the ministry entrusted to him for the benefit of his subjects. In regard to this he does two things. First, he exhorts them in general to do all the things that are commonly necessary for a good life; secondly, he urges them in particular to help the saints in Jerusalem (chap. 8). In regard to the first he does two things. First, he urges them to goods that are present; secondly, he commends them for the good they have done in the past (chap. 7). In regard to the first he does three things. First, he admonishes them in general that the grace of God should not be used in vain; secondly, he shows that the grace of God has been conferred on them (v. 2); thirdly, he teaches them in particular how to use the grace mentioned (v. 3). Dicit ergo primo: ex quo facultas adest nobis ad bene operandum, et haec est gratia Dei, nos autem ad hoc pro Christo legatione fungimur; ideo, adiuvantes, nos, scilicet praedicationibus, exemplis et exhortationibus. Prov. XVIII, 19: frater qui adiuvatur a fratre, et cetera. Vel, adiuvantes, scilicet Deum. I Cor. III, 9: adiutores Dei sumus. Sed contra Is. XL, 13: quis adiuvit spiritum domini, et cetera. Non ergo bene dicitur, adiuvantes Deum. Responsio: quod iuvare Deum potest intelligi, vel ei vires ministrare ad aliquid agendum, et sic nullus iuvat Deum, nec iuvare potest; vel eius mandatum exequi, et sic sancti homines Deum iuvare dicuntur, exequendo eius mandata. Nos, inquam, sic iuvantes, hortamur vos, Rom. XII, 8: qui exhortatur, et cetera. Hoc scilicet exhortamur, ne in vacuum gratiam Dei recipiatis, quasi dicat: ne receptio gratiae sit vobis inutilis et vacua, quod tunc contingit, quando ex perceptione gratiae quis non sentit fructum. Qui quidem duplex est, scilicet remissio peccatorum. Is. XXVII, 9: hic est omnis fructus, et cetera. Et ut homo iuste vivendo perveniat ad gloriam caelestem. Rom. c. VI, 21: habetis fructum vestrum. Quicumque ergo gratia percepta non utitur ad vitandum peccata, et consequendum vitam aeternam, hic gratiam Dei in vanum recipit. Phil. II, 16: non in vacuum cucurri, et cetera. 204. – He says therefore: from the fact that we have the faculty to do good, and this by the grace of God, and we are ambassadors of Christ for this purpose, therefore, working together [helping] by preaching, by examples and by exhortations: “A brother helped is like a strong city” (Prov. 18:19); or helping, namely, God: “We are God’s helpers” (1 Cor. 3:9). But this seems contrary to Isaiah (40:9): “Who has directed the Spirit of the Lord?” (Is. 40:13). Therefore it is not correct to say, helping God. I answer that to help God can be taken to mean that a person gives God the power to do something. In this sense, no one helps God or can help him; or to mean that a person carries out his commandment. Then holy men are said to help God by carrying out his commands. We, I say, so helping do entreat [exhort] you: “He that exhorts, in his exhortation” (Rom. 12:8), not to accept the grace of God in vain. As if to say: let not the reception of grace be useless and vain for you, which it is when a person does not perceive the fruit of the grace he received. This fruit is twofold: the remission of sins: “And this will be the full fruit of the removal of his sin” (Is. 27:9); and that a man by living righteously attain to heavenly glory: “The return [fruit] you get is sanctification” (Rom. 6:22). Therefore, whoever does not use the grace he has received for avoiding sin and obtaining eternal life, receives the grace of God in vain: “I did not run in vain or labor in vain” (Phil. 2:16). Et ne aliquis dubitaret de perceptione huius gratiae a Deo, ideo consequenter apostolus probat eos iam recepisse gratiam hanc, vel paratam habere ad recipiendum, dicens ait enim: tempore, et cetera. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo inducit auctoritatem prophetae; secundo inductam adaptat ad propositum, ibi ecce nunc tempus, et cetera. 205. – But lest anyone doubt that he has received this grace from God, the Apostle proves that they have already received or are prepared to receive it, saying: For he says, “At the acceptable time I have listened to you. In regard to this he does two things. First, he quotes the Prophet; secondly, he adapts the quotation to his thesis (v. 2b). Dicit ergo primo: dico quod paretis vos ad fructuose percipiendum gratiam, quae vobis est collata, vel parata. Ait enim, dominus per Isaiam XLIX, 8: tempore accepto, et cetera. Circa quod sciendum est quod dominus dicitur facere nobis gratiam, vel exaudiendo nos in petitionibus nostris, vel iuvando in operationibus nostris; sed exaudit, ut percipiamus quod petimus. Iac. I, 5: si quis indiget sapientia, postulet, et cetera. Adiuvat, ut perficiamus quod operamur. Ps. XCIII, 17: nisi quia dominus adiuvit me, et cetera. Et haec duplex est gratia, praeveniens scilicet et cooperans, vel subsequens, quae quidem necessaria est nobis ad obtinendum. Et primo gratiam praevenientem quam optare debemus, ut simus accepti a Deo. Ps. XXXI, 6: pro hac orabit ad te omnis sanctus. Et quantum ad hoc dicit in tempore accepto, id est acceptionis et gratificationis; hoc enim tempore accepto fit, quod gratis fit. Rom. IV, 6: beatitudinem hominis cui Deus accepto fert iustitiam, et cetera. Exaudivi te, id est acceptavi te. Vel tempore accepto, id est in tempore gratiae. Et hoc modo gratia praeveniens dicitur illa, per quam liberamur a peccatis. Gratia vero subsequens dicitur per quam virtutes nobis ex perseverantia in bono conferuntur. Secundo necessaria est nobis gratia cooperans; et hanc petebat Ps. XXII, 6: et misericordia eius subsequatur me, et cetera. Et quantum ad hoc dicit in die salutis adiuvi te. Tempus enim ante Christum non fuit dies, sed nox. Rom. XIII, 12: nox praecessit, et cetera. Sed tempus Christi dicitur dies, et non solum dies, sed dies salutis. Ante enim non erat salus, quia nullus ad finem salutis perveniebat, scilicet ad visionem Dei, sed modo, quando iam nata est salus in mundo, homines salutem sequuntur. Matth. I, 21: vocabis nomen eius Iesum. Ipse enim salvum faciet populum, et cetera. I Petr. IV: operamini vestram salutem. Et hoc fit auxilio gratiae cooperantis, qua per nostra opera pervenimus ad vitam aeternam. Phil. II, 13: Deus est qui operatur, et cetera. 206. – He says therefore: I say that you should be prepared to receive this grace fruitfully, which has been conferred on you or prepared for you, for the Lord says as much in Is. (44:8): “In a time of favor I have answered you.” In regard to this it should be noted that the Lord is said to make grace for us either by hearing us in our petitions or by helping us in our actions. But he hears that we might receive what we ask: “If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask God, who gives to all men generously and without reproaching, and it will be given him” (Jas. 1:5); “If the LORD had not been my help, my soul would soon have dwelt in the land of silence” (Ps. 94:17). This grace is of two kinds: prevenient and cooperating, i.e., subsequent, which it is necessary for us to obtain. First of all, prevenient grace, which we ought to desire in order to be accepted by God: “Therefore let every one who is godly offer prayer to you” (Ps. 32:6). As to this he says, At an acceptable time, i.e., for accepting and being put in the state of grace, for in that acceptable time that is done which is done gratuitously: “So also David pronounces a blessing upon the man to whom God reckons righteousness apart from works” (Rom. 4:6). I have listened to you, i.e., accepted you. Or at an acceptable time, i.e., in the time of grace; and in this way prevenient grace is the name given to the grace by which we are freed from sin, and subsequent grace that by which we the virtues and perseverance in good are conferred on us. Secondly, we need cooperating grace, such as David requested in Ps. 23 (v. 6): “Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life.” As to this he says, and helped you on the day of salvation, for the time before Christ was not day but night: “The night is far gone, the day is at hand” (Rom 13:12). But the time of Christ is called the day, and not only the day, but the day of salvation. For before there was not salvation, because no one reached the end of salvation, namely, the vision of God. But now, when salvation has been born in the world, men attain to salvation: “And you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins” (Matt. 1:21); “Work out your salvation” (Phil. 2:12). And this is done by the help of cooperating grace, by which we arrive at eternal life through our works: “For God is at work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure” (Phil. 2:13). Consequenter auctoritatem inductam adaptat ad propositum, dicens ecce nunc, etc., quasi dicat: haec quae dixit dominus de tempore gratiae per prophetam, implentur modo, quia ecce nunc tempus acceptabile, id est gratificationis, per quam exaudimur a Deo, quia iam venit plenitudo temporis, scilicet incarnationis Christi, Gal. c. IV, 4. Et hoc quantum ad primam partem auctoritatis Ps. LXVIII, 14: tempus beneplaciti Deus. Ecce nunc dies salutis, in quo scilicet, adiuti gratia cooperante, possumus operari ad consequendum salutem aeternam. Io. IX, 4: me oportet operari, et cetera. Gal. VI, v. 10: dum tempus habemus, et cetera. 207. – Then he adapts this text to his purpose, saying, Behold, now is the acceptable time. As if to say: the things which the Lord says by the prophet about the time of grace are now being fulfilled, because behold, now is the acceptable time, i.e., for being adorned with grace, through which we are heard by God, because the fulness of time has already come, namely, of the Incarnation of Christ (Gal. 4:4); and this as to the first part of the quotation: “At an acceptable time, O God” (Ps. 69:13). Behold, now is the day of salvation, in which, helped by cooperating grace, we can work for the attainment of eternal salvation: “We must work the works of him who sent me” (Jn. 9:4); “As we have the opportunity, let us do good to all men” (Gal. 6:10). Consequenter cum dicit nemini dantes, etc., docet modum utendi gratia eis collata. Et primo in generali, qualiter scilicet in vacuum non recipiatur; secundo in speciali, ibi in multa patientia, et cetera. 208. – Then when he says, we put no obstacle, he teaches them the way to use grace conferred on them; first, in general, namely, that they not receive it in vain; secondly, in particular (v. 4b). Dicit ergo: sic utendum est gratia, ut dantes nemini ullam offensionem. Nam gratia ad duo datur, scilicet ad vitandum mala, et ad operandum bona. Et ideo duo docet, ut scilicet vitemus mala, et quantum ad hoc dicit nemini dantes, et cetera. Quod potest dupliciter exponi. Uno modo, ut referatur ad apostolos, quasi dicat: nos adiuvantes vos exhortamur; nos, dico, nemini ullam dantes offensionem, quia si per malam vitam aliquos offenderemus, vituperaretur ministerium nostrum, et contemneretur praedicatio nostra. Rom. II, 24: nomen Dei per vos blasphematur. Gregorius: cuius vita despicitur, restat ut eius praedicatio contemnatur. Unde publicus et famosus peccator cavere debet sibi ne praedicet, alias peccat. Ps. XLIX, 16: peccatori autem dixit Deus, et cetera. Alio modo, ut referatur ad subditos, quasi dicat hortamur vos ne in vacuum, etc.; vos, dico, nemini dantes ullam, etc.; id est, non facientes aliquid unde alii scandalizentur. I Cor. X, 32: sine offensione estote, et cetera. Rom. XIV, 13: non ponatis offendiculum, et cetera. Et ratio huius est ut non vituperetur, et cetera. Id est ita irreprehensibiliter vos habeatis, ut ministerium nostrum, id est apostolatus noster, non vituperetur. Quando enim subditi male se habent, vituperium est praelatis. I Petr. II, 12: conversationem vestram inter gentes, et cetera. Vel ut non vituperetur commune ministerium, quo ad vos et nos, qui sumus ministri Dei. Nos, dico, sumus ministri Dei ad exequendum voluntatem eius in nobis, et in aliis. Sed vos ad exequendum voluntatem eius in vobis tantum. Is. LXI, 6: vos sacerdotes domini vocabimini, et cetera. 209. – He says therefore: use grace in such a way as putting no obstacle in any one’s way. For grace is given for two things: to avoid evil and to do good. Therefore, he teaches these two things, namely, that we avoid evil, in regard to which he says, putting no obstacle in any one’s way. This can be explained in two ways: in one way as referring to the apostles. As if to say: we, helping you, do exhort you. We, I say, giving no offense to any one, because if we were to offend others by a wicked life, our ministry would be blamed and our preaching ridiculed: “The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you” (Rom. 2:24); “If one’s life is despised, it follows that his preaching is scorned” (Gregory). Hence, a public and notorious sinner should beware of preaching; otherwise, he would commit sin: “But to the wicked God says: ‘What right have you to recite my statutes, or take my covenant on your lips?’” (Ps. 50:17). In another way as referring to his subjects. As if to say: we exhort you, that you not receive the grace of God in vain; you, I say, putting no obstacle in any one’s way, i.e., not doing anything that would scandalize others: “Give no offense to Jews or to Greeks or to the church of God” (1 Cor. 10:32); “Decide never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of a brother” (Rom. 14:13). The reason for this is so that no fault may be found with our ministry, i.e., our apostleship. For when subjects behave badly, the blame is put on the prelates: “Maintain good conduct among the Gentiles” (1 Pet. 2:12). Or that the common ministry in regard to you and us, who are ministers of God, not be blamed. We, I say, are ministers of God to fulfil his will in you and in others, but you to fulfil it well in yourselves only: “You shall be called the priests of the LORD, men shall speak of you as the ministers of our God” (Is. 61:6). Consequenter cum dicit sed in omnibus exhibeamus, etc., docet eos modum utendi percepta gratia quantum ad bona operanda. Dicit ergo: nemini demus ullam offensionem, sed exhibeamus nos, et vos, opere et sermone, in omnibus quae ad virtutes pertinent, tales, quales debent esse ministri Dei, ut scilicet conformemur nos Deo faciendo eius voluntatem. Eccli. X, 2: secundum iudicem populi, sic et ministri eius. I Cor. IV, v. 1: sic nos existimet homo, ut ministros, et cetera. 210. – Then when he says, but as servants of God we commend ourselves in every way, he teaches them how to use the grace they received for doing good. He says therefore: let us give no offense to anyone, but we commend ourselves, both you and we, in work and word and in all things which pertain to the virtues, such ministers of God as we ought to be, i.e., let us conform ourselves to God by doing his will: “Like the magistrate of the people, so are his officials” (Sir. 10:2); “This is how one should regard us, as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God” (1 Cor. 4:1). Consequenter cum dicit in multa patientia, etc., ostendit in speciali quomodo nos debemus exhibere sicut Dei ministros in usu gratiae collatae. Et hoc quantum ad tria. Primo, quantum ad exteriorem operationem; secundo quantum ad maiorem devotionem, ibi os nostrum patet, etc.; tertio quantum ad infidelium vitationem, ibi nolite iugum ducere, et cetera. Circa primum tria facit, secundum tria in quibus consistit operatio exterior. Primo enim consistit in sufferentia malorum; et quantum ad hoc dicit in multa patientia, et cetera. Secundo in operatione bonorum, et quantum ad hoc dicit in castitate, et cetera. Tertio in mutua cooperatione bonorum ad mala, et quantum ad hoc dicit per arma iustitiae, et cetera. 211. – Then when he says, through great endurance, he shows in particular how we should exhibit ourselves as ministers of God in using the grace conferred on us. And this as to three things: first, as to outward actions, secondly, as to greater devotion (v. 11); thirdly, as to avoiding unbelievers (v. 14). In regard to the first he does three things in keeping with the three things in which external activity consists: first, it consists in enduring evil, and concerning this he says, through great endurance; secondly, in doing good (v. 6); thirdly, in mutual cooperation of good with bad (v. 7b). Est ergo necessaria in malis sustinendis virtus patientiae. Unde dicit in multa patientia, et cetera. Ubi tria facit. Primo inducit ad patientiam. Et hoc quia in Ps. XCI, 15 s. legitur: bene patientes erunt, ut annuntient. Et quantum ad hoc dicit in multa patientia. Prov. XIX, 11: doctrina viri per patientiam noscitur. Lc. XXI, 19: in patientia vestra possidebitis animas vestras. Dicit in multa, id est propter multas tribulationes quae occurrunt. 212. – To endure evils the virtue of patience is necessary; hence, he says, through great endurance [in much patience]. In regard to this he does three things. First, he exhorts them to patience, because it says in Ps. 91 (v. 15): “They will be well off that they may proclaim” (Ps. 92:14-15, Vulgate); “By your endurance [patience] you will gain your lives” (Lk. 21:19). He says, in much, on account of the many tribulations they meet. Secundo ostendit materiam patientiae in generali, et hoc dupliciter, scilicet in superventione malorum; unde dicit in tribulationibus, Rom. XII, 12: in tribulatione patientes; Act. XIV, 12: per multas tribulationes, et cetera. Et in defectu necessariorum; unde dicit in necessitatibus, scilicet eorum quae sunt necessaria ad vitam. Ps. XXIV, 17: de necessitatibus, et cetera. 213. – Secondly, he shows the matter patience deals with in general, and this in two ways, namely in evils that come upon them, in regard to which he says, in afflictions [tribulations]: “Patient in tribulation” (Rom. 12:12); “By many tribulations we must enter the kingdom of God” (Ac. 11:21); and in the lack of necessities; hence, he says, in hardships [necessities], namely, of things necessary for life: “Bring me out of my distresses” (Ps. 25:17). Tertio ostendit materiam patientiae in speciali. Et primo in his, quae pertinent ad tribulationes, quae sunt voluntariae, et hoc quantum ad tribulationes, quae pertinent ad animam, et sic dicit in angustiis, scilicet cordis, quando scilicet sic arctatur adversis, ut non pateat via evadendi. Hebr. c. XI, 37: angustiati, afflicti, et cetera. Item inquantum ad tribulationes, quae sunt in corpore, et sic dicit in plagis, scilicet illatis ab aliis, et carceribus, Act. XVI, 23: cum multas plagas ei intulissent, et cetera. Infra XI, 23: in carceribus abundantius, in plagis supra modum, et cetera. In seditionibus, scilicet totius populi commoti. Act. XIX, 40: periclitamur argui seditionis hodiernae, et cetera. Secundo in his, quae pertinent ad necessitates. Necessitas autem aliquando est voluntaria. Et sic dicit in laboribus, propria manu operando apud Corinthios, quia avari erant, ne eos gravaret sumptibus; et apud Thessalonicenses, quia erant otiosi, ut daret exemplum exercitii. Act. XI: ad ea quae mihi opus erant, et cetera. In vigiliis, propter praedicationes. Infra XI, 27: in vigiliis. In ieiuniis, aliquando voluntariis aliquando involuntariis propter penuriam. I Cor. IX, 27: castigo corpus meum, et cetera. 214. – Thirdly, he shows in particular the material with which patience is concerned. First, with things that pertain to tribulations which are voluntary, and this as to the soul. Hence, he says, in calamities [distresses], namely of the heart, when we are so beset with tribulations that there is no way of escape: “Destitute, afflicted, ill-treated” (Heb. 11:37), and then as to the body; hence, he says, in beatings, namely, inflicted by others, and in prisons: “And when they had inflicted many blows upon them, they threw them into prison” (Ac. 16:23); “Far more imprisonments, with countless beatings” (2 Cor. 11:23). In tumults, namely, of an entire people in an uproar: “For we are in danger of being charged with rioting today, there being no cause that we can give to justify this commotion” (Ac. 19:40). Secondly, in things that pertain to necessities. But necessity is sometimes voluntary, and so he says, in labours, by working with his own hands among the Corinthians, so as not to burden them with his support, because they were avaricious; and among the Thessalonians, to give them an example of work because they were idle: “You yourselves know that these hands ministered to my necessities, and to those who were with me” (Ac. 20:34). In watchings, for the sake of preaching: “Through many a sleepless night” (2 Cor. 11:27). In hunger [fasting], sometimes voluntary and sometimes involuntary because of need: “I pommel my body and subdue it” (1 Cor. 9:27) Sed contra est quod dicitur Matth. c. XI, 30: iugum meum suave est. Hic vero dicitur in tribulationibus multis, et cetera. Non ergo suave, sed gravissimum. Respondeo. Haec sunt in seipsis aspera, sed propter amorem et interiorem fervorem spiritus dulcorantur. Unde Augustinus: omnia grandia et immania, facilia et prope nulla facit amor. 215. – But this seems to be contrary to what is said in Matt. (11:30): “My yoke is easy and my burden is light,” whereas he says here, in much tribulation. Therefore, it is not sweet but very distasteful. I answer that these are hard in themselves, but they are made sweet by love and an inward fervor of spirit. Hence, Augustine says: “All huge and difficult tasks love makes easy and almost nothing.”
6-2
2 Cor. 6:6-10Positis his quae pertinent ad tolerantiam malorum, ponit consequenter ea quae pertinent ad observantiam bonorum. Bonitas autem operis consistit in tribus: in perfectione virtutum, et hoc pertinet ad cor; in veritate locutionis, et hoc pertinet ad os; in virtute operis, et hoc pertinet ad opus. Primo ergo ostendit apostolus qualiter se habeant in his quae pertinent ad perfectionem virtutum, quae consistunt in corde; secundo in his, quae ad virtutem oris, ibi in verbo veritatis; tertio in his, quae pertinent ad perfectionem operis, ibi in virtute Dei. 216. – Having set down the things which pertain to enduring evils, he now mentions those which pertain to the observance of good. Now the goodness of a work consists in three things, namely, in the perfection of virtues, and this pertains to the heart; in speaking the truth, and this pertains to the mouth; and in the virtuous activity which pertains to a work. First, therefore, the Apostle shows how they conduct themselves in matters pertaining to the perfection of the virtues, which consists in the heart; secondly, in those which pertain to the virtue of the mouth (v. 7); thirdly, in those which pertain to the perfection of a work (v. 7b). Circa primum ponit quatuor virtutes: et primo virtutem castitatis, quae maximum locum tenet in virtute temperantiae, et quantum ad hoc dicit in castitate, scilicet mentis et corporis. Ubi notandum est quod immediate post multos labores, vigilias et ieiunia, subdit de castitate, quia qui vult habere virtutem castitatis, necesse habet laboribus dari, vigiliis insistere, et macerari ieiuniis. I Cor. IX, v. 27: castigo corpus meum, et in servitutem redigo, et cetera. Hebr. XII, 14: pacem sequimini, et cetera. Si autem quaeratur, quare non facit mentionem de aliis virtutibus, nisi solum de temperantia, dicendum est quod sic facit, sed implicite; quia hoc quod dicit: in multa patientia, in tribulationibus, etc., pertinet ad virtutem fortitudinis; hoc vero quod dicit: per arma iustitiae, pertinet ad virtutem iustitiae. 217. – In regard to the first he sets down four virtues: first of all the virtue of chastity, which holds a prominent place in the virtue of temperance: in regard to this he says, in purity [chastity], namely, of mind and body. Here it should be noted that immediately after many labours, watches and fasts he mentions chastity, because a person who wills to have the virtue of chastity must be given to labours, continue in watchings, and be worn out with fasts: “But I pommel my body and subdue it, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified” (1 Cor. 9:27); “Strive for peace with all men, and for the holiness without which no one will see the Lord” (Heb. 12:14). But if anyone should ask why he makes no mention of the other virtues, but only of temperance, the answer is that he does mention them implicitly, because when he says, “in much patience, in tribulations” (v. 4), they pertain to the virtue of courage; when he says, “by the armor of justice” (v. 7), there is reference to the virtue of justice. Secundo ponit virtutem scientiae. Unde dicit in scientia. Et siquidem scientia referatur ad scientiam qua aliquis scit bene conversari in medio nationis pravae et perversae, sic refertur ad virtutem prudentiae. Si vero scientia referatur ad certitudinem, qua fideles certi sunt de his quae pertinent ad cognitionem Dei, sic pertinet ad virtutem fidei. Et utraque necessaria est Christianis, quia sine scientia, primo modo sive secundo modo accepta, homines de facili ruunt in peccatis. Is. V, 13: propterea captivus ductus est populus meus, quia non habuit scientiam. Ier. c. III, 15: dabo vobis pastores iuxta cor meum. 218. – Secondly, he mentions the virtue of knowledge; therefore he says, in knowledge. If this is taken as referring to the knowledge by which a person knows how to behave well in the midst of a wicked and perverse nation, it pertains to the virtue of prudence. But if knowledge is taken as referring to the certitude with which the faithful are certain about the things which pertain to their knowledge of God, it pertains to the virtue of faith. Both are necessary for Christians, for without prudence and faith, men easily slip into sins: “Therefore my people go into exile for want of knowledge” (Is. 5:13); “And I will give you shepherds after my own heart” (Jer. 3:15). Tertio ponit virtutem spei. Unde dicit in longanimitate, quae pertinet ad perfectionem spei. Nihil autem aliud est longanimis, quam qui arduum aliquod ex spe, semper ac diu dilatum, patienter expectat, et hoc a spiritu sancto. Gal. V, 22; fructus autem spiritus, charitas, etc., longanimitas, et cetera. Col. I, 11: in omni patientia et longanimitate. 219. – Thirdly, he mentions the virtue of hope when he says, longsuffering, which pertains to the perfection of hope. For a longsuffering person is nothing less than a person who is always hopeful of obtaining a good that is difficult and waits patiently if it delay; and this is by the Holy Spirit: “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control” (Gal. 5:22-23); “For all endurance and patience with joy” (Col. 1:11). Quarto ponit virtutem charitatis. Charitas autem duo habet, scilicet effectum exteriorem et interiorem. Sed in effectu exteriori habet suavitatem ad proximum. Non enim convenit quod aliquis non sit suavis ad eos quos diligit. Et ideo dicit in suavitate, id est dulci conversatione ad proximos, ut scilicet blandi simus. Prov. XII, 11: qui suavis est, vivit in moderationibus, et cetera. Eccli. VI, 5: verbum dulce multiplicat amicos, et cetera. Sed non in suavitate mundi, sed in ea quae causatur ex amore Dei, scilicet ex spiritu sancto, et ideo dicit in spiritu sancto, id est quam spiritus sanctus causat in nobis. Sap. c. XII, 1: o quam bonus et suavis, et cetera. In effectu autem interiori habet veritatem absque fictione, ut scilicet non praetendat exterius contrarium eius quod habet interius. Et ideo dicit in charitate non ficta. I Io. c. III, 18: non diligamus verbo neque lingua, sed, et cetera. Col. III, 14: super omnia charitatem habentes. Et huius ratio est quia, ut dicitur Sap. I, 5: spiritus sanctus disciplinae effugiet fictum. 220. – Fourthly, he mentions charity, which has two effects, namely, one inward and one outward. In the inward effect it has sweetness toward one’s neighbor: for it is unseemly for a person not to be sweet toward those he loves; therefore he says, in kindness [sweetness], in our behavior toward others, and gentle: “A pleasant voice multiplies friends, and a gracious tongue multiplies courtesies” (Sir. 6:5). Not in the sweetness of the world, but in that which is caused by the love of God, i.e., by the Holy Spirit; hence he says, in the Holy Spirit, i.e., which the Holy Spirit causes in us: “O how good and sweet is your Spirit, Lord, in all things” (Wis. 12:1, Vulgate). In the outward effect it has truth without pretense, i.e., that a person not pretend outwardly the contrary of what he has within; hence he says, in genuine love: “Let us not love in word or speech but in deed and in truth” (1 Jn. 3:18); “And above all these put on love” (Col. 3:14). The reason for this is because, as it says in Wis. (1:5): “For the Holy Spirit of discipline will flee from deceit.” Consequenter ostendit quomodo se habeant in his, quae pertinent ad veritatem oris, ut scilicet sint veraces. Et ideo dicit in verbo veritatis, scilicet vera loquendo et praedicando. 221. – Then he shows how they should act in things which pertain to the truth of the mouth, namely, that they be truthful. Hence, he says, truthful speech, namely, speaking and preaching what is true. Quomodo autem se habeant in perfectione operis, subdit, dicens in virtute Dei, id est non in operibus nostris confidamus, sed solum in virtute Dei, et non in propria. I Cor. IV, 20: regnum Dei non est in sermone, et cetera. 222. – But how they should act in regard to the perfection of a work, he tells them when he says, in the power of God, i.e., in let us not put confidence in our own works, but only in the power of God: “For the kingdom of God does not consist in talk but in power” (1 Cor. 4:20). Consequenter cum dicit per arma iustitiae, etc., ostendit qualiter se habeant in operatione bonorum et malorum, inter bona et mala, prospera et adversa, et hoc pertinet ad virtutem iustitiae. Et primo ostendit hoc in generali; secundo exponit in speciali. Dicit ergo primo, quod exhibeamus nos sicut Dei ministros in multa patientia. Et quod plus est, per arma iustitiae. Ubi sciendum est quod iustitia ordinat et facit hominem tenere locum suum, a dextris, id est, in prosperis, ut scilicet non elevetur, et a sinistris, id est in adversis, ut scilicet non deiiciatur. Phil. IV, 12: ubique et in omnibus, etc., scio abundare, et cetera. Consequenter hoc exponit per partes prosperorum et adversorum, dicens per gloriam, et cetera. Ubi sciendum est, quod in rebus temporalibus prosperitas vel adversitas in tribus consistit: in superbia vitae, in concupiscentia carnis, in concupiscentia oculorum, iuxta illud I Io. II, 16: omne quod est in mundo, aut est concupiscentia carnis, et cetera. Et haec prosequitur ordine suo, quia primo dicit quomodo se habeant in adversis et prosperis, quae pertinent ad superbiam vitae, dicens per gloriam, et cetera. Secundo quomodo se habeant in his quae pertinent ad concupiscentiam carnis, ibi quasi morientes, et cetera. Tertio quomodo se habeant in his quae pertinent ad concupiscentiam oculorum, ibi sicut egentes, et cetera. 223. – Then when he says, with the weapons of righteousness, he shows how they should act in doing good in prosperity and adversity; and this pertains to the virtue of justice. First, he shows this in general; secondly, he explains it in particular. He says therefore, that we should show ourselves as God’s ministers in much patience and what is more with the weapons of righteousness [by the armor of justice]. Here it should be noted that justice ordains and makes a man keep his place for the right hand, i.e., in prosperity, namely, that he not be lifted up; and for the left hand, i.e., in adversity, namely, that he not be cast down: “In any and all circumstances I have learned the secret of facing plenty and hunger, abundance and want” (Phil. 4:12). Then he explains this by the two sides, prosperity and adversity, saying, in honor and dishonor. Here it should be noted that in temporal affairs prosperity and adversity consist in three things, namely, the pride of life, in the concupiscence of the flesh, and in the concupiscence of the eyes: “For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the pride of life, is not of the Father but is of the world” (1 Jn. 2:16). He treats these in order. First, he shows how they should act in prosperity and adversity as pertaining to the pride of life; secondly, in things which pertain to the concupiscence of the flesh (v. 9); thirdly, pertaining to the concupiscence of the eyes (v. 10b). Sunt autem duo, quae ad superbiam pertinent, scilicet sublimitas status et operum. Et ideo dicit per gloriam, id est per statum excellentiae, quasi dicat: exhibeamus nos Dei ministros, scilicet per Dei gloriam, id est in prosperitate. Is. XXIII, 9: dominus exercituum cogitavit, et cetera. Et quod apostoli gloriosi appareant, patet Act. XIV, 10, quod Paulus et Barnabas credebantur esse dii. Et ignobilitatem, quae est in sinistris, quasi dicat: nec in gloria elevemur, nec, si contemptibiles sumus, deiiciamur. I Cor. I, 28: ignobilia huius mundi elegit Deus, et cetera. Quantum ad famam operum dicit per infamiam et bonam famam. Ubi sciendum est, quod, sicut Gregorius dicit, homo non debet ex se dare causam infamiae suae, sed potius debet procurare bonam famam, iuxta illud Eccli. XLI, 15: curam habe de bono nomine, et hoc propter alios, quia oportet nos bonum testimonium habere ad eos, qui foris sunt, I Tim. III, 7. Si vero contingat aliquem incurrere in infamiam iniuste, non debet esse ita pusillanimis, ut propter hoc derelinquat iustitiam. Si vero sit in bona fama apud infideles, non debet tamen superbire, sed debet inter utrumque medio modo incedere. Consequenter exponit ista duo quae posuit. Et primo quam infamiam habuerunt, et ostendit quod magnam, quia ut seductores, etc., quasi dicat: a quibusdam habemur ut seductores, a quibusdam vero habemur ut veraces. Nec mirum, quia etiam de Christo alii dixerunt quia bonus est, alii vero quod non, sed seducit turbas, ut dicitur Io. VII, v. 12. Secundo ostendit quomodo fuerunt gloriosi et ignobiles, quia sicut ignoti et cogniti, id est approbati a bonis, et incogniti, id est despecti a malis. I Cor. IV, 13: tamquam purgamenta, et cetera. 224. – Now there are two things which pertain to pride, namely, excellence of state and of works. Hence he says, in honor, i.e., by a condition of excellence. As if to say: let us show ourselves as God’s ministers, namely, by the glory of God, that is, in prosperity: “The LORD of hosts has purposed it, to defile the pride of all glory” (Is. 23:9). That the apostles seemed glorious is shown in Acts (chap. 14), when Paul and Barnabas were taken as gods. And dishonor, which is on the left. As if to say: let us neither be lifted up by glory nor, if we are contemptible, be cast down: “God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are” (1 Cor. 1:28). As to reports about works, he says, in ill repute and good repute. Here it should be noted that, as Gregory says, a man should not be the cause of his own bad reputation among those who are outside; rather he should try to acquire a good reputation, as Sir. (41:15) says: “Better is the man who hides his folly than the man who hides his wisdom,” and this for the sake of others, because we need to have a good reputation among those who are outside (1 Tim. 3:7). But if anyone happens to fall into bad repute unjustly, he should not be fainthearted or abandon holiness on that account. But if he has a good reputation among unbelievers, he should not be proud but take a middle path between the two. Then he explains the two things he mentioned. First, the evil reputation they had and to what a degree. Hence he says, as imposters and yet true. As if to say: some regard us as deceivers and some as honest. But this is not strange, because even in the case of Christ some said that he was good, and some that he was not, but that he was deceiving the multitude, as it says in Jn. (7:12). Secondly, he shows how they were noble and ignoble. Hence he says, as unknown and yet well known, i.e., approved by the good and unknown, i.e., despised by the evil: “We have become, and are now, as the refuse of the world, the offscouring of all things” (1 Cor. 4:13). Consequenter prosequitur ea quae pertinent ad concupiscentiam carnis. Et ponit tria quae concupiscit caro. Primo enim concupiscit longam vitam, et quantum ad hoc dicit quasi morientes, id est licet exponamur periculis mortis, infra XI, 23: in mortibus frequenter, etc., tamen ecce vivimus, virtute et fide. Et ideo Hab. II, 4: iustus ex fide vivit. Ps. CXVII, 17: non moriar, sed vivam, et cetera. Secundo concupiscit incolumitatem et quietem. Et quantum ad hoc dicit ut castigati et non mortificati, quasi dicat: licet diversis flagellis castigemur a domino, non tamen tradit nos morti. Ps. XI: castigans castigavit me dominus, et cetera. II Tim. c. III, 12: omnes qui pie volunt, et cetera. Tertio concupiscit gaudium et iucunditatem, et quantum ad hoc dicit quasi tristes, semper autem gaudentes; quia licet in exterioribus, et quae ad carnem sunt, patiamur tristitiam et amaritudinem, interius tamen continuum gaudium habemus, quod crescit in nobis ex consolationibus spiritus sancti, et spe remunerationis aeternae. Iac. I, 2: omne gaudium existimate, et cetera. Io. XVI, 20: tristitia vestra vertetur in gaudium, et cetera. 225. – Then he discusses the things which pertain to the concupiscence of the flesh and mentions three things which the flesh desires: first, it desires a long life; as to this he says, as dying, i.e., although we are exposed to the dangers of death: “And often near death” (2 Cor. 11:23), and behold we live in virtue and faith. Therefore, Hab. (2:4) says: “But the righteous live by their faith”; “I shall not die, but I shall live” (Ps. 118:17). Secondly, it desires health and repose; as to this he says, as punished and yet not killed. As if to say: although we are chastised with many stripes by the Lord, yet he has not delivered us over to death: “The Lord has chastened me sorely, but he has not given me over to death” (Ps. 118:13); “Indeed all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted” (2 Tim. 3:12). Thirdly, it desires joy and pleasantness; as to this he says, as sorrowful, yet always rejoicing. For although in outward things and things which pertain to the flesh, we suffer sadness and bitterness, yet inwardly we have continual joy, which grows in us by the consolations of the Holy Spirit and by the hope of an eternal reward: “Count it all joy, my brethren, when you meet various trials” (Jas. 1:2); “You will have pain, but your pain will turn into joy” (Jn. 16:20). Consequenter prosequitur de his quae pertinent ad concupiscentiam oculorum. Et circa hoc ponit duo, quorum unum est in comparatione ad alios; et secundum hoc, prosperum in divitiis est quod homo abundet, ita quod possit aliis ministrare de divitiis suis. Sinistrum autem in hoc est, quod homo sit ita pauper, quod oporteat eum ab aliis mendicare. Et ideo dicit quod, in his temporalibus, sumus sicut egentes, id est ab aliis accipientes; sed tamen quantum ad spiritualia sumus multos locupletantes. Et non dicit omnes, quia non sunt omnes locupletari parati. Prov. XIII, 7: est quasi pauper, cum in multis divitiis sit. Secundum est in comparatione ad seipsos, et secundum hoc prosperum in divitiis est multa possidere, sinistrum autem, ut nihil penitus habeat. Et quantum ad hoc dicit, quod in exterioribus sunt tamquam nihil habentes, scilicet in temporalibus, quia omnia dimiserunt propter Christum. Matth. XVI: si vis perfectus esse, vade, et vende omnia quae habes, et cetera. Sed interius et in spiritualibus, omnia possidentes, scilicet per interiorem magnitudinem cordis. Et hoc ideo est quia ipsi vivebant non sibi, sed Christo, et ideo, omnia quae sunt Christi, reputabant ut sua. Unde cum Christo omnia sint subiecta, omnia possidebant, et omnia tendebant in eorum gloriam. Ios. I, 3: et omnem locum quem calcaverit pes vester, vobis tradam. 226. – Then he discusses the things which pertain to the concupiscence of the eyes, and in regard to this he mentions two things. One of these is in relation to others, and according to this the right hand in riches consists in a man abounding, so that he can minister to others from his riches. But the left hand consists in a man’s being so poor that he must beg from others. Hence he says that in these temporal things we are as poor, i.e., receiving from others; but as to spiritual things, yet making many rich. He does not say, “all,” because not all are ready to be enriched: “Another pretends to be poor, yet has great wealth” (Prov. 13:7). The second is in relation to themselves, and according to this, prosperity in riches is to possess many; but the left side is that he have absolutely nothing. In regard to this he says that in external things they are as having nothing, namely, in temporal things, because they have forsaken all things for Christ: “If you would be perfect, go, sell what you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven” (Matt. 19:21). But inwardly and in spiritual things, possessing all things, namely, by an inner greatness of heart. And this is so because they lived not for themselves, but for Christ. Consequently, all that were Christ’s they regarded as their own. Hence, since all things are subject to Christ, they possessed all things, and all things tended to their glory: “Every place that the sole of your foot will tread upon I have given to you” (Jos. 1:3). Nota autem circa praemissa, quod apostolus utitur in praemissis miro modo loquendi. Nam ipse quasi semper ponit unum contra unum, et temporale contra spirituale; sed tamen in temporalibus semper addit quamdam conditionem, puta: ut, sicut, quasi, tamquam, sed in opposito spirituali, nihil addit. Cuius ratio est quia temporalia, sive sint mala, sive bona, sive transmutabilia et apparentia, habent tamen similitudinem vel boni vel mali. Et ideo dicit: ut seductores, et quasi ignoti, quia non erant in rei veritate sic, sed in opinione hominum, et si erant transitoria, erant bona aut mala. Bona autem spiritualia existentia sunt et vera, et ideo non addit eis conditionem aliquam. 227. – Note in regard to the foregoing that the Apostle employs a remarkable manner of speaking. For he, as it were, always sets one thing against another, and temporal against spiritual. But yet in temporal things he always adds a condition, namely, as or as though, but in the opposite spiritual things he adds nothing. The reason for this is that temporal things, whether they be good or evil, are changeable and apparent, and they have only a likeness to good and evil. Hence he says, as imposters and as unknown, because they were not so in reality, but only in men’s opinion. Consequently, they were transitory good or evils. But spiritual goods are existent and true; therefore, he adds no condition to them.
6-3
2 Cor. 6:11-18Postquam apostolus docuerat usum gratiae collatae quantum ad bonas operationes exteriores, hic consequenter instruit eos circa usum praedictum quantum ad interiorem devotionem, quae consistit in laetitia cordis, quae latitudinem cordis causat. Et circa hoc tria facit. Primo enim exhibet se eis in exemplum latitudinis; secundo ostendit, quod ab ipso non habent contrarium exemplum, nec possunt accipere, ibi non angustiamini in nobis, etc.; tertio exhortatur eos ad cordis latitudinem, ibi eamdem autem habentes, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo ponit signum latitudinis cordis; secundo ponit ipsam latitudinem cordis quam habebat apostolus, ibi cor nostrum dilatatum est, et cetera. 228. – After teaching them the use of grace as to good outward actions, the Apostle now instructs them about this use in regard to internal devotion, which consists in joy of heart, which causes the heart to enlarge. In regard to this he does three things. First, he offers himself as an example of this enlargement; secondly, he shows that they have no contrary example, nor could they have (v. 12); thirdly, he exhorts them to enlarge their hearts (v. 13). In regard to the first he does two things: first, he gives a sign of an expanded heart; secondly, he mentions the expansion of heart he had (v. 11b). Signum autem latitudinis est os latum, quia os immediate adhaeret cordi. Unde quae per os exprimimus, sunt expressa signa conceptionum cordis. Matth. XII, 34: ex abundantia cordis os loquitur. Et hoc est quod dicit os nostrum patet ad vos. Os enim clausum est aliquando, tunc scilicet quando ea quae sunt in corde non patent exterius; sed apertum et patens est, quando ea quae in corde sunt, manifestantur. Iob III, 1: post haec aperuit, et cetera. Matth. V, 2: aperiens os suum, et cetera. Et ne hoc videatur pertinere ad vitium vanitatis, quia manifestat se, subdit rationem, dicens ad vos, id est propter utilitatem vestram manifestamus vobis secreta cordis nostri. I Cor. X, 33: non quaerens quod mihi utile sit, et cetera. 229. – Now the sign of an expanded heart is an open mouth, because it adheres immediately to the heart. Hence, the things we express by the mouth are express signs of the thoughts of the heart: “For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks” (Matt. 12:34). And this is what he says: our mouth is open to you. For the mouth is closed sometimes when the things in the heart are not outwardly apparent, but it is opened when the things in the heart are manifested: “After this Job opened his mouth” (Job 3:1); “And he opened his mouth and taught them” (Matt. 5:2). But that it might not seem to pertain to the vice of vanity that he manifest himself, he gives a reason, saying, to you, i.e., for your benefit we manifest to you the secrets of our heart: “Not seeking my own advantage, but that of many” (1 Cor. 10:33). Causa autem huius dilatationis procedit ex dilatatione et latitudine cordis. Et ideo dicit cor nostrum dilatatum est, et cetera. Prov. XXI, 4: exaltatio oculorum dilatatio est cordis. Cor autem aliquando est strictum, tunc scilicet quando comprimitur et concluditur in modico, sicut cum quis non curat nisi de terrenis, et contemnit caelestia, non valens ea intellectu capere. Aliquando autem est latum, tunc scilicet quando quis magna appetit et desiderat, et talis erat apostolus, qui non reputans ea quae videntur, desiderabat caelestia. Et ideo dicit cor nostrum dilatatum est, id est ampliatum ad magna appetenda. 230. – The cause of this enlargement comes from enlarging and widening the heart. Hence he says, our heart is wide [enlarged]: “The raising of the eyes is the enlarging of the heart” (Prov. 21:4, Vulgate). But sometimes the heart is narrow, namely, when it is pressed together and confined in a small place, as when a person cares for nothing but earthly things and scorns the heavenly, not being able to grasp them with his mind. But sometimes is it wide, namely, when a person seeks and desires great things. Such was the case with the Apostle, who did not regard the things which are seen, but desired heavenly things. Hence he says, our heart is enlarged, i.e., expanded for desiring great things. Consequenter ostendit quod non habent ab apostolo contrarium exemplum, dicens non angustiamini, etc., quasi dicat: ex quo ostendimus vobis latitudinem cordis nostri, non habetis a nobis exemplum, nec causam unde angustiamini. Sed si hoc facitis, tunc quidem angustiamini, sed non in nobis, imo ex visceribus vestris, id est ex vobis. Ubi sciendum est quod angustiari idem est quod includi in aliquo, unde non patet alius aditus evadendi. Isti autem erant seducti adeo a pseudo, quod non credebant posse salutem consequi, nisi in observantiis legalibus. Et ideo efficiebantur servi, cum essent liberi secundum fidem Christi. Unde angustiatio huius servitutis non proveniebat eis ab apostolo, sed ex visceribus eorum, id est ex duritia cordium ipsorum. Lc. XXIII, 28: nolite flere, et cetera. 231. – Then he shows that they have no contrary example from the Apostle, saying, You are not restricted by us [straightened]. As if to say: from the fact that we show you the largeness of our heart, you do not have an example or a reason why you should be straightened. But if you do this, then indeed you are straightened, but not by us, but in your own affections, i.e., by yourselves. Here it should be noted that to be straightened is the same as to be enclosed in something, from which no exit appears. But they have been deceived by a false apostle to such a degree that they did not believe salvation was possible without observing legal ceremonies. As a result, they became slaves, whereas they had been free according to the faith of Christ. Hence, the confinement of this slavery did not come to them from the Apostle, but from their bowels, i.e., from the hardness of their hearts: “Do not weep for me, but weep for yourselves and your children” (Lk. 23:28). Consequenter hortatur eos ad latitudinem cordis, dicens eamdem autem habentes, etc., quasi dicat: si aliquando decepti a pseudo angustiati estis, non omnino remaneatis in angustiatione, imo studeatis habere latum cor, sicut nos habemus, quia eamdem habebitis remunerationem quam nos habemus. Et ideo dicit eamdem remunerationem habentes, scilicet sicut et nos. Supra I, v. 7: sicut estis socii passionum, et cetera. Tamquam filiis, non inimicis, dico vobis, vel tamquam filiis Dei; quasi dicat: eamdem remunerationem habentes, quam filii Dei, scilicet haeredes vitae aeternae. Rom. VIII, 17: si filii, et haeredes. Eamdem, inquam, habentes remunerationem, dilatamini et vos, id est habeatis cor magnum et liberum libertate spiritus, quae est in fide Christi, et non coangustiamini in servitute observantiae legalis. 232. – Then he urges them to enlarge their hearts, saying, In return [having the same recompense], widen your hearts also. As if to say: if you had been deceived and straightened by a false apostle, then do not continue in that state, but try to have a large heart, as we have, because you love the same recompense as we. Therefore he says, having the same recompense as we: “For we know that as you share in our sufferings, so also you share in our consolation” (2 Cor. 1:7). I speak as to children, and not to enemies, as to children of God, namely, heirs of eternal life: “And if children, then heirs” (Rom. 8:17). Having the same recompense, I say, widen your hearts also, i.e., have a large heart and free with the freedom of the Spirit, which is in the faith of Christ, and be not straightened in the slavery of legal observances. Consequenter cum dicit nolite iugum ducere, etc., docet eos usum collatae gratiae quantum ad infidelium vitationem. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo ponitur apostoli exhortatio; secundo exhortationis ratio, ibi quae enim participatio, etc.; tertio rationem huius auctoritate confirmat, ibi vos enim estis templum Dei, et cetera. 233. – Then when he says, Do not be mismated with unbelievers, he teaches them the use of grace as to avoiding unbelievers. In regard to this he does three things. First, he exhorts them; secondly, the reason for the exhortation (v. 14b); thirdly, he confirms this reason with an authority (v. 16b). Dicit ergo nolite iugum ducere, et cetera. Ubi est sciendum quod iugum dicitur omne illud quod ligat plures ad aliquid faciendum. Unde quia aliquando aliqui conveniunt ad faciendum aliquid boni quod est ex Deo, et aliqui ad faciendum aliquid mali quod est ex Diabolo, ideo dicitur iugum Dei et iugum Diaboli. Iugum quidem Dei est ipsa charitas, quae ligat hominem ad serviendum Deo. Matth. X: tollite iugum meum, et cetera. Iugum vero Diaboli est ipsa iniquitas, quae ligat ad malum et ad male faciendum. Is. IX, 4: iugum oneris eius. Hoc ergo dicit nolite iugum ducere, id est nolite communicare in operibus infidelitatis, cum infidelibus. Et hoc propter duo. Primo quia aliqui erant inter eos, qui reputabantur sapientiores, non abstinentes ab idolothitis, et ex hoc scandalizabant inferiores. Alii autem erant qui communicabant cum Iudaeis in traditionibus seniorum. Unde apostolus hortatur eos, cum dicit nolite, etc., ut non communicent cum Iudaeis in traditionibus legis, neque cum gentibus in cultu idolorum. Utrique enim infideles sunt. 234. – He says therefore, Do not be mismated [bear the yoke] with unbelievers. Here it should be noted that a yoke is anything which binds several to do something. Hence, because some come together sometimes to do something good, which is from God, and some to do something evil, which is from the devil, we speak of God’s yoke and the devil’s yoke. God’s yoke is charity, which binds a man to serve God: “Take my yoke upon you” (Matt. 11:29). But the devil’s yoke is for doing evil: “The yoke of his burden” (Is. 9:4). Therefore he says this: Do not be mismated, i.e., do not take part in works of unbelief, with unbelievers; and this for two reasons. First, because there were some among them who considered themselves wiser, not refraining from idolatry; as a result they scandalized the lowly. But there were others who took part with the Jews in the traditions of their elders. Hence, the Apostle exhorts them and says, do not be mismated with unbelievers, i.e., do not communicate with the Jews in the traditions of the Law or with Gentiles in the worship of idols, for both groups were unbelievers. Rationem autem huius assignat, dicens quae enim participatio, et cetera. Quae sumitur ex distinctione duplici. Una distinctio est quantum ad causam, sed alia est quantum ad statum. Distinctio quantum ad causam duplex est, scilicet quantum ad causam habitualem, et quantum ad causam efficientem. Causa autem habitualis est duplex: una quantum ad effectum, et hoc est quod dicit quae enim participatio iustitiae, etc.; quasi dicat: non debetis iugum ducere cum infidelibus, quia alius habitus est in vobis, alius in illis. In vobis quidem est habitus iustitiae, in illis vero est habitus iniquitatis. Maxima autem iustitia est reddere Deo quod suum est, et hoc est colere ipsum. Unde cum vos colatis Deum, est in vobis habitus iustitiae; summa autem iniquitas est auferre Deo quod suum est, et dare Diabolo. Is. I, 13: iniqui sunt coetus vestri. Ier. XXIII, 28: quid paleis ad triticum? Alia causa habitualis est quantum ad intellectum, et haec distinctio est, quia fideles sunt illuminati lumine fidei sed infideles sunt in tenebris errorum. Et quantum ad hoc dicit aut quae societas lucis ad tenebras? Quasi dicat: non est conveniens quod eis communicetis, quia non est aliqua societas conveniens, quia vos estis lux per scientiam fidei. Eph. V, 8: eratis aliquando tenebrae, nunc autem lux in domino, et cetera. Illi vero tenebrae sunt per ignorantiam. Prov. IV, 19: via impiorum tenebrosa, et cetera. Unde dominus a principio divisit lucem a tenebris, ut dicitur Gen. c. I, 18. 235. – He gives the reason for this when he says, For what partnership have righteousness and iniquity? This is based on two distinctions: one regards the cause and the other the state. The distinction as to cause is twofold, namely, as to habitual and as to efficient cause. The habitual cause is also twofold: one as to effect, and this is what he says: For what partnership have righteousness and iniquity [justice with injustice]? As if to say: you should not bear the yoke with unbelievers, because there is one habit in you and another in them. In you it is the habit of justice; in them it is the habit of iniquity. But the higher justice is to render to God what is his, and this is to worship him. Hence, since you worship God, the habit of justice is in you. But the greatest iniquity is to take from God what is his and give it to the devil: “I cannot endure iniquity and solemn assembly” (Is. 1:13); “What has straw in common with wheat” (Jer. 23:28). The other habitual cause is in regard to the intellect; and this distinction is that the faithful are enlightened with the light of faith, but unbelievers are in the darkness of errors. As to this he says, Or what fellowship has light with darkness? As if to say: it is not right for you to communicate with them, because it is not a suitable fellowship, because you are light through knowledge of the faith: “For once you were darkness, but now you are light in the Lord” (Eph. 5:8), but they are darkness through ignorance: “The way of the wicked is like deep darkness” (Prov. 4:19). Hence, from the beginning the Lord separated the light from the darkness, as it says in Gen. (1:18). Quantum vero ad causam efficientem dicit quae autem conventio Christi ad Belial? Quasi dicat: vos estis servi Christi, et membra eius, I Cor. XII, 27: vos estis corpus Christi, illi autem sunt membra Diaboli. Et dicitur Diabolus Belial, absque iugo, quia noluit subiici iugo Dei. Ier. II, 20: a saeculo fregisti, et cetera. Quod autem non possit esse conventio Christi ad Belial, patet ex verbis Christi, Io. XIV, 30: venit princeps mundi huius, etc., et etiam ex verbis Diaboli, Matth. VIII, 29: quid nobis, et tibi, Iesu, et cetera. 236. – As to the efficient cause he says, What accord has Christ with Belial? As if to say: you are the servants of Christ and his members: “Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it” (1 Cor. 12:27), but they are members of the devil. The devil is called Belial, without a yoke, because he refused to submit to God’s yoke: “For long ago you broke your yoke and burst your bonds” (Jer. 2:20). That there cannot be concord between Christ and Belial is clear from Christ’s words: “For the ruler of this world is coming; he has no power over me” (Jn. 14:30), as well as from the devil’s words: “What have you to do with us, O Son of God?” (Matt. 8:29). Alia distinctio est quantum ad statum fidei, et hoc quantum ad duo, scilicet quantum ad statum fidei, et secundum hoc dicit aut quae pars est fidelis, etc.; quasi dicat: non eadem est pars utriusque, quia pars fidelis est ipse Deus, quem habet praemium, et ut finem suae beatitudinis. Ps. XV, 5: dominus pars haereditatis meae, et cetera. Sed pars infidelis sunt bona terrena. Sap. II, 9: haec est sors nostra, et cetera. Matth. XXIV, 51: dividet eum, et partem, et cetera. Item quantum ad statum gratiae, et secundum hoc dicit quis autem consensus, etc., quasi dicat: non est aliqua convenientia templo Dei et idolis. Unde vos estis templum Dei per gratiam, I Cor. III, 16: templum Dei, etc. et VI, 19: nescitis quoniam membra vestra templum sunt, etc., non debetis ergo communicare cum infidelibus qui sunt templa idolorum. Sed notandum quod dominus prohibet per Ezechielem, quod in templo Dei non colantur idola, Ez. XXVI. Multo ergo magis prohibentur homines, quorum animae sunt templum Dei, ne violent illa per participationem idolorum. I Cor. III, 17: si quis templum Dei violaverit, et cetera. 237. – Another distinction regards the state of faith. In regard to this he says, Or what has a believer in common with an unbeliever? As if to say: there is not the same part on both sides, because the part of the believer is God, whom he has as a reward and as the end of his happiness: “The Lord is my chosen portion and my cup” (Ps. 16:5). But the part of the unbeliever is earthly goods: “Because this is our portion and this is our lot” (Wis. 2:9); “And he will punish him and put him with the hypocrites” (Matt. 24:51). As to the state of grace he says, What agreement has the temple of God with idols? As if to say: there is no agreement. Hence, you are a temple of God by grace: “Do you not know that you are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in you?” (1 Cor. 3:16). Therefore, you should not communicate with unbelievers, who are temples of idols. But it should be noted that in Ez. 25, the Lord forbids idols to be worshipped in God’s temple. Much more then are men forbidden, whose souls are God’s temple, to violate them by partaking of idols: “If any one destroys God’s temple, God will destroy him” (1 Cor. 3:17). Consequenter cum dicit vos enim estis, etc., confirmat rationem propositam per auctoritatem. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo enim confirmat quod induxit ratione admonitionis; secundo vero confirmat ipsam admonitionem, ibi propter quod exite, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo resumit quod probare intendit; secundo vero inducit auctoritatem ad propositum, ibi sicut dicit dominus, et cetera. 238. – Then when he says, For you are the temple of the living God, he strengthens his reason with an authority. In regard to this he does two things. First, he confirms what he had concluded by reason of an admonition; secondly, he confirms the admonition itself (v. 17). In regard to the first he does two things. First, he reviews what he intends to prove; secondly, he quotes an authority to support his conclusion (v. 17c). Dicit ergo: recte dico quod non est consensus templo Dei cum idolis, id est non debetis cum eis participare, quia vos estis templum Dei vivi, et non mortui, sicut idololatrae. 239. – He says therefore: rightly do I say that there is no agreement between the temple of God and idols, i.e., you should not take part in them, because you are the temple of the living God, and not of a dead one, as idolaters are. Ad hoc probandum adducit auctoritatem, probans hoc ipsum per usum templi. Usus enim templi est ut Deus habitet in eo, nam templum est locus Dei ad inhabitandum sibi consecratus. Ps. X, 5: dominus in templo sancto suo, et cetera. Quae quidem auctoritas sumitur ex Levit. XXVI, 12, quae talis est: ponam tabernaculum meum in medio vestri, et cetera. In qua auctoritate quatuor tangit, quantum ad hunc usum pertinet. Primum, pertinet ad gratiam operationum quod est Deum esse in aliquo per gratiam. Et hoc est quod dicit inhabitabo in eis, scilicet in sanctis, per gratiam excolens eos. Licet autem Deus in omnibus rebus dicatur esse per praesentiam, potentiam et essentiam, non tamen dicitur in eis inhabitare, sed in solis sanctis per gratiam. Cuius ratio est quia Deus est in omnibus rebus per suam actionem, inquantum coniungit se eis, ut dans esse et conservans in esse. In sanctis autem est per ipsorum sanctorum operationem, qua attingunt ad Deum, et quodammodo comprehendunt ipsum, quae est diligere et cognoscere: nam diligens et cognoscens dicitur in se habere cognita et dilecta. Secundum pertinet ad gratiam cooperantem, quo scilicet proficiunt sancti auxilio Dei, et quantum ad hoc dicit inambulabo in eis, id est promovebo eos de virtute in virtutem. Nam hic profectus sine gratia Dei esse non potest. I Cor. XV, 10: gratia Dei sum id quod sum: nam, sicut gratia operans facit nos esse aliquid in esse iustitiae, ita et gratia cooperans facit nos in ipso esse proficere. Tertium pertinet ad Dei beneficium, et hoc vel protectionis per providentiam, et hoc tangit, dicens ego ero illorum Deus, id est providentia mea protegam eos. Ps. CXLIII, 15: beatus populus, cuius dominus, et cetera. Vel beneficium remunerationis, ut sic dicatur ero illorum Deus, id est dabo eis meipsum in mercedem. Gen. XV, 1: ego ero merces tua, et cetera. Et Hebr. XI, 16: non confunditur Deus eorum vocari Deus. Quartum pertinet ad debitum cultum et servitium sanctorum, et quantum ad hoc dicit et ipsi erunt mihi in populum, id est me colent et mihi obedient, ut mei et non alterius. Ps. XCIV, 7, IC, 3: nos autem populus eius, et oves, et cetera. 240. – To prove this he cites an authority, proving this very point from the use to which a temple is put. For the use of a temple is that God dwell in it, because a temple is a place consecrated for God to dwell in: “The Lord is in his holy temple” (Ps. 11:4). This authority is taken from Lev. (26:11), which says: “And I will make my abode among you”. In this authority four things are touched as pertaining to this use. The first pertains to operating grace, which consists in God’s being is someone through grace; and this is what he says, I will live in them, namely, in the saints, adorning them with grace. For although God is said to be in all things by his presence, power, and essence, he is not said to dwell in them, but only in the saints through grace; the reason being that God is in all things by his activity, inasmuch as he joins himself to them as giving esse and conserving it, but in the saints by their very activity, by which they attain to God and in a way comprehend him, which is to love and to know. For those who know and those who love have within themselves the thing known and loved. The second pertains to cooperating grace, by which the saints make progress with God’s help; as to this he says, I will move among them, i.e., I will promote them from virtue to virtue, for this progress is impossible without grace: “By the grace of God I am what I am” (1 Cor. 15:10). For just as operating grace makes us to be something in the being [esse] of justice, so cooperating grace makes us progress in that being [esse]. The third pertains to God’s benefits: and this is either the benefit of his protection through providence; hence, he touches this when he says, and I will be their God, i.e., I will protect them by my providence: “Happy the people whose God is the Lord” (Ps. 144:15), or the benefit of recompense. As if to say: I will be their God, i.e., I will give them myself as a reward: “Your reward shall be very great” (Gen. 15:1); “Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God” (Heb. 11:16). The fourth pertains to correct worship and service offered by the saints; as to this he says, and they shall be my people, i.e., they will worship me and obey me as mine and not another’s: “We are the people of his pasture, the sheep of his hand” (Ps. 95:4). Vel possunt ad praesentiam corporalem referri, et tunc exponitur sic: quoniam inhabitabo in illis per carnis assumptionem, Io. I, 14: verbum caro factum est, etc.; et ambulabo inter illos, corporaliter cum eis conversando, Bar. III, 38: post haec in terris visus est, etc.; et ero illorum Deus per gloriam, Deut. IV, 7: non est alia natio tam grandis, etc.; et ipsi erunt mihi populus, id est per fidem me 241. – Or they could refer to bodily presence; then it is explained this way: For I will live in them by assuming flesh: “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us” (Jn. 1:14), and I will move among them bodily by living with them: “Afterward she appeared upon earth and lived among men.” (Bar. 3:37), and I will be their God by glory: “For what great nation is there that has a god so near to it as the LORD our God is to us” (Deut. 4:7). And they shall be my people, i.e., they will worship me in faith. colent. Consequenter cum dicit propter quod exite, etc., confirmat ipsam admonitionem per aliam auctoritatem. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo confirmat admonitionem per auctoritatem; secundo ostendit praemium promissum servantibus monitionem, ibi ego recipiam vos, et cetera. 242. – Then when he says, Therefore come out from them, he confirms this admonition with another authority. In regard to this he does two things. First, he confirms the admonition by an authority; secondly, he indicates the reward promised to those who heed the admonition (v. 18). Dicit ergo propter quod, id est quia estis templum Dei, exite de medio eorum. Et sumitur de Is. LII, 11: recedite, recedite inde, et pollutum nolite tangere. Ubi tria dicit: exite, separamini, et immundum nolite tangere, quia tripliciter debemus nos habere ad infideles. Primo ut exeamus ab eis, relinquendo peccata. Zach. II, 6: o, o, fugite de terra Aquilonis, et cetera. Sed Donatistae dicunt quod debemus corporaliter deserere malam societatem, quod non est verum. Unde quod apostolus dicit, intelligendum est de separatione spirituali. Et ideo sic exponit: exite, spiritualiter, non sequendo vitam eorum. Cant. II, 2: sicut lilium inter spinas, et cetera. Et hoc ideo, ut vitemus ipsas peccatorum occasiones ab eis datas. Et ideo dicit separamini, id est longe ab eorum consensu sitis. Matth. X, 35: veni enim separare, et cetera. Num. XVI, 26: recedite a tabernaculis hominum impiorum, et cetera. Tertio ut arguamus eos cum male agunt. Et ideo dicit immundum ne tetigeritis, scilicet consentientes eis in malis. Rom. I, 32: non solum qui faciunt ea, sed et qui consentiunt, et cetera. Eph. V, 11: nolite communicare operibus infructuosis. Et hoc, quia qui tangit picem, etc., Eccli. XIII, 1. 243. – He says therefore, i.e., because you are temples of God, come out from them: “Depart, depart, go out from there! Touch no unclean thing; go out from the midst of it” (Is. 52:11). Here he says three things: go out, be separated from them, and do not touch anything unclean, because there are three ways we should behave toward unbelievers. First, we should go out from them by abstaining from sins: “Ho! ho! Flee from the land of the north” (Zech. 2:6). But the Donatists say that we must depart bodily from an evil society. But this is not true. Hence, the Apostle’s words must be understood of a spiritual separation and are explained in this way: go out spiritually by not following their life: “As a lily among brambles” (S of S 2:2), and this in order to avoid the very occasions of sin given by them. Hence he says, be separate, i.e., be far from consenting to them: “For I have come to set a man against his father” (Matt. 10:35); “Depart, I pray you, from the tents of these wicked men” (Num. 16:26). Thirdly, to rebuke them when they do wrong; hence he says, touch nothing unclean, i.e., do not consent to them in evil: “They not only do them but approve those who practice them” (Rom. 1:32); “Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them.” (Eph. 5:11). And this because “whoever touches pitch will be defiled [by it]” (Sir. 13:1). Praemium autem repromissum servantibus monitionem, est duplex, scilicet divina familiaritas et divina adoptio. Divina familiaritas, quia ego recipiam vos, quasi dicat: secure exeatis, quia ego recipiam vos in meos. Ps. XXVI, 10: quoniam pater meus et mater mea, et cetera. Ps. LXIV, 5: beatus quem elegisti, et cetera. Is. XLII, 1: ecce servus meus, et cetera. Sed divina adoptio, quia adoptat nos in filios, quia dicit et ero vobis in patrem, et vos eritis mihi in filios, Rom. VIII, v. 15: non accepistis, et cetera. Et dicit filios quantum ad perfectos, et filias quantum ad imperfectos, et hoc sumitur ex II Reg. VII, v. 14, ubi dicitur de Salomone: ego ero ei in patrem, et cetera. 244. – Two rewards are promised to those who heed this admonition, namely, familiarity with God and adoption by God. Familiarity with God, because I will welcome you. As if to say: go out confidently, because I will welcome you as mine: “For my father and my mother have forsaken me, but the LORD will take me up” (Ps. 27:10); “Blessed is he whom thou dost choose and bring near, to dwell in your courts!” (Ps. 65:5); “Behold my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen, in whom my soul delights” (Is. 42:1). Divine adoption, because he adopts us as sons, because he says, I will be a father to you, and you shall be my sons and daughters: “For you did not receive the spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received the spirit of sonship” (Rom. 8:15). He says, sons, as to the perfect, and daughters, as to the imperfect; and this is taken from 2 Sam. (7:14), where it says of Solomon: “I will be his father, and he shall be my son.”
7-1
2 Cor. 7:1-3Monuit apostolus Corinthios qualiter se in futuro debeant habere, hic commendat eos de bonis praeteritis. Sed ut fiat quaedam continuatio praeteritorum ad futura, primo concludit admonitionem; secundo vero commendat eos, ibi multa mihi fiducia, et cetera. Circa primum tria facit. Primo ponit admonitionem; secundo inducit exemplum sui ipsius ad admonitionem servandam, ibi capite nos, etc.; tertio ponit admonentis intentionem, ibi non ad condemnationem vestram, et cetera. 245. – Having informed the Corinthians how to behave in the future, the Apostle now commends them on the good they have accomplished in the past. But in order to connect the past with the future, he first concludes his admonition; secondly, he commends them (v. 4). In regard to the first he does three things. First, he gives the admonition; secondly, he gives himself as an example to have the admonition obeyed (v. 2); thirdly, he states his intention in admonishing them (v. 3). Circa primum tria facit. Primo ponit motivum ad observantiam admonitionis, et hoc est promissio eis facta. Et ideo dicit has igitur habentes promissiones charissimi, scilicet quod Deus habitet in nobis, et recipiat nos, et cetera. 246. – In regard to the first he does three things. First, he gives them a motive for observing the admonition, and this is a promise made to them. Hence, he says, Since we have these promises, beloved, namely, that God may dwell in you, and that you may receive us. Secundo ponit admonitionem, cum dicit: mundemus, et cetera. Et hoc ideo, quia promissiones istae non dantur nisi mundis, et ideo mundemus nos ab omni inquinamento carnis et spiritus, id est carnalium et spiritualium vitiorum. Is. LII, 11: mundamini, qui fertis vasa domini, et cetera. Ubi sciendum est, quod omne peccatum quod consummatur in delectatione carnis est carnale; illud vero quod consummatur in delectatione spiritus, est spirituale. Et inde est quod peccata carnalia, si considerentur quantum ad sui consummationem, sunt duo tantum, scilicet gula et luxuria, caetera vero peccata sunt spiritualia. Si vero considerentur quantum ad sui originem, sic omnia peccata possunt dici carnalia, quia omnia ex conceptione carnis originem habent, et hoc modo loquitur ad Gal. V, 19: manifesta sunt autem opera carnis, et cetera. 247. – Secondly, he gives the admonition, when he says, let us cleanse ourselves from every defilement of body and spirit, because those promises are given only to those who are clean; and so let us cleanse ourselves from every defilement of body and spirit, i.e., of carnal and spiritual vices: “Purify yourselves, you who bear the vessels of the Lord” (Is. 52:11). Here it should be noted that every sin which is consummated in carnal delight is carnal, while that which is consummated in spiritual delight is spiritual. That is why carnal sins, if they are considered in their consummation, are two in number, namely, gluttony and lust; but the others are spiritual sins. But if they are considered in their origin, then all sins can be considered carnal, because all of them have their origin in a conception of the flesh. In this sense he speaks to the Galatians (5:19): “Now the works of the flesh are plain: fornication, impurity, licentiousness, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, anger, selfishness, dissension, party spirit, envy, drunkenness, carousing, and the like.” Tertio ponit modum implendi admonitionem, ibi perficientes, et cetera. Posset enim aliquis dicere: numquid non sumus mundati in Baptismo? Et ideo addit perficientes sanctificationem, id est perficimus emundationem inchoatam in Baptismo. Sanctus enim idem est quod mundus. Lev. XI, 44 et XIX, 2: sancti estote, quoniam ego sanctus sum, et cetera. Perficiamus, inquam, quia philosophi conati sunt perficere et non potuerunt, quia non potuerunt omnia peccata vitare: quantumcumque enim aliqua peccata vitarent et exercerent actus virtutum, adhuc tamen remanebat in eis peccatum infidelitatis. Et ideo in vero cultu Dei solum perficitur emundatio, et hoc est quod dicit in timore, id est, in cultu, Dei. Eccli. XXV, 14: timor domini, et cetera. Sed contra Col. III, 14: super omnia charitatem habentes, quae est vinculum perfectionis. Non igitur perficitur sanctificatio in timore Dei, sed in charitate Dei. Respondeo. Dicendum est quod hic loquitur de timore filiali, qui est charitatis effectus, et non de servili, qui contrariatur charitati. Dicit autem in timore, ut doceat nos habere affectum ad Deum cum quadam reverentia et sollicitudine. Amor enim causat securitatem, quae quandoque negligentiam parit, sed, qui timet, semper est sollicitus. 248. – Thirdly, he mentions how they can fulfil the admonition when he says, making holiness perfect in the fear of God. For someone could say: were we not cleansed in baptism? That is why he added, making holiness perfect, i.e., let us perfect the original cleansing in baptism. For the same is holy that is clean: “Be holy, for I am holy” (Lev. 11:44). Let us perfect, I say, because philosophers have tried to be perfect and have failed, because they were unable to avoid sins. For no matter how many other sins they avoided or how well they exercised the acts of the virtues, the sin of unbelief remained in them. Consequently, cleanness is made perfect only in the true worship of God. And this is what he says: in the fear, i.e., in the worship, of God: “The fear of God has set itself over all things” (Sir. 25:14, Vulgate). But this seems contrary to Col. (3:14): “And above all these put on love, which binds everything together in perfect harmony.” Therefore, sanctification is not perfected in the fear of God, but in the love of God. I answer that he is speaking here of filial fear, which is the effect of charity, and not of servile fear, which is contrary to charity. He says, in the fear, to teach us to love God with a certain reverence and carefulness. For love causes security, which sometimes begets negligence; but one who fears is always careful. Consequenter cum dicit capite nos, etc., in exemplum se praebet, quasi diceret: accipite nos in exemplum. I Cor. XI, v. 1: imitatores mei estote, et cetera. Ego enim mihi cavi ab immunditia per sanctificationem, quia neminem laesi. Ubi notandum quod tripliciter potest aliquis laedere proximum, et nullo istorum modorum laesit aliquem. Primo in persona, et quantum ad hoc dicit neminem laesimus, scilicet in persona, sicut faciunt mali domini, Mich. III, 2: violenter tollitis pellem eorum, et cetera. Secundo quantum ad famam, inducendo eos, vel exemplo vel persuasionibus, ad malum, et quantum ad hoc dicit neminem corrupimus. I Cor. XV, 33: corrumpunt bonos mores. Tertio quantum ad subtractionem bonorum, et quantum ad hoc dicit neminem circumvenimus, id est in bonis fraudavimus. I Thess. IV, 6: ne quis circumveniat, et cetera. 249. – Then when he says, open your hearts to us, he offers himself as an example. As if to say: take us as an example: “Be imitators of me as I am of Christ” (1 Cor. 11:1). For I have guarded myself against uncleanness by holiness, because I have injured no one. Here it should be noted that a person might injure his neighbor in three ways, but Paul did not injure them in any of these ways. First, in his person, as to this he says, we have wronged no one, namely in his person, as wicked masters do: “Who tear the skin from off my people” (Mic. 3:2). Secondly, in their reputation by inducing them to evil by example and persuasion; as to this he says, we have corrupted no one: “Bad company ruins good morals” (1 Cor. 15:33). Thirdly, by stealing their goods; as to this he says, we have taken advantage of no one: “That no man transgress and wrong his brother in this matter” (1 Th. 4:6). Consequenter cum dicit non ad condemnationem vestram, etc., aperit suam intentionem, quasi dicat: non dico hoc condemnando vos, sed ut emendemini. Mala enim praeterita propter duo consueverunt commemorari. Aliquando ad condemnationem, et hoc quando non est ultra spes correctionis; aliquando autem ad emendationem, ut scilicet corrigantur, et hoc modo loquitur hic non ad condemnationem vestram, et cetera. I Cor. VII, 35: haec ad utilitatem vestram dico, et cetera. Et ratio huius est, quia gaudeo de bono vestro, praediximus enim quod vos estis, et cetera. Supra III, 2: epistola nostra vos estis scripta in cordibus nostris. Phil. I, 7: eo quod habeam vos, et cetera. Estis, inquam, in cordibus nostris, scilicet ad commoriendum et ad convivendum. Quod potest intelligi de morte culpae, et de morte naturali. De morte culpae, ut non intelligatur quod nos simus parati ad commoriendum vobiscum, id est quando vos peccatis, nos volumus peccare, sed quod mortem culpae vestram eo dolore accipimus quo nostram. II Cor. XI, 29: quis infirmatur, et ego non infirmor? I Cor. XV, 31: quotidie morior, et cetera. Et ad convivendum, quia ita gaudeo de bona vita vestra in gratia, sicut et de nostra. De morte vero naturali, ut intelligatur ad commoriendum, id est paratus sum mori pro vobis, infra XII, 15: libentius impendar, et superimpendar, etc., et ad convivendum, id est ut desiderem vos esse socios in vita aeterna, II Tim. II, 11: si commortui sumus, et convivemus. 250. – Then when he says, I do not say this to condemn you, he discloses his intention. As if to say: I do not say this to condemn you, but to correct you. For past evils are wont to be recalled sometimes for condemnation, when there is no further hope of correction; and sometimes for amendment, so that they will be corrected. And this is the way he speaks here: I do not say this to condemn you: “I say this for your own benefit” (1 Cor. 7:35). The reason for this is because I rejoice in your good: for I said before that you are in our hearts: “You yourselves are our letter of recommendation, written on your hearts, to be known and read by all men” (2 Cor. 3:2); “It is right for me to feel thus about you all, because I hold you in my heart, for you are all partakers with me of grace, both in my imprisonment and in the defense and confirmation of the gospel” (Phil. 1:7). You are, I say, in our hearts, namely, to die together and to live together. This can be understood of the death of guilt and of natural death. Of the death of guilt, not that we are prepared to die with you, i.e., not that when you sin, we want to sin, but we take your death of guilt with as much pain as our own: “Who is weak, and I am not weak?” (2 Cor. 11:29); “I die everyday” (1 Cor. 15:31). And to live together, because I take as much joy in your good life in grace as in my own. Of natural death: then to die together it taken to mean that I am prepared to die for you: “I will most gladly spend and be spent for your souls” (2 Cor. 12:15); to live together, i.e., I desire you to be companions in eternal life: “If we have died with him, we shall also live with him” (2 Tim. 2:11).
7-2
2 Cor. 7:4-9aApostolus posuit supra admonitionem ex praemissis conclusam, hic subdit suam commendationem. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo ponit eorum commendationem; secundo ipsam exponit, ibi nam et cum venissem, et cetera. 251. – Having given an admonition derived from what went before, the Apostle now gives his commendation. In regard to this he does two things: first, he commends them, secondly, he explains it (v. 5). Commendationem autem ipsorum ponit ostendendo affectum suum, qui consurgit ex bonis operibus quae Corinthii faciebant. Consuevit enim quadruplex affectus in cordibus diligentium consurgere ex bonis quae dilecti operantur, et hos quatuor se apostolus concepisse de eis ostendit. Et primo affectum fiduciae. Unde dicit multa mihi fiducia est apud vos, inquantum scilicet confido, quod qui bene coepistis, semper proficietis in melius. Unde ex bonis auditis de vobis, spero maiora in futurum. Phil. I, 6: confido de vobis, quod qui coepit in vobis opus bonum, et cetera. Hebr. VI, 9: confidimus de vobis, charissimi, et cetera. Et haec fiducia bona est et salubris. Hebr. X, 35: nolite amittere fiduciam, et cetera. 252. – He commends them by showing his love, which springs from the good works the Corinthians did. For in the hearts of those who love there are four feelings (affectus) that usually arise from the good works, which the lovers accomplish. First, the feeling of confidence. Hence, he says, I have great confidence in you, inasmuch as I am confident that, having begun well, you will always get better. Consequently, from the good things I have heard about you I hope for greater things to come: “And I am sure that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ” (Phil. 1:6); “Though we speak thus, yet in your case, beloved, we feel sure of better things that belong to salvation” (Heb. 6:9). And this confidence is good and salutary: “Therefore do not throw away your confidence, which has a great reward” (Heb. 10:35). Secundo ex hoc concipit affectum gloriationis. Ex quo enim quis bona amici sicut sua diligit, consequens est ut de bonis amici, sicut de propriis, glorietur. Et hoc specialiter, quoniam ipse est causa illorum bonorum, sicut magister est causa doctrinae discipuli. Et ideo dicit multa mihi gloriatio pro vobis est, et cetera. Prov. X, 1: gloria patris filius sapiens. 253. – Secondly, from this confidence he conceives a feeling of glory; for as a result of loving a friend’s good as his own, a person glories in that good as he glories in his own. And this is especially true here, because he is the cause of their goods, as a teacher is the cause of his disciple’s doctrine. Hence he says, I have great pride in you: “The glory of a father is a wise son” (Prov. 10:1, Aquinas Latin). Tertio ex praedictis concipit affectum consolationis, quando is qui laetatur et gloriatur de bonis suis vel amici, habet remedium contra tristitias. Consolatio enim est remedium contra tristitias. Naturale autem est quod semper delectatio et gaudium, tristitiae opponitur. Et, secundum philosophum, omnis delectatio debilitat, vel totaliter tollit tristitiam. Si delectatio sit contraria tristitiae, totaliter absorbet tristitiam; si autem non sit contraria, debilitat et diminuit eam. Et inde est quod quando quis est in tristitia, quandocumque nuntiantur sibi aliqua laeta, diminuitur tristitia. Et ideo, quia audit laeta de Corinthiis, dicit repletus sum consolatione, audita scilicet correctione vestra. Supra I, 5 s.: sicut abundant Christi passiones, et cetera. Phil. II, 2: si qua consolatio, et cetera. Implete gaudium meum, et cetera. 254. – Then as a result of these two feelings he conceives a feeling of consolation, when the one who rejoices and glories in his own goods or in those of his friend has a remedy against sadness. This consolation is a cure for sadness; and according to the Philosopher every delight weakens or entirely destroys sadness. If the delight is contrary to the sadness, it totally swallows up the sadness; but if it is not contrary, it weakens or diminishes it. This is why when a person is sad, his sadness is lessened whenever something joyful is announced to him. Therefore, because he heard joyful things about the Corinthians, he says, I am filled with comfort, having heard of your amendment: “For as we share abundantly in Christ’s sufferings, so through Christ we share abundantly in comfort too” (2 Cor. 1:5); “So if there is any encouragement in Christ, any incentive of love, any participation in the Spirit, any affection and sympathy, complete my joy by being of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind” (Phil. 2:1-2). Quarto, consurgit ex praedictis affectus exsuperantis gaudii. Licet enim ex aliquibus delectationibus diminuatur tristitia, non tamen totaliter tollitur, nisi gaudium sit magnum. Quamvis autem apostolus multas tribulationes sustineret, quia tamen multum gaudebat de bonis Corinthiorum, ideo non solum non absorbebatur tristitia totaliter, sed etiam superabundabat gaudio. Et ideo dicit superabundo gaudio in omni tribulatione nostra, id est gaudium meum superat omnem tribulationem, quae erat in animo meo. I Thess. II, 19: quae est enim spes nostra, aut gaudium, et cetera. Rom. c. XII, 12: in tribulatione patientes. 255. – Fourthly, there finally arises a feeling of exuberant joy, for although sadness is lessened by certain delights, it is not entirely displaced unless there is great joy. But although the Apostle had endured many tribulations, yet because he found great joy in the good actions of the Corinthians, not only was sadness entirely absorbed, but his joy superabounds. Hence he says, With all our affliction, I am overjoyed, i.e., my joy overcomes every tribulation that was in my soul: “For what is our hope or joy or crown of boasting before our Lord Jesus at his coming?” (1 Th. 2:19); “Be patient in tribulation” (Rom. 12:12). Consequenter cum dicit nam cum venissem, etc., exponit suam commendationem. Duo autem dixerat, scilicet se accepisse gaudium, et habuisse tribulationem. Primo ergo manifestat suam tribulationem; secundo vero suam consolationem, ibi sed qui consolatur, et cetera. 256. – Then when he says, For even when we came, he explains his commendation. But he said that he experienced two things, namely, joy and tribulation. First, therefore, he makes manifest his tribulation; secondly, his consolation (v. 6). Tribulationem autem aggravat ex duobus, scilicet ex subtractione remedii, et ex tribulationis multiplicitate. Ex subtractione remedii, cum dicit nam et cum venissem, et cetera. Quasi dicat: vere tribulationem habeo, quia in nullo consolor, nam cum venissem Macedoniam, nullam requiem habuit caro nostra. Hic facit mentionem de persecutione quam passus est in Macedonia, quando liberavit ancillam pythonissam, ut legitur Act. XVI, 18-24. Dicit autem nullam requiem habuit caro nostra, et non dicit spiritus noster, quia sancti semper habent pacem spiritus, cum etiam in adversis, anima quae in corpore patitur, spe futuri praemii quiescat, quamquam multa sustineat affectui carnis contraria. 257. – He enlarges upon his tribulations for two reasons, namely, because the cure was removed, and because the tribulations were multiplied. Because of the removal of the cure he says: For even when we came, etc. As if to say: indeed I have tribulation, because I am consoled by no one, for even when we came into Macedonia, our bodies had no rest. Here he is referring to the persecution he suffered in Macedonia, when he freed a certain possessed maidservant, as we read in Acts (16:16). He says, our bodies had no rest, but not “our spirit,” because the saints always have peace in spirit. For even in adversity the soul, which suffers in the body, rests in the hope of a reward to come, although it suffers many things contrary to the desires of the flesh. Ex multiplicitate vero tribulationum aggravat, cum dicit omnem tribulationem passi sumus, id est omne genus tribulationis secundum corpus, et secundum animam. Supra IV, 8: in omnibus tribulationem patimur, et cetera. Io. XVI, 33: in mundo pressuram, et cetera. Et quod omnem tribulationem passus fuerit exponit consequenter, cum dicit foris pugnae, intus timores. Foris, id est extra meipsum, pugnae persecutionum, sed tamen intus, id est in corde, est timor de malo, timens persecutionem in futuro. Deut. c. XXXII, 25: foris vastabit eos gladius, et cetera. Sed contra Prov. XXVIII, 1: iustus quasi leo confidens absque terrore erit. Respondeo. Est sine timore quantum ad spiritum, non tamen quantum ad carnem. Vel foris, id est extra Ecclesiam, pugnae illatae ab infidelibus, sed intus timores, ne scilicet illi qui intra Ecclesiam sunt, excidant a fide propter persecutores. Vel foris, id est in manifesto, pugnae, quibus impugnantur a manifestis inimicis; intus timores, qui iniiciuntur nobis ab illis, qui dicunt se amicos, et non sunt: quia, ut dicit Boetius de consolatione, nulla pestis efficacior ad nocendum, quam familiaris inimicus. Matth. X, 36: inimici hominis domestici eius. 258. – But he enlarges upon his tribulations by reason of their number when he says, we were afflicted at every turn, i.e., every type of tribulation in the body and in the soul: “In the world you have tribulation; but be of good cheer, I have overcome the world” (Jn. 16:33). That he had suffered all tribulations he explains when he says, fighting without and fear within, i.e., outside myself the combat of persecutions, but within, i.e., in the heart, the fear of evil, fearing persecutions in the future: “In the open the sword shall bereave” (Deut. 32:25) But this seems contrary to Prov. (28:1): “But the righteous are bold as a lion.” I answer that he is without dread as to the spirit, but not as to the flesh. Or without, i.e., outside the Church, combats are started by unbelievers; but fear within, lest those who are in the Church fall away from the faith on account of persecutors. Or without, i.e., in public, fighting, because we are attacked by obvious enemies; fear within, which is produced in us by those who call themselves friends but are not. For as Boethius says in The Consolation: “No pest can inflict more harm than a friendly enemy”; “A man’s foes will be those of his own household” (Matt. 10:36). Consequenter, cum dicit sed qui consolatur, etc., ponit materiam suae consolationis, quam extollit ex duobus, scilicet grata praesentia Titi, et ex consolatione Titi, ibi non solum autem, et cetera. 259. – Then when he says, But God, who comforts, he states the reason for his consolation, which he applauds from two aspects, namely, from the gratifying presence of Titus and from the consolation of Titus (v. 7). Dicit ergo: licet hic graviter afflicti fuerimus, sed qui, scilicet Deus, consolatur humiles, consolatus est, etc., cuius praesentia, utpote mihi gratissima, est et in adiutorium. Supra: qui consolatur nos in omni tribulatione nostra. Dicit autem, qui consolatur humiles, quia superbos non consolatur, sed eis resistit, ut dicitur Iac. IV, 6 et I Petr. V, 5. Consolatur autem humiles, dando eis gratiam, quae est consolatio spiritus sancti. Is. LXI, 2: ut consolarer omnes lugentes, et cetera. 260. – He says therefore: although we were gravely afflicted here, God, who comforts the downcast, comforted us by the coming of Titus, whose presence was very pleasing and a great help to me: “Who comforts us in all our affliction” (2 Cor. 1:4). He says, who comforts the downcast [humble], because he does not comfort the proud but resists them, as it says in James (4:6) and 1 Pet. (5:5). But he comforts the humble by giving grace, which is the consolation of the Holy Spirit: “To comfort all who mourn” (Is. 61:2). Non solum autem, et cetera. Hic ponitur alia materia consolationis apostoli, scilicet consolatio Titi. Et materia huius consolationis est duplex. Prima emendatio Corinthiorum, quam habuerunt in praesentia Titi; secunda est devotio Corinthiorum, quam ostenderunt ad Titum, ibi in consolatione autem vestra, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo ponit consolationem de poenitentia Corinthiorum; secundo exponit quaedam quae dixit, ibi contristati enim estis, et cetera. Circa primum tria facit. Primo ponit consolationem Titi; secundo materiam consolationis, ibi referens nobis, etc.; tertio effectum consolationis in mente apostoli, ibi ita ut magis gauderem, et cetera. 261. – And not only by his coming but also by the comfort with which he was comforted in you. Here he gives another reason for the Apostle’s consolation, namely, the consolation of Titus. The reason for this comfort is twofold: first, the amendment of the Corinthians, which they had in Titus’ presence; secondly, the devotion they showed to Titus (v. 13b). In regard to the first he does two things. First, he mentions his comfort in the repentance of the Corinthians; secondly, he explains something he has said (v. 9b). In regard to the first he does three things. First, he mentions the comfort of Titus; secondly, the reason for the comfort (v. 7b); thirdly, the effect of the comfort on the mind of the Apostle (v. 7c). Dicit ergo: non solum consolatur nos Deus in adventu Titi, sed etiam in consolatione qua ipse Titus consolatus est de vobis et in vobis. 262. – He says therefore: God not only comforted us in the coming of Titus, but also in the comfort with which Titus was comforted by you and in you. Et huius consolationis materia est, quia ipse Titus consolatus est, referens nobis vestrum desiderium, et cetera. Ubi tria ponit laudabilia propter tria reprehensibilia quae fuerunt in eis. Fuerunt enim pigri ad bonum, et contra hoc dicit referens nobis vestrum desiderium, de proficiendo in melius. Item erant proni ad malum, et contra hoc dicit vestrum fletum, scilicet de peccatis commissis. Ier. VI, 26: luctum unigeniti fac, et cetera. Item erant faciles deceptioni pseudorum, et contra hoc dicit vestram aemulationem, contra pseudos habitam pro amore mei. Nam ante aemulabamini contra me pro eis. 263. – The reason for this comfort is that Titus himself was comforted in you, as he told us of your longing, your mourning, your zeal for me. Here he mentions three praiseworthy things to counter the three blameworthy things that were in them. For they were lazy in regard to the good; against this he says, he told us of your longing to make more progress. They were also prone to evil; against this he says, your mourning, namely for sins committed: “Make mourning as for an only son” (Jer. 6:26). Finally, they were easily deceived by the false apostles; against this he says, your zeal against the false apostles for love of me. For previously you were zealous for them against me. Consequenter, cum dicit ita ut magis, etc., ponit affectum conceptum ex consolatione Titi, qui quidem affectus est gaudium. Unde circa hoc tria facit. Primo ponit conceptum gaudium; secundo ostendit suae aestimationis imitationem; tertio subdit rationem gaudii. Dicit ergo: intantum gavisus sum de his quae Titus retulit mihi, ita ut magis gauderem de hoc, quam de tribulatione mea doluerim. Nam spiritualia praeferenda sunt temporalibus. Vel, ut magis gauderem de hoc quod contristavi vos, quam doluerim olim. Peccaverant enim faciendo fornicationem, et apostolus increpaverat eos, ut patet in prima epistola. Tunc autem incertus erat apostolus, quem eventum deberet habere illa tristitia, bonum scilicet an malum; et ideo dubitans poenituit. Sed videns postmodum quod bonum inde provenerat, gaudebat, ideo dicit quoniam etsi contristavi vos, increpando in prima epistola, non me poenitet modo, quia correcti estis, etsi olim poeniteret, quando scilicet eram incertus, utrum tristitia induceret vos ad correctionem vel desperationem, videns quod epistola illa, etsi ad horam vos contristavit, nunc gaudeo, quia estis conversi. Et rationem gaudii assignat, quia non gaudeo de hoc, quia contristati estis, sed de effectu, scilicet de correctione, quia scilicet contristati estis non ad desperationem, sed ad poenitentiam, sicut medicus non gaudet de amaritudine medicinae sed de effectu, scilicet de sanitate. Supra VI, 10: quasi tristes, semper autem gaudentes. 264. – Then when he says, so that I rejoiced still more, he mentions the feeling he conceived from Titus’ consolation, namely, one of joy. Hence, in regard to this he does three things: first, he mentions the joy he felt; secondly, he intimates his doubts; thirdly, the reason for the joy. He says therefore: I was so pleased with the things Titus related to me, that I rejoiced still more in that than I grieved in my tribulations. For spiritual things must be preferred to temporal things. Or that I rejoiced still more for having saddened you than I sorrowed before. For they had sinned by fornication, and the Apostle has rebuked them, as is evident from the first epistle (chaps. 5-6). But at that time he wondered what effect that sadness would have, whether good or bad; therefore, in his wonder he felt sad. But later, seeing that good had come from it, he was glad. Hence, he says: For even if I made you sorry with my letter, I do not regret it now, because you have been corrected. And though I did regret it before, namely, when I was uncertain whether the sadness would bring you to correct yourselves or to despair, seeing that that letter grieved you, though only for a while, now I am glad, because you have been converted. Then he gives the reason for his joy, because I am not glad that you were made sorrowful, but at the effect, namely, your amendment, because you were grieved not unto despair, but you were grieved into repenting; just as a physician is not glad at the bitterness of the medicine, but at the effect, namely, health: “As sorrowful, yet always rejoicing” (2 Cor. 6:10).
7-3
2 Cor. 7:9b-11Posita consolatione apostoli et Titi de tristitia Corinthiorum, eo quod fuerit ad poenitentiam, et non ad desperationem, hic consequenter huius consolationis ratio assignatur, eorum tristitiam commendando. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo enim commendat eorum tristitiam; secundo ex hoc concludit propositum, ibi et si scripsi vobis, et cetera. Commendat autem Corinthiorum tristitiam ex duobus. Primo ex causa, secundo ex effectu, ibi quae enim tristitia est, et cetera. 265. – Having mentioned the comfort the Apostle and Titus experienced at the grief of the Corinthians, because it ended in repentance and not in despair, he now gives the reason for his comfort by commending their sorrow. In regard to this he does two things. First, he commends their sorrow; secondly, from this he concludes to his intent (v. 12). In regard to the first he does two things: first, he commends their sorrow on the part of its cause; secondly, on the part of its effect (v. 10). Causa autem ex qua commendatur eorum tristitia, haec est, quia est secundum Deum. Et ideo dicit: licet ad horam contristaverim vos per epistolam, tamen gaudeo, id est quia contristati estis secundum Deum. Ubi sciendum est, quod tristitia et gaudium et communiter omnis affectio, ex amore causatur. Tristatur enim quis, quia caret eo quod amat. Qualis autem est amor, talis est tristitia ex amore causata. Est autem duplex amor. Unus quo diligitur Deus, et ex hoc causatur tristitia quae est secundum Deum; alius amor quo amatur saeculum, et ex hoc causatur tristitia saeculi. Amor, quo diligimus Deum, facit nos libenter servire Deo, sollicite quaerere honorem Dei, et vacare Deo dulciter. Et quia peccando impedimur a servitio Dei et ideo ei non vacamus, nec eius honorem quaerimus, ideo amor Dei causat tristitiam de peccato, et haec est tristitia secundum Deum, quae quidem tristitia non fuit vobis ad malum, nec detrimentum, sed potius ad fructum et meritum. Et ideo dicit ut in nullo detrimentum patiamini ex nobis, quia non solum bona et grata quae vobis impendimus, vobis prosunt, sed etiam hoc ipsum quod vos corrigimus et contristamus. Hebr. XII, 11: omnis disciplina in praesenti, et cetera. 266. – The cause on account of which he commends their sorrow is that it was according to God. Therefore he says: although for a time I was sorry for the epistle, nevertheless I rejoice now, for you felt a godly grief. Here it should be noted that sorrow and joy and generally every emotion arise from love; for a person is sad when he lacks what he loves. The kind of love determines the kind of sorrow it causes. But there are two kinds of love: one by which God is loved, and from this arises a sorrow which is according to God; the other is that by which the world is loved, and from this arises a worldly sorrow. The love by which we love God makes us serve him gladly, honor him carefully and set some time apart for God joyfully. But because sin hinders us from serving God, we devote no time to him or seek his honor, the love of God causes sorrow for sin: and this is sorrow according to God. This sorrow was not in you to produce evil and loss, but fruit and merit. Hence, he says, that you suffered no loss through us, because you profit not only from the good and pleasant things we bestow on you, but also from the fact that we correct and sadden you: “For the moment all discipline seems painful rather than pleasant; later it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it” (Heb. 12:11). Consequenter cum dicit quae enim tristitia, etc., commendat eorum tristitiam ex effectu, qui quidem est praemium vitae aeternae. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo enim ponit effectum in generali; secundo experimentum specialiter in eis consecutum, ibi ecce enim hoc ipsum, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo enim ponit effectum tristitiae, quae est secundum Deum; secundo ponit effectum tristitiae, quae est secundum mundum, ibi saeculi autem, et cetera. 267. – The when he says, For godly grief, he commends their sorrow because of its effect, which is the reward of eternal life. In regard to this he does two things. First, he mentions the effect in general; secondly, what their experience teaches (v. 11). In regard to the first he does two things. First, he mentions the effect of sorrow which is according to God; secondly, of sorrow which is according to the world (v. 10b). Dicit ergo primo: dico quod tristitia nostra non fuit vobis detrimentum, enim, id est quia, tristitia quae est secundum Deum, operatur poenitentiam; poenitentiam autem dico in salutem stabilem, id est sempiternam, quae est salus stabilis, et est beatorum, de qua Is. XLIX: salus autem mea in sempiternum erit. Et hanc operatur poenitentia. Matth. III, 2: agite poenitentiam, appropinquabit enim regnum caelorum. Et dicit stabilem, ut excludat salutem temporalem, quae est transitoria et communis ipsis hominibus et iumentis, de qua in Ps. XXXV, 7: homines et iumenta salvabis, domine, et cetera. 268. – He says therefore: I say that our sorrow was not a loss for you, i.e., for godly grief produces a repentance, I say, that leads to salvation, i.e., eternal salvation, which is a steadfast salvation belonging to the blessed: “But my salvation will be for ever, and my deliverance will never be ended” (Is. 51:6); and this is the work of penance: “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand” (Matt. 3:2). He says, steadfast, to exclude temporal, which is transitory and common to men and beasts: “Man and beasts you save, O Lord” (Ps. 35:8). Sed contra hoc quod dicit quod tristitia, quae est secundum Deum, poenitentiam operatur, videtur esse, quia ipsa tristitia secundum Deum est poenitentia. Poenitere enim est tristari de malo, et secundum Deum. Non ergo operatur poenitentiam. Respondeo. Dicendum est, quod poenitentia habet tres partes, quarum pars prima est tristitia, scilicet dolor et compunctio de peccatis; aliae duae sunt confessio et satisfactio. Cum ergo dicit, quod tristitia operatur poenitentiam, intelligendum est, quod compunctio, seu dolor de peccato operetur in nobis poenitentiam, id est, alias partes poenitentiae, scilicet confessionem et satisfactionem. Vel dicendum est, quod tristitia secundum Deum est communior quam poenitentia, quia poenitentia est de proprio peccato, sed tristatur quis secundum Deum et de peccatis propriis et de alienis. Sic ergo effectus tristitiae, quae est secundum Deum, est salus aeterna. Effectus vero tristitiae, quae est secundum mundum, est mors. Quia enim qui diligit saeculum, inimicus Dei constituitur, ut dicitur Iac. IV, 4, ideo ex amore saeculi mors causatur. Tristatur enim secundum saeculum quis, non quia peccans Deum offendit, sed, deprehensus in peccato, punitur de eo et detegitur. Et haec tristitia est vitanda in peccatis. Eccli. XXX, 24: tristitiam longe fac a te, et cetera. 269. – But against what he says, that sadness which is according to God works penance, it seems that the very sorrow according to God is penance. For penance is sorrow over evil and is according to God. Therefore it does not work penance. I answer that penance has three parts, the first of which is sorrow, namely grief and compunction over sins; the other two are confession and satisfaction. Therefore, when he says that sorrow works penance, it is to be understood that compunction or sorrow for sin works penance in us, i.e., the other parts of penance, namely, confession and satisfaction. Or we might say that sorrow according to God is more common than penance, because penance is about one’s own sins, but one sorrows according to God for his own sins and those of others. Thus, therefore, the effect of sorrow according to God is eternal salvation, but the effect of sorrow according to the world is death. For since a person who loves the world is made an enemy of God, as it says in Jas. (4:4), the love of the world causes death. For a person is sorrowful according to the world, not because he offended God by sin, but because, being caught in his sin, he is punished for it and exposed; and this sadness should be avoided in sins (Sir. 30:24, Vulgate). Consequenter manifestat effectum praedictum per experimentum sumptum in ipsis, cum dicit ecce enim hoc ipsum, etc., quasi dicat: vere salutem stabilem, quia experimento patet quod in nobis multa, quae ad salutem ducunt, operatur. Ponit autem sex ad hoc pertinentia, quorum unum est generale, scilicet sollicitudo. Quando enim homo est in laetitia, de facili committit aliquas negligentias; sed quando est tristis et in timore, sollicitatur. Et ideo dicit ecce enim, scilicet in vobis experti estis, hoc ipsum, scilicet secundum Deum contristari vos, quantam in vobis operatur sollicitudinem ad vitandum mala et ad faciendum bona. Mich. VI, 8: indicabo tibi, o homo, quid sit bonum, et cetera. Et infra: sollicitum, et cetera. 270. – Then (v. 11) he explains this effect from the experience learned from them. As if to say: a truly steadfast salvation, because it is clear from experience that it works in us many things that lead to salvation. He mentions six of these things, one of which is general, namely, carefulness. For when a person is free of care, it is easy for him to become negligent; but when he is sad and fearful, he is careful. Hence he says, For see, i.e., you have experienced in your own case, what earnestness this godly grief has produced in you to avoid evil and to do good: “He has shown you, O man, what is good” (Mic. 6:8); and then, “walk carefully with your God.” Alia vero sunt specialia, quorum quaedam pertinent ad effectum interiorem, quaedam ad actum exteriorem. Eorum vero quae pertinent ad effectum interiorem, quaedam sunt ad peccati remotionem, quaedam vero ad boni adeptionem. Nam verus poenitens debet recedere a malo et facere bonum. Quantum autem ad remotionem mali, ponit tria. Primum est, ut desistat facere malum, et quantum ad hoc dicit sed defensionem, contra alios qui nos ad malum inducunt. I Petr. V, 9: cui resistite fortes in fide. Vel, secundum Glossam, ut contra pseudo-apostolos me defendatis. Eph. VI, 13: accipite armaturam Dei, et cetera. Secundum est quod homo indignetur contra se pro peccatis quae fecit, et quantum ad hoc dicit sed indignationem. Indignatio autem sui operatur tristitiam secundum Deum. Is. LXIII, v. 5: indignatio mea auxiliata est mihi. Tertium est, quod sit in continuo timore de futuro, ut caveat, et quantum ad hoc dicit sed timorem, de recidivo, ne scilicet in futuro similiter contingat. Eccli. XXV, 14: timor domini omnia, et cetera. Quantum autem ad hanc boni adeptionem, duo ponit. Primo desiderium, quo ad bonum afficitur, et quantum ad hoc dicit sed desiderium, quo bonum facere affectetis. Prov. c. XI, 23: desiderium iustorum omne bonum. Secundo aemulationem bonam, qua bonos imitari conatur, et quantum ad hoc dicit sed aemulationem, ut scilicet me et alios bonos imitemini. I Cor. XIV, 1: sectamini charitatem, aemulamini charismata meliora. 271. – The other five are special: some pertain to internal feeling and some to external action. Of those that pertain to inward feeling, some are for the removal of sin, and some for the attainment of good. For a true penitent should depart from evil and do good. In regard to the removal of evil he lists three, the first of which is to desist from evil; as to this he says, what eagerness to clear yourselves, against those who induce us to evil: “Resist him, firm in your faith” (1 Pet. 5:9). Or according to a Gloss, to defend me against the false apostle: “Take the whole armor of God” (Eph. 6:13). The second is that a man be indignant against himself for the sins he has committed; as to this he says, what indignation. For indignation at oneself works sorrow according to God: “And my wrath upheld me” (Is. 63:5). The third is that he live in continual fear of the future, so as to be wary; as to this he says, what alarm at falling again, namely, that the same thing might happen in the future: “The fear of God came upon all” (Sir. 25:14, Vulgate). As to the attainment of good he lists two things. The first is desire for what is good; as to this he says, what longing [desire], by which a man is inclined to do good: “The desire of the righteous ends only in good” (Prov. 11:23). Secondly, good rivalry, by which one strives to imitate those who are good; as to this he says, what zeal to imitate me and other good men: “But earnestly desire the higher gifts” (1 Cor. 12:31) Eorum vero quae pertinent ad exteriorem actum duo ponit. Primum est ut vindicent in seipsis quod peccaverunt: et hoc utile est. Cum enim omne malum necessarium sit puniri, vel ab homine vel a Deo, si hoc non punit, melius est quod homo malum in se puniat quod fecit, quam quod Deus, quia, ut dicitur Hebr. X, v. 31, horrendum est incidere in manus Dei, et cetera. Et quantum ad hoc dicit sed vindictam, id est quia peccantes punitis, et etiam vos ipsos. I Cor. IX, 27: castigo corpus meum, et cetera. Is. XXVI: iustitiam non fecimus, et cetera. Secundum est quod totaliter abstineat a malo. Et ideo dicit in omnibus exhibuistis, duce scilicet fide, incontaminatos esse negotio, scilicet Christiano. Supra VI, 4: in omnibus exhibeamus, et cetera. Eph. I, 4: elegit nos ante mundi constitutionem, ut essemus sancti. Ps. c, 6: ambulans in via immaculata, et cetera. Vel negotio de quo scilicet correcti estis, puta de favore quem dedistis fornicatori, sed postmodum, puniendo et condemnando ipsum, ostendistis vos in hoc incontaminatos esse. 272. – Of those which pertain to outward action he mentions two. The first is that they take revenge on themselves for having sinned; and this is useful. For since every evil must be punished either by man or by God, if he [God] does not punish here, it is better that a man punish in himself the evil that he has done than that God do it, because as it says in Heb. (10:31): “It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.” As to this he says, what punishment, i.e., because you punish sinners and even yourselves: “But I pommel my body and subdue it, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified” (1 Cor. 9:27); (Is. 26:18). The second is that he refrain from sin altogether; hence he says, At every point you have proved yourselves, namely, with faith leading you, guiltless in the matter, i.e., of being a Christian: “But as servants of God we commend ourselves in every way” (2 Cor. 6:4); “He chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him” (Eph. 1:4); “He who walks in the way that is blameless shall minister to me” (Ps. 101:6). Or in the matter about which you were corrected, for the favor you did for the fornicator; but later by punishing and condemning him you showed that you were undefiled in this.
7-4
2 Cor. 7:12-16Hic, assignata ratione quare gaudet apostolus de ipsorum tristitia, consequenter inducit conclusionem suam, in qua duo facit. Primo enim ostendit intentionem suam quam habuit in scribendo; secundo manifestat gaudium quod habuit de ipsorum correctione, ibi ideo consolati, et cetera. 273. – Here the Apostle assigns the reason why he rejoices over them; then he draws his conclusion, in which he does two things. First, he discloses the intention he had in writing; secondly, he reveals the joy he had over their amendment (v. 13). Dicit ergo primo: ex quo incontaminati estis, igitur apparet quod et si scripsi vobis, per epistolam increpando, non scripsi propter eum tantum qui fecit iniuriam, incestu maculando cubile patris sui, ut dicitur I Cor. V, 1; nec propter eum tantum qui passus est, scilicet propter patrem, quasi non propter zelum vindictae solum; sed hoc feci ad manifestandam sollicitudinem nostram, quam pro vobis habemus, id est ut sciretis quam solliciti simus pro vobis. Et hoc dico coram Deo, ut sit iuramentum, id est Deo teste. Vel ad manifestandam coram vobis Deo, scilicet de omnibus, sollicitudinem nostram. Col. II, 1: volo vos scire quam sollicitudinem, et cetera. Vel aliter: non scripsi tantum propter eum qui fecit iniuriam, ut scilicet corrigeretur, vel propter eum qui passus est ut placaretur, sed ad manifestandam, etc., ut scilicet vos, qui indignati fuistis pro contumelia et poena inflicta fornicatori, reconciliaremini Deo. 274. – He says therefore: from the fact that you are undefiled, it is apparent that although I wrote to you to rebuke you in my epistle, it was not only on account of the one who did the wrong by staining his father’s chamber with incest, as it says in 1 Cor. (chap. 5), nor on account of the one alone who suffered the wrong, namely, on account of the father, as if not on account of the zeal for revenge only, but I did this that our solicitude might be revealed, which we have for you, i.e., that you might know how careful we are for you. And I say this in the sight of God, as an oath with God as witness: “For I want you to know how greatly I strive for you” (Col. 2:1). Or another way: I have not written to you only for the sake of him that did the wrong, that he might be corrected, or for him that suffered it, that he might be placated, but that our solicitude for you might be revealed, namely, to you who were indignant for the insult and for the punishment inflicted on the fornicator: be reconciled to God. Consequenter concludit gaudium quod habuit de eorum correctione, cum dicit ideo et consolati sumus, etc., quasi dicat: quia hoc consecutus sum, ex eo quod scripsi, scilicet quod estis correcti, ideo consolati sumus, id est consolationem accepimus. Gaudium enim hominis est cum consequitur quod cum desiderio intendit. Supra I, 12: abundantius autem, et cetera. 275. – Then he concludes to the joy he had at their correction when he says, therefore we were comforted. As if to say: because I obtained this from writing to you, namely, that you are corrected, therefore, we were comforted, i.e., we took comfort. For a man is joyful when he obtains what he desired and intended: “But by the grace of God” (2 Cor. 1:12). Consequenter cum dicit in consolatione autem, etc., ponit secundam causam suae consolationis, quae sumitur ex devotione quam ostenderunt ad Titum. Et circa hoc tria facit. Primo ponit gaudium suum de gaudio Titi conceptum; secundo gaudii rationem assignat, ibi et si quid apud illum, etc.; tertio materiam gaudii Titi assignat, ibi reminiscentis omnium vestrum, et cetera. 276. – Then when he says, and besides our own comfort, he states the second cause of his comfort, which is taken from the devotion they showed to Titus. In regard to this he does three things. First, he mentions the joy he felt at Titus’ joy; secondly, the reason for the joy (v. 14); thirdly, the matter over which Titus rejoiced (v. 15). Dicit ergo primo: gavisi sumus, de correctione vestra, autem, id est sed, in consolatione nostra abundantius magis gavisi sumus, quam turbati fuerimus de tribulatione, super gaudio Titi. Vel magis gavisi sumus, id est magis gaudium attulit consolationi nostrae gaudium Titi. Et hoc quia refectus est spiritus eius. Tunc enim reficitur animus praelati, quando subditi eius sunt obedientes ei et eum reverentur. Ad Philem.: refice viscera, et cetera. Refectus, inquam, ab omnibus vobis, quia omnes vel correcti estis, vel est spes correctionis. 277. – He says, therefore: we did rejoice at your amendment, and besides our own comfort, we rejoiced still more than we were disturbed by the tribulation, at the joy of Titus: and this because his mind has been set at rest by you all. For a prelate’s spirit is refreshed when his subjects are obedient to him and revere him: “Refresh my heart in Christ” (Phlm. 20). Set at rest, I say, by you all, because all are either amended or there is a hope of amendment. Rationem autem huius gaudii assignat quantum ad duo. Unum est ex parte apostoli, quia scilicet ipse inventus est verax. Nam apostolus commendaverat Corinthios Tito, antequam iret ad eos. Quia vero nunc ita invenit Titus, sicut apostolus dixit, gaudet apostolus verba sua vera fuisse, et hoc est quod dicit et si quid apud illum de vobis gloriatus sum, commendando vos. Dicit autem gloriatus sum, quia gloria apostoli erat bonum illorum. Non sum confusus, id est non erubesco me falsa dixisse. Quando enim aliquis invenitur mendax, confunditur. Eccli. XXXVII, 20: ante omnia sermo verax, et cetera. Sed sicut omnia in veritate vobis locutus sum, id est sicut praedicavi vobis veritatem, ita gloriatio nostra quae fuit ad Titum de vobis, veritas facta est, id est inventa est vera. Alia ratio est ex parte Corinthiorum. Nam amici desiderant, ut illi quos diligunt, ab omnibus diligantur. Quia ergo Titus diligebat Corinthios propter eorum devotionem, ideo de hoc apostolus gaudebat. Et ideo dicit apostolus et viscera eius, etc., quasi dicat: non solum gaudeo quia inventus sum verax, sed etiam quia viscera eius, id est viscerosa charitas eius, et nimius amor abundantius, quam antea, in vobis esset, ex quo vidit profectum vestrum; vel abundantius quam in aliis. Eph. VI: induite vos sicut electi Dei, et cetera. 278. – He assigns the reason for this joy from two aspects: one is on the part of the Apostle, namely, because he was found to be truthful. For the Apostle had commended the Corinthians to Titus before he went to them. But now, because Titus found them to be just as the Apostle had said, he rejoiced that his words were true. And this is what he says, for if I have expressed to him some pride in you, by commending you, I was not put to shame, i.e., I do not blush as having said something false. For when a person is found to be a liar, he is ashamed: “A man skilled in words may be hated” (Sir. 37:20). But just as everything we said to you was true, i.e., as I have preached the truth to you, so our boasting before Titus has proved true. The other reason is on the part of the Corinthians. For friends desire that those whom they love be loved by everyone. Therefore, because Titus loved the Corinthians for their devotion, the Apostle rejoices over this and says, and his heart goes out all the more to you. As if to say: I not only rejoice because I was found to be right, but also because his heart, i.e., his charity and great love, goes out all the more to you than before, because he has seen your progress; or, more abundantly than towards others: “Put on then, as God’s chosen ones, holy and beloved, compassion, kindness, lowliness, meekness, and patience” (Col. 3:12). Materiam autem gaudii manifestat ex duobus, scilicet ex obedientia et reverentia. Ex obedientia quidem cum dicit reminiscentis omnium vestrum obedientiam, qua obedienter sibi obtemperastis. In quo etiam et laudavit vos. I Reg. XV, 22: melior est obedientia, et cetera. Eccli. III, 1: filii sapientiae Ecclesia iustorum. Ex reverentia autem cum dicit quomodo cum timore, scilicet filiali, non servili, cum timore animi et tremore corporis excepistis eum. Gal. IV, 15: testimonium enim vobis, et cetera. Et quia ita habuistis vos ad eum, gavisus sum, quia verax inventus sum, et ipse diligit vos. Unde gaudeo quod in omnibus confido in vobis, non solum in bona voluntate sed etiam in bonis operibus in futuro, quod bene vos habeatis. Hebr. VI, 9: confidimus de vobis meliora et viciniora saluti. 279. – He discloses that the matters over which he rejoiced were their obedience and reverence: obedience, when he says, as he remembers the obedience of you all; for this also he praised you: “To obey is better than sacrifice” (1 Sam. 15:22); “Listen to me, your father, O children” (Sir. 3:1). But their reverence when he says, and the fear, namely, filial and not servile, with fear of soul and trembling of body with which you received him: “For I bear you witness that, if possible, you would have plucked out your eyes and given them to me” (Gal. 4:15). And because you acted that way toward him, I rejoiced, for I was found to be right and he loves you. Hence, I rejoice, because I have perfect confidence in you, not only in good will, but also in good works, that you will act well in the future: “In your case, beloved, we feel sure of better things that belong to salvation” (Heb. 6:9).
8-1
2 Cor. 8:1-8Posita iam exhortatione ad bonum in generali, hic consequenter exhortatur eos ad quoddam bonum particulare, scilicet ad largitionem collectarum pro sanctis qui erant in Ierusalem. Nam, sicut Act. c. XV, 2 dicitur, et apostolus tangit ad Gal. c. II, 9, apostoli imposuerunt Paulo et Barnabae, ut proponerent verbum salutis gentibus, exhortando eos ad subveniendum sanctis, qui erant in Ierusalem, qui venditis omnibus, et positis ad pedes apostolorum, in maxima erant paupertate; et ad hoc inducit eos ad praesens. Ubi duo facit. Primo inducit eos ad dandum; secundo monet ad modum dandi, ut scilicet cito et abundanter dent, et hoc cap. IX, ibi nam de ministerio, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo tractat de collectis dandis; secundo de ministris per quos huiusmodi collectae fiant, ibi gratias autem Deo qui dedit, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo inducit eos ad dandum; secundo excludit excusationem, ibi si enim voluntas prompta est, et cetera. Inducit autem eos ad dandum tripliciter. Primo exemplo aliorum qui dederunt; secundo exemplo Christi, ibi scitis enim gratiam domini nostri, etc.; tertio ex ipsorum propria utilitate, ibi hoc enim vobis utile, et cetera. Circa primum tria facit. Primo ponit exemplum; secundo ostendit se permotum ab hoc exemplo, ibi ita ut rogaremus Titum, etc.; tertio monet ut ipsi hoc exemplum sequantur, ibi sed sicut in omnibus abundatis, et cetera. Circa primum sciendum est quod apostolus ad hoc, ut Corinthii liberaliter tribuant, proponit eis Macedones in exemplum. Et commendat eos quantum ad duo, scilicet primo quantum ad patientiam in adversis; secundo quantum ad liberalitatem in donis, ibi et altissima paupertas, et cetera. 280. – Having exhorted them to good in general, he now exhorts them to a particular good, namely, to contribute to the things being collected for the saints at Jerusalem. For, as it says in Acts (chap. 5), and suggested in Gal. (2:10), the apostles had charged Paul and Barnabas to preach the word of salvation to the Gentiles and exhort them to help the saints in Jerusalem, who having sold all their possessions and placed them at the feet of the apostles, were in dire need. It is to this that he induces them now, and he does two things. First, he urges them to give; secondly, he advises them how to give, namely, quickly and generously (chap. 9) In regard to the first he does two things. First, he treats of what should be given; secondly, of the ministers by whom these things will be collected (v. 16). In regard to the first he does two things. First, he exhorts them to give; secondly, he rejects any excuse (v. 13). He uses three things to urge them to give. First, the example of others who gave; secondly, the example of Christ (v. 9); thirdly, their own benefit (v. 10). In regard to the first he does three things. First, he gives the example; secondly, he shows how he was moved by this example (v. 6); thirdly, he suggests that they follow this example (v. 7). In regard to the first it should be noted that in order to induce the Corinthians to contribute generously, he proposes to them the example of the Macedonians and commends them for two things, namely, their patience in adversity and their generosity in giving. Circa primum sciendum est quod apostolus inducit eos ad eleemosynas ut merita ipsorum crescant, et ideo in illo tempore hoc fecit, quando possunt mereri, scilicet tempore gratiae; tunc enim eleemosynae meritoriae sunt. Et hoc est quod dicit notam vobis facimus gratiam, id est gratuitum donum Dei, scilicet eleemosynarum largitionem. Et dicit hoc esse gratiam, quia quidquid boni facimus, est ex gratia Dei. Quae, quidem gratia, non est data istis, sed mihi, inquantum scilicet ex mea procuratione et sollicitudine et monitione, Macedones ad hoc moti sunt. Eph. III, 8: mihi autem omnium sanctorum minimo, et cetera. Data est, inquam, mihi in Ecclesiis Macedoniae, id est apud fideles Macedoniae. 281. – In regard to the first, it should be noted that the Apostle urges them to give alms, so that their merit may grow. Consequently, he did this at a time when they could merit, namely, in the time of grace, for that is when alms are meritorious. Therefore he says, We want you to know, brethren, about the grace, i.e., the gratuitous gift, of God, namely, the bestowing of alms. He calls this a grace, because every good we do is from God’s grace. Which grace was not given to them but to me, namely, inasmuch as it was by my management and care and urging that the Macedonians were moved to this: “To me, though I am the very least of all the saints” (Eph. 3:8). It was shown, I say, to me in the churches of Macedonia, i.e., among the faithful in Macedonia. Quae quidem gratia est quantum ad duo, scilicet quantum ad patientiam, quia in multo experimento, et cetera. Ubi ponit conditiones patientiae perfectae. Una est quod homo sit constans, ita quod nec timore tribulationis deiiciatur, sed nec etiam in ipso tribulationis experimento. Et ideo dicit quod in multo experimento tribulationis, constantes fuerunt. Alia est quod in ipsis tribulationibus gaudeat, sicut legitur de beato Laurentio; et quantum ad hoc dicit abundantia gaudii ipsorum, scilicet Macedonum, fuit. Iac. c. I, 2: omne gaudium existimate, et cetera. Rom. c. XII, 12: in tribulatione gaudentes, et cetera. Vel in multo experimento tribulationis, non quam ipsi passi fuerunt, sed quam viderunt pati in Macedonia, abundantia gaudii ipsorum fuit. 282. – It was a grace as to two things. First, as to patience, because, i.e., for in a severe test of affliction, they have had an abundance of joy. Here he lays down the conditions of perfect patience: one is that a person be constant, so that he will not be cast down by fear of tribulation or by the very experience of tribulation. Hence he says, for in a severe test of affliction, they were constant. The other is that they rejoice in those tribulations, as we read of St. Lawrence. As to this he says, they had an abundance of joy, i.e., the Macedonians: “Count it all joy, my brethren, when you meet various trials” (Jas. 1:2); “Rejoice in your hope, be patient in tribulation”(Rom. 12:12). Or: in a severe test of affliction, not that which they suffered, but which he saw suffered in Macedonia, they have had an abundance of joy. Item secundo, gratia est quantum ad liberalitatem in eleemosynis. Et quantum ad hoc dicit et altissima, et cetera. Ubi duo facit. Primo ponit eorum liberalitatem; secundo exponit quod dixerat, ibi quia secundum virtutem, et cetera. 283. – Secondly, it is a grace as to their generosity in almsgiving; as to this he says, and their extreme poverty have overflowed in a wealth of liberality on their part. Here he does two things: first, he mentions their generosity; secondly, he explains what he had said (v. 3). Dicit ergo primo: non solum fuerunt patientes in tribulationibus, scilicet Macedones, sed etiam fuerunt liberales, quia altissima, id est maxima, paupertas eorum, vel nobilissima. Secundum Glossam facit paupertatem altam elevatio spiritus supra res temporales et contemptus earum. Et sic istorum paupertas altissima erat, quia non habebant divitias, et contemnebant eas. Iac. II, 5: nonne Deus elegit pauperes in mundo, et cetera. Haec, inquam, paupertas abundavit, id est excrevit, in divitiis copiose dando. 284. – He says therefore: not only were they patient in tribulations, namely, the Macedonians, but they were also liberal, considering their extreme or very noble poverty. According to a Gloss, the raising of the spirit above temporal things and a contempt for them makes poverty profound. And so their poverty was very profound, because they did not have riches and scorned them: “Has not God chosen those who are poor in the world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom” (Jas. 2:5). This poverty, I say, overflowed, i.e., grew into riches by giving. Sed haec expositio Glossae non videtur esse secundum intentionem apostoli, et ideo aliter dicendum est altissima paupertas, et cetera. Ubi sciendum est, quod homo ex duabus causis habet promptum animum ad dandum satis, scilicet ex abundantia divitiarum, sicut divites, vel ex contemptu divitiarum; et sic idem facit in paupere contemptus, quod facit in divite abundantia. Et ideo dicit altissima paupertas, sic supra, abundavit, id est effectum abundantiae fecit, in divitias simplicitatis eorum, quia cor eorum erat solum ad Deum, et ex hoc provenit contemptus divitiarum. Prov. XI, 3: simplicitas iustorum, et cetera. 285. – But the explanation found in this Gloss does not seem to accord with the Apostle’s intention; therefore, it must be explained another way. Here it should be noted that there are two causes which make a man sufficiently ready to give: one is from an abundance of riches, or from a contempt for riches. Consequently, in a poor man contempt for riches produces the same effect as abundance in a rich man. Hence he says, their extreme poverty so overflowed, i.e., produced the effect of abundance, in a wealth of liberality on their part, because their heart was solely on God. And from this arose their contempt for riches: “The integrity of the upright guides them” (Prov. 11:3). Consequenter cum dicit quia secundum virtutem, etc., exponit quod dixit commendando ipsorum liberalitatem quantum ad tria, scilicet quantum ad quantitatem dati, quantum ad voluntatem dandi, et quantum ad ordinem dationis. 286. – Then when he says, For they gave according to their means, he explains what he said by commending their generosity as to three things, namely, as to the quantity given, the will to give, and the order of giving. Quantum ad quantitatem dati, quia dederunt supra virtutem. Et ideo dicit: vere abundavit in divitias, quia ego reddo illis testimonium quod fuerunt voluntarii ad dandum secundum virtutem rerum suarum et supra virtutem, quia intantum dederunt quod post eguerunt. Vel dicendum est, et melius, quod est virtus interior animi, et virtus exterior, scilicet facultas rerum temporalium. Virtus interior est promptitudo animi ad dandum. Et ideo dicit testimonium illis reddo, quod fuerunt voluntarii ad dandum, secundum virtutem animi interiorem, et supra virtutem exteriorem, scilicet divitiarum. Tob. IV, 9: si multum tibi fuerit, et cetera. Contra: quicumque dat supra virtutem, dat immoderate; non ergo ex hoc est dignus laude. Respondeo. Dicendum est quod virtus in dando potest considerari dupliciter, scilicet simpliciter seu absolute, et secundum proportionem aliorum. Quando ergo dat plus quam alii suae proportionis, non peccat; sed si simpliciter dat supra virtutem, tunc immoderate dat. 287. – As to the quantity given, it was beyond their power. Hence, he says: truly I abounded in riches, for they gave according to their means, as I can testify, and beyond their means, because they gave so much that they were in need later. Or it might be said, and better, that there is an internal power of the soul and an external power, namely, the amount of one’s riches. The internal power is the soul’s readiness to give; hence he says, I can testify that of their own free will that they were willing to give according to the internal power of their soul and beyond the external power of their riches: “So you will be laying up a good treasure for yourself against the day of necessity” (Tob. 4:9). But on the other hand, whoever gives beyond his power gives immoderately; therefore, he is not worthy of praise. I answer that power in giving can be considered in two ways, namely, absolutely and according to a proportion. Therefore, when a person gives more than others of his proportion, he does not sin; but if he gives absolutely above his power, then he gives immoderately. Sic ergo commendat eorum liberalitatem quantum ad quantitatem dati. Commendat autem eam quantum ad voluntatem dandi, cum dicit quia voluntarii fuerunt, Ex. XXV, 2: ab omni qui ultroneus offert. In hoc autem fuerunt voluntarii, quia rogaverunt nos cum multa exhortatione, obsecrantes, id est rogantes. Quasi dicat: non solum rogaverunt, sed etiam per rationes nos induxerunt, ut habeant gratiam et communicationem ministerii, etc., id est ut liceret eis dare sua pauperibus sanctis, qui sunt in Ierusalem, non reputantes se facere gratiam nobis, sed quod eis gratia fiat. Hebr. ult.: beneficentiae autem et communionis, et cetera. 288. – Thus does he commend their generosity as to the quantity given; but he commends it as to their will to give, when he says, of their own free will: “Speak to the people of Israel, that they take for me an offering; from every man whose heart makes him willing you shall receive the offering for me” (Ex. 25:2). They were willing in the sense that they asked us, begging us earnestly. As if to say: they not only asked, but they induced us by reasons that they might have the favor of taking part in the relief of the saints, i.e., be allowed to give their own to the poor saints in Jerusalem, not considering that they were doing a favor for us, but we for them: “Do not neglect to do good and to share what you have, for such sacrifices are pleasing to God” (Heb. 13:16). Commendat etiam eorum liberalitatem quantum ad ordinem dandi, quia non solum sua dederunt, sed primo seipsos, quia talis debet esse ordo in dando, ut primo homo sit acceptus Deo, quia nisi homo sit Deo gratus, non sunt accepta munera eius. Gen. IV, 4: respexit dominus ad Abel, scilicet primo, et ad munera eius consequenter. Eccli. XXX, 24: miserere animae tuae, et cetera. Et ideo dicit non sicut speravimus, quasi dicat: vere voluntarii fuerunt, quia non sicut speravimus, id est non ea intentione qua putabamus, ut scilicet darent pro culpis redimendis, sed semetipsos dederunt primum domino, emendando vitam suam, et deinde nobis, obediendo per omnia, per voluntatem Dei, quae est ut subdantur homines vicariis suis. Hebr. ult.: obedite praepositis vestris, et cetera. Glossa dicit quod non aliter erat ab eis recipiendum, nisi scilicet prius seipsos dedissent Deo; ergo videtur quod non sint recipiendae eleemosynae a peccatoribus. Sed dicendum est quod non est ab eis recipiendum, quando dant ea intentione ut foveantur in peccatis. 289. – He also commends their generosity as to the order of giving, because they not only gave what they owned, but they first gave themselves. For this should be the order of giving, namely, that a man be first acceptable to God, for if a man is not pleasing to God, his gifts are not acceptable: “And the Lord had regard for Abel and his offering” (Gen. 4:4). Therefore he says, and this, not as we expected. As if to say: they were truly willing, because not as we expected, i.e., not with the intention we considered, that is, that they would give in reparation for sin; but first they gave themselves to the Lord, by amending their life, and to us, by obeying in all things, by the will of God, which is that man be subject to his vicars: “Obey your leaders and submit to them” (Heb. 13:17). A Gloss says that their offerings would not have been acceptable, unless they had first given themselves to God. Therefore, it seems that alms should not be accepted from sinners. I answer that they should not be accepted, when they are given with the intention of being nourished in their sins. Sic ergo, posito exemplo Macedonum, ostendit se consequenter permotum esse hoc exemplo, cum dicit ita ut rogaremus Titum, quasi diceret: intantum nos permoti fuimus hoc exemplo de liberalitate Macedonum, ut scilicet rogaremus Titum, ut etiam vos sitis participes ipsius gratiae, ut, scilicet Titus, quemadmodum coepit vos monere ad benefaciendum, postquam vidit vos correctos, et inducere vos ad communionem, ita perficiat in vobis, et spiritualiter gratiam istam de largitione eleemosynarum, ut non desit vobis. Phil. I, 6: qui coepit in vobis, et cetera. 290. – Having given the example of the Macedonians, he then shows how he was moved by this example, when he says, Accordingly we have urged Titus. As if to say: we were so moved by this display of generosity by the Macedonians, that we desired Titus to make you partakers of that grace, namely, that as Titus had already made a beginning, to urge you to do good after he saw you amended and to induce you to communion, he should also complete among you, and particularly that gracious work of giving alms, that it not be lacking to you: “And I am sure that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ” (Phil. 1:6). Consequenter admonet eos, ut hoc exemplo ipsi inducantur, cum dicit sed sicut in omnibus, et cetera. Ubi duo dicit. Primo monet ut ipsi, exemplo Macedonum, sint prompti ad eleemosynas faciendum; secundo quamdam suspicionem aufert, ibi non quasi imperans dico, et cetera. 291. – Then when he says, Now as you excel in everything, he urges them to be influenced by this example. Here he does two things. First, he urges them to be prompted by the example of the Macedonians to give alms; secondly, he removes a suspicion (v. 8) Dicit ergo sed sicut in omnibus, etc., quasi dicat: sicut vos superatis Macedones in omnibus aliis gratiis, ita debetis eos superare etiam in ista, scilicet eleemosynis faciendis. Et hoc est quod dicit sicut in omnibus aliis abundatis; et, primo in his quae pertinent ad intellectum, et quantum ad hoc dicit in fide, qua creditur, et sermone, quo confitemur, Rom. X, 10: corde creditur ad iustitiam, quantum ad fidem, ore autem confessio fit ad salutem, quantum ad sermonem; et in scientia Scripturarum. I Cor. I, 5: in omnibus divites facti estis, et cetera. Secundo in his quae pertinent ad opus, et quantum ad hoc dicit et in omni sollicitudine, scilicet bene operandi. Rom. XII, 11: sollicitudine non pigri. Tertio in his quae pertinent ad affectum, et quantum ad hoc dicit in charitate vestra spirituali habita in nos superabundantius. Col. III, 14: super omnia charitatem habentes, et cetera. Sicut, inquam, in omnibus istis abundatis, ita scilicet rogavi Titum, ut in hac gratia, scilicet eleemosynarum, abundetis. 292. – He says therefore: Now as you excel in everything—in faith, in utterance, in knowledge, in all earnestness, and in your love for us—see that you excel in this gracious work also. As if to say: just as you surpass the Macedonians in all other graces, so you should surpass them in this, namely, in giving alms. And this is what he says: as you excel in all other things: first, in things pertaining to the intellect; and as to this he says, in faith, by which they believe, and in utterance, by which they confess: “For man believes with his heart and so is justified, and he confesses with his lips and so is saved” (Rom. 10:10); in knowledge of the Scriptures: “In every way you were enriched in him with all speech and all knowledge” (1 Cor. 1:5). Secondly, in things pertaining to works; as to this he says, in all earnestness, namely, in doing good: “Never flag in zeal” (Rom. 12:11) Thirdly, in things pertaining to the effect; as to this he says, and in your love spiritually dwelling in us superabundantly: “And above all these put on love, which binds everything together in perfect harmony” (Col. 3:14). As, I say, you abound in all those things, so I asked Titus to see that in this gracious work, namely, of alms, you may also excel. Et quia posset haberi suspicio quod quasi ex imperio mandaret, ut darent eleemosynas, contra quod est quod dicitur Ez. XXXIV, 4: vos autem cum austeritate, etc., et ideo contra removet, dicens non quasi imperans dico. Hoc est quod rogavi Titum, vel quod ego ipse hoc dico vobis, id est non feci quasi imperans. I Petr. ult.: non ut dominantes in cleris. Sed dico hoc comprobans, id est volens comprobare per aliorum sollicitudinem, scilicet Macedonum, vestrae charitatis ingenium. Ubi sciendum est, quod ingenium bonum sumitur non solum pro aptitudine ad sciendum faciliter, sed etiam ad bene operandum. Cuius ratio est, quia ad hoc quod aliquis bene operetur, exigitur scientia dirigens. Et ideo sicut in addiscendo dicitur boni ingenii esse qui cito capit verba magistri, ita, in operando, boni ingenii dicitur, qui exemplo aliorum cito movetur ad bene operandum. Et ideo dicit apostolus comprobans, id est probare volens, bonum ingenium vestrum, id est quam promptam voluntatem habeatis ad dandum, moti exemplo Macedonum. I Cor. c. IV, 14: non ut confundam vos haec scribo. 293. – But because there might be a suspicion that he was ordering them to give alms, contrary to what is stated in Ezek. (34:4): “With force and harshness you have ruled them,” he removes this, saying: I say this not as a command, i.e., what I asked Titus, or the fact that I say this to you, I did not do as though commanding: “Not as domineering over those in your charge but being examples to the flock” (1 Pet. 5:3). But I say this to prove, i.e., desiring to prove, by the earnestness of others, namely, the Macedonians, that your love also is genuine. Here it should be noted that a good disposition refers not only to an aptitude to learn easily, but also to acting well, the reason being that in order to act well, a knowledge which directs is necessary. Therefore, just as in learning, a person is said to have a good disposition, if he quickly grasps the words of the teacher, so in doing good a person is said to have a good disposition, if he is quickly moved to do good by the example of others. That is why the Apostle says, to prove that your love also is genuine, i.e., how prompt a will you have for giving when moved by the example of the Macedonians: “I do not write this to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my beloved children” (1 Cor. 4:14).
8-2
2 Cor. 8:9-15Hic inducit Corinthios ad dandum eleemosynas exemplo Christi, dicens: volo comprobare ingenium vestrum bonum ad dandum, scilicet pauperibus, et hoc facere debetis exemplo Christi. Enim, id est quia, scitis gratiam domini nostri Iesu Christi, quam quidem humano generi contulit. Io. I, v. 17: gratia et veritas per Iesum Christum, et cetera. Et haec dicitur gratia, quia quidquid filius Dei poenalitatum nostrarum assumpsit, totum gratiae est imputandum, quia nec praeventus alicuius bonitate, nec alicuius virtute coactus, nec inductus sua necessitate. Est autem gratia ista quoniam propter nos egenus factus est. Et dicit egenus, quod plus est quam pauper. Nam egenus dicitur ille, qui non solum parum habet, sed qui indiget seu eget; pauper vero ille qui parum habet. Ad significandum ergo maiorem paupertatem dicitur egenus factus est, scilicet in temporalibus. Lc. IX, 58: filius hominis non habet, et cetera. Thren. III, 19: recordare paupertatis, et cetera. Est autem factus egenus, non ex necessitate, sed ex voluntate, quia gratia ista iam non esset gratia. Et ideo dicit cum dives esset, scilicet in bonis spiritualibus. Rom. X, v. 12: idem Deus dives in omnes, et cetera. Prov. c. VIII, 18: mecum sunt divitiae, et cetera. Dicit autem esset, non fuisset, ne videretur Christus amisisse divitias spirituales cum assumpsit paupertatem. Sic enim assumpsit hanc paupertatem quod illas inaestimabiles divitias non amisit. Ps. XLVIII, 3: simul in unum dives et pauper. Dives in spiritualibus, pauper in temporalibus. 294. – Here he uses the example of Christ to induce the Corinthians to give alms, saying: I wish to approve your good disposition, namely, for giving to the poor, and you should do this by reason of Christ’s example. For, that is, because you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, which he conferred on the human race: “Grace and truth came through Jesus Christ” (Jn. 1:17). This is called grace, because whatever the Son of God assumed of our punishments, all must be imputed to grace, because he was not anticipated by anyone’s goodness, or compelled by anyone’s power, or induced by any necessity of his own. But it is grace, because he for your sake he became poor [needy]. He says, needy, which is more than poor; for a needy person is one who not only has very little, but is destitute; but a poor man is one who has a little. Therefore, to signify the extent of his poverty, he says, he became poor [needy], namely, in temporal things: “The Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head” (Lk. 9:58); “Remember my affliction” (Lam. 3:19). He was made needy not from necessity but willingly, because that grace would not then be a grace. Hence he says, though he was rich, namely, in spiritual goods: “The same Lord is Lord of all and bestows his riches upon all who call upon him” (Rom. 10:12); “Riches and honor are with me” (Prov. 8:18). He says, being, and not “having been,” lest it seem that Christ lost his spiritual riches when he assumed poverty. For he assumed this poverty in such a way that he did not lose those inestimable riches: “Both rich and poor together” (Ps. 49:2). Rich is spiritual things, poor in temporal things. Causam autem quare voluit fieri egenus, subdit cum dicit ut illius inopia divites essemus, id est ut illius paupertate in temporalibus, vos essetis divites in spiritualibus. Et hoc est propter duo, scilicet propter exemplum et propter sacramentum. Propter exemplum quidem, quia si Christus dilexit paupertatem, et nos, exemplo suo, debemus diligere eam. Diligendo autem paupertatem in temporalibus, efficimur divites in spiritualibus. Iac. II, 5: nonne Deus elegit pauperes in mundo, divites in fide, et cetera. Et ideo dicit ut illius inopia, et cetera. Propter sacramentum autem, quia omnia quae Christus egit vel sustinuit, fuit propter nos. Unde sicut per hoc quod sustinuit mortem, liberati sumus a morte aeterna et restituti vitae, ita per hoc quod sustinuit inopiam in temporalibus, liberati sumus ab inopia in spiritualibus, et facti divites in spiritualibus. I Cor. I, 5: divites facti estis in illo in omni scientia, et cetera. 295. – The reason he willed to be made needy is added, when he says, so that by his poverty you might become rich, i.e., that through his poverty in temporal things, you might become rich in spiritual things. And this for two reasons: for an example and for a sacrament. For an example, indeed, because if Christ loved poverty, we also should love it because of his example. But by loving poverty in temporal things, we are made rich in spiritual things: “Has not God chosen those who are poor in the world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which he has promised to those who love him?” (Jas. 2:5). This is why he says, so that by his poverty you might become rich. For the sacrament, however, because everything Christ did or endured was for our sake. Hence, just as by the fact that he endured death, we were delivered from eternal death and restored to life, so by the fact that he suffered need in temporal things, we have been delivered from need in spiritual things and made rich in spiritual things: “That in every way you were enriched in him with all speech and all knowledge” (1 Cor. 1:5). Consequenter cum dicit consilium in hoc do, etc., inducit eos ad dandum ex parte eorum. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo ponit ipsorum utilitatem, quae ex hoc provenit; secundo ostendit quod hoc etiam ab ipsis volitum est, scilicet ut darent eleemosynas, ibi qui non solum, et cetera. 296. – Then when he says, And in this matter I give my advice, he induces them to give on their part. In regard to this he does two things. First, he shows the benefit they will obtain from this; secondly, he shows that this is desired from itself, namely, that they would give alms (v. 10b). Dicit ergo: considerans hoc beneficium, consilium vobis do, id est hortor vos ad hoc, scilicet ad dandum eleemosynas, scilicet non solum propter utilitatem sanctorum, qui sunt in Ierusalem, sed et propter utilitatem vestram. Prov. XXVII, 9: boni amici consiliis anima dulcoratur, et cetera. Et hoc quia utile est vobis. Bonum enim pietatis plus est utile facienti, quam illi cui fit, quia faciens reportat inde commodum spirituale, recipiens vero temporale. Et sicut spirituale praeferri debet temporali, sic in operibus pietatis utilitas dantis praefertur utilitati accipientis. I Tim. IV, 8: pietas ad omnia valet. 297. – He says therefore: considering this benefit, I give my advice, i.e., I urge you to give alms not only for the benefit of the saints in Jerusalem but also for your benefit: “The good counsels of a friend are sweet to the soul” (Prov. 27:9, Vulgate). And this is because it is best for you. For the good of piety is more beneficial to the doer than to the one to whom it is done, because the doer obtains a spiritual benefit from it, but the recipient a temporal one. And just as the spiritual is preferred to the temporal, in works of piety the profit to the giver is preferred to the benefit of the recipient: “Godliness is of value in every way” (1 Tim. 4:8). Hoc autem non solum eis est utile sed etiam ipsi hoc voluerunt, et ideo dicit quia non solum, et cetera. Ubi tria facit. Primo commemorat bonum principium in eis; secundo hortatur eos ad debitum finem, ibi nunc vero et facto, etc.; tertio exponit quoddam quod dixerat, ibi si enim voluntas, et cetera. 298. – But this is not only profitable to them, but they also wanted this; hence he says, now to complete what a year ago you began not only to do but to desire. Here he does three things. First, he reminds them of their good start; secondly, he urges them to the due end (v. 11); thirdly, he explains something he had said (v. 12). Dicit ergo: vere debetis libenter dare eleemosynas, quia non solum est vobis utile, sed etiam hoc ipsum velle sponte coepistis, scilicet dare eleemosynas, a priori anno, quo scilicet veni ad vos. Vel a priori anno, id est praecedenti. Quasi dicat: plus est velle, quam facere, iuxta illud Eccli. XVIII, v. 16: verbum melius est quam datum, et cetera. Et ideo debetis esse prompti ad dandum. 299. – He says therefore: in truth you should give alms gladly, because this is not only profitable to you, but you began not only to do but to desire this spontaneously, namely, to give alms, a year ago, i.e., before I came to you. As if to say: it is better to will than to do: “So a word is better than a gift” (Sir. 18:16). Therefore, you should be eager to give. Et quia estis prompti ad dandum, ideo nunc quod habuistis in animo perficite facto, alioquin illa voluntas esset frustra. Io. IV: non diligamus verbo, neque lingua, et cetera. Phil. I, 6: qui coepit in vobis, et cetera. Et huius ratio est, ut quemadmodum promptus est animus voluntatis, id est discretio voluntatis. Secundum Glossam, prompta est, ita sit prompta discretio perficiendi. Vel, aliter, ut animus sumatur pro voluntate. Et tunc dicitur: quemadmodum prompti fuistis ad volendum, ita prompti ad perficiendum. Et hoc ex eo quod habetis, id est secundum facultatem vestram. 300. – And because you are eager to give, therefore, now complete in deed what you had in your intention; otherwise that willingness is in vain: “Let us not love in word or speech but in deed and in truth” (1 Jn. 3:18); “And I am sure that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ” (Phil. 1:6). The reason for this is so that your readiness in desiring it, i.e., the judgment of your will, according to a Gloss is prompt, may be matched by your completing it. Or another way, so that mind is taken for will, and then the sense is: as you were prompt in willing, so be prompt in accomplishing, and this out of what you have, i.e., according to your means. Consequenter exponit hoc quod dicit ex eo quod habetis, dicens si enim, etc., quasi dicat: dico quod debetis esse prompti ad dandum, et in hoc non intendo vos gravare, ut scilicet detis supra facultates vestras, quia forte voluntas prompta ad hoc inducit vos, sed in hoc opus non potest imitari voluntatem. Et ideo dicit: ex eo quod habetis, enim, pro quia, si voluntas prompta est secundum id quod habet, accepta est. Et huius ratio est, quia voluntas acceptatur in perfectione operationis; opus autem non perficitur, nisi ex eo quod habetur. Et ideo dicit secundum quod habet, accepta est. Tob. IV, 9: si multum tibi fuerit, abundanter tribue, et cetera. 301. – Then he explains what he means by out of what you have, saying, For if the readiness is there, it is acceptable according to what a man has. As if to say: I say that you should be prompt to give, but I do not wish to burden you in this matter, namely, that you would give beyond your means, because perhaps your will inclines you to this; but in this matter the work cannot follow the will. Therefore he says, out of what you have. For, i.e., because, if the readiness is there, it is acceptable according to what a man has, the reason being that the will is accepted in the accomplishment of the work; but the work is not perfected except from what a man has; hence he says, it is acceptable according to what a man has: “If you have much, give generously; if you have a little, then try to impart a little gladly” (Tob. 4:9, Vulgate). Consequenter cum dicit non enim ut aliis, etc., removet suspicionem quamdam. Possent enim dicere isti: si damus eleemosynas pauperibus sanctis, qui sunt in Ierusalem, ipsi otiosi vivent, et nos damna patiemur, et sic efficiemur miseri. Ideo apostolus primo hanc suspicionem excludit; secundo suam intentionem manifestat; tertio vero confirmat per auctoritatem. 302. – Then when he says, I do not mean, he removes a suspicion. For someone could say: if we give alms to the saints in Jerusalem, they will live in idleness, while we suffer a loss and become wretched. Therefore the Apostle first removes the suspicion; secondly he shows his intention (v. 13b); thirdly, he confirms it by authority (v. 14b). Et removet suspicionem, cum dicit non enim ut aliis, etc.; quasi dicat: non enim ita moneo vos eleemosynas dare, ut aliis sit refrigerium, dum otiose viverent de eleemosynis vestris, vobis autem sit tribulatio, id est paupertas, quia vos affligeremini. Sed numquid peccant illi qui dant omnia aliis, et ipsi postea paupertate affliguntur? Et videtur quod sic per haec verba apostoli. Respondeo. Dicendum est, secundum Glossam, quod melius esset totum dare pauperibus, et affligi pro Christo. Illud autem quod dicit hic, condescendendo fecit, quia infirmi erant, et forte deficerent, si egestate premerentur. 303. – He removes this suspicion when he says, I do not mean that others should be eased and you burdened. As if to say: I do not urge you to give alms in order that others might be refreshed, as they live in idleness off your alms, while you are burdened, impoverished, because you would be afflicted. But do they commit sin who give everything to others and they are later afflicted with poverty? It seems so from these words of the Apostle. I answer that according to a Gloss, it would be better to give all to the poor and be afflicted with Christ. But what the Apostle says here is out of condescension, because they were weak and might perhaps have fallen away if they were pressed by need. Intentionem suam manifestat, cum dicit sed ex aequalitate, etc., quasi dicat: non intendo tribulationem vestram, sed quamdam aequalitatem, ut scilicet vestra abundantia, et cetera. Quod potest exponi tripliciter. Primo de aequalitate quantitatis; secundo de aequalitate proportionis; tertio de aequalitate voluntatis. 304. – He discloses his intention when he says, but that as a matter of equality your abundance at the present time should supply their want. As if to say: I do not seek your affliction, but an equality, namely, that your abundance supply their want. This can explained in three ways. First, as an equality of quantity; secondly, an equality of proportion; thirdly, an equality of the will. De aequalitate quantitatis, quia isti, scilicet Corinthii, abundabant in temporalibus et deficiebant in spiritualibus; sancti vero, qui erant in Ierusalem, abundabant in spiritualibus et deficiebant in temporalibus. Vult ergo ut fiat inter eos aequalitas quantitatis, ut scilicet illi qui abundant in temporalibus, dent medietatem omnium illis, qui deficiunt in eis, et isti dent medietatem spiritualium eis, ut sic sint aequaliter divites. Et ideo hoc potius dicit, ut scilicet ex aequalitate quantitatis, id est dimidia parte bonorum vestrorum, in praesenti tempore, quod breve est, vestra abundantia, terrenorum, suppleat illorum inopiam, qui deseruerunt omnia mundi, et ut illorum abundantia, scilicet in spiritualibus, sit supplementum vestrae inopiae in spiritualibus, id est ut sitis participes vitae aeternae. Lc. XVI, 9: facite vobis amicos, et cetera. Eccli. XIV, 15 s.: in divisione sortis da et accipe; da temporalia et accipe spiritualia. 305. – An equality of quantity, because they, i.e., the Corinthians, abounded in temporal things and were wanting in spiritual things; but the saints in Jerusalem abounded in spiritual things and were lacking in temporal things. Therefore he desired that an equality of quantity be established between them, namely, that those who abounded in temporal things give half of everything to those in need of them, while the others should give half of their spiritual things to them, so that they would be equally rich. Therefore, he says rather, that as a matter of equality of quantity, i.e., from a half-share of your goods at the present time, which is short, let your abundance of earthly goods supply their want in spiritual goods, i.e., that you may be partakers of eternal life: “Make friends for yourselves by means of unrighteous mammon” (Lk. 16:9); “In dividing the lot, give and take” (Sir. 14:15); i.e., give temporal things and accept spiritual things. De aequalitate autem proportionis exponitur sic, et melius. Vos, Corinthii, habetis abundantiam temporalium, sancti qui sunt in Ierusalem abundantiam spiritualium. Volo ergo ex quadam aequalitate, non quae sit secundum quantitatem, sed secundum proportionem, ut scilicet sicut illi sustentantur eleemosynis vestris, ita vos ditemini precibus illorum apud Deum. Sicut enim illi non ita ditantur de bonis vestris temporalibus, sicut vos estis divites, ita nec vos bonis illorum spiritualibus ditemini sicut illi. Et ideo dicit sed ex aequalitate, etc., praedicta vestra abundantia terrenorum, illorum, scilicet sanctorum, inopiam, in temporalibus, suppleat, ut et illorum abundantia in spiritualibus, et cetera. I Cor. IX, 11: si nos vobis spiritualia seminavimus, et cetera. 306. – As an equality of proportion it is explained in the following way, and better: you Corinthians have an abundance of temporal goods, but the saints of Jerusalem an abundance of spiritual goods. I wish, therefore, that as a matter of equality, not according to quantity, but according to proportion, namely, that as they are sustained by your alms, so may you be enriched by their prayers to God. For just as they are not as rich in your temporal goods as you are rich, so neither are you as rich in their spiritual goods as they are. And so he says: but by an equality in the present time your abundance of earthly things should supply their want of earthly good, so that their abundance of spiritual things may supply your want: “If we have sown spiritual good among you, is it too much if we reap your material benefits?” (1 Cor. 9:11). De aequalitate autem voluntatis exponitur sic: sed ex aequalitate, etc., id est volo quod sit in vobis aequalitas voluntatis, ut scilicet sicut illi habent voluntatem communicandi vobis ea in quibus abundant, ita vos habeatis voluntatem communicandi illis ea in quibus abundatis. 307. – It is explained as an equality of will in this way: but by an equality your abundance at the present time should supply their want, i.e., I desire an equality of will to be in you, that just as they are willing to communicate to you the things in which they abound, so you would have the will to communicate to them the things in which you abound. Consequenter confirmat hoc per auctoritatem. Unde dicit sicut scriptum est, scilicet Ex. XVI: qui multum, scilicet collegerat de manna, id est qui amplius habuit quam gomor, non abundavit, id est non habuit ultra sufficientiam suam; et qui modicum, non minoravit, id est non defecit ei, quia omnes aequaliter abundabant, ut dicitur Ex. XVI. Et sic nec qui plus collegerat, plus habuit, nec qui minus paraverat, reperit minus. 308. – Then he confirms this with an authority; hence he says, As it is written, namely in Ex. (16:18): “He who gathered much”, i.e., had collected more manna than an omer, “had nothing over”, i.e., did not have more than his sufficiency; “and he who gathered little had no lack”, i.e., he did not fall short of it, because all had an equal abundance, as it says in Ex. (16:18). And so neither he who had collected more had more, nor he who had prepared less, discovered less.
8-3
2 Cor. 8:16-24Postquam tractavit de collectis dandis, hic consequenter tractat de ministris per quos collectae fiant. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo nominat eos; secundo recommendat eos Corinthiis, ibi ostensionem ergo quae est, et cetera. Circa primum tria facit. Primo enim nominat Titum; secundo Barnabam, ibi misimus etiam cum illo fratrem, etc.; tertio Apollo, ibi misimus autem cum illis, et cetera. Circa Titum duo commendat, scilicet eius sollicitudinem et sollicitudinis signum, ibi quoniam exhortationem, et cetera. 309. – After dealing with the collections, to which they should contribute, the Apostle then deals with the ministers by whom the collections should be made. In regard to this he does two things. First, he names them; secondly, he recommends them to the Corinthians (v. 24). In regard to the first he does three things. First, he names Titus; secondly, Barnabas (v. 18); thirdly, Apollos (v. 22). Concerning Titus he commends two things, namely, his earnest care and the sign of his earnest care (v. 17). Dicit ergo primo: dixi, supra, quod rogavi Titum ut perficeret gratiam istam de eleemosynis colligendis, quod imminet sollicitudini meae ex ordinatione apostolorum, de quo inveni etiam ipsum sollicitum; et ideo ago gratias Deo, qui dedit eamdem sollicitudinem, quam ego habeo, pro vobis, exhortandis et promovendis ad opera misericordiae, in corde Titi; quia ipse etiam sollicitus est, sicut et ego, ut perficiat in vobis hanc gratiam. Hebr. VI, 11: cupimus unumquemque vestrum eamdem ostentare sollicitudinem, et cetera. Rom. XII, 8: qui praeest in sollicitudine. 310. – He says therefore, in regard to Titus: I have said above that I have asked Titus to prove that grace collecting alms, because it has a bearing on the care entrusted to me by the apostles, in which I have also found him careful. But thanks be to God who puts the same earnest care for you into the heart of Titus, as I have, for exhorting you and promoting you to works of mercy, because he is as solicitous as I to prove this grace for you: “And we desire each one of you to show the same earnestness in realizing the full assurance of hope until the end” (Heb. 6:11); “The leader, in diligence” (Rom. 12:8). Signum autem huius sollicitudinis est, quia quando rogavi eum, ipse consensit exhortationi meae. Et ideo dicit quoniam exhortationem quidem suscepit. Et quia prosecutus est quod petii, unde dicit sed cum sollicitior esset sua voluntate, quam mea exhortatione, profectus est ad vos; qui tamen primo recusabat venire propter peccata vestra. Rom. XII, 11: sollicitudine non pigri. 311. – But the sign of this carefulness is that when I asked him, he consented to my exhortation; hence he says, For he not only accepted our appeal, and because he carried out what I asked; hence he says, but being himself very earnest, of his own accord more than by my exhortation, he is going to you, although at first he refused to go on account of your sins: “Never flag in zeal” (Rom. 12:11). Consequenter cum dicit misimus autem, etc., tractat de secundo ministro. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo commendat ipsum; secundo subdit rationem quare mittit tam solemnes nuntios, ibi devitantes, et cetera. 312. – Then when he says, With him we are sending the brother, he treats of the second minister. In regard to this he does two things. First, he commends him; secondly, he gives the reason why he is sending such earnest messengers (v. 20) Frater iste, secundum quosdam, est Lucas, vel secundum alios Barnabas, quem quidem commendat ex tribus, scilicet ex fama, quia laus eius, scilicet Lucae, est in Evangelio ab eo scripto per omnes Ecclesias, quia est approbatum per apostolos. Vel cuius laus, scilicet Barnabae, est in Evangelio praedicato ab ipso per omnes Ecclesias, quia Iudaeis et gentibus. Unde dicitur de Barnaba, Act. XI, 24, quod erat vir bonus plenus fide et spiritu sancto. Item commendat ipsum ex societate sua, quia non solum est famosus, sed et ordinatus est ab Ecclesiis Iudaeae comes peregrinationis meae, id est praedicationis meae, qua, ut peregrini, mundum circuimus. Supra c. V, 6: quamdiu sumus in corpore, peregrinamur a Deo, et cetera. Et hoc est verum de Luca, quia ipse fuit unus de septuaginta duobus discipulis, et socius Pauli. De Barnaba similiter, quia per spiritum sanctum dicitur Act. XIII, 2: segregate mihi Barnabam et Paulum in opus, et cetera. Et factus est comes in hanc gratiam, scilicet collectionis eleemosynarum. Vel in hanc gratiam, scilicet praedicationis, de qua dicitur Eph. III, 8: mihi autem omnium sanctorum minimo, et cetera. Item commendat eum ex officio, quia est minister gratiae quae ministratur a nobis. I Cor. IV, 1: sic nos existimet homo. Supra c. III, 6: qui et idoneos nos, et cetera. Ministratur autem gratia ista ad domini gloriam, ut scilicet dominus noster glorificetur, scilicet de eleemosynis factis, de conversione plurimorum populorum praedicationi nostrae, quia, ut dicitur Prov. XIV, 28, in multitudine populi, et cetera. Item ministratur, ut voluntas nostra impleatur, quia nos hoc volumus fieri. Et ideo dicit et voluntatem nostram destinatam, id est praedestinatam a Deo, qui praedestinavit ab aeterno nos talem voluntatem habere. 313. – This brother, according to some, is Luke, and according to others, Barnabas. Whoever it is, he recommends him on three points, namely, on his reputation, because of his fame, that is, Luke’s, is in the gospel written by him among all the churches, because it was approved by the apostles. Or whose fame, namely, Barnabas’, is in the preaching of the gospel among all the churches, because he preached to Jews and Gentiles. Hence it is said of Barnabas in Acts (4:38), that he was a good man, full of faith and the Holy Spirit. He also commends him on his companionship, because not only that, i.e., not only is he famous, but he has been appointed by the churches to travel with us in this gracious work, i.e., of my preaching, for which we traveled as pilgrims over the world: “We know that while we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord” (2 Cor. 5:6). And this is true of Luke, because he was one of the seventy-two disciples and a companion of Paul. It is also true of Barnabas, because it was said by the Holy Spirit in Acts (13:2): “Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.” And he was made a companion for this gracious work, namely, to collect the alms, of for this gracious work of preaching, of which it says in Eph. (3:8): “To me, though I am the very least of all the saints.” He also commends him from his office, because he is a minister of grace which we are carrying on: “This is how one should regard us, as servants of Christ” (1 Cor. 4:1); “Who has made us competent to be ministers of a new covenant” (2 Cor. 3:6). But that grace is administered for the glory of the Lord, namely, that our Lord be glorified by the alms collected after the conversion of many people by our preaching, because, as it says in Prov. (14:28): “In a multitude of people is the glory of a king.” Likewise it is administered in order that our will be fulfilled, because we want this to be done; hence, he says, and to show our good will, i.e., predestined by God, who from eternity predestined us to have such a will. Consequenter cum dicit devitantes, etc., assignat causam quare mittat tam solemnes nuntios. Et primo huius rationem assignat; secundo probat, ibi providemus ergo, et cetera. 314. – Then when he says, We intend, he assigns the cause for why he is sending such solemn messengers. First, he assigns the reason for this; secondly, he proves it (v. 21). Dicit ergo: causa quare tam solemnes nuntios mittimus, est ista: ut sciatis negotium huiusmodi inesse cordi nostro. Et ideo dicit devitantes hoc, scilicet ne quis, etc., quasi dicat: ut vitemus vituperium quod posset mihi impingi ab aliquibus, vel negligentiae, si non mitterem strenuos, vel fraudis si non mitterem securos. Et isti strenui erant et prompti et securi, quia dati ab Ecclesiis et electi per spiritum sanctum. Supra c. VI, 3: nemini dantes ullam offensionem, et cetera. Dicit autem in hac plenitudine, scilicet eleemosynarum vel conversionis gentium. I Petr. IV, 10: unusquisque sicut accepit gratiam in alterutrum, et cetera. 315. – He says therefore: the reason we are sending such solemn messengers is this, that you may know that this affair is in our heart. Hence he says, We intend that no one should blame us. As if to say: to avoid the accusation that could be lodged against us by others either for negligence, if we did not send solemn messengers, or of fraud, if we did not send trustworthy men. But they are energetic and prompt and trustworthy, because they were given by the churches and chosen by the Holy Spirit: “We put no obstacle in any one’s way, so that no fault may be found with our ministry” (2 Cor. 6:3). But he says, about this liberal gift, namely, of alms, or of converted Gentiles: “As each has received a gift, employ it for one another, as good stewards of God’s varied grace” (1 Pet. 4:10). Et hoc probat dicens providemus enim, etc., quasi dicat: bene dico devitantes, quia providemus, id est providere debemus, bona, id est ut opera nostra bona sint non solum coram Deo, ut ei placeamus, sed etiam coram hominibus, ut scilicet eis bona videantur. Et hoc facit, sollicite procurando et bonos imitando. Rom. XII, 9: adhaerentes bono, et cetera. 316. – Then he proves this, saying: for we aim at what is honorable not only in the Lord’s sight but also in the sight of men, namely, that the good works may be seen by them. And he does this by providing carefully and by imitating good men: “Let love be genuine; hate what is evil, hold fast to what is good” (Rom. 12:9). Consequenter cum dicit misimus autem cum illis et fratrem nostrum, etc., tractat de tertio nuntio, scilicet de Apollo. Ubi duo facit. Primo, quia commendat eum de sollicitudine, cum dicit quem, scilicet Apollo, probavimus saepe sollicitum esse de salute vestra; nunc autem multo sollicitiorem. Nam, sicut supra apparet, Apollo fuit primus, qui post apostolum praedicavit apud Corinthum. I Cor. III, 6: ego plantavi, Apollo rigavit. Hic autem, turbatus de peccato ipsorum recessit, et sollicitudinem quam ante pro ipsis habebat, postposuit. Nunc vero, audita conversione eorum, factus est de salute ipsorum sollicitior, quam antea esset. Eph. IV, 3: solliciti servare unitatem spiritus, et cetera. Rom. XII, 8: qui praeest in sollicitudine, et cetera. 317. – Then when he says, And with them we are sending our brother, he deals with the third messenger, namely, Apollos, and he does two things. First, he commends him for his diligence, when he says, whom, namely, Apollos, we have often tested and found earnest in many matters for your salvation, but who is now more earnest than ever. For as is apparent above, Apollos was the first one after the Apostle to preach to the Corinthians: “I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the growth” (1 Cor. 3:6). But being disturbed at their sin, he departed and put aside the carefulness he had previously for them. But now, hearing of their conversion, he became more diligent than ever for their salvation: “Eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (Eph. 4:3); “The leader, in diligence” (Rom. 12:8). Secundo, subdit causam sollicitudinis quam assumpsit, quia Apollo confidit de vobis ex his quae Titus dixit de vobis, commendans vos. Unde dicit multa confidentia in vobis, sive pro Tito qui est socius meus, et quia libenter venit in societatem Titi et Lucae seu Barnabae, et quia ad hoc inductus fuit ab apostolis Ecclesiarum, quae sunt in Iudaea. Et ideo dicit sive fratres nostri, apostoli Ecclesiarum Iudaeae, scilicet induxerunt eum ad sollicitudinem habendam pro vobis. Quae quidem Ecclesiae sunt gloriae Christi, id est ad gloriam Christi. 318. – Secondly, he discloses the cause of the diligence he assumed, because Apollos is confident of you from the things Titus has said about you, commending you. Hence, he says, because of his great confidence in you. As for Titus, he is my partner, and because he gladly went in fellowship with Titus and Luke, or Barnabas, and because he was induced to do this by the apostles of the Church, who are in Judea. And therefore he says: as for our brethren, they are messengers of the churches of Judea, that is, they induced him to have a care for you; which churches are the glory of Christ, i.e., to the glory of Christ. Consequenter cum dicit ostensionem ergo quae est, etc., recommendat istos nuntios Corinthiis, dicens: quia tales misimus ad vos, ergo ostensionem, etc., id est, ostendatis opere, quod charitatem habetis ad eos et quod vere commendavi vos et quod ego vere gloriatus sim de vobis in faciem Ecclesiarum, ad quas perveni et quibus praedicavi. Vel in faciem omnium Ecclesiarum, quia quod facitis eis, innotescet omnibus Ecclesiis. 319. – Then when he says, so give proof, he recommends those messengers to the Corinthians, saying: because I have sent such men to you, so give proof, before the churches, of your love and of our boasting about you to these men, i.e., show by your deeds that you have charity toward them, and that he has truthfully commended you, and that he was right in boasting about you, before the churches, where I have been and to whom I have preached; or: before the churches, because what you do to them will be made known to all the churches.
9-1
2 Cor. 9:1-7Supra apostolus induxit Corinthios ad dandum eleemosynas sanctis qui sunt in Ierusalem, hic vero inducit eos quantum ad modum dandi, ut scilicet hilariter et abundanter dent. Unde ad hoc quod bene darent, misit tam solemnes nuntios. Circa hoc autem duo facit. Primo excludit opinatam causam de missione nuntiorum; secundo vero astruit veram, ibi misimus autem fratres, et cetera. Circa primum tria facit. Primo excludit suspicionem; secundo ad hoc causam assignat, ibi scio enim promptum, etc.; tertio causam probat, ibi pro quo de vobis, et cetera. 320. – Having exhorted the Corinthians to give alms to the saints in Jerusalem, the Apostle now admonishes them how to give, namely, cheerfully and abundantly. Hence, in order that they might give properly, he has sent them important messengers. In regard to this he does two things. First, he excludes the supposed cause for sending the messengers; secondly, he gives the true one (v. 3). In regard to the first he does three things. First, he excludes a suspicion; secondly, he assigns the cause for this (v. 2); thirdly, he proves the cause (v. 2b). Quantum ad primum, quia posset aliquis dicere apostolo: tu mones nos quod bene recipiamus nuntios quos mittis, sed quare non potius mones quod bene largiamur eleemosynas? Et ideo hoc removens dicit: non est necessarium quod hoc moneam, nam, id est quia, de ministerio quod fit in sanctos ex abundanti est, id est superfluum est, mihi scribere vobis. 321. – As to the first, because someone could say to the Apostle: you urge us to receive your messengers cordially, but why do you not rather urge us to give alms properly. Therefore, rejecting this, he says: it is not necessary for me to urge this now, i.e., because, it is superfluous for me to write to you about the offering for the saints. Et huius causa est, quia scio promptum animum vestrum, ad subveniendum eis. Ps. CVII, 2: paratum cor meum, Deus, et cetera. Quod autem sit promptus animus vester, probo ex duobus. Primo ex gloriatione nostra de vobis. Nam nisi scirem vos esse promptos ad hoc, non fuissem gloriatus de vobis apud alios. Et ideo dicit pro quo, scilicet promptitudine animi vestri. Supra I, 12: gloria nostra, et cetera. Et supra VII, 4: multa mihi fiducia, et cetera. Glorior apud Macedones, de hoc scilicet quoniam et Achaia, in qua Corinthus metropolis est, parata est ab anno praeterito, ad largiendum. Secundo ex effectu, quia vos provocastis exemplo vestro multos ad hoc. Et ideo dicit et vestra aemulatio, id est amor et studium imitandi vos, provocavit plurimos, quia enim audierunt vos bene correctos proficere, provocantur plurimi, scilicet ad proficiendum. Prov. XXVII, 17: ferrum ferro acuitur, et cetera. Gal. IV, 18: bonum autem aemulamini, et cetera. I Cor. XII, 31: aemulamini charismata, et cetera. 322. – And the reason for this is because I know your readiness to help them: “My heart is steadfast, O God”(Ps. 108:1). That your mind is ready I prove by two things. First, from our boasting of you, for unless I knew that you were ready for this, I would not have boasted to them about you. Therefore he says, of which, namely, the promptitude of your mind: “For our boast is this, the testimony of our conscience” (2 Cor. 1:12); “I have great confidence in you” (2 Cor. 7:4). I boast about you to the people of Macedonia, saying that Achaia, in which Corinth is the metropolis, has been ready since last year to give. Secondly, from the effect, because you have provoked many to do this by your example. Hence he says, and your zeal, i.e., the desire to imitate you, has stirred up most of them, for since they heard of your progress after your amendment, many were provoked to make progress: “Iron sharpens iron, and one man sharpens another” (Prov. 27:17); “For a good purpose it is always good to be made much of” (Gal. 4:18); “But earnestly desire the higher gifts” (1 Cor. 12:31). Consequenter cum dicit misimus autem fratres, etc., ponit veram causam quare miserit tam solemnes nuntios. Et primo ponit in generali; secundo in speciali, ibi ut quemadmodum dixi, et cetera. 323. – Then when he says, But I am sending the brethren, he establishes the true cause for why he was sending such solemn messengers. First, he lays down the general reason; secondly, the special reason (v. 3b). Circa primum duo facit. Primo assignat veram causam, dicens: causa autem quare istos misi, est non quod credam vos nolle subvenire pauperibus, sed ut ne quod gloriamur de vobis, id est ne gloria nostra, quam habemus de vobis, evacuetur, si scilicet deficeretis. I Cor. IX, 15: bonum est mihi mori, et cetera. Evacuetur, inquam, in hac parte, quia bene constat mihi quod in aliis virtutibus et bonis non evacuabitis gloriam meam. 324. – Concerning the first he does two things. First, he assigns the true cause, saying: the reason why I have sent them is not that I believe you are not willing to help the poor, but that our boasting about you may not prove vain, if you should fail: “For I would rather die than have any one deprive me of my ground for boasting” (1 Cor. 9:15). That it not be made void, I say, in this case, because it is evident to me that in the other virtues and good deeds you will not void by glory. Secundo cum dicit ut quemadmodum, etc., hortatur eos ad debitum modum dandi. Et primo hortatur, ut dent prompte; secundo ut dent abundanter, ibi necessarium ergo, etc.; tertio ut dent hilariter ibi unusquisque prout destinavit, et cetera. 325. – Secondly, when he says, so that you may be ready, as I said you would be, he urges them to give in the proper way. First, he urges them to give readily; secondly, that they may give abundantly (v. 5); thirdly, that they may give cheerfully (v. 7). Circa primum duo facit. Primo ponit modum dandi; secundo rationem assignat, ibi ne cum venero, et cetera. Modus dandi est ut scilicet prompte detur. Et ideo dicit: ideo misi ministros, ut sitis parati ad dandum, quemadmodum dixi, scilicet exemplo Macedonum. Matth. XXV, 10: quae paratae erant, et cetera. Prov. III, 28: ne dicas amico tuo: vade, et revertere, et cras dabo tibi, et cetera. Ratio autem huius est ne cum venerint mecum, scilicet ad vos, Macedones, et invenerint vos imparatos, erubescamus nos, quasi dicat: vobis erit confusio si promisistis, et non solvistis. Sed esto quod sustineatis, et non curetis de confusione vestra, ad minus caveatis erubescentiae nostrae, qui dicimus vos esse paratos. 326. – In regard to the first he does two things. First, he mentions how to give; secondly, he assigns the reason (v. 4). The way to give is promptly; hence he says, I sent the ministers so that you may be ready, as I said you would be, namely, after the example of the Macedonians: “And those who were ready went in with him to the marriage feast” (Matt. 25:10); “Do not say to your neighbor, ‘Go, and come again, tomorrow I will give it’ –when you have it with you” (Prov. 3:28). The reason for this is lest if some Macedonians come with me and find that you are not ready, we be humiliated. As if to say: it will be to your shame if you have promised and not paid. But even if you can stand it and you do not care about your shame, at least think of our embarrassment, who say that you are prepared. Consequenter cum dicit necessarium ergo, etc., hortatur eos quod dent abundanter. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo ponit admonitionem; secundo admonitionis rationem assignat, ibi hoc autem dico, et cetera. 327. – Then when he says, So I thought it necessary, he urges them to give abundantly. In regard to this he does two things. First, he gives the admonition; secondly, he gives the reason for it (v. 6) Dicit ergo: ne ergo evacuetur gloria nostra, et vos non erubescatis, necessarium existimavi rogare fratres, scilicet Lucam. Titum et Apollo, ut perveniant ad vos, et praeparent repromissam benedictionem hanc, scilicet eleemosynam, quae dicitur benedictio, quia est causa aeternae benedictionis. Nam per actionem dandi, homo benedicitur a Deo, Ps. XXIII, 5: hic accipiet benedictionem a domino, etc., et ab hominibus, Eccli. XXXI, 28: splendidum in panibus, et cetera. Prov. XXII, 9: qui pronus est ad misericordiam, et cetera. Et dicit hanc benedictionem paratam esse quasi benedictionem, id est abundanter, et non quasi avaritiam, id est parce. 328. – He says therefore: lest our boasting be voided and you be put to shame, I thought it necessary to urge the brethren, namely, Titus and Apollos, to go on to you before me, and arrange in advance for this gift [blessing] you have promised, namely, the alms, which is called a blessing because it is a cause of eternal blessedness. For by the act of giving a man is blessed by the Lord: “He will receive blessing from the Lord” (Ps. 24:4); and by men: “The lips of many shall bless him that is liberal of his bread” (Sir. 31:28, Vulgate); “He who has a bountiful eye will be blessed” (Prov. 22:9). And he calls this a blessing to be prepared, as a willing gift, i.e., abundantly, not as an exaction, i.e., not sparingly. Ratio autem quare debeant abundanter dare, est quia ego dico, quod qui parce seminat, id est qui parum dat in mundo isto, parce et metet, id est parum recipiet in alio saeculo. Et dicit seminat, quia semina nostra sunt quidquid boni fecerimus. Et iterum, quia si parum seminatur, non multum colligetur. Gal. VI, 8: quae seminaverit homo, haec et metet. Sed multiplicata, et qui seminat in benedictionibus, id est abundanter, metet et de benedictionibus, scilicet Dei largam retributionem. Sed numquid non metent omnes abundanter? Dicendum est sic, quantum ad quantitatem praemii, quia omnes affluent, et nullus ibi parce metet. Sed dicit abundanter, quasi ad proportionem et bene seminantium. I Cor. c. XV, 41: stella a stella differt. Abundanter omnes quantum ad praemium substantiale, sed parce in comparatione ad praemium accidentale, in quo est sanctorum differentia. Supra VIII, 15: qui multum, non abundavit, et qui modicum, non minoravit. Quia aliquando aliquis parce dat, et cum magna charitate, et abundanter metet. 329. – The reason why they should give abundantly is because, I say, he who sows sparingly, i.e., who gives little in this world, will also reap sparingly, i.e., will receive little in the other world. And he says, sows, because our seeds are whatever good we do; and again, if little is sown, not much is gathered: “For he who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption” (Gal. 6:8); but multiplied: And he who sows bountifully, i.e., abundantly, will also reap bountifully, i.e., the generous reward of God. But will not all reap abundantly? Yes, as to the quantity of the reward, because all will abound and no one will reap sparingly. But he says, bountifully, in proportion to those sowing well: “Star differs from star in glory” (1 Cor. 15:41). All will reap abundantly as to the substantial reward, but sparingly as to the accidental reward, in which the saints will differ: “As it is written, ‘He who gathered much had nothing over, and he who gathered little had no lack’” (2 Cor. 8:15), because sometimes a person gives sparingly and with great charity, and reaps abundantly. Consequenter cum dicit unusquisque enim, etc. hortatur eos, ut dent hilariter et gaudenter. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo enim monet eos ad gaudenter dandum; secundo rationem assignat, ibi hilarem enim datorem, et cetera. 330. – Then when he says, each one must do, he exhorts them to give cheerfully and joyfully. In regard to this he does two things. First, he urges them to give joyfully; secondly, he gives the reason (v. 7b). Dicit ergo: dico quod paretis illud quod vultis dare quasi benedictionem, id est abundanter, et dignum benedictione, non quasi avaritiam, id est non parce. Et hoc dicit, quia illud quod sponte fit, non potest avare fieri. Et ideo subdit unusquisque enim, etc., quasi non avare, quia unusquisque, scilicet vestrum, det eleemosynas prout destinavit, id est praedeliberavit, in corde suo, scilicet secum conferens, non ex tristitia, et cetera. Quasi dicat unusquisque voluntarie det, non coacte. Ponit autem duo opposita voluntario, scilicet tristitiam et necessitatem. Voluntarium enim tollitur per violentum. Est autem duplex violentum, scilicet simplex et mixtum. Simplex quando absolute quis cogitur ad aliquid contra voluntatem suam faciendum. Ad removendum ergo illud violentum, dicit non ex necessitate, quod fieret si darent coacti mandato apostoli. Quasi dicat: non cogat vos ad dandum mandatum nostrum, sed moveat vos ad hoc prompta voluntas vestra. Ex. c. XXXV, 5: omnis voluntarius, et cetera. Violentum mixtum est quando quis non absolute cogitur ad faciendum aliquid contra voluntatem suam, sed secundum quid, scilicet quod nisi faciat incurrit maius damnum, sicut si non proiiciantur merces in mari, navis submergitur. Et ideo aliquo modo fit sponte et aliquo modo violenter inquantum scilicet coguntur timore maioris damni. Ut ergo hoc removeat, dicit non ex tristitia, id est non ita quod sit violentum mixtum. Quasi dicat: non ex timore confusionis, ne scilicet erubescatis, sed ex gaudio quod concepistis propter amorem quem habetis ad sanctos. Ps. LIII, 8: voluntarie sacrificabo tibi, et cetera. 331. – He says therefore: I say that you should prepare what you intend to give as a gift, i.e., abundantly, and as worthy of a blessing, and not as an exaction, i.e., not sparingly. He says this, because what is done spontaneously cannot be done with covetousness. Therefore he adds, Each one must do as he has made up his mind, as though without covetousness, because each one of you should give his alms as he has made up, i.e., decided beforehand, in his mind [heart], namely, conferring with himself. Not reluctantly or under compulsion: as if to say: let each one give willingly, not as being forced. Here he mentions the two things opposed to a voluntary action, namely, sadness and necessity. For a voluntary action is destroyed by violence, which is of two kinds, namely, simple and mixed. It is simple, when someone is absolutely compelled to do something against his will. To remove that violence he says, not reluctantly, which would be present if they gave as though compelled by the command of the Apostle. As if to say: do not permit my command to compel you to give, but let your ready will move you to do this: “Whoever is of a generous heart, let him bring the Lord’s offering” (Ex. 35:5). But a mixed violent action happens when one is not absolutely forced to do something against his will, but in a qualified sense, namely, that he would incur great harm, unless he did it; for example, if a ship would sink, unless the cargo were thrown overboard. Therefore in one sense it is done willingly, and in another sense by force, inasmuch as he is compelled by fear of a greater loss. Therefore, to remove this he says, not under compulsion, i.e., not making it a mixed violent action. As if to say: not from fear of shame, but from the joy you have conceived because of the love you have towards the saints: “With a freewill offering I will sacrifice to thee” (Ps. 54:6). Consequenter cum dicit hilarem enim datorem, etc., rationem assignat, et est talis: omnis remunerator remunerat ea quae sunt remuneratione digna. Haec autem sunt solum actus virtutum. In actibus autem virtutum duo sunt, scilicet species actus et modus agendi qui est ex parte agentis. Unde, nisi in actu virtutis utrumque istorum concurrat, non dicitur actus ille simpliciter virtuosus, sicut non dicitur perfecte iustus, secundum virtutem, qui operatur opera iustitiae, nisi delectabiliter et cum gaudio operetur. Et licet apud homines, qui non vident nisi ea quae patent, sufficiat quod quis operetur actum virtutis secundum ipsam speciem actus, puta actum iustitiae, tamen apud Deum, qui intuetur cor, non sufficit quod solum operetur actum virtutis secundum speciem, nisi etiam secundum debitum modum operetur, scilicet delectabiliter et cum gaudio. Et ideo non datorem tantum, sed hilarem datorem diligit Deus, id est approbat et remunerat, et non tristem, et remurmurantem. Ps. IC, 2: servite domino in laetitia. Eccli. c. XXXV, 11: in omni dato hilarem, et cetera. Rom. c. XII, 8: qui miseretur in hilaritate, et cetera. 332. – Then when he says, For God loves a cheerful giver, he gives the reason, which is this: everyone who rewards gives a reward for things worthy of a reward; but only acts of the virtues are such. But in the acts of the virtues there are two elements, namely, the species of the act and the manner of acting, which is taken on the side of the one acting. Hence, unless both are found in an act of virtue, that act is not said to be absolutely virtuous, just as a person is not said to be perfectly just according to the virtue, when he does works of justice, unless he acts with delight and with joy. And although with men, who see only what is obvious, it is enough that one perform an act of justice according to the very species of the act, say an act of justice; nevertheless, with God, who sees the heart, it is not enough merely to perform the act of a virtue according to the species, but he must also act according to the proper manner, namely, with delight and joy. Therefore, it is not the giver, but the cheerful giver that God loves, i.e., approves and rewards, and not the sad and grumbling one: “Serve the Lord with gladness” (Ps. 100:2); “For the Lord is the one who repays” (Sir. 35:11); “He who does acts of mercy, with cheerfulness” (Rom. 12:8).
9-2
2 Cor. 9:8-15Hic rationem trium modorum assignat. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo assignat rationem sumptam ex parte ipsorum; secundo rationem sumptam ex parte Dei, ibi ut in omnibus locupletati, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo ponit rationem; secundo ipsam confirmat, ibi sicut scriptum est, et cetera. 333. – Here he gives the reason for the three ways of giving. In regard to this he does two things. First, he assigns the reason taken on their part; secondly, the reason taken on God’s part (v. 11). In regard to the first he does two things. First, he gives the reason; secondly, he confirms it (v. 9). Ratio est talis: quicumque dat aliquid quod multiplicatur sibi, debet prompte, abundanter et hilariter dare, sicut videmus quod homines abundanter et prompte et cum gaudio seminant semen, quia multiplicatum illud recolligunt. Cum ergo eleemosynae multiplicentur dantibus, debetis illas prompte, gaudenter et abundanter facere. Et quod multiplicentur patet, quia Deus potens est omnem gratiam, etc., quasi dicat: non timeatis dare ne, indigentia gravati, poeniteat aliquando vos dedisse, quia potens est Deus facere abundare omnem gratiam spiritus sancti, qua scilicet semper gaudeatis de bono opere quod fecistis. Et ideo dicit abundetis in omne opus bonum, id est abundantem affectum habeatis ad dandum eleemosynam, sicut habetis ad alia opera virtutum. Et tamen habeatis plenam sufficientiam bonorum exteriorum; et ideo dicit semper omnem sufficientiam habentes, id est vos reputantes habere. Iac. I, 5: qui dat omnibus affluenter, et I Tim. VI, 8: habentes alimenta, et cetera. De ista sufficientia dicitur infra XII, 9: sufficit tibi gratia mea, et cetera. De multiplicatione vero dicitur Is. XXX, 23: dabitur pluvia semini tuo; Matth. XIX, 29: omnis qui reliquerit, etc., centuplum accipiet, et cetera. 334. – The reason is this: whoever gives something which is multiplied for him should give promptly, abundantly and cheerfully, just as when we see men sowing seed abundantly and promptly and cheerfully, because they gather it up again multiplied. Since therefore alms are multiplied for those who give them, you should give them promptly, joyfully and abundantly. That they are multiplied is evident, because God is able to provide you with every blessing. As if to say: do not be afraid to give, as though you will be burdened with need and regret having given, because God is able to provide you with every blessing of the Holy Spirit in abundance, namely, the grace by which you will always rejoice in the good work you have done. He says therefore, so that you may always be provided in abundance for every good work, i.e., have an abundant will to give alms, just s you have for the other works of the virtues, and also that you have a full sufficiency of external goods; hence he says, always having enough of everything, i.e., considering yourself to have: “He gives to all men generously and without reproaching, and it will be given him” (Jas. 1:5); “But if we have food and clothing, with these we shall be content” (1 Tim. 6:8). Of that sufficiency it says below (2 Cor. 12:9): “My grace is sufficient for you.” But concerning the multiplication it says in Is. (30:25): “And he will give rain for the seed with which you sow the ground”; “And every one who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or lands, for my name’s sake, will receive a hundredfold, and inherit eternal life” (Matt. 19:29). Consequenter cum dicit sicut scriptum est, etc., probat positam rationem dupliciter, scilicet auctoritate et experimento, ibi qui autem administrat, et cetera. Probat autem auctoritate, dicens: recte debet vos movere praedicta ratio, quia, sicut scriptum est, et cetera. Sed Glossa in alio sensu adducit hanc auctoritatem, quam sit intentio apostoli. Nam Glossa sic adducit: dico quod abundetis in omne opus bonum, scilicet largitione eleemosynarum, quia scriptum est dispersit, dedit pauperibus. Sed apostolus videtur hoc velle referre ad illud quod dicit abundare facere omnem gratiam, et hoc quia ille qui dispersit, dedit pauperibus, iustitia eius manet in aeternum. Eccli. c. XII, 2: bene fac iusto, et invenies retributionem, et cetera. In auctoritate autem proposita notatur quibus sit dandum, quia pauperibus id est indigentibus, et cetera. Lc. XIV, 12: cum facis prandium, et cetera. Quomodo dandum, quia dispersit, quia non totum uni, sed divisim multis. I Cor. c. XII, 3: si distribuero, et cetera. Is. LVIII, 7: frange esurienti panem, et cetera. Iustitia eius, id est virtus iustitiae, manet in aeternum, quia ex quo dat, augetur voluntas ad dandum. Vel iustitia eius, id est merces iustitiae eius, manet in aeternum. Prov. c. XI, 18: seminanti iustitiam merces fidelis, et cetera. 335. – Then when he says, As it is written, he proves his reason in two ways, namely, by authority and from experience. He proves it by an authority when he says: rightly should this reason move you, because, As it is written, “He scatters abroad, he gives to the poor; his righteousness endures for ever.” But a Gloss adduces this authority in a sense different from the Apostle’s intention; for the Gloss says: I say that you shall abound for every good work, namely, by the giving of alms, because, As it is written, “He scatters abroad, he gives to the poor.” But the Apostle wishes to refer this to his statement that God is able to make every grace abound in you; and this, because he who scattered abroad and given to the poor, his justice remains forever: “Do good to a godly man, and you will be repaid” (Sir. 12:2). In the authority cited we note to whom should be given, namely, to the poor, i.e., to the needy: “When you give a dinner or a banquet, do not invite your friends or your brothers or your kinsmen or rich neighbors, lest they also invite you in return, and you be repaid” (Lk. 14:12); how to give, namely, he scatters abroad, i.e., not all to one person, but divided among many: “If I give away all I have” (1 Cor. 13:3); “Is it not to share your bread with the hungry” (Is. 58:7); his righteousness [justice], i.e., the reward for justice, endures forever: “But one who sows righteousness gets a sure reward” (Prov. 11:18). Experimento autem confirmat rationem praedictam, dicens qui autem administrat, et cetera. Quasi dicat: experti estis, quia hoc ipsum quod datis in eleemosynas, habetis a Deo. Et ideo debetis libenter dare amore Dei. I Par. ultimo: tua sunt omnia quae de manu, et cetera. Et insinuat tria circa hoc. Primum est quod aliquis posset dicere: si nos damus modo quod habemus, deficient nobis necessaria ad quotidianum victum. Et hoc removet, quia non solum semen ministrat seminanti, sed panem, id est necessaria vitae, praestabit ad manducandum, Ps. CXXXV, 25: qui dat escam omni carni. Secundum est, quia posses dicere quod si multum daremus, deficient nobis quae habemus ad dandum iterum. Et hoc apostolus removet dicens, quod non deficiet, sed multiplicabit semen vestrum, unde scilicet plures eleemosynas facitis. Tertium est, quia posset aliquis dicere, quod si modo damus, deficiet nobis voluntas ad dandum, et poenitebit nos dedisse, et sic totum amittemus. Et hoc removet, dicens et augebit incrementa frugum iustitiae vestrae, id est intantum augebit facultatem et voluntatem dandi eleemosynas, ex quibus procedit iustitia vestra, quod semper parati et prompti eritis ad dandum eleemosynas, et quod fruges maximae erunt in comparatione ad parvum semen. Prov. III, 9: de primitiis frugum tuarum da pauperibus. Lev. XXV, 21: dabo benedictionem, et cetera. I Tim. IV, 8: pietas ad omnia valet. 336. – He confirms his reason by experience when he says, He who supplies seed to the sower and bread for food. As if to say: you know from experience that what you give in alms you have from the Lord; therefore you should give gladly for the love of God: “For all things come from you, and of your own have we given you” (1 Ch. 29:14). He suggests three things in regard to this. The first is that someone could say: if we give now what we have, what is necessary for daily food will be wanting to us. But he rejects this, saying: he not only supplies seed to the sower, but bread for food, i.e., the necessities of life: “He who gives food to all flesh” (Ps. 136:24). The second is that they could say: if we give much, we will not have enough to give again. The Apostle answers this, saying that they will not want, but he will multiply your sowing, from which you can give more alms. The third is that someone could say: if we give now, the will to give will be lost, and we will regret having given, and so we shall lose everything. But he removes this, saying: he will increase the harvest of your righteousness [justice], i.e., he will increase the ability to give alms and the will from which your justice proceeds, to such a degree that you will always be prepared and ready to give alms, and the fruit will be the most in comparison with the small seed: “Honor the LORD with your substance and with the first fruits of all your produce” (Prov. 3:9); “I will command my blessing upon you” (Lev. 25:21); “Godliness is of value in every way” (1 Tim. 4:8). Deinde cum dicit ut in omnibus locupletati, etc., assignat rationem, quare prompte, abundanter et hilariter dare debeant, ex parte ipsorum dantium; hic assignat rationem ex parte ipsius Dei pro quo dare debent. Et primo assignat rationem; secundo manifestat eam, ibi quoniam ministerium huius officii, et cetera. 337. – The when he says, You will be enriched in every way, after having assigned the reason why they should give promptly, abundantly and cheerfully on the part of the donors, he then assigns the reason on God’s part, for whom they ought to give. First he assigns the reason they should give; secondly, he explains it (v. 12). In ratione autem assignanda tria considerantur, quorum primum est ipsorum locupletatio, quod respondet praemissis. Dixerat enim supra: multiplicabit semen vestrum et augebit incrementa frugum iustitiae vestrae et hoc primo resumit, dicens et ut in omnibus locupletati, id est tam in corporalibus, quam in spiritualibus bonis. I Cor. I, 5: divites facti estis, et cetera. Sed ne aliquis crederet, quod finis ponendus sit in abundantia divitiarum temporalium, aut quod divitias spirituales aliquis otiose absque usu possidere deberet, refert hoc primum ad aliud secundum, dicens abundetis in omnem, id est perfectam, simplicitatem, id est largitatem simplici animo factam, ut largitio procedat ex divitiis temporalibus, simplicitas autem ex spiritualibus. Prov. XI, 3: simplicitas iustorum, et cetera. Sed et hoc ipsum ad alium finem referendum est, scilicet ad Deum. Et ideo tertio subdit quae, scilicet largitio simplex, operatur per nos, id est mediantibus nobis, gratiarum actionem Deo, I Thess. V, 18: in omnibus gratias agite, et cetera. 338. – In the reason to be assigned, three things are to be considered, the first of which is their enrichment, which corresponds to what has gone above. For he had said above: he will multiply your sowing and increase the fruits of your justice; and he recalls the first, saying: You will be enriched in every way, i.e., both in bodily and spiritual goods: “That in every way you were enriched in him” (1 Cor. 1:5). But lest anyone suppose that his end should be placed in an abundance of temporal riches or that he should possess spiritual goods in idleness without using them, he refers this first to another second thing: have great generosity directed by a simple spirit, so that the giving comes from temporal goods but the simplicity from spiritual goods: “The integrity of the upright guides them” (Prov. 11:13). But this should itself be referred to another end, namely, to God; therefore he adds in the third place, which, namely, simple abundance, through us will produce thanksgiving to God: “Give thanks in all circumstances” (1 Th. 5:18). Deinde cum dicit quoniam ministerium, etc., manifestat rationem supra positam, scilicet quomodo eorum largitio operetur gratiarum actionem Deo. Et primo hoc ostendit; secundo ponit gratiarum actionis materiam, ibi glorificantes Deum, etc.; tertio ipse prorumpit in gratiarum actionem, ibi gratias Deo, et cetera. 339. – Then when he says, for the rendering of this service, he explains the reason mentioned above, namely, how their abundance works thanksgiving to God. First he shows this; secondly, the reason for thanks (v. 13); thirdly, he breaks out in thanksgiving (v. 14). Dicit ergo: dico quod largitio vestra operatur gratiarum actiones Deo, quia ministerium huius officii vestri, quo subvenitis sanctis, multa bona habet, quia non solum supplet ea quae desunt sanctis, quantum ad temporalia. Supra VIII, 14: vestra abundantia illorum inopiam suppleat, et cetera. Non solum ergo hoc bonum sequitur inde, sed etiam quod ipsi orant pro vobis, et agunt gratias Deo, probantes et approbantes ministrationem vestram. Et hoc est quod dicit sed etiam abundat, id est excrescit, in actione gratiarum, quae fit per multos, non solum perfectos, sed per alios fideles pauperes, qui inde agunt gratias Deo in domino, qui eos ad hoc movet, videntes et probantes ministerium vestrum. Supra I, 11: ut ex multarum personis facierum, et cetera. 340. – He says therefore: I say that your abundance works thanksgiving to God, for the rendering of this service of yours, by which you help the saints, has many good results: “As a matter of equality your abundance at the present time should supply their want” (2 Cor. 8:14). Not only does this good follow therefrom, but also the fact that they pray for you and give thanks to God, proving and approving your service. And this is what he says: but also overflows in many thanksgivings to God, which are given by many, not only by the perfect, but by the poor believers who give thanks to God in the Lord, who moves them to this, seeing and approving your ministry: “So that many will give thanks on our behalf for the blessing granted us in answer to many prayers” (2 Cor. 1:2). Huius quidem gratiarum actionis materia est propter tria. Primo propter eorum fidem quam acceperunt, et ideo dicit: dico quod abundat in gratiarum actione, glorificantes, scilicet fideles, Deum in obedientia confessionis vestrae, id est de confessione fidei vestrae, quam confitemini et creditis in Christum. Matth. V, v. 16: sic luceat lux vestra, et cetera. Prov. XXI, v. 28: vir obediens loquetur victorias. Secundo propter eorum largitionem. Et ideo dicit glorificantes et in simplicitate communicationis vestrae, id est pro largitione vestra, in illos, scilicet sanctos pauperes, et in omnes, scilicet fideles qui indigent, simplici et puro animo facta. Gal. VI, 6: communicet is qui catechizatur verbo ei qui se catechizat, etc., et iterum operemur bonum ad omnes, et cetera. Tertio propter hoc quod ipsi viri sancti habent a Deo, ut pro eis agant gratias Deo. Et ideo dicit: glorificantes etiam Deum in ipsorum obsecratione pro vobis; id est glorificant Deum de hoc quod ipsi viri sancti obsecrant pro nobis. Ipsorum, dico, desiderantium vos videre in aeterna beatitudine, et hoc propter eminentem gratiam Dei in vobis. 341. – This thanksgiving is given for three reasons. First, for their faith, which they have received; hence he says: I say that they abound in thanksgiving, the faithful glorifying God by your obedience in acknowledging the gospel of Christ, i.e., the confession of your faith, by which you confess and believe in Christ: “Let your light so shine before men” (Matt. 5:16); “The word of a man who hears will endure” (Prov. 21:28). Secondly, on account of their abundance; hence he says, glorifying God also for the generosity of your contribution for them, namely, the holy poor, and for all others, namely, the faithful in need, and given with a simple and pure spirit: “Let him who is taught the word share all good things with him who teaches” (Gal. 6:6); and “Let us do good to all men” (Gal. 6:10). Thirdly, on account of what these saints have from God that they may give thanks to God; hence he says: glorifying God also in their praying for you, i.e., they glorify God for the fact that those holy men pray for you; the men, I say, who are desirous of seeing you in eternal happiness; and this because of the surpassing grace of God in you. Ex his ergo apostolus prorumpit in gratiarum actionem Deo, dicens gratias, et cetera. Id est quia tot bona inde proveniunt de ministerio vestro, ego ago gratias Deo, etc., scilicet charitatis, quae maxime videtur vigere in vobis, qui subvenitis etiam illis qui sic agunt gratias Deo et orant pro vobis. Et hoc donum est inenarrabile, quia non potest dici, quantum utile sit, quia oculus non vidit, nec auris audivit, et cetera. 342. – From this the Apostle breaks forth in thanksgiving to God, saying: Thanks be to God for his inexpressible gift!, that is, for the charity which is especially seen in you who even help those who thus thank God and pray for you. This gift is inexpressible, because it cannot be said how profitable it is, for “What no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man conceived, what God has prepared for those who love him” (1 Cor. 2:9).
10-1
2 Cor. 10:1-6Postquam tractavit de bonis ministris Christi et fidei, consequenter apostolus invehitur contra falsos ministros et pseudo-prophetas. Et primo invehitur contra eos; secundo vero contra illos, qui, decepti ab eis, adhaerebant eis, in XIII cap., ibi ecce tertio, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo excusat se de eis quae imponuntur sibi per rationem; secundo vero per facti evidentiam, ibi quae autem secundum faciem sunt, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo recusat se excusare per experimentum, cum tamen posset; secundo vero excusat per rationem, ibi qui arbitrantur, et cetera. Circa primum tria facit. Primo praemittit obsecrationem; secundo interponit illud quod imponitur sibi a pseudo, ibi qui in facie quidem, etc.; tertio recusat experimentum, ibi rogo autem. 343. – After dealing with the good ministers of Christ and of the faith, the Apostle now attacks false ministers and false apostles. First, he attacks these; secondly, those who, being deceived by them, have adhered to them (chap. 13). In regard to the first he does two things. First, he gives the reason, excusing himself from the task imposed on him; secondly, he gives the evidence for the fact (v. 7). In regard to the first he does two things. First, he refuses to make a test; secondly, he excuses himself with a reason (v. 2b). In regard to the first he does three things. First, he entreats them; secondly, he interjects what is imposed on them by the false apostles (v. 1b); thirdly, he refuses the test (v. 2). Dicit ergo ipse autem ego Paulus, qui vos et alios ad eleemosynas exhortor; ego, inquam, ipse, obsecro vos per mansuetudinem et modestiam Christi. De mansuetudine Christi habetur Matth. XI, 29: discite a me, quia mitis sum, et cetera. De modestia Sap. c. XI, 21: omnia in numero, pondere et mensura disposuisti, et cetera. Modestia enim nihil aliud est quam modum servare in agendis. Facit autem specialiter hic mentionem de mansuetudine et modestia Christi, quia pseudo, et Corinthii, specialiter imponebant Paulo quod cum esset praesens apud eos conversaretur humiliter, et cum esset absens scriberet eis valde dure. Et ideo posuit illa duo quae Christus habuit, ut sciant quod apostolus haec etiam ostendit et servavit exemplo Christi. 344. – He says therefore: I, Paul, myself, who am urging you and others to give alms; I myself, I say, entreat you, by the meekness and gentleness of Christ. Of the mildness of Christ, Matt. (11:29) has: “Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me; for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls”; of his modesty, Wis. (11:21) has: “For it is always in your power to show great strength, and who can withstand the might of your arm?” For modesty consists in nothing less than observing the measure in acting. But he makes special mention of Christ’s mildness and modesty, because the false apostles and the Corinthians accused Paul of acting humbly when he was among them, but when he was absent he wrote very harshly. Therefore, he mentioned those two qualities of Christ to show that the Apostle also has them and observes them after the example of Christ. Et ideo consequenter interponit vitium sibi impositum, dicens: ego ipse Paulus, id est vere humilis, quia Paulus humilis et quietus interpretatur. I Cor. XV, 9: ego sum minimus, et cetera. Unde ego ipse, id est, vere Paulus. Ps. ci, 28: tu quidem ipse es. Eccli. c. XIX, 23: est qui nequiter humiliat se, et cetera. Et Iac. III, 16: ubi zelus et contentio, ibi inconstantia, et cetera. Ego inquam obsecro, qui in facie, id est exterius, ut dicitis, humilis sum inter vos, id est humiliter conversatus, cum sum vobis praesens, absens autem, id est cum sum absens a vobis, quando scilicet non timeo laedi ab aliquo vestrum, confido in vobis, id est confidenter ago, aspere vobis per epistolam scribens. Prov. XXVIII, 1: iustus quasi leo confidens, et cetera. 345. – Hence, he introduces the vice ascribed to him, saying, I, Paul, myself, i.e., truly humble, because Paul means humble and quiet: “For I am the least of the apostles” (1 Cor. 15:9); hence, “I myself”, i.e., truly Paul: “But thou art the same” (Ps. 102:27); “There is one that humbles himself wickedly, and his interior is full of deceit” (Sir. 19:23); “For where jealousy and selfish ambition exist, there will be disorder and every vile practice” (Jas. 3:16). I, I say, entreat you, who when face to face with you, i.e., outwardly, as you say, am humble among you, acting humbly while I am present with you, but when I am away, namely, when there is no fear of being injured by any of you, am bold toward you, i.e., act boldly, writing harsh epistles to you: “But the righteous are bold as a lion” (Prov. 28:1). Consequenter cum dicit rogo autem, etc., recusat sumere experimentum. Isti enim credebant quod apostolus ex timore ductus conversaretur humiliter inter eos, et ideo dicit: vos ita creditis, sed ego rogo vos, qui et ipse obsecro, ut velitis experiri, utrum ego, si necesse sit, faciam in praesentia, quomodo facio in absentia. Et ideo dicit ne praesens, id est cum fuero apud vos, audeam facere in vobis, si necesse sit, per eam confidentiam, id est ita confidenter, sicut existimor a vobis audere, id est audacter et confidenter agere, in quosdam, incorrectos dure reprehendendo, per litteras etiam corrigendo. Iob XXXI: exaltat audacter, et cetera. 346. – Then when he says, I beg of you, he refuses to make a test. For they believed that the Apostle acted humbly among them because of fear; hence, he says: you believe so, but I beg of you—since you would like to experience whether I, if it were necessary, would do when I am present as I do in my absence. And so he says: I may not have to show boldness when I am present, i.e., when I am among you, to do anything, if it is necessary, with such confidence as I count on showing, i.e., as confidently as I am thought by you to be bold, i.e., to act boldly and confidently against some uncorrected persons, by rebuking and correcting through letters: “He exults in his strength” (Job 39:20). Deinde excusat se per rationem, dicens qui arbitrantur, etc., quasi dicat: et licet nolim experimento me excusare propter vos, tamen ratio in promptu est ad excusandum me sufficienter. Circa hoc ergo tria facit. Primo ponit causam, quare imponunt ei quod dictum est; secundo destruit causam illam; tertio confirmat per rationem. 347. – Then he excuses himself with a reason, saying: who suspect us of acting in worldly fashion. As if to say: although I am not willing to justify myself for your sake with a test, nevertheless, there is a reason at hand to justify me. In regard to this he does three things. First, he gives the reason why they lay this charge against him; secondly, he destroys the reason (v. 3); thirdly, he confirms it with a reason (v. 4). Causa autem quare hoc sibi imponitur, scilicet quod praesens sit humilis, absens autem severus et austerus, est quia isti arbitrabantur apostolum secundum carnem ambulare. Et quia unusquisque secundum regulam operis operatur, finis autem habet rationem regulae, ideo quilibet dirigit opus suum ad finem quem intendit. Qui ergo ponunt finem suum in bonis carnalibus dicuntur ambulare secundum carnem. Et inde est quod ita regulant opera sua, ut consequantur ea quae sunt carnis; quae quidem, quia possunt subtrahi ab hominibus, ideo homines, qui in carnalia tendunt, blande se habent ad homines et humiliter. Et ideo, quia credebant apostolum ambulare secundum carnem ideo credebant quod propter hoc humiliter conversatus sit inter eos. 348. – The reason why this charge is laid to him, namely that he is humble when present but harsh and severe when absent, is that they consider that the Apostle acts in a worldly manner, i.e., walks according to the flesh. And because every person works according to what rules the work, and the end should be the rule, it follows that everyone directs his own work to the end he intends. Therefore, those who place their end in carnal goods are said to walk according to the flesh. And because these things can be taken from them, men who tend to carnal things behave gently and humbly toward others. Therefore, because they believed that the Apostle walked according to the flesh, they supposed that this was the reason he behaved humbly among them. Sed haec ratio nulla est et vana, et ideo destruit eam. Dicens in carne enim, etc., quasi dicat: quod nos sumus in carne non possumus negare, quia Rom. VIII, 12 dicitur: debitores sumus non carni, etc.; sed quod nos regulemur secundum carnem, ponendo in bonis carnalibus finem, sive intentionem nostram, hoc est falsum, quia non secundum carnem militamus, id est vitam nostram, quae est quaedam militia, ut dicitur Iob VII, 1, non regulamus secundum carnem. 349. – But this reason is null and void; therefore, he destroys it, saying: For though we live in the world we are not carrying on a worldly war [according to the flesh]. As if to say: we cannot deny that we are in the flesh, because in Rom. (8:12) he says: “So then, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh,” but that we are ruled according to the flesh, by placing our end or our intention in carnal goods, this is false, because we are not carrying on a worldly war, i.e., we do not regulate our life, which is a warfare (Job 7:1) according to the flesh. Et quod non militemus secundum carnem probat, cum dicit nam arma nostra, etc., et primo, ex militaribus armis, sicut unusquisque pugnator habet arma accommoda militiae et pugnae suae. Sed constat quod arma eorum qui pugnant secundum carnem, seu militant, sunt divitiae, voluptates, honores et potentiae mundanae et temporales, cum ergo arma nostra non sint huiusmodi, quia arma militiae nostrae non sunt carnalia, sed potentia Deo, id est secundum Deum, vel ad honorem Dei, ergo nos non militamus secundum carnem. 350. – That we are not carrying on a worldly war he proves when he says, for the weapons of our warfare are not worldly [carnal]; and first of all, from the weapons of warfare, as a fighter has weapons suitable to his warfare. Now it is plain that the weapons of those who fight according to the flesh, or wage war, are riches, pleasures, and worldly and temporal honors and power. But since our weapons are not of this sort, for the weapons of our warfare are not worldly, but have divine power [are mighty to God], i.e., according to God or to the honor of God, therefore, we do not war according to the flesh. Secundo vero cum dicit ad destructionem, etc., ponit virtutem armorum spiritualium, quorum quidem virtus patet ex triplici effectu eorum. Primus effectus est quod per ipsa arma confunduntur rebelles. Et quantum ad hoc dicit ad destructionem munitionum, quasi dicat: bene sunt potentia Deo, ut destruant rebelles. Infra Tit. I, 9: ut sit potens exhortari, et cetera. Ier. I, 10: ut evellas et destruas, et cetera. Muniunt autem se aliqui contra Deum dupliciter. Aliqui astutis consiliis, sicut sunt tyranni, qui machinantur pravis consiliis suis destruere quae Dei sunt, ut ipsi tyrannizent. Et quantum ad hoc dicit consilia destruentes, scilicet tyrannorum. Iob V, 13: qui apprehendit sapientes, et cetera. Aliqui vero per superbiam vel altitudinem ingenii proprii. Et quantum ad hoc dicit et omnem altitudinem, scilicet suae superbiae. Rom. XII, 16: non alta sapientes, etc., id est superba. Sive profunditatem intellectus tam legisperitorum, quam philosophorum. Rom. VIII, 39: neque altitudo, neque profundum. Is. V, 21: vae qui sapientes estis in oculis vestris. Altitudinem, dico, extollentem se adversus scientiam Dei, scilicet fidem, quae est scientia Dei, quia quae de Deo dicuntur impugnant, scilicet partum virginis, et alia Dei mirabilia. Is. XI, 9: repleta est terra scientia Dei. Apoc. II, 23: quam dicunt altitudinem Satanae. Apoc. II, 24: qui non cognoverunt altitudinem Satanae. Rom. XI, 20: noli altum sapere, sed time. 351. – But secondly, when he says, but have divine power to destroy strongholds, he indicates the power of spiritual armor, which is evident from its threefold effect. The first effect is that rebellious persons are put to shame by those arms; in regard to this he says, to destroy strongholds. As if to say: the power of God is quite capable of destroying the rebellious: “That he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to confute those who contradict it” (Titus 1:9); “See, I have set you this day over nations and over kingdoms, to pluck up and to break down, to destroy and to overthrow, to build and to plant” (Jer. 1:10). Men fortify themselves against God in two ways: some with astute plans, such as tyrants, who plot with their evil designs to destroy the things of God, that they may exercise their tyranny; as to this he says, we destroy arguments [counsels], namely, of tyrants: “He takes the wise in their own craftiness” (Job 5:13). But others through pride or profundity of their own talent; as to this he says, and every proud obstacle [height], namely, of their pride: “Do not be haughty” (Rom. 12:16), i.e., proud things, or by profundity of intellect, both of lawyers and philosophers: “Neither height nor depth” (Rom. 8:39); “Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes” (Is. 5:21). Every proud obstacle to the knowledge of God, i.e., the faith, which is knowledge of God, because they attack things said about God, namely, the virgin birth and other of God’s marvels: “For the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord” (Is. 11:9); “Who have not learned what some call the deep things of Satan” (Rev. 2:24); “So do not become proud, but stand in awe” (Rom. 11:20). Secundus effectus est conversio infidelium ad fidem. Et quantum ad hoc dicit et in captivitatem redigentes, etc.; quod quidem fit quando id quod homo scit, totum supponit ministerio Christi et fidei. Ps. CIL, v. 8: ad alligandos reges eorum in compedibus, et cetera. Eccli. VI, 25: iniice pedem tuum in compedes illius, id est in documenta fidei, et cetera. 352. – The second effect is the conversion of unbelievers to the faith; as to this he says, and take every thought captive to obey Christ. This happens when a man submits all he knows to the ministry of the Christ and of the faith: “To bind their kings with chains and their nobles with fetters of iron” (Ps. 149:8); “Put your feet into her fetters, and your neck into her chains” (Sir. 6:25), i.e., into the teaching of the faith. Tertius effectus est correctio peccantium. Et quantum ad hoc dicit et in promptu habentes, id est promptum et liberum animum habentes ad puniendum omnem inobedientiam. Ps. CIL, 6: gladii ancipites in manibus, et cetera. Et hoc erit, cum impleta fuerit vestra obedientia, id est cum vos perfecte obedientes eritis, quia si vos velitis obedire, non erit nobis locus puniendi inobedientiam aliorum et vestram. Vel, tunc ulciscemur vos de inobedientia, quando impleta fuerit obedientia vestra, id est quando destruetur inobedientia vestra: contraria enim contrariis curantur. 353. – The third effect is the correction of sinners; as to this he says, being ready to punish every disobedience, i.e., having the readiness and free will to punish all disobedience: “And two-edged swords in their hands” (Ps. 149:6). This will occur when your obedience is complete, i.e., when you are perfectly obedient, because if you are willing to obey, there will be no reason for punishing the disobedience of others and your own. Or we shall take revenge on disobedience, when your obedience is complete, i.e., when your disobedience shall be destroyed; for contraries are cured by contraries.
10-2
2 Cor. 10:7-12Supra excusavit se apostolus per rationem hic excusat se per facti evidentiam. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo enim committit auditoribus iudicium suae excusationis; secundo prosequitur suam causam, ibi si quis confidit, et cetera. 354. – Above, the Apostle excused himself by reason; here he excuses himself by the evidence of the fact. In this regard he does two things. First, he submits his excuse to his hearers to judge; secondly, he pursues his cause (v. 7b). Dicit ergo primo: licet appareat per rationem falsum esse quod imponunt mihi pseudo, tamen si aliqui sint inter vos, qui ratione non vincantur et noluerint rationi acquiescere, saltem videte, id est considerate, ea quae sunt secundum faciem, id est in manifesto apparent de me evidenter. Committit autem eis iudicium causae suae, ad ostendendam securitatem cordis sui. Iob VI, v. 29: respondete, obsecro, absque contradictione. Sed contra Io. VII, 24: nolite secundum faciem iudicare. Non ergo bene dicitur hic quae secundum faciem sunt videte. Respondeo. Dicendum est quod ibi accipitur secundum faciem pro his quae exterius apparent in homine, scilicet pro sola veritatis apparentia, secundum quae non debet homo iudicare, quia aliquando contrarium latet in corde. Unde dicitur Matth. VII, 15: veniunt ad vos in vestimentis ovium, intrinsecus, et cetera. Hic vero accipitur secundum faciem pro ipsa veritate evangelica et facti evidentia, secundum quam potest fieri iudicium. Glossa aliter exponit, scilicet secundum faciem, id est pseudo videte, id est attendite. Quasi dicat: considerate facta eorum, quia impossibile est quin inter multa bona quae praetendunt, non faciant aliqua ex quibus poteritis cognoscere intentionem ipsorum pravam. Matth. VII, 20: ex fructibus eorum, et cetera. 355. – He says therefore: although reason shows that the charge laid against me by the false apostles is false, nevertheless, if some among you are not convinced by reason and refuse to acquiesce to it, at least look at, i.e., consider, the things that are before your eyes, i.e., that are evident, concerning me. But he submits the judgment of his cause to them in order to indicate how secure he is in his heart: “Turn, I pray, let no wrong be done” (Job. 6:29). But this is contrary to Jn. (7:24): “Do not judge by appearances.” Therefore it is not proper for him to say, what is before your eyes. I answer that the phrase, what is before your eyes [according to outward appearance], is taken there for things that appear outwardly in a man, namely, for that which appear to be true, according to which a man should not judge, because sometimes the contrary is present in the heart: “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves” (Matt. 7:15). But here it is taken for the Gospel’s truth itself and the evidence of the fact according to which judgment can be made. A Gloss explains it another way, namely, according to outward appearance, i.e., of the false apostles, see, i.e., look to. As if to say: consider the facts about them, because it is impossible that among the many good things they pretend they not do some things from which you can recognize their wicked intention: “Thus you will know them by their fruits” (Matt. 7:20). Consequenter cum dicit si quis autem confidit, etc., prosequitur causam suam. Contingit autem quod aliquis movetur contra aliquem, deceptus auctoritate alicuius qui se magnum facit. Et sic Corinthii commoti erant contra apostolum decepti a pseudo, qui se dicebant maioris auctoritatis quam Paulus, quia venerant a Iudaea, et quia erant primo conversi. Et ideo apostolus duo facit. Primo evacuat auctoritatem illorum pseudorum; secundo prosequitur causam suam, ibi ut autem non existimer, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo ostendit quod pseudo non sint sibi praeferendi; secundo quod ipse est praeferendus eis, ibi nam et si amplius, et cetera. 356. – Then when he says, For even if I boast, he pursues his cause. But it sometimes happens that a person is moved against someone because the former is deceived by the authority of someone who gives himself out as being great. This is the way the Corinthians, deceived by the false apostles who claimed greater authority than Paul, were stirred up against him, because they had come from Judea and were among the first converts. Therefore the Apostle does two things. First, he deflates the authority of those false apostles; secondly, he pursues his cause (v. 9) Dicit ergo: hoc, inquam, secundum faciem videte; quod si quis, de pseudo, confidit se Christi esse, propter aliquod magnum quod fecerit, vel propter aliquod donum spirituale quod a Christo receperit, hoc cogitet apud se, id est consideret diligenter in corde suo quia sicut ipse Christi est, ita et nos. Quasi dicat: quidquid invenitur in eis, totum invenitur in nobis, unde debeamus dici et esse Christi. I Cor. VII, 40: puto quod et ego spiritum Christi habeam. Rom. c. VIII, 9: si quis spiritum Christi non habet, hic non est eius. 357. – He says therefore: see this, I say, according to outward appearance, that if any one of the false apostles is confident that he is Christs on account of some great thing he has done or some spiritual gift he has received from Christ, let him remind himself, i.e., carefully consider in his heart, that as he is Christs, so are we. As if to say: whatever is found in them is also found in us; hence we also should be considered as Christ’s: “And I think I have the Spirit of God” (1 Cor. 7:40); “Any one who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him” (Rom. 8:9). Non solum autem nos sumus Christi sicut et ipsi, sed multo plus possumus gloriari quod sumus Christi quam ipsi. Et hoc est quod dicit nam et si amplius aliquid gloriatus fuero de potestate nostra, quam, scilicet potestatem, dedit nobis dominus. Act. IX, 15: vas electionis est mihi iste. Gal. II, 8: qui operatus est Petro, et cetera. Dedit, inquam, mihi potestatem hanc specialem ad convertendum gentes in aedificationem, scilicet Ecclesiae, et non in destructionem, sicut faciunt pseudo, abutentes potestate eis data in contrarium ad quod data est. Nam, licet potestas detur in aedificationem Ecclesiae in fide et charitate, isti tamen quaerunt gloriam suam et non Christi, et ideo destruunt. Et hoc faciebant praedicando observari legalia et faciendo quaestum. Si ergo amplius glorior de hac potestate quam habeo, et in qua gloriam Christi quaero et non meam, non erubescam, scilicet de huiusmodi commendatione mea, quia non facio ad ostendendum me, sed causa necessitatis, scilicet ut ostendens auctoritatem meam esse magnam, et pseudo nullam, non decipiamini ab eis de caetero. 358. – But we are not only Christ’s, as they are, but we can glory more that we are Christ’s than they can. And this is what he says: for even if I boast a little too much of our authority, which the Lord has given us: “He is a chosen instrument of mine” (Ac. 9:15); “For he who worked through Peter for the mission to the circumcised worked through me also for the Gentiles” (Gal. 2:8). He gave me, I say, this special power to convert the Gentiles, for building you up, i.e., the church, and not for destroying you, as the false apostles do, who abuse the power given to them by using it for a purpose contrary to that for which it was given. For although the power was given for building up the Church in faith and charity, they seek their own glory and not Christ’s; consequently, they destroy. They did this by preaching that the ceremonies of the Law must be observed and by making a profit. Therefore, if I glory more in that power which I have in which I seek Christ’s glory, I shall not be put to shame, namely, for such commendation of myself, because I do not do it for ostentation, but out of necessity, so that by showing that my authority is great and that of the false apostles null, no man may be deceived by them again. Ubi nota quod, secundum Gregorium, duabus de causis potest aliquis se commendare absque peccato, scilicet quando aliquis provocatur opprobriis et conculcatur; et hoc ut non desperet videns se conculcari, et ut confutet adversarios. Sic Iob commendavit se multum, sicut patet XXVII cap., unde dicit: neque enim reprehendit me cor meum in omni vita mea, et cetera. Item quando aliquis praedicans veritatem, et alius adversarius veritatis contradicit sibi et impedit manifestationem veritatis, tunc huiusmodi praedicator debet se commendare et ostendere auctoritatem suam, ut confutet illum et ut trahat auditores ad veritatem. Et hoc facit apostolus in multis locis et hic etiam. 359. – Note here that according to Gregory there are two cases in which a person may commend himself without sinning, namely, when he is provoked by reproaches and is treated with contempt, and this in order that he not despair, seeing that he is treated with contempt, and be able to refute his adversaries. This is the way Job commended himself, as it is clear from (27:6), where he says: “My heart does not reproach me for any of my days” Likewise, when a person is preaching the truth and an adversary of the truth contradicts him and hinders the manifestation of the truth, in that case the preacher should commend himself and show his authority in order to refute him and draw his hearers to the truth. The Apostle does this in many places and also here. Consequenter cum dicit ut autem non existimer, etc., prosequitur causam suam ex facti evidentia. Et circa hoc tria facit. Primo ostendit falsum esse quod sibi imponitur; secundo rationem dicti assignat, ibi non enim audemus, etc.; tertio exponit rationem ipsam, ibi non autem non, et cetera. 360. – Then when he says, I would not seem to be frightening you, he pursues his cause with the evidence of the facts. In regard to this he does three things. First, he shows that the charge lad against him is false; secondly, the reason he says this (v. 12); thirdly, he explains the reason (v. 13). Circa primum sciendum est, quod, sicut dictum est, imponebatur apostolo quod in praesentia esset humilis propter timorem, vel propter gratiam et favorem captandum, et in absentia dure scriberet eis. Et ideo dicit apostolus quod non est ita, sed si bene volunt considerare quae apparent, ita invenient eum facto, qualem habuerunt scripto, et hoc possunt experiri, si volunt. Et hoc est quod dicit ut autem non existimer, a pseudo seu a vobis, tamquam terrere vos, vel timorem vobis incutere, per epistolas nostras quas vobis mittimus, quem quidem timorem non incutiebam vobis in praesentia. Et hoc ideo est quoniam ipsi, scilicet pseudo, inquiunt: epistolae, scilicet Pauli, graves sunt, id est dure et graviter punientes, et fortes, id est absque timore; sed praesentia non talis, imo infirma, id est debilis et humilis, quod respondet ei quod dicit fortes; et sermo, scilicet praedicatio sua, et collocutio, et exhortatio, contemptibilis, quod respondet ei quod dicitur graves. 361. – In regard to the first it should be noted that, as has been said, it was charged that the Apostle, when he was present, was humble out of fear or to win their favor; but when he was absent, he wrote harshly to them. But the Apostle says that this is not so, and that if they would carefully weigh the things that appear, they would find him to be in fact as he appears in his epistles; and they can test this, if they wish. And that is what he says: but that I would not seem to the false apostles or by you, as it were, to be frightening you, or to make you fearful, with the letters which we sent to you; which fear we would not cause you when we were present. For they, namely, the false apostles, say that his letters, namely, Paul’s, are weighty, i.e., punishing harshly and severely, and strong, i.e., without fear, but his bodily presence is not such, for it is weak, i.e., feeble and humble, and his speech, namely, his preaching and conversation and exhortation, is of no account. Sed qui est huiusmodi, id est qui talia dicit de nobis, cogitet, id est sciat certe, quia quales sumus, et cetera. Id est tales erimus praesentes, cum venimus ad vos, quales sumus per epistolas, absentes, si necesse fuerit. Causam autem quare apostolus se habuit humiliter ad eos, manifestat apostolus I Cor. c. II, 3: et ego, fratres, cum timore multo et tremore, etc., quod faciebat, quia non erant firmi in fide. Et voluit eos per dulcedinem suae conversationis firmare. Quare autem locutus fuerit sibi plana, et praedicaverit eis non subtilia, insinuat I Cor. III, dicens: tamquam parvulis in Christo lac potum dedi vobis, et cetera. Nondum enim erant capaces altioris doctrinae. 362. – But let such people, i.e., who say such things about me, understand this, i.e., know for certain, that what we say by letter when absent we do when present, i.e., we will be such when we come to you as we are by epistle when absent, if it is necessary. Now the reason the Apostle acted humbly toward them is given in 1 Cor. (2:3): “And I was with you in weakness and in much fear and trembling,” which he did, because they were not firm in faith and he wanted to strengthen them by the gentleness of his manner. Furthermore, the reason he spoke plain words and did not preach subtle things to them is suggested in 1 Cor. (3:1): “But I, brethren, could not address you as spiritual men, but as men of the flesh, as babes in Christ.” For they were not yet ready for a more profound doctrine. Consequenter cum dicit non enim audemus, etc., ostendit rationem dicti sui, dicens: dico quod non sumus similes pseudo, nec etiam est verum quod imponitur nobis, quia ego non dico alia quam facere est necesse. Et ideo dicit non enim audemus nos inserere, id est dicere nos esse unum ex eis, aut comparare, id est similem facere, quibusdam, scilicet pseudo, qui seipsos vobis tantum commendant, et tamen ab aliis et a factis suis non commendantur, contra illud Prov. XXVII, 2: laudet te alienus, et non os tuum, et cetera. Sed ipsi in nobis, etc., id est secundum ea quae sunt in nobis commensuramus facta nostra et dicta. Quasi dicat: illa dicimus de nobis quae sunt proportionata nobis, id est commensurata factis nostris. Gal. ult.: unusquisque opus suum probet, et cetera. 363. – Then when he says, Not that we venture, he indicates the reason behind what he says, saying: I say that we are not like the false apostles, nor is the charge they lay against us true, because I do not say any more than I have to say. Hence, he says: Not that we venture, i.e., say that we are one of them, to class or compare ourselves with, i.e., make ourselves like some, that is, the false apostles who commend themselves to you only. And yet they are not commended by others and by their deeds contrary to what is stated in Prov. (27:2): “Let another praise you, and not your own mouth; a stranger, and not your own lips.” But when they measure themselves by one another, and compare themselves with one another, they are without understanding. But we measure ourselves against ourselves, i.e., according to what is in us we measure our deeds and our statements. As if to say: we say things about ourselves that are proportionate to ourselves, i.e., in keeping with our deeds: “But let each one test his own work, and then his reason to boast will be in himself alone and not in his neighbor” (Gal. 6:4). Sed contra cap. IV, 2 dicitur commendantes nosmetipsos ad omnem conscientiam, et cetera. Ergo non bene dixit. Respondeo. Dicendum est quod aliud est commendare seipsum ad conscientiam, et aliud ad aures. Nam ad conscientias hominum commendamus nos ipsos, cum bene agimus, et hoc est bonum. Ad aures autem commendamus nosmetipsos verbis tantum, et hoc est malum. Primo modo commendant se iusti et apostolus; secundo modo pseudo et hypocritae. 364. – But on the other hand, he said above (4:2): “We would commend ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God.” Therefore, it was not proper for him to say what he did. I answer that it is one thing to commend himself to their conscience and another to their ears. For we commend ourselves to their ears by words alone; and this is evil. The Apostle and just men commend themselves in the first way; but in the second way the false apostles and hypocrites.
10-3
2 Cor. 10:13-18Supra apostolus ostendit rationem eorum quae dixerat, hic consequenter ipsam rationem manifestat. Dixerat enim quod commensurabat se sibi, et non excedebat mensuram suam. Potest autem aliquis in gloriando et commendando se, excedere dupliciter. Primo quantum ad id de quo gloriatur, puta, si quis gloriatur de eo quod non habet; secundo quantum ad id in quo gloriatur, puta, si quis habens aliquid ex alio, gloriatur in ipso, tamquam a se haberet. Et ideo apostolus ostendit quod neutro istorum modorum excedit mensuram gloriando vel laudando se. Et primo quantum ad primum; secundo quantum ad secundum, ibi qui autem gloriatur, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo probat quod non excedit mensuram suam quantum ad gloriam de praeteritis; secundo quantum ad gloriam de futuris, ibi spem autem habentes, et cetera. Circa primum tria facit. Primo proponit intentum; secundo propositum probat, ibi non enim quasi non, etc.; tertio concludit, ibi nec in immensum gloriantes, et cetera. 365. – Having indicated the reason behind the things he had said, the Apostle now explains that reason. For he had said that he measures himself by himself and did not go beyond that measure. But a person could be excessive in two ways in glorying and commending himself. First, in regard to that about which he glories; for example, if he glories about something he does not have. Secondly, in regard to that in which he glories; for example, if a person has something from someone else, but glories in himself as though he has it of himself. Thus the Apostle shows that he did not go beyond the measure in glorying or praising himself. In regard to the first he does three things. First, he states his proposition; secondly, he proves it (v. 14); thirdly, he draws the conclusion (v. 15). Dicit ergo primo: dico quod metimur et comparamus nosmetipsos nobis, facientes scilicet secundum quod officium nostrum exigit. Hoc autem nos agentes non in immensum gloriamur, id est non excedimus mensuram nostram exercendo potestatem nostram et commendando nos, Lev. XIX, v. 35: nolite facere iniquum, etc.; sed, gloriamur, secundum mensuram regulae, qua mensus est nobis Deus. Glossa hic exponit de mensura praelationis apostoli, et dicit secundum mensuram, id est secundum mensuratum mihi a Deo populum, cuius ego sum praelatus et regula ad dirigendum. Sed hoc idem potest universalius accipi, ut mensura regulae dicatur quantitas gratiae: et tunc est sensus: sed gloriamur secundum mensuram qua mensus est nobis Deus, id est, secundum quantitatem gratiae, quam dedit nobis Deus. Eph. IV, 7: unicuique data est gratia, et cetera. Quae quidem gratia est nobis regula, ne extollamur, et deviemus a Deo. Qua mensus est nobis Deus, quia quidquid boni facimus in evangelizando et in conversatione vestra et aliorum, totum est ex Deo mihi in vobis et aliis concessum. I Cor. III, v. 6: ego plantavi, Apollo rigavit, et cetera. Mensuram, dico, pertingendi usque ad vos, quia vos estis sub mensura gratiae mihi datae, per quam conversi estis ad Christum et obeditis Evangelio. Hoc est ergo quod proponit, scilicet quod non excedit mensuram suam gloriando se, quod sit eorum praelatus et quod per eum conversi sunt. 366. – He says therefore: I say that we measure and compare ourselves to ourselves, namely, by doing what our office demands. But in doing this we will not boast beyond limit [our measure], i.e., when we exercise our power and commend ourselves: “You shall do no wrong in judgment, in measures of length or weight or quantity” (Lev. 19:35); but will keep to the limits God has apportioned us. A Gloss [Lombard] explains this of the limit of the Apostle’s prelacy and says: according to the measure, i.e., according to the people measured out to him by God, the people whose prelate and rule of conduct he is. But this same thing can be taken more universally, such that the measure of the rule is the quantity of grace. Then the sense is this: but we glory according to the limits God has apportioned us, i.e., according to the amount of grace God has given us: “But grace was given to each of us according to the measure of Christ’s gift” (Eph. 4:7). This grace is a rule keeping us from being lifted up or separated from God. Which God has apportioned us, because whatever good we do in preaching the Gospel and in converting you and others, it is all from God, granted to me for you and others: “I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the growth” (1 Cor. 3:6). A measure, I say, to reach even to you, because you are under the measure of grace granted to me, by which you have been converted to Christ and obey the Gospel. Therefore, what he is proposing is this, namely, that he is not going beyond the measure of glorying and praising himself that he is their prelate and that they were converted by him. Et quod ita sit, scilicet quod pertingat usque ad eos, probat consequenter, cum dicit non enim quasi non pertingentes, etc., quasi dicat: vere gloriamur, non enim superextendimus nos in gratia vel gloria, vel in potestate nostra, quasi non simus pertingentes usque ad vos potestate nostra et ministerio. Nam usque ad vos pervenimus in Evangelio Christi, id est, in praedicatione Evangelii Christi. I Cor. IV, 15: in Christo Iesu per Evangelium ego vos genui, etc.; et supra IX, 1: nonne opus meum vos estis, et cetera. Gal. II, 8: qui operatus est Petro in apostolatum, et cetera. 367. – That this is so, namely, that it reaches even to them, he proves when he says: For we are not overextending ourselves, as though we did not reach you. As if to say: of course we glory, but we do not stretch beyond ourselves in our grace or glory or power, as if we do not reach to you in our power and ministry: we were the first to come all the way to you with the gospel of Christ, i.e., in the preaching of Christ’s Gospel: “For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the Gospel” (1 Cor. 4:15); “Are you not my workmanship in the Lord” (1 Cor. 9:1); “For he who worked through Peter for the mission to the circumcised worked through me also for the Gentiles” (Gal. 2:8). Et ideo concludit dicens: igitur cum glorior de vobis, non glorior in immensum. Unde dicit non in immensum gloriantes, etc., ubi alius fundamentum fidei posuisset. 368. – Therefore he draws the conclusion, saying: therefore, when I glory in you, I am not glorying beyond measure. Hence he says: We do not boast beyond limit, in other men’s labours, where someone else laid the foundation of faith. Consequenter cum dicit spem autem habentes, etc., ostendit quod non excedit mensuram suam quantum ad gloriam de futuro. Sciendum est autem, quod praedicator potest habere duplex argumentum gloriae de praedicatione sua. Unum est ut conversi ad praedicationem suam proficiant in melius. Aliud ut per ipsos conversos alii convertantur, quia, ut dicitur Ex. XXXVI, cortina cortinam trahit, etc.; et Apoc. ult.: qui audit, dicat: veni. Nam quando quis videt alios converti, facilius convertitur. Et quantum ad ista duo, apostolus sperat augeri gloriam suam de Corinthiis, primo scilicet de profectu eorum in melius. Et ideo dicit: dico quod nec in immensum gloriamur de conversione vestra per nos causata olim sed adhuc habentes, scilicet sumus, spem magnificari in futuro, id est augeri gloriam nostram, crescentis fidei vestrae in vobis, id est de fide vestra crescente et proficiente in melius per bona opera. I Petr. II, 2: lac concupiscite, ut in eo crescatis in salutem, et cetera. Et iterum, secundo, speramus magnificari in conversione aliorum per vos. Et ideo dicit in abundantia, etc., id est in abundantia praedicationis, non solum in vobis, sed etiam in illa loca quae ultra vos sunt. Et hoc secundum regulam nostram, id est, secundum quod iniunctum est nobis a Christo, non solum evangelizare vobis, sed omnibus gentibus. Mc. ult.: euntes in mundum universum, et cetera. Nec tamen sumus habentes spem in aliena regula, id est non speramus gloriari, nec gloriamur in aliqua aliena regula. Quasi dicat: non in illis quae praeparata sunt ab aliis, id est quos alii duxerunt ad fidem sed faciam fructum in illis, in quibus ab aliis non est praedicatum. Rom. XV, 20: praedicavi Evangelium hoc, non ubi nominatus est Christus. Contra est quod Petrus praedicavit Romae antequam praedicaret ibi Paulus. Respondeo. Dicendum est, quod non dicit hoc recusans praedicare ubi alius praedicasset, sed dicit quod intendit praedicare etiam ubi non praedicasset aliquis. 369. – Then when he says, but our hope is that as your faith increases, our field among you may be greatly enlarged, he shows that he is not going beyond the measure, when he glories about the future. But it should be noted that a preacher has two reasons for glorying in his preaching: one is that those converted by his preaching are making progress; the other is that other people are converted by his converts, because as it says in Ex. (cf. 36:10): “Curtain is joined to curtain”; “And let him who hears say, ‘Come’” (Rev. 22:17). For one is easily converted when he sees others converted. In regard to those two things the Apostle hopes that his glorying in the Corinthians will be increased. First, in regard to their progress; hence he says: I say that we do not glory beyond measure over your conversion caused by us in the past, but will hope to be greatly enlarged in the future, i.e., for our glory to be increased in your increasing faith, and in the progress of your good works: “Long for the pure spiritual milk, that by it you may grow up to salvation” (1 Pet. 2:2). Secondly, we hope to be magnified in the conversion of others by you; therefore he says, abundantly, i.e., in the abundance of preaching not only among you but even in lands beyond you; and this according to our rule, i.e., according as Christ has enjoined us to preach not only to you but to all the Gentiles “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to the whole creation” (Mk. 16:15). Without boasting of work already done in another’s field, i.e., we do not hope to glory, nor do we glory in another man’s rule. As if to say: not in things prepared by others, i.e., whom others have brought to the faith, but I will bear fruit among those to whom others have not preached: “Thus making it my ambition to preach the gospel, not where Christ has already been named” (Rom. 15:20). But to the contrary, Peter preached at Rome before Paul preached there. I answer that he does not say this as though refusing to preach where another has preached; but he says that he intends to preach even where no other have preached. Consequenter cum dicit qui autem gloriatur, etc., ostendit quod non excedit mensuram suam quantum ad id in quo gloriatur, dicens: quia si ego glorior in eo, in quo gloriandum est, non excedo. Cum autem gloriandum sit in Deo, qui gloriatur, in domino glorietur, Ier. IX, 24: in hoc glorietur qui gloriatur, et cetera. Potest autem hoc exponi tripliciter. Uno modo, in domino glorietur, ut ly domino, denotet obiectum gloriandi, quasi dicat: ex hoc glorietur quod habet dominum amando et cognoscendo. Ier. IX, 24: in hoc glorietur, et cetera. Alio modo, glorietur in domino, id est secundum Deum; et hoc modo gloriatur qui gloriatur de his quae Dei sunt, et non de malis, sicut ille, de quo dicitur in Ps. LI, 3: quid gloriaris in malitia? Alio modo, in domino glorietur, id est ut gloriam suam reputet se habere a Deo, totum quod cecidit ad gloriam suam referens in Deum. I Cor. IV, 7: quid habes quod non accepisti? Si autem accepisti, et cetera. Et sic accipitur hic cum dicitur qui gloriatur, in domino glorietur, quasi dicat: glorior de praedictis, sed non quasi hoc a me habeam, sed a Deo. Et hoc etiam est mensura vestra, quia totum bonum vestrum habet ortum a nobis. Et vere in domino debemus gloriari, non nobis imputare gloriam nostram, sed Deo. Nam non est probatus, id est comprobatus, a Deo vel hominibus, ille, qui seipsum commendat, Prov. XXVII, 2: laudet te, etc., sed ille quem Deus commendat, id est commendabilem facit bonis operibus et miraculis. Nam Deus est causa totius boni operis per homines facti. 370. – Then when he says, Let him who boasts, boast of the Lord, he shows that he is not going beyond the measure as to that in which he glories, saying: if I glory in him in whom one should glory, I am not going beyond. But since one should glory in God, Let him who boasts, boast of the Lord: “Let him who glories glory in this, that he understands and knows me” (Jer. 9:24). This can be explained in three ways: in one way, Let him who boasts, boast of the Lord, so that in the Lord denotes the object in which he glories. As if to say: let him glory in the fact that he possesses the Lord by knowing and loving. In another way, Let him who boasts, boast of the Lord, i.e., according to God; and one glories in this way when he glories in the things of God and not in evil, as the one who is asked in Ps. (52:1, Vulgate): “Why do you glory in malice?” In the third way, Let him who boasts, boast of the Lord, i.e., let him regard himself as having his glory from God, referring to God everything that redounds to his own glory: “What have you that you did not receive? If then you received it, why do you boast as if it were not a gift?” (1 Cor. 4:7). This is the way it is taken here when he says: Let him who boasts, boast of the Lord. As if to say: I glory in the foregoing, but not as though I had this from myself and not from God. And this is also your measure, because all your good has sprung from us. And indeed we should glory in the Lord, not imputing our glory to ourselves, but to God. For it is not the man who commends himself that is accepted, i.e., approved by God or by men: “Let another praise you, and not your own mouth; a stranger, and not your own lips” (Prov. 27:2), but the man whom the Lord commends, i.e., makes commendable by good works and miracles. For God is the cause of the entire good done by me.
11-1
2 Cor. 11:1-3Postquam apostolus excusavit se de his quae falso imponebantur sibi a pseudo, hic consequenter, ut confutet eos, scilicet pseudo, et reddat auctoritatem suam honorabilem, commendat se Corinthiis. Circa hoc autem duo facit. Primo rationem suae commendationis assignat; secundo ponit suam commendationem, ibi in quo quis audet, et cetera. Circa primum tria facit. Primo petit ut eius insipientia supportetur; secundo subdit necessitatem suae commendationis, ut non insipiens videatur, ibi aemulor enim vos, etc.; tertio innuit quod dato quod sit insipiens, supportare debent, ibi iterum dico ne quis, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo praemittit suum desiderium, ut petitio sua facilius exaudiatur; secundo ponit suam petitionem, ibi sed et supportate me. 371. – After defending himself against the false charges placed against him by the false apostles, the Apostle, in order to refute them, that is, the false apostles, and render his own testimony more honorable, now commends himself to the Corinthians. In regard to this he does two things. First, he assigns the reason for his commendation; secondly, he makes the commendation (v. 21b). In regard to the first he does three things. First, he asks that they bear with his foolishness; secondly, he states why he must commend himself in order not to seem foolish (v. 2); thirdly, he suggests that, granted he is foolish, they should bear with it (v. 16). In regard to the first he does two things. First, he mentions his desire so that his request may be easier to grant; secondly, he makes the request (v. 1b). Desiderium autem apostoli est, ut Corinthii sustineant apostolum commendantem se. Et ideo per adverbium optandi incipit dicens utinam sustineretis, et cetera. Circa quod sciendum est, quod praecepta moralia sunt de agendis, quae cum sint particularia et variabilia, non possunt determinari una communi ratione et regula indefinite, sed oportet quandoque praeter regulam communem aliquid facere in aliquo casu emergente. Quando autem hoc modo fit aliquid praeter communem regulam, sapientes, qui causam huius considerant, non turbantur, nec reputant insipienter factum esse. Indiscreti vero et minus sapientes non considerantes ex qua causa hoc ita fiat, turbantur et reputant stulte factum fore; sicut patet, quia praeceptum morale est non occides, aliquando tamen necesse est malos occidere. Et quando hoc fit, sapientes commendant vel non reputant male factum. Stulti autem et haeretici damnant, dicentes hoc esse male factum. Quia ergo communis lex moralis est quod homo non commendet seipsum, secundum quod dicitur Prov. XXVII, 2: laudet te alienus, etc., potest fieri in aliquo casu praeter hanc communem regulam ut homo commendet se, et laudabiliter hoc facit, et tamen indiscreti hoc reputant insipientiam. Unde cum immineret casus quo apostolus deberet se commendare, hortatur eos ad hoc quod istud non reputent ei ad insipientiam, dicens utinam sustineretis, scilicet patienter, modicum insipientiae meae, supportando me. Et dicit modicum, quia si commendaret se sine causa, esset maxima insipientia. Et iterum, si commendaret se ex causa omnino urgente, tunc nihil esset ibi insipientiae. Sed quia commendat se, licet ex causa non tamen omnino urgente, cum alio modo posset confutare pseudo, et quia commendat se multum, videtur ibi esse aliquid insipientiae, et hoc est, quod dicit modicum insipientiae meae. Infra XII, 11: factus sum insipiens, et cetera. 372. – The Apostle’s desire is that the Corinthians bear with him as he commends himself; therefore he begins with an optative expression: I wish you would bear with me in a little foolishness. In regard to this it should be noted that the moral precepts deal with actions which, since they are particular and variable, cannot be confined within the limits of one general reason and rule with no exceptions. But sometimes it is necessary to do something beside the common rule in some case that crops up. But when something is done beside the common rule in this way, wise men, who consider the cause of it, are not troubled and do not think it was done foolishly. For example, the moral precept forbids killing, but sometimes it is necessary to kill evil men. When this is done, wise men commend it or do not think it was wicked to have done so, but the undiscerning and less wise, not considering the cause why one acted in this manner, are disturbed and think it was foolish to do. So when the wicked are killed, fools and heretics condemn it, saying it was a wicked thing to do. Therefore, because the common law is that a man should not commend himself, as it says in Prov. (27:2): “Let another praise you, and not your own mouth; a stranger, and not your own lips”, it could happen in some case beside this common rule, that a man commends himself and is acting praiseworthily; nevertheless, the undiscerning regard it as folly. Therefore, since the Apostle was confronted with a case in which he should commend himself, he urges them not to lay it to his folly, saying, I wish you would bear with me in a little foolishness. He says, little, because were he to commend himself without cause, it would be the utmost folly. Again, if he commended himself for a reason entirely urgent, then there would be no folly involved. But because he is commending himself for a reason not altogether urgent, since he could refute the false apostles in some other way, and because he is commending himself very much, there seems to be some folly there; and that is what he says, in a little foolishness: “I have been a fool! You forced me to it” (2 Cor. 12:11). Et licet sic sim insipiens, tamen supportate me. Et hoc debent facere, quia subditi debent supportare praelatos, et e converso. Gal. VI, 2: alter alterius onera, et cetera. Eph. IV, v. 2: supportantes invicem in charitate. 373. – But although I am foolish, do bear with me. And they should do this because subjects should uphold their prelates and vice versa: “Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ” (Gal. 6:2); “Forbearing one another in love” (Eph. 4:2). Necessitatem autem commendationis ostendit, dicens aemulor, et cetera. Et circa hoc tria facit. Primo ostendit huiusmodi commendationem provenire ex zelo, ut excludat insipientiam; secundo dicit hunc zelum non esse inordinatum, ut vitet indiscretionem, ibi timeo autem, etc.; tertio excludit eorum excusationem, ibi nam si is qui venit, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo ponit zelum, quem habet ad eos, sanctum, quia Dei; secundo ostendit causam huius zeli, quia incumbebat sibi ex officio, ibi despondi vos, et cetera. 374. – Then, saying I feel a divine jealousy, he shows the need for this commendation. In regard to this he does three things. First, he shows that a commendation of this sort springs from zeal, to exclude folly; secondly, he says that this zeal is not irregular, to avoid indiscretion (v. 3); thirdly, he rejects their excuse (v. 4). In regard to the first he does two things. First, he mentions the holy zeal he has for them; secondly, the cause of this zeal, because his office obliged him (v. 2b). Est ergo zelus sanctus, quia aemulor vos, id est diligo vos ferventer, Dei aemulatione, id est ad honorem Dei, non meum. Circa quod nota, quod aemulatio, prout est idem quod zelus, non aliud est quam quidam motus animi bonus vel malus, tendentis in statum proximi, et importat fervorem amoris. Et ideo consuevit sic definiri: zelus est amor intensus non patiens consortium in amato. Et si quidem non patiatur consortium in aliquo bono, puta vitii vel alicuius imperfectionis, sed singulariter illud solus vult habere, tunc zelus est bonus et aemulatio bona, de qua dicitur I Cor. XII, 31: aemulamini charismata, et cetera. Gal. IV, 18: aemulamini bonum in bono, et cetera. III Reg. XVII: zelo zelatus, et cetera. Ps. LXVIII, 10: zelus domus tuae, et cetera. Si vero non patiatur consortium in aliqua excellentia vel in aliqua prosperitate mundi, quia aliquis singulariter vult eam sibi, tunc zelus est malus et aemulatio mala. Hoc autem bono zelo, seu aemulatione, aliquando quis aemulatur alios pro se, sicut vir zelatur pro uxore sua, quam sibi soli vult servari. Aliquando vero zelatur aliquis pro alio, sicut eunuchus zelatur uxorem domini sui, ut custodiat eam sibi. Sic apostolus populum suum, quem videbat paratum ad praecipitium, et cum sponso Christo velle prostitui Diabolo, aemulabatur, ne Christus sponsus verus in eis aliquod Diaboli consortium pateretur. Et ideo dicit Dei aemulatione, quasi dicat: non pro me sed Christo, qui est sponsus. Io. IX, 29: qui habet sponsam, sponsus est. III Reg. XIX, 10, 14: zelo zelatus sum pro domino, et cetera. 375. – His zeal, therefore, is holy, because I feel a divine jealousy for you, i.e., I love you fervently with the jealousy of God, i.e., to God’s honor, not mine. In regard to this it should be noted that jealousy taken as being the same as zeal is nothing more than a good or evil movement of the spirit concerning itself with the state of one’s neighbor, and implies a fervor of love. Consequently, zeal is an intense love that does not permit any sharing of the beloved. If it does not permit any sharing of an evil, say of a vice or some imperfection, but it alone wishes to have the beloved exclusively, then the zeal is good and the jealousy good. Thus it says in 1 Cor. (12:31): “But earnestly desire the higher gifts”; “For a good purpose it is always good to be made much of” (Gal. 4:18); “I have been very jealous for the Lord, the God of hosts” (1 Kg. 19:10); “For zeal for your house has consumed me” (Ps. 69:10). But if it does not allow a sharing in something excellent or in some worldly prosperity, because someone wants it all for himself, then the zeal is evil and the jealousy evil. Now a person is sometimes jealous for his wife, to keep her for himself. This is the way the Apostle was jealous on behalf of his people, whom he saw prepared for a fall and, although espoused to Christ, wished to be prostituted to the devil. Consequently, he would not permit Christ, the true spouse, to suffer their being shared with the devil; hence he says, a divine jealousy. As if to say: Not for me but for Christ, who is the spouse: “He who has the bride is the bridegroom” (Jn. 3:29); “I have been very jealous for the Lord, the God of hosts” (1 Kg. 19:10). Unde autem apostolo incumbebat huiusmodi aemulatio, ostendit, dicens despondi enim vos, etc., quasi diceret: merito vos aemulor Dei aemulatione, quia ego sum paranymphus huius matrimonii, quod est inter vos et Christum, quia ego despondi vos, id est feci sponsalia, quae sunt per fidem et charitatem. Os. II, 20: sponsabo te mihi, et cetera. Et ideo pertinet ad me custodire vos. Quicumque ergo convertit populum ad fidem et ad iustitiam, despondet eum Christo. Despondi, inquam, non multis, quia quae multis adhaeret, polluitur. Ier. III, 1: tu autem polluta es, et cetera. Sed uni Christo, scilicet viro perfecto virtutis plenitudine. Zach. VI, v. 12: oriens nomen eius. Ier. XXXI, 22: novum faciet dominus super terram, et cetera. Et dicitur Christus vir unus quia singularis, et quantum ad modum conceptionis, et quantum ad modum nascendi, et quantum ad gratiae plenitudinem. Eccle. VII, 29: unum de mille, et cetera. Isti, inquam, viro despondi vos exhibere virginem. 376. – Then he shows from what source the responsibility to be zealous arose, when he says: for I betrothed you to Christ to present you as a pure bride to her one husband. As if to say: it is proper for me to be jealous for you with the jealousy of God, because I am the groomsman of this wedding between you and Christ, i.e., I effected the espousals made by faith and charity: “I will betroth you to me in faithfulness” (Hos. 2:20). Therefore, it is my duty to protect you. So whoever converts the people by faith and charity, espouses them to Christ. I have betrothed you, I say, not to many, because she that adheres to many is defiled: “You have played the harlot with many lovers” (Jer. 3:1), but to one husband, Christ, that is, to a perfect man filled with the virtues: “The Orient is his name” (Zech. 6:12, Vulgate). Christ is called one husband because he is unique both as to the manner of conception (as to the manner of being born), and as to the fullness of grace: “One man among a thousand I found” (Ecc. 7:28). To that husband, I say, I have espoused you to present you a virgin. Nota quod a plurali ad singulare descendit, dicens desponsavi vos in plurali, et exhibere virginem in singulari, volens ostendere quod ex omnibus fidelibus fit unum corpus et una Ecclesia, quae debet esse virgo in omnibus membris suis, et ideo dicit virginem castam. In omnibus enim accipitur virginitas pro integritate corporis, castitas pro integritate mentis. Nam aliquando aliqua est virgo corpore, quae non est casta mente. Sic Ecclesia exhibet se Christo virginem, quando perseverat in fide, et infra sacramenta absque corruptione alicuius idololatriae et infidelitatis. Ez. XVI, 25: ad omne caput viae aedificasti signum, et cetera. Castam exhibet se quando existens infra sacramenta et in fide Christi, exhibet puritatem corporis et operis. Eph. V, 27: ut exhiberet sibi gloriosam Ecclesiam, non habentem maculam, neque rugam, et cetera. 377. – Note that he passes from the plural, I have betrothed you, to the singular, to present you as a pure bride, thus showing that from all the faithful is formed one body and one Church, which ought to be a virgin in all its members. For in all, virginity is taken for bodily integrity and chastity for mental integrity; for sometimes a person is a virgin in body, but not chaste in mind. Thus the Church shows herself a virgin when she perseveres in the faith and the sacraments without being corrupted by idolatry and unbelief: “At the head of every street you built your lofty place and prostituted your beauty” (Ez. 16:25). She shows herself chaste when, persevering in the sacraments and in the faith of Christ, she presents herself pure in body and in work: “That he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish” (Eph. 5:27). Sed quia Corinthii possent dicere: non necesse est quod custodias nos, et zelus tuus non est rationabilis, quia nos bene servabimus nosmetipsos; ideo consequenter causam huius zeli ostendit, dicens timeo autem, et cetera. Ubi sciendum est quod in Paradiso fuit coniugium Adam et Evae; sed Eva corrupta fuit per serpentem non violenter, sed astute, inquantum promisit falsum et suasit iniquum. Falsum quidem, cum dixit: eritis sicut dii et nequaquam moriemini, cum tamen ex hoc ipsi incurrerint necessitatem mortis; iniquum vero ut transgrederentur et praeterirent mandatum Dei. Et secundum hanc similitudinem apostolus loquens, dicit Ecclesiam esse sicut Evam, quam Diabolus aliquando persecutus est manifeste per tyrannos et potestates, et tunc sicut leo rugiens circuit, quaerens quem devoret, ut dicitur I Petr. V, 8. Aliquando molestat Ecclesiam latenter per haereticos, qui promittunt veritatem et simulant se bonos, et tunc sicut serpens seducit astutia sua promittendo falsa. 378. – But because the Corinthians could say: it is not necessary for you to protect us, and your zeal is not reasonable, because we can take care of ourselves very well, he discloses the cause of his zeal saying, but I am afraid that as the serpent deceived Eve by his cunning, your thoughts will be led astray [corrupted]. Here it should be noted that in paradise Adam and Eve were married, but Eve was corrupted by the serpent, not with violence, but with craftiness, inasmuch as he promised something false and urged something wicked: false, when he said, “You will be as gods” (Gen. 3:5), and ‘No, you will not die” (Gen. 3:4), even though they did incur guilt as a result; wicked, when he persuaded her to transgress the and ignore God’s command. The Apostle, speaking according to this likeness, says that the Church is like Eve, whom the devil has sometimes persecuted openly by tyrants and potentates, and then “like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour,” as it says in 1 Pet. (5:8); and sometimes he molests the Church in secret by heretics who promise the truth and pretend to be good, and then as the serpent deceived Eve with his subtility by promising false things. Et ideo dicit timeo ne sicut serpens Evam seduxit, a Paradiso eam eiiciens, astutia sua, promittendo falsa, I Tim. II, 14: Adam non est seductus, sed mulier; ita, idest per similes deceptiones haereticorum, corrumpantur sensus vestri. Et dicit sensus vestri, quia sicut in matrimonio carnali cavet sponsus ne coniux corrumpatur carnaliter, ita apostolus in hoc matrimonio spirituali timet ne corrumpantur spiritualiter sensus cordis, I Cor. XV, 33: corrumpunt bonos mores, etc.; vel sensus spirituales, de quibus Sap. I, v. 1: sentite de domino, etc.; I Cor. XIV, v. 20: nolite pueri effici sensibus. Et excidant a simplicitate, quae est in Christo Iesu. Simplex enim est illud quod compositione caret. Pseudo ergo componebant unam sectam ex Iudaismo et Evangelio, mandantes simul cum Evangelio servari legalia. Illi ergo excidunt a simplicitate Christi, qui seducti a pseudo, simul cum Evangelio servant legalia, et hoc timebat apostolus de Corinthiis. Eccli. II, 14: vae peccatori ingredienti terram duabus viis. Et e contra Prov. XI, 3: simplicitas iustorum dirigit eos. 379. – Therefore he says, I am afraid that as the serpent deceived Eve, casting her out of paradise, by his cunning with false promises: “Adam was not deceived, but the woman” (1 Tim. 2:14), so, i.e., by like deceptions of heretics, your thoughts [senses] will be led astray. He says, your senses, because just as in a natural marriage a spouse takes precautions against his bride’s being corrupted carnally, so in this spiritual marriage the Apostle fears that the senses of the heart will be spiritually corrupted: “Bad company ruins good morals” (1 Cor. 15:33). Or the spiritual senses referred to in Wis. (1:1): “Think of the Lord with uprightness”; “Do not be children in your thinking” (1 Cor. 14:20). And from a sincere and pure devotion to Christ [from the simplicity that is in Christ]. That is simple which lacks composition. Therefore, the false apostles formed one sect with Judaism and the Gospel, commanding that the ceremonies of the Law be observed along with the Gospel. Therefore, they fall from the simplicity of Christ, who, being seduced by the false apostles, observe those ceremonies along with the Gospel; and this the Apostle feared about the Corinthians: “The integrity of the upright guides them” (Prov. 11:3).
11-2
2 Cor. 11:4-8Posito zelo quem ad Corinthios habebat apostolus, et ostenso zelum esse rationabilem, hic consequenter removet eorum excusationem. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo proponit eorum excusationem; secundo vero removet eam, ibi existimo enim me, et cetera. 380. – Having described the zeal he had for the Corinthians and proved it reasonable, the Apostle now rejects their excuse. In regard to this he does two things. First, he proposes their excuse; secondly, he removes it (v. 5) Circa primum sciendum est quod Corinthii possent suspicari quod ideo zelum haberet de eis, quia timeat ne dimittant doctrinam suam propter doctrinam pseudo; unde possent dicere: constat quod minus bona sunt dimittenda propter magis bona; ergo si pseudo meliora doceant, non debes turbari, si acquiescimus eis. Et ideo hanc excusationem ponit, ostendendo quod nihil maius quam apostolus, docent et praedicant. 381. – In regard to the first it should be noted that the Corinthians might suppose that he has zeal for them, because he feared that they might set aside his teaching on account of the false apostles’ teaching; hence they could say: it is obvious that lesser goods should be discarded in favor of greater goods. Therefore, if the false apostles teach better doctrines, you should not be disturbed if we acquiesce in them. Hence, he proposes this excuse by showing that no one is better than the Apostle in teaching and preaching. Nam apostolus tria praedicavit eis, et docuit eos. Primo quod essent Christi. Supra IV, 5: non enim praedicavimus nosmetipsos, sed Christum Iesum. Secundo quod haberent spiritum Christi. Rom. VIII, v. 9: si quis spiritum Christi non habet, hic non est eius. Tertio ut reciperent Evangelium Christi. Rom. I, 16: non enim erubesco Evangelium, et cetera. Si ergo pseudo meliora vobis praedicarent et vos docerent, recte faceretis et excusabiles essetis; sed hoc non faciunt. Et hoc est quod dicit nam et si is qui, etc., quasi dicat: timeo ne pseudo qui venit ad vos non missus, sed ex se, sicut fur et latro. Io. X, 8: quotquot venerunt, fures sunt et latrones. Ier. XXIII, 21: non mittebam eos, et ipsi currebant. Rom. X, 15: quomodo praedicabunt, nisi, et cetera. Si, inquam, talis praedicator praedicat vobis alium Christum, scilicet excellentiorem quam illum quem nos praedicavimus: quod non potest esse, quia, ut dicitur I Cor. VIII, 6: unus dominus noster Iesus Christus, per quem omnia, et cetera. Et hoc quantum ad primum. Aut alium spiritum, scilicet meliorem, accipitis, scilicet per talem, quam accepistis, scilicet per nos, id est ministerio nostro, quod non potest esse, quia, ut dicitur I Cor. c. XII, 11: haec omnia operatur unus atque idem spiritus, et cetera. Et hoc quantum ad secundum. Aut praedicat vobis aliud Evangelium, id est aliam praedicationem vel doctrinam, quam per nos non recepistis, Gal. I, 6: miror quod sic tam cito transferimini, et cetera. Si, inquam, alia et meliora facerent vobis, recte pateremini, id est faceretis, excusando vos. Et quia non potest eis aliud Evangelium, id est melius tradi, ideo apostolus excommunicat Galatas, si aliud Evangelium recipiant, Gal. I, 9: si quis aliud vobis evangelizaverit, et cetera. 382. – For the Apostle preached and taught three things. First, that they were Christ’s: “For what we preach is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord” (2 Cor. 4:5); secondly, that they have the Spirit of Christ: “Any one who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him” (Rom. 8:9); thirdly, that they received the Gospel of Christ: “For I am not ashamed of the gospel: it is the power of God for salvation to every one who has faith, to the Jew first and also to the Greek” (Rom. 1:16). If, therefore, the false apostles preach and teach something better to you, you would do right and would be excusable; but they do not do this. And this is what he says: For if some one comes and preaches another Jesus than the one we preached, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or if you accept a different gospel from the one you accepted, you submit to it readily enough. As if to say: I fear that a false apostle might come to you unsent, but of himself, as a thief and a robber: “All who came before me are thieves and robber” (Jn. 10:8); “I did not send the prophets, yet they ran” (Jer. 25:21); “And how can men preach unless they are sent?” (Rom. 10:15). If, I say, such a preacher preaches to you another Christ, namely, more excellent than the one we have preached, which cannot be, because as it says in 1 Cor. (8:6): “And one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist”; and this as to the first. Or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, namely, better than the one you have received from us, i.e., by our ministry, which cannot be, because as it says in 1 Cor. (12:11): “All these are inspired by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills”; and this as to the second. Or if you accept a different gospel, i.e., another preaching or doctrine, from the one you accepted from us: “I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and turning to a different gospel” (Gal. 1:6). If, I say, they did other and better things for you, you submit to it readily enough, i.e., you would be right in excusing yourselves. But because another, i.e., better Gospel cannot be delivered to them, the Apostle excommunicates the Galatians, if they receive another Gospel: “If any one is preaching to you a gospel contrary to that which you received, let him be accursed” (Gal. 1:9). Consequenter cum dicit existimo, etc., removet hanc excusationem. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo ostendit quod ipse non minus fecit eis quam alii; secundo quod plus, ibi aut numquid, et cetera. Circa primum tria facit. Primo ostendit quod nihil minus fecit facto quam alii apostoli; secundo innuit quod non defuit ei facultas ad hoc faciendum, ibi nam et si imperitus sermone, etc.; tertio ostendit evidentiam utriusque, ibi in omnibus autem, et cetera. 383. – Then when he says, I think that I am not in the least inferior, he removes this excuse. In regard to this he does two things. First, he shows that he did not do less for them than the others; secondly, that he did more (v. 7). In regard to the first he does three things. First, he shows that he did nothing less in deed than the other apostles; secondly, he suggests that he was not lacking the means to do this (v. 6); thirdly, he presents the evidence for both (v. 6b). Dicit ergo: recte pateremini vos seduci ab eis, si melius praedicarent vobis, sed hoc non est verum. Enim, id est quia, existimo me nihil minus fecisse, in his, a magnis apostolis, id est quam Petrus et Ioannes, quos isti habebant magnos. Et comparat se magnis apostolis, tum quia Paulus videbatur et reputabatur ab eis minor quam illi, eo quod illi fuerunt cum Iesu, et Paulus non; tum etiam quia pseudo dicebant se missos ab eis, et ideo ostendendo se parem magnis apostolis, istorum errorem removet et pseudo confutat. Et non solum nihil minus fecit, sed plus. I Cor. XV, 10: plus omnibus laboravi. 384. – He says therefore: you would be right in allowing yourselves to be seduced by them, if they preached something better to you; but this is not true. For, i.e., because I think that I am not in the least inferior to these superlative apostles, i.e., than Peter and John, whom they considered great. He compares himself to the great apostles, both because Paul seemed to them and was regarded by them as less than they, on the ground that they had been with Christ, and Paul not; and because the false apostles claimed to have been sent by them. Therefore, by showing himself equal to the great apostles, he removes their error and refutes the false apostles: “I worked harder than any of them” (1 Cor. 15:10). Et ne forte dicerent ei: unde tibi est facultas ad hoc faciendum, cum sis imperitae linguae? Ostendit quod ei facultas affuit ex magnitudine scientiae, dicens: licet sim imperitus sermone, tamen non sum imperitus scientia, II Petr. ult.: sicut et charissimus frater noster Paulus, secundum sapientiam, et cetera. Sed hoc sciendum est, quod pseudo quaerentes gloriam propriam et lucra sectantes, nitebantur attrahere populum per ornata et subtilia et exquisita verba, non attendentes nisi solum aures permulcere. Apostolus vero, quia non quaerebat utilitatem propriam, sed solum dilatationem fidei Christi et profectum eius, ita proponebat verbum fidei, ut omnes possent capere, conformans se conditioni audientium et capacitati. Unde quia isti in principio non erant capaces altae doctrinae, proposuit eis fidem, non in subtilitate sermonis, sed eo modo quo capere possent, scilicet plane et aperte. Et ideo isti dicebant eum esse imperitum sermone. I Cor. I, 17: non in sapientia verbi, et cetera. Et propter hoc dicit apostolus: licet sim imperitus sermone, ut vobis videtur, hoc non fuit ex defectu scientiae, sed propter vos, ex quadam dispensatione, quia tamquam parvulis in Christo lac potum dedi vobis, et cetera. Vel dicendum, ad litteram, quod apostolus fuit balbus, et ex hoc pseudo deridebant eum. Et ideo dicit et si imperitus sermone, id est impeditae linguae, non tamen sum imperitus scientia, Ex. IV, 10: impeditioris et tardioris linguae sum. 385. – But lest perhaps they should say to him: whence did you obtain the faculty to do this, since you are unskilled in our speech? He shows that the faculty is due to the vastness of his knowledge, saying, even if I am unskilled in speaking, I am not in knowledge: “So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him” (2 Pet. 3:15). But this should be noted, namely, that the false apostles, seeking their own glory and pursuing gain, tried to attract people by ornate and subtle and exquisite words, trying only to stroke their ears gently. But the Apostle, because he was not seeking his own advantage but only the spread and growth of the faith, proposed the word of faith in such a way that all could understand, adjusting himself to the condition and capacity of his hearers. Hence, because they were not capable of lofty doctrine in the beginning, he proposed the faith to them not in subtle terms but in a way they could understand, namely, plainly and clearly. That is why they said he was rude in speech: “Not with eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power” (1 Cor. 1:17). On this account the Apostle says: although I be rude in speech, as it seems to you, this was not due to a lack of knowledge but for your sake by way of dispensing it, because I “could not address you as spiritual men, but as men of the flesh, as babes in Christ” (1 Cor. 3:1) Or according to the letter, it must be said that the Apostle stuttered, and on this account the false apostles ridiculed him. Therefore he says: for even if I am unskilled in speaking, i.e., have a speech impediment, I am not in knowledge: “I am slow of speech and of tongue” Ex. 4:10). Quod autem nihil minus fecerim a magnis apostolis, evidenter apparet per ea quae feci vobis. Et ideo dicit in omnibus praedictis, manifestatus sum in vobis, qui experti estis quae per me fiunt. I Cor. IX, 2: signaculum apostolatus mei vos estis in domino. Et infra XII, 12: signa tamen apostolatus mei facta sunt super vos, et cetera. 386. – But the fact that I did no less than the great apostles is evident from the things I have done for you; hence, he says: in every way we have made this plain to you in all things, who have experienced what I have done: “You are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord” (1 Cor. 9:2); “The signs of a true apostle were performed among you in all patience, with signs and wonders and mighty works” (2 Cor. 12:12). Consequenter cum dicit aut numquid peccatum, etc., ostendit quod plus fecit quam omnes alii, et hoc quia praedicavit sine sumptibus. Circa hoc duo facit. Primo ponit factum, secundo causam facti assignat, ibi quare? Quia non diligo vos, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo ostendit factum quantum ad praeteritum; secundo quantum ad futurum, ibi et in omnibus, et cetera. Factum autem praeteritum ostendit dupliciter. Primo in generali, secundo in speciali, ibi quoniam gratis, et cetera. 387. – Then when he says, Did I commit a sin, he shows that he has done more than all the others; and this because he preached without payment. In regard to this he does two things. First, he states the fact; secondly, he assigns the reason of the fact (v. 11). In regard to the first he does two things. First, he shows the fact as to the past; secondly, as to the future (v. 9b). He shows the past fact in two ways: first in general, and second in particular (v. 7b). Dicit ergo: recte dico quod nihil minus feci ab illis, nisi forte hoc reputetis male et minus factum, quia diminui de auctoritate mea, non accipiens sumptus a vobis; sed si hoc esset malum, minus fecissem. Et ideo ostendit quod non est malum. Et hoc est quod dicit aut numquid peccatum feci, id est numquid peccavi, humilians meipsum et diminuens de auctoritate mea? Quasi dicat, non. Eccli. III, 20: quanto maior es, et cetera. I Cor. IX, 19: cum essem liber, et cetera. Matth. VI: qui humiliaverit se, et cetera. Ratio autem humiliationis meae est non propter lucrum proprium, sed propter promotionem vestram. Unde dicit ut vos exaltemini, id est in fide confirmemini. Corinthii autem avari erant, et ideo si a principio accepisset sumptus, forte destitissent a fide. Item, pseudo praedicabant propter quaestum. Ut ergo Corinthii reciperent apostolum et pseudo auferret occasionem quaestus, gratis praedicavit eis sine sumptibus propriis. 388. – He says therefore: I am correct in saying that I have done no less than the others, unless you think I did less and acted wrongly, because I lessened my authority in not accepting payments from you. But if this were so, I would have done evil. Therefore he shows that it is not evil, and this is what he says: Did I commit a sin in abasing myself and lessening my authority? As if to say: No: “The greater you are, humble yourself in all things, and you will find grace in the sight of God” (Sir. 3:20, Vulgate); “For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a slave to all, that I might win the more” (1 Cor. 9:19); “Whoever humbles himself like this child, he is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 18:4). The reason for humbling myself is not for my own gain but for your improvement; hence he says: so that you might be exalted, i.e., be strengthened in faith. But the Corinthians were very covetous, and if he had accepted payment from the very beginning, they might perhaps have left the faith. Likewise, the false prophets preached for monetary profit. Therefore, in order that the Corinthians receive the Apostle, and the false prophets remove the occasion for profit, the Apostle preached for free and without subsidy. Hoc autem quod dixerat in generali, manifestat in speciali, ibi quoniam gratis, etc., et facit duo. Primo ostendit quomodo sine sumptibus praedicavit eis in primo adventu ad eos; secundo ostendit quod idem fecit in mora quam apud eos contraxit, ibi et cum essem, et cetera. 389. – Then he explains in detail what he had said in general. In regard to this he does two things. First, he shows how he preached to them without charge during his first visit with them; secondly, he shows that he did the same during the long stay he made with them (v. 9). Circa primum duo facit. Primo proponit quod intendit, scilicet humiliationem, dicens: in hoc humilians meipsum, quoniam evangelizavi vobis gratis, id est sine sumptu, non autem sine mercede, quia hoc non est laudis. Licet enim omnes possent capere sumptus personae ab eis quibus proponunt verbum Dei, nullus tamen praedicare debet pro mercede et quaestu. 390. – In regard to the first he does two things. First, he mentions the humiliation, saying: in this did I humble myself, because I preached God’s gospel without cost to you, i.e., without charge; but not for a reward, because this is not praiseworthy. For although all could take personal payments from those to whom they preached the word of God, yet no one should preach for the reward or the payment. Secundo, quia possent dicere isti: unde ergo accepisti sumptus? Respondet quod ab aliis Ecclesiis, dicens Ecclesias alias expoliavi, accipiens ab eis stipendium ad ministerium vestrum. Ex hoc convincit eos quod non possint dicere apostolo quod non liceret ei accipere ab eis. Si enim accipitur ab aliis ad servitium eorum, multo magis liceret ei accipere ab ipsis. Ex hoc etiam apparet quod legatus Papae visitans unam partem legationis, potest accipere stipendia. Et quod dominus Papa, pro necessitate unius patriae, potest accipere subsidium ab aliis partibus mundi. Ratio est, quia Ecclesia est sicut unum corpus. Videmus autem in corpore naturali quod natura, quando deficit virtus in uno membro, subministrat humores et virtutem accipiens ab aliis membris. 391. – Secondly, because they could say: where did you obtain your support? He answers that it came from the other churches, saying: I robbed other churches by accepting support from them in order to serve you. By this he convinces them that they could not say to the Apostle that it is unlawful for him to take from them. For if it is taken from others for serving them, it is much more lawful for him to take from them. From this it is apparent that a papal legate visiting one part of his jurisdiction can accept stipends, and that the Pope can take subsidies from various parts of the world to relieve the needs of some country. The reason is that the Church is as one body. But we see in a natural body that, when strength is failing in one member, nature administers humors and strength by taking from other members.
11-3
2 Cor. 11:9-15Ostenso quod quando primo eis praedicavit in ipso adventu, evangelizavit eis gratis, hic ostendit quod nec etiam contrahendo moram apud eos, accepit ab eis sumptus. Et primo hoc ostendit, secundo vero respondet cuidam tacitae quaestioni, ibi nam quod mihi, et cetera. 392. – Having shown that when he first preached to them during his first visit, he preached to them without charge, he now shows that not even during his long stay among them did he accept any payments from them. First, he shows this; secondly, he answers a tacit question (v. 9b). Dicit ergo: non solum quando primo veni ad vos non accepi a vobis sumptus; sed etiam cum essem apud vos diu et etiam egerem, ut ostendat quod non dimisit eis sumptus propter divitias, nulli onerosus fui, aliquid ab aliquo accipiendo. In quo apparet causa quare dimisit: quia Corinthii, propter avaritiam eis innatam, reputabant sibi onus ministrare sumptus. I Cor. IX, 12: non sumus usi hac potestate, sed omnia sustinemus, et cetera. 393. – He says therefore: I took no payments from you not only when I first came to you, but also when I was with you for some time and was in want, in order to show that he did not forego the payments, because he was rich: I did not burden any one by taking anything from anyone. This reveals the cause why he forewent it, namely, because the Corinthians in their innate avarice considered it a burden to minister to him: “We have not made use of this right, but we endure anything rather than put an obstacle in the way of the gospel of Christ” (1 Cor. 9:12). Sed possent isti dicere: unde ergo habuisti necessaria? Et ideo respondet dicens quod ab aliis Ecclesiis. Ideo scilicet nihil accepi, quia illud quod mihi deerat, scilicet a pretio quod lucrabatur nocte laborando manibus suis, apud aquilam et Priscam. Erat enim scenofactoriae artis, per quam lucrabatur sibi necessaria. Act. XX, 34: ad ea quae mihi opus erant, et cetera. Illud ergo quod deerat non dedistis vos, sed suppleverunt fratres qui venerunt a Macedonia, scilicet Philippenses, qui erant valde liberales. Unde de hoc in epistola ad Philippenses commendat eos: Phil. IV, 15: nulla Ecclesia communicavit mihi in ratione dati et accepti, nisi vos. Sed Corinthii erant avari. 394. – But they could ask: Where did you get what you needed? So he answers: from the other churches. Therefore I took nothing, because my need was supplied from the wage I earned by working at night with Aquila and Priscilla, for he practiced the tentmaker’s art, from which he furnished his necessities: “You yourselves know that these hands ministered to my necessities, and to those who were with me” (Ac. 20:34). Therefore, that which was lacking you did not give, but my needs were supplied by the brethren who came from Macedonia, namely, the Philippians, who were very generous; for which the Apostle commended them in the epistle to the Philippians (4:15): “No church entered into partnership with me in giving and receiving except you only.” But the Corinthians were avaricious. Consequenter cum dicit et in omnibus sine onere, etc., ostendit quomodo se habebit in hoc ad eos in futurum, dicens, quod etiam sine onere vult se habere ad eos. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo ponit suam rationem communem; secundo confirmat eam, ibi est veritas Christi, et cetera. 395. – Then when he says, So I refrained, he shows how he plans to act toward them in this matter in the future, saying that he does not want to be a burden to them. In regard to this he does two things. First, he gives his general reason; secondly, he confirms it (v. 10). Dicit ergo: non solum feci hoc, scilicet quod gratis vobis evangelizavi et nulli onerosus fui, sed etiam in omnibus servabo me vobis sine onere, sicut usque modo servavi, non dure reprehendendo, non severe corrigendo, nec vestra accipiendo. Act. III: argentum et aurum et vestem nullius concupivi. Num. XVI, 15: tu scis quod nec asellum quidem acceperim ab eis, dicit Moyses ad dominum. Samuel dicit, I Reg. c. XII, 3: loquimini de me, si oppressi, et cetera. 396. – He says therefore: not only have I preached the Gospel to you without charge and was a burden to no one, so I refrained and will refrain from burdening you in any way; and so I will keep myself, not rebuking you sharply or correcting you severely or accepting anything: “I coveted no one’s silver or gold or apparel” (Ac. 20:33); “I have not taken one ass from them, and I have not harmed one of them” (Num. 16:15); and Samuel says: “Testify against me before the Lord and before his anointed. Whose ox have I taken? Or whose ass have I taken? Or whom have I defrauded? Whom have I oppressed? Or from whose hand have I taken a bribe to blind my eyes with it?” (1 Sam. 12:3). Et quod ita facturus sit, confirmat ex duobus. Primo ex eo qui loquitur in ipso, scilicet Christo, qui est veritas, a qua non potest esse falsum. Et ideo dicit est veritas Christi in me, etc., quasi dicat: hoc quod dixi verum est, quia veritas Christi loquitur in me, et cetera. Hoc infra ultimo: an experimentum quaeritis eius qui in me, et cetera. Vel hoc potest accipi per modum iurantis. Quasi dicat: Deus, qui est veritas et est in me scrutans corda, sit mihi testis, quod ita servabo me. Rom. I, 9: testis est mihi Deus, et cetera. 397. – That he will continue to do so he confirms in two ways. First, by reason of the one who speaks in him, namely, Christ, who is the truth from which nothing false can come; hence he says, As the truth of Christ is in me. As if to say: what I say is true, because the truth of Christ speaks in me: “Since you desire proof that Christ is speaking in me” (2 Cor. 13:3). Or this can be taken as an oath, as if to say: God, who is truth, and who is in me searching my heart is my witness that I will keep myself so: “For God is my witness, whom I serve with my spirit in the gospel of his Son” (Rom. 1:9). Secundo, ex eo quod non intendit minuere gloriam suam, sed augere. Apostolus enim attribuebat sibi apud Christum ad magnam gloriam quod ipse solus, inter apostolos, sine sumptu praedicabat Corinthiis. Et ideo dicit: ideo servabo me sine onere, quoniam non infringetur, id est non minuetur, in me haec gloria, quod scilicet gratis praedico vobis, et quod a licitis abstineo, propter salutem vestram: quae quidem est gloria Christi, quia ipse glorificatur per hoc in me; vel quia ego hanc gloriam habeo specialiter apud Christum. Quae quidem refringeretur in regionibus Achaiae, ubi Corinthus erat metropolis, si recepisset ab eis, quia avari erant. Habitabant enim in maritimis, et erant intenti mercationibus, et tales consueverunt esse avari. I Cor. IX, 15: bonum est mihi magis mori, quam ut gloriam meam quis evacuet. 398. – Secondly, from the fact that he does not intend to lessen his glory, but to increase it. For the Apostle attributed to himself before Christ as his great glory that he alone of all the apostles preached to the Corinthians without payment; hence he says: I will not burden anyone; this boast of mine shall not be silenced, i.e., lessened, namely, that I preached to you free and that I refrained from what is lawful for your salvation which is Christ’s glory, because he is glorified in me by this, or because I particularly have this glory with Christ. This would have been broken off in the regions of Achaia, where Corinth was the metropolis, if he had taken anything from them, because they were avaricious: “For I would rather die than have any one deprive me of my ground for boasting” (1 Cor. 9:15). Consequenter cum dicit quare? Quia non, etc., ponit causam quare non accepit sumptus ab eis. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo excludit falsam causam; secundo astruit veram, ibi quod autem facio, et cetera. 399. – Then when he says, And why?, he presents the cause why he did not take payment from them. First, he excludes the false cause; secondly, he gives the true one (v. 12). Circa primum sciendum est, quod pseudo imponebant apostolo, quod ideo non recipiebat a Corinthiis sumptus, quia non diligebat eos, et quia non intendebat eis benefacere et servire. Dicit ergo quare, scilicet hoc facio, quia non diligo vos, id est pro odio quod habeo ad vos, sicut dicunt pseudo? Deus scit quod diligo vos, et quod non pro odio hoc facio. Io. ult.: domine, tu scis, quia amo te. 400. – In regard to the first it should be noted that the false apostles charged the Apostle with not taking payment from the Corinthians, because he did not love them and because he did not intend to help and serve them. He says therefore: Why do I do this? Because I do not love you?, i.e., is it from any hatred I bear towards you, as the false apostles claim? God knows that I love you and that I do not do this out of hatred: “Yes, Lord; you know that I love you” (Jn. 21:15). Sic ergo, exclusa causa falsa, sequitur vera, ibi quod autem facio, et cetera. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo ponit veram causam; secundo rationem huius assignat, ibi nam eiusmodi pseudo, et cetera. 401. – Therefore, having removed the false cause, he gives the true one, And what I do I will continue to do. First he states the true cause; secondly, the reason for it (v. 13). Circa primum sciendum est, quod pseudo, ut dictum est, quaerebant lucra et gloriam propriam. Et ideo, ut in reverentia haberentur, nitebantur exterius sequi vestigia apostoli, vel etiam, si potuissent, excellere ipsum. Dicit ergo apostolus: si ergo volunt me imitari, in hoc imitentur, ut nihil accipiant. Et quia sciebat quod pseudo praedicabant ut acciperent, et, per consequens, quod non praedicarent si deficeret eis lucrum, dicit quod facio, ideo facio et faciam hoc, non propter odium, sed ut amputem occasionem eorum, scilicet pseudo, qui volunt, supple meo exemplo, habere occasionem accipiendi vestra. Sciebat enim, secundum Ambrosium, quod si non acciperent, non diu praedicarent. E contrario dicitur Prov. VI: da occasionem sapienti, et cetera. Et hoc, ut tales inveniantur, scilicet pseudo, sicut et nos, scilicet non accipientes pecunias, sicut et nos non accipimus. 402. – In regard to the first it should be noted that the false apostles, as has been stated, were seeking their own profit and glory; therefore, in order to be held in reverence, they tried to follow the example of the Apostle outwardly or even excel him, if they could. Therefore the Apostle says: if you wish to imitate me, let them imitate me in taking nothing. And because he knew that the false apostles preached in order to take and, consequently, would not preach if their gain ceased, he says: And what I do I will continue to do, and what I shall do is not out of hatred, but in order to undermine the claim of those, namely, the false apostles, who desire from my example to have an occasion for taking what is yours. For he knew, according to Ambrose, that they would not preach very willingly, if they received nothing; whereas on the contrary it is stated: “Give instruction to a wise man, and he will be still wiser; teach a righteous man and he will increase in learning” (Prov. 9:9). And this that they may be found, that is, the false apostles, on the same terms as we, namely, not receiving money, even as we do not receive it. Indeed they glory in the fact that they imitate us; and I am unwilling, if they would imitate me completely, that they would receive: “I wish that all were as I myself am” (1 Cor. 7:7), namely, not receiving. In quo quidem ipsi gloriantur, scilicet quod imitantur nos, et ego nolo, si perfecte volunt nos imitari, quod accipiant. I Cor. VII, 7: volo omnes homines esse sicut me, scilicet non accipientes. Ut in quo, et cetera. Hoc legitur tripliciter. Uno modo sic: ut inveniantur tales, supple sicut et nos, non accipiendo sicut et nos non accipimus, et, per consequens, a praedicatione cessando. In quo, scilicet esse tales, sicut et nos gloriantur; contendebant enim esse similes veris apostolis. Secundo modo sic: ut in eo in quo gloriantur, scilicet accipiendo, quia hoc solum quaerebant, inveniantur sicut et nos, id est similes nobis, cessando scilicet et desistendo ab acceptione, ut nobis assimilentur. Tertio modo sic: ut in eo in quo gloriantur, scilicet in non accipiendo, dicunt enim se nihil accipere, inveniantur sicut et nos, id est non meliores nobis, ne scilicet possint se in hoc nobis praeferre. Nam eiusmodi, hoc continuatur tripliciter. Primo modo sic: ita gloriantur et contendunt, non sicut nos, nam eiusmodi, et cetera. Secundo modo sic: et vere desistant accipere, ut nobis assimilentur, nam eiusmodi, et cetera. Tertio modo sic: ita in non accipiendo gloriantur, ut nobis similes videantur. 403. – That in their boasted mission they work on the same terms as we do. This is read in three ways. In one way thus: that they may be found to be such as we, not receiving, even as we do not receive; wherein, namely, in being such as we, they may glory, for they strive to be like the apostles. In a second way thus: that in that wherein they glory, namely, in receiving, because this is all they sought, they may be found even as we, i.e., similar to us, namely, by ceasing and desisting from receiving, that they may be like us. In the third way thus: that in that wherein they glory, namely, in not receiving, for they claim they receive nothing, they may be found even as we, i.e., not better than we, namely, lest they be able to prefer themselves to us in this. For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen. This can be connected with what went before in three ways; in the first way thus: they do not glory and strive in the way we do, for such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen. In the second way thus: and indeed they stop receiving in order to be like us: for such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen. In the third way thus: so they glory in not receiving in order to seem like us. Posita autem vera causa, probat eam consequenter, dicens nam eiusmodi, etc., ostendens quomodo student assimilari apostolos. Et circa hoc tria facit. Primo ponit causam; secundo probat eam, ibi sed non mirum; tertio consequenter ostendit differentiam pseudo ad veros apostolos, ibi quorum finis, et cetera. 404. – Having stated the true cause, he proves it by saying: For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen. In regard to this he does three things. First he states the cause; secondly, he proves it (v. 14); thirdly, he shows the difference between false and true apostles (v. 15). Dicit ergo: recte dico, quod hoc facio, ut amputem eis occasionem accipiendi. Nam eiusmodi pseudo-apostoli sunt operarii, scilicet falsi. Phil. III, 2: videte canes, videte malos operarios, et cetera. Subdoli, id est, callidi et vulpini, sub specie religionis decipientes. Ez. XIII, 4: quasi vulpes in desertis, et cetera. Cant. II, 15: capite nobis vulpes parvulas, quae demoliuntur vineas, et cetera. Matth. VII, 15: veniunt ad vos in vestimentis ovium, et cetera. Et hoc est quod dicit transfigurantes se in apostolos Christi, id est exterius portantes signa bonorum apostolorum. II Tim. III, 5: habentes quidem speciem pietatis, et cetera. 405. – He says therefore: I am right in saying that I do this in order to cut off from them the occasion, for such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, namely, false: “Look out for the dogs, look out for the evil-workers” (Phil. 3:2). Deceitful, i.e., shrewd, foxy, deceiving others under the guise of religion: “Your prophets have been like foxes among ruins, O Israel” (Ez. 13:4); “Catch us the foxes, the little foxes, that spoil the vineyards” (S. of S. 2:15); “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves” (Matt. 7:15). And this is what he says: disguising themselves as apostles of Christ, i.e., bearing the outward signs of good apostles: “Holding the form of religion but denying the power of it” (2 Tim. 3:5). Et hoc probat, quia sicut veri apostoli mittuntur a Deo et informantur ab ipso, sic Satanas transformat se in Angelum lucis, qui est dux et incentor eorum, ostendens se esse vel Angelum Dei, vel aliquando Christum. Non est ergo mirum neque magnum si ministri eius, scilicet pseudo, transformant se in ministros iustitiae, id est simulant se esse iustos. Eccli. X, 2: secundum iudicem populi, sic et minister eius, et cetera. 406. – He proves this, because just as the true apostles are sent by God and are transformed by him, so Satan disguises himself as an angel of light, who is their leader and inciter, showing himself to be an angel of God or sometimes Christ. Therefore it is no strange or great thing if his servants also disguise themselves as servants of righteousness, i.e., pretend to be just: “Like the magistrate of the people, so are his officials” (Sir. 10:2). Notandum autem est, quod Satanas transfigurat se aliquando visibiliter, sicut beato Martino, ut deciperet eum, et hoc modo multos decepit. Sed ad hoc valet et necessaria est discretio spirituum, quam specialiter Deus contulit beato Antonio. In hoc tamen potest cognosci, quod Satanas sit, quia bonus Angelus in principio hortatur ad bona, et perseverat in eis, sed malus in principio quidem praetendit bona, sed postmodum volens explere desiderium suum, et quod intendit, scilicet decipere, inducit et instigat ad mala. I Io. IV, 1: omni spiritui nolite credere, et cetera. Et ideo Iosue cum videret Angelum in campo suo, dixit Iudic. V: noster es an adversariorum? Aliud etiam signum est, quod bonus Angelus etsi terreat in principio, tamen statim consolatur, et confortat, sicut Zachariam, Lc. I, v. 13: ne timeas, Zacharia. Et ad beatam virginem dixit: ne timeas, Maria, et cetera. Malus autem Angelus stupefacit et desolatum dimittit. Et hoc ideo, ut stupefactum facilius decipiat et persuadeat sibi. Aliquando autem transfigurat se invisibiliter, et hoc quando ea, quae in se mala sunt, facit apparere bona, pervertendo sensus hominis et inflammando concupiscentiam. Prov. c. XVI, 25: est via quae videtur homini recta, et cetera. Sic decepit monachum quemdam, qui cum proposuisset in animo suo numquam exire cellam, suggessit ei Diabolus, quod bonum esset quod exiret ad Ecclesiam et reciperet corpus Christi. Cui suggestioni consentiens, propositum mutavit vadens ad Ecclesiam. Postmodum cognoscens eum fuisse Diabolum, gloriatus est monachus quod non deceperat eum, quia ad bonum iverat, et tamen iam removit eum a proposito continue standi in cella. Postmodum vero iterum suggessit ei, quod pater suus esset mortuus, et dimiserat sibi multas divitias distribuendas inter pauperes, quod iret ad civitatem, ad quam cum iret, numquam rediit ad cellam, et mortuus est in peccato. Unde valde difficile est, quod homo caveat sibi, et ideo recurrendum est ad adiutorium divinum. Iob XLI, 4: quis revelabit faciem indumenti eius, etc., quasi dicat: nullus nisi Deus. 407. – But it should be noted that Satan sometimes transfigures himself so that he can be seen, as by St. Martin, in order to deceive men. But for this the discerning of spirits, which God conferred in a special way on St. Antony, is necessary and sufficient. One is able to know that it is Satan by the fact that a good angel urges one to good works from the very beginning and continues to do so, but a bad angel pretends good things in the beginning, but later, in order to fulfil his desire and accomplish what he intends, namely, to deceive, he induces and instigates to evil: “Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are of God” (1 Jn. 4:1). According to Joshua (5:13), when he saw an angel in the field, he said: “Are you for us, or for our adversaries?” Another sign is that a good angel, even though he causes one to be fearful in the beginning, immediately comforts and consoles, as he did Zechariah: “Do not be afraid, Zechariah” (Lk. 1:13), and the Blessed Virgin: “Do not be afraid, Mary” (Lk. 1:30). But an evil angel stupefies and leaves one desolate, in order the more easily to deceive and persuade him. But sometimes he transforms himself but cannot be seen; and this when he makes things, which are in themselves evil, appear good by perverting a man’s senses and inflaming concupiscence: “There is a way which seems right to a man, but its end is the way to death” (Prov. 14:12). This is the way he deceived a certain monk, who had resolved never to leave his cell. But the devil suggested to him that it would be good to go to Church and receive the body of Christ. Consenting to this suggestion, he broke his resolve by going to the Church. Later, recognizing that it was the devil, the monk congratulated himself for not being deceived, because he had left for a good purpose. Later on, he suggested to him that his father had died and left many riches to be distributed among the poor, and that he should go to the city. When he went there, he never returned and died in sin. Hence, it is very difficult for a person to be too careful, but one should have recourse to divine help: “Who can open the doors of his face? Round about his teeth is terror” (Job 41:14). As if to say: no one but God. Consequenter ponit ministrorum, et malorum et bonorum differentiam, quae consistit in hoc, quod finis illorum, scilicet ministrorum Christi, et Satanae, erit secundum opera eorum. Nam finis bonorum erit bonus, et malorum erit malus, et boni inducuntur ad bonum, et mali ad malum. Phil. c. III, 19: quorum finis interitus, et cetera. Item boni recipient bona, et mali mala. Supra V, v. 10: omnes nos manifestari oportet ante tribunal Christi. 408. – Then he indicates the difference between good and bad ministers, which consists in this, that their end, namely, of Christ’s ministers and Satan’s, will correspond to their deeds; for the end of the good will be good, and of the evil, evil: “Their end is destruction” (Phil. 3:19). Furthermore, the good will receive good things and the evil, evil things: “For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ” (2 Cor. 5:10).
11-4
2 Cor. 11:16-21aSupra apostolus induxit Corinthios, ut patienter sustinerent suam commendationem, ostendens, quod hoc faciebat ex zelo quem habebat ad eos, et quia zelus ille erat rationabilis et ordinatus, hic autem consequenter ponit aliam rationem, per quam ostendit, quod dato, quod insipienter ageret, nihilominus tamen deberent eum supportare. Unde in ista ratione procedit ex suppositione stultitiae. 409. – Having asked the Corinthians to bear patiently with his commendation, and shown that he did this out of the zeal he had for them because that zeal was reasonable and ordinate, the Apostle now presents another reason through which he shows that, given he is acting foolishly, they should nevertheless, put up with him. Hence, in this reason he proceeds on the supposition that he is foolish. In this part he does two things. First he makes his request; secondly, he gives the reason for what he said (v. 17). In hac autem parte duo facit. Primo enim proponit suam petitionem; secundo rationem dictorum assignat, ibi quod loquor, et cetera. In petitione sua duo facit. Primo enim petit, quod non reputent eum insipientem, quod pertinet ad praemissam rationem. Et ideo dicit iterum dico, quod ex quo zelus meus est rationabilis, et ego rationabiliter commendo me, ne quis, scilicet vestrum, me reputet insipientem. Secundo petit, quod dato, quod insipienter agat, tamen supportent eum, et hoc pertinet ad rationem hanc. Et ideo dicit alioquin, id est si non rationabiliter commendo me, et penitus velitis me ex hoc insipientem reputare, tamen accipite, id est supportate, me velut insipientem. Et dicit, velut, quia licet ipsi reputent eum insipientem in hoc, tamen in rei veritate non est insipiens. Accipite me, inquam, velut insipientem, ut et ego modicum quid glorier. Et dicit modicum, quia infra commendabit se de gloria, quae est secundum carnem, quae valde modica est. Iob XXV, 6: homo putredo et filius hominis vermis. Eccli. X, 9: quid superbis, terra et cinis? 410. – In his request he does two things. First, he asks that they not consider him foolish, which pertains to the previous reason; hence he says, I repeat it, since my zeal is reasonable and I am acting reasonably in commending myself, let no one think me foolish. Secondly, he asks that, granted that he is acting foolishly, they should nevertheless put up with him, which pertains to the present reason. Therefore he says, but even if you do, i.e., if I am not reasonable in commending myself and on that account you want to regard me as foolish, nevertheless, accept, i.e., bear with me as a fool. He says, as, because although they may regard him as foolish, in this matter he is not really foolish. Accept me, I say, as a fool so that I too may boast a little. He says, a little, because further on he will commend himself on the glory which is according to the flesh, which is very little: “Man, who is a maggot, and the son of man, who is a worm!” (Job 25:6); “How can he who is dust and ashes be proud?” (Sir. 10:9). Rationem autem dictorum assignat, dicens quod loquor, et cetera. Dixerat autem tria. Primo quia supponit insipienter commendasse se ipsum; secundo quod vult gloriari; tertio quod sustineant eum. Et horum trium rationem assignat. Et primo de hoc, quod supposuit insipienter commendare se; secundo quare vult gloriari, ibi quoniam multi gloriantur, etc.; tertio quod debeant eum supportare, ibi libenter enim suffertis, et cetera. 411. – Then when he says, What I am saying, he assigns the reason for what he had said. But he had said three things, for which he wishes to give a reason. First, for the fact that he supposed it was foolish to commend himself; secondly, why he wishes to glory (v. 18); thirdly, that they should bear with him (v. 19). Dicit ergo primo: ratio quare debetis insipientem accipere me est, quia illud quod loquor in hac substantia gloriae, id est commendatione carnis, quae a quibusdam appetitur, ac si per eam debeant subsistere, non loquor secundum Deum, sed quasi in insipientia. Et dicit ex hypothesi, sicut illud quod supra dixit: velut insipientem. Unde ibi posuit velut, hic ponit quasi. Ac si diceret: si non rationabiliter commendarem me, tunc illud quod loquor, in commendatione mea, non est secundum Deum, id est, secundum rationem divinae sapientiae. Et tunc merito acciperetis me non secundum Deum loqui, sed insipienter. Supra X, 18: non enim, qui seipsum commendat, ille probatus est, et cetera. Prov. XXVII, 2: laudet te alienus, et cetera. 412. – He says therefore: the reason why you should take me who am foolish is because what I am saying in this boastful confidence, i.e., in this commendation according to the flesh, which is desired by some, as if they ought to subsist by it, I say not with the Lord’s authority, but as a fool. He speaks hypothetically, as if to say: if I were not reasonable in commending myself, then what I am saying for my commendation would not be with the Lord’s authority, i.e., according to the notion of divine wisdom; and then you would be right in not taking me as speaking according to God, but foolishly: “For it is not the man who commends himself that is accepted, but the man whom the Lord commends” (2 Cor. 10:18); “Let another praise you, and not your own mouth; a stranger, and not your own lips” (Prov. 27:2). Rationem autem suae commendationis et gloriae ostendit, subdens quoniam multi gloriantur, et cetera. Ubi sciendum est, quod pseudo, quia ex Iudaeis erant, gloriabantur secundum carnem, dicentes se esse filios Abrahae et ex hoc volebant haberi in reverentia a Corinthiis et auctoritate. Dicit ergo apostolus: dato, quod sit insipientia, quod glorier secundum carnem, tamen quoniam multi, scilicet pseudo, gloriantur secundum carnem, et ego etiam gloriabor secundum carnem, Prov. XXVI, 5: responde stulto secundum stultitiam suam, ne sibi sapiens videatur. 413. – He indicates the reason why he commends himself and glories, when he says, since many boast of worldly things [according to the flesh], I too will boast. Here it should be noted that the false apostles, because they were Jews, gloried according to the flesh, saying that they were sons of Abraham. They hoped thereby to be held in reverence and authority by the Corinthians. Therefore, the Apostle says: granted that it is foolish for me to glory according to the flesh, yet because many, namely the false apostles, glory according to the flesh, I too will even glory according to the flesh: “Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own eyes” (Prov. 26:5). Sed contra est quia Seneca dicit summa malorum est, quod ad exemplum vivitur malorum. Et Ex. XXIII, 2: non sequaris turbam ad faciendum malum. Non ergo apostolus debet gloriari secundum carnem, eo quod pseudo gloriantur. Respondeo. Dicendum est, quod licet sit eadem materia gloriationis, non tamen est eadem intentio et idem finis, quia pseudo commendabant se propter gloriam propriam, et ut ipsi haberentur in auctoritate, et possent lucrari; apostolus autem gloriabatur, ut verbum Dei, per eum praedicatum, esset maioris auctoritatis et ponderis, et fructum faceret Christo. 414. – But on the other hand, Seneca says: “The greatest of evils is to live by the example of evil men”; “You shall not follow a multitude to do evil”(Ex. 23:2). Therefore, the Apostle should not glory according to the flesh on the ground that the false apostles glory. I answer that although both are glorying about the same thing, the intention and end are not the same, because the false apostles commended themselves for their own glory and to acquire authority and gain; but the Apostle glories in order that the word of God preached by him might have greater authority and weight and bear fruit for Christ. Rationem autem quare debeant eum supportare, subdit, dicens libenter enim suffertis, etc., et primo ponit rationem hanc, quod scilicet debeant eum supportare. Possent enim dicere: quare debemus te supportare, si es insipiens? Et dicit apostolus, quod ideo, quia cum vos ipsi sitis sapientes in oculis vestris et in vestra reputatione, libenter suffertis, id est estis consueti supportare, insipientes, pseudo scilicet. 415. – Then he tells why they should bear with him, saying: you gladly bear with fools, being wise yourselves. First, he gives this reason, namely, that they should bear with him. For they could say: Why should we bear with you, if you are foolish? And the Apostle says that the reason is this: since you yourselves are wise in your own eyes and in your reputation, you gladly bear with, i.e., are wont to bear with, fools, namely, the false apostles. Secundo ostendit in quo supportent insipientes. Et ponit quinque gravia quae sustinebant a pseudo: primum est iugum servitutis. Et quantum ad hoc dicit sustinetis enim si quis, id est aliquis pseudo, redigit vos in servitutem, quasi dicat: per Christum liberati fuistis a servitute legis, quae est in timore, et reducti estis in libertatem filiorum Dei, quae est in charitate. Gal. IV, 31: non sumus ancillae filii, sed liberae. Et tamen vos sustinetis pseudo, qui ex huiusmodi libertate redigunt vos in servitutem legis, quia cogunt vos servare legalia. Gal. V, 1: nolite iugo servitutis, et cetera. Multo ergo magis debetis sustinere me, qui volo vos praeservare in libertate Christi, quam pseudo, qui volunt vos reducere in servitutem legis. Secundum est grave valde, scilicet quod pseudo vivunt de bonis vestris laute, nos vero non. Supra VIII, 13: non ut aliis sit remissio, et cetera. Et ideo dicit si quis devorat, Matth. c. XXIII, 14: vae qui comeditis domos viduarum, et cetera. Tertium grave est depraedatio et expoliatio, quia isti ad litteram blandis verbis et praetextu pietatis accipiebant eis omnia, et quantum ad hoc dicit si quis accipit, id est blande decipit, subtrahendo vestra. Rom. c. XVI, 18: per blandos sermones seducunt corda insipientium. Quartum grave est nimia iactantia super eos cum Corinthiorum contemptu. Ideo dicit si quis extollitur, iactando se importune. Eccli. c. VI, 2: non te extollas in cogitatione, et cetera. Quintum grave est illatio opprobriorum. Nam pseudo non solum tam gravia eis inferebant, sed super hoc addebant improperia, dicentes eis iniurias, et maxime de ignobilitate. Nam quia ipsi erant Iudaei, et cultores unius Dei, dicebant se nobiles esse, et Corinthios ignobiles, quia non erant de semine Abrahae, nec circumcisi, et quod de idololatris. Et quantum ad hoc dicit si quis in faciem vos caedit, id est coram vobis infert contumelias et dicit iniurias. Et huiusmodi iniuriae sunt secundum ignobilitatem, quam vobis obiiciunt, vel ignominiam quam inferunt. Et tamen illos sustinetis, et nos non, quasi nos fuerimus infirmi in hac parte gloriae, quam attribuistis eis, praeferendo eos nobis, praesertim cum pseudo dicant, quod ideo nos non dicimus nec facimus vobis ista, quia nos sumus infirmi in hac parte, id est quia sumus ignobiles. I Cor. c. IV, 10: nos infirmi, vos fortes; vos nobiles, nos autem ignobiles. 416. – Secondly, he shows wherein they bear with the foolish and points out five cases of oppression imposed by the false apostles. The first is the yoke of slavery; as to this he says, for you bear it if a man, i.e., the false apostles, makes slaves of you. As if to say: through Christ you were freed from the bondage of the Law, which is in fear, and were raised to the freedom of the sons of God, which is charity: “So, brethren, we are not children of the slave but of the free woman” (Gal. 4:31). And yet you suffer the false apostles, who take such liberty from you and reduce you to the slavery of the Law, because they compel you to observe the ceremonies of the Law: “Do not submit again to a yoke of slavery” (Gal. 5:1). With greater reason, then, should you bear with me, who want to preserve you in the freedom of Christ, than with the false apostles, who wish to reduce you to the slavery of the Law. The second is a very heavy burden, because the false apostles live sumptuously on your goods, but we do not: “I do not mean that others should be eased and you burdened” (2 Cor. 8:13). Therefore he says: or preys upon [devours] you: “Woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you devour the houses of widows, praying long prayers. For this you shall receive the greater judgment” (Matt. 23:14). The third oppression is depredation and despoilation, because they literally took everything from them with soft words and under the pretext of piety; as to this he says, or take advantage of you, i.e., smoothly deceive you by taking your property: “By fair and flattering words they deceive the hearts of the simple-minded” (Rom. 16:18). The fourth oppression is their excessive vaunting of themselves over them along with contempt for the Corinthians; therefore he says: or puts on airs by conducting himself in a conceited manner: “Do not exalt yourself through your soul’s counsel, lest your soul be torn in pieces like a bull” (Sir. 6:2). The fifth oppression is verbal abuse; for the false apostles not only oppressed them in these ways but added reproaches by saying insulting things to them and especially about their low estate. For because they were Jews and worshippers of the one true God, they called themselves noble and the Corinthians ignoble, because they were not of the seed of Abraham or circumcised, but descended from idolaters; as to this he says, or strikes you in the face, i.e., insults you publicly and says harmful things. For these harmful things, I was too weak, I must say, to my shame, and yet you bear with them and not with us, as if we were too weak for that and for the glory you have attributed to them by preferring them to us, especially since the false apostles say that the reason we do not say or do such things to you is that we are weak in this part, i.e., because we are lowly: “We are weak, but you are strong. You are held in honor, but we in disrepute” (1 Cor. 4:10).
11-5
2 Cor. 11:21b-26Positis rationibus suae commendationis et causis quare supportandus est, hic consequenter incipit se commendare. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo enim adaequat se pseudo et aliis, qui commendabant se; secundo praefert se eis, ibi ut minus sapiens, et cetera. Adaequat autem se apostolus eis in gloria. Est autem gloria duplex. Una secundum carnem, quae modica est et contemnenda. Unde ipse dicit Phil. III, 7: sed quae mihi fuerunt lucra, arbitratus, et cetera. Alia est secundum Christum, quia magna gloria est sequi dominum, Eccli. XXIII, 38. Et haec est quaerenda. Gal. ult. 14: mihi absit gloriari nisi in cruce, et cetera. Et ideo apostolus adaequat se eis quantum ad utramque gloriam. Et primo quantum ad primam; secundo quantum ad secundam, ibi ministri Christi, et cetera. 417. – Having given the reasons for commending himself and the causes why they should bear with him, he now begins to commend himself. In regard to this he does two things. First, he shows himself equal to the false apostles and others who commended themselves; secondly, he prefers himself to them (v. 23b). The Apostle makes himself their equal in glory. But glory is of two kinds: one is according to the flesh and is slight and worthy of scorn; hence he says to the Philippians (3:7): “But whatever gain I had, I counted as loss for the sake of Christ”; the other in according to Christ, because “it is great glory to follow the Lord” (Sir. 23:38, Vulgate), and this should be sought: “But far be it from me to glory except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Gal. 6:14). The Apostle therefore makes himself equal to them in regard to both glories: first, in regard to the first; secondly, in regard to the second (v. 23). Et, primo, adaequat se eis in generali, dicens: recipiatis me insipientem, si tamen insipientia est. Ex hypothesi enim loquor, quia si quis ausus est praesumere de se, et commendare se, et ego possum bene audere et commendare me in eodem, in quo ipse commendat se, quia non subest eis maior causa suae commendationis, quam mihi. Et hoc dico in insipientia, id est dico, quod insipienter agam, cum tamen ipse sapienter ageret, cum hoc non faceret pro sui iactantia sed ut pseudo humiliaret. Supra eodem: existimo me non minus fecisse a magnis apostolis, et cetera. 418. – First, he shows himself equal to them in general, saying: receive me as one who is foolish, provided it is foolish, for I speak hypothetically; because whatever any one dares to boast of or to take for granted about himself and to commend himself, I can dare and commend myself on the same matters in which they commend themselves, because they have no better reason than I to commend themselves. I am speaking as a fool, i.e., I say that I am acting foolishly; yet he was acting wisely, because he was not doing this to boast, but to humiliate the false apostles: “I think that I am not in the least inferior to these superlative apostle” (2 Cor. 11:5). Secundo cum dicit Hebraei sunt, etc., adaequat se eis in speciali, ostendens per singula se parem eis esse in quibus pseudo gloriabantur. Commendatio autem istorum et gloria erat de tribus. Primo de natione et lingua, quia dicebant se Hebraeos; secundo de genere, quia dicebant se esse de genere Israel; tertio de promissione, quia dicebant se esse participes promissionis Abrahae, cum essent de semine eius. Et quantum ad haec tria adaequat se eis. Primo quantum ad nationem et linguam, dicens Hebraei sunt, et ego, scilicet lingua et natione, quasi dicat: ita sicut et illi. Et notandum est, quod, secundum quod quidam dicunt, Hebraei dicuntur ab Abraham, quia ante eum de facili non invenitur illud nomen. Potest tamen dici et forte melius, quod dicuntur a quodam Heber, de quo habetur Gen. cap. XI, 14: vixit sale triginta annis, et genuit Heber. Et sequitur: vixit Heber triginta tribus annis, et genuit Phaleg. Et tempore eius fuerunt divisae linguae, et lingua Hebraeorum remansit in familia sua. Secundo adaequat se eis quantum ad genus, dicens Israelitae sunt, et ego, scilicet secundum ritus. Tertio quantum ad tertium, dicens semen Abrahae sunt, et ego. Et de istis tribus dicitur Phil. III, 4 s.: si quis alius sibi confidere videtur, ego magis circumcisus octavo die quantum ad tertium, ex genere Israel de tribu Beniamin quantum ad secundum, Hebraeus, ex Hebraeis quantum ad primum. Rom. XI, 1: nam ego Israelita sum ex semine Abrahae, et cetera. 419. – Secondly, when he says, Are they Hebrews? So am I, he shows in detail that he is equal to them, indicating one by one the points in which he is equal to them, and in which the false apostles found glory. But they took glory and commended themselves on three points. First, in their nationality and tongue, because they called themselves Hebrews; secondly in their race, because they said they were of the race of Israel; thirdly, in the promise, because they said they were partakers of the promise to Abraham, since they were of his seed. So he shows that he is equal to them on these three points. First, as to nationality, as if to say: I am as they are. It should be noted that, as some say, they are called Hebrews from Abraham, because before him that name was uncommon. But it can be said, and perhaps better, that the word is derived from a certain Eber mentioned in Gen. (11:14-15): “Shelah had lived thirty years, he became the father of Eber,” and then Eber lived thirty-four years and begot Peleg. It was during this time that languages became distinct, and the language of the Hebrews remained in the family. Secondly, he shows himself equal to them in race, saying Are they Israelites? So am I, namely, according to rite. Thirdly, as to the third he says: Are they descendants of Abraham? So am I. Of these three things it says in Phil. (3:4): “If any other man thinks he has reason for confidence in the flesh, I have more, circumcised on the eighth day” as to the third point; “Of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin,” as to the second point; “A Hebrew born of Hebrews,” as to the first: “I myself am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe of Benjamin” (Rom. 11:1). Sic ergo patet, quod non sum minor eis quantum ad gloriam, quae est secundum carnem; sed nec etiam quantum ad gloriam, quae est secundum Christum, quia ministri Christi sunt, id est dicunt se sic, ut decipiant vos, et ego sum minister Christi. I Cor. IV, 1: sic nos existimet homo, ut ministros Christi, et cetera. Supra III, 6: qui et nos idoneos fecit, et cetera. 420. – Thus, it is clear that I am not inferior to them as to the glory, which is according to the flesh; nor even as to the glory which is according to Christ, because they are servants of Christ, i.e., they say so to deceive you; I am a better one: “This is how one should regard us, as servants of Christ” (1 Cor. 4:1); “Who has made us competent to be ministers of a new covenant” (2 Cor. 3:6). Consequenter cum dicit ut minus sapiens, etc., praefert se omnibus apostolis et pseudo. Et primo quantum ad mala perpessa, secundo quantum ad beneficia recepta, et hoc cap. XII, ibi si gloriari oportet, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo praefert se quantum ad mala, quae pertulit; secundo quantum ad modum quo mala vitavit, ibi Damasci praepositus. Circa primum tria facit. Primo proponit se aliis praeferendum; secundo ostendit in quo sit praeferendus, ibi quia in laboribus, etc.; tertio confirmat quaedam dictorum, ibi si gloriari oportet, et cetera. 421. – Then when he says, I am talking like a madman, he prefers himself to all the apostles and to the false. First, in regard to evils endured; secondly, as to benefits received (chap.12). In regard to the first he does two things. First, he prefers himself as to evils endured; secondly, as to the manner in which he avoided evils (v. 32). In regard to the first he does three things. First, he proposes that he should be preferred to the others; secondly, he shows in what he should be preferred (v. 23c); thirdly, he confirms some of the statements (v. 30). Dicit ergo: si videor insipiens vobis, quia commendo me et adaequo me aliis, quanto magis videbor vobis minus sapiens, si praeferam me eis? Et ideo dicit: non solum sum minister Christi sicut et illi, sed ut minus sapiens, secundum vestrum iudicium, dico quod ego sum plus minister Christi quam illi, et quantum ad hoc dicit se praeferendum esse. Rom. XI, 13: ministerium meum honorificabo, praeponendo scilicet illud ministerio aliorum. 422. – He says therefore: I am talking like a madman; because I commend myself and make myself equal to the others, how less wise will I seem to you, if I prefer myself to them. Therefore he says: not only am I a minister of Christ, as the others, but as one less wise according to your opinion, I say that I am a better minister of Christ than they; and as to this he says that he should be preferred to them: “I magnify my ministry” (Rom. 11:13) by placing it ahead of the ministry of the others. In quo autem sit praeferendus ostendit, dicens quia in laboribus, etc., quasi dicat: in hoc plus ego, quia sum magis ostensus minister Christi. In hoc, primo, quantum ad mala illata, secundo quantum ad mala sponte assumpta, ibi in itineribus saepe. Mala autem illata primo ponit in generali, dicens: plus ego sum, scilicet ostensus minister, in laboribus plurimis quam illi, etsi aliquos labores pertulerint. I Cor. XV, v. 10: abundantius omnibus illis laboravi. Secundo quantum ad flagellorum dolores, quia in plagis, scilicet ostensus sum, supra modum aliorum, scilicet modum humanae virtutis, vel supra modum humanae consuetudinis. 423. – Then he indicates the matters in which he should be preferred, saying, with far greater labours. As if to say: in this I am more, because I am more obviously a minister of Christ. First, as to the evils inflicted; secondly, as to evils voluntarily assumed (v. 26). First, he mentions in general the evils inflicted, saying: I am more, namely, a proven minister; with far greater labours than they, even though they have undertaken some labours: “I worked harder than any of them” (1 Cor. 15:10). Secondly, he lists those evils in detail. First, as to the squalor of prison, because far more imprisonments, namely, than they: “And when they had inflicted many blows upon them”—namely, on Paul and his companions—”they threw them into prison” (Ac. 16:23). Supra XI, 23: in plagis, in carceribus, et cetera. Sed contra I Cor. X, 13: fidelis Deus, qui non permittet vos tentari supra id, et cetera. Non ergo supra modum humanae virtutis. Respondeo. Dicendum est, quod Deus non permittit nos tentari sine adiutorio gratiae divinae. Et ideo dicebat apostolus I Cor. XV, v. 10: non autem ego, sed gratia Dei mecum. Et quantum ad mortis terrorem; unde dicit in mortibus frequenter, id est in periculis et terroribus mortis. Unde dicebat ipse Rom. VIII, 36: mortificamur tota die. I Cor. c. XV, 31: quotidie morior propter gloriam vestram. Sed consequenter, cum dicit a Iudaeis quinquies, etc., manifestat duo ultima pericula, quae perpessus est. Et primo periculum plagarum, secundo periculum mortis. Secondly, as to the pains of floggings, because with countless beatings, i.e., above the measure of human virtue, or above the measure of human custom: “In beatings, imprisonments, tumults, labors, watching, hunger” (2 Cor. 6:5). But this seems to be contrary to what is stated in 1 Cor. (10:13): “God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your strength.” Therefore, not above the measure of human virtue. I answer that God does not permit us to be tried without the held of divine grace; that is why the Apostle said in 1 Cor. (15:10): “Not I, but the grace of God which is with me.” Then as to the terror of death; hence he says, and often near death, i.e., in the dangers and terrors of death. Hence he said in Rom. (8:36): “For your sake we are being killed all the day long”; “I die daily for your glory” (1 Cor. 15:31, Vulgate). Secundo enumerat ista mala in speciali, et hoc, primo, quantum ad carceris squalores, quia in carceribus abundantius, scilicet quam illi. Act. XVI, 23: cum multas plagas illis intulissent, scilicet Paulo et sociis, miserunt in carcerem. 424. – Then he manifests the two extreme dangers he underwent. And first, the danger of lashes; secondly, the danger of death. Plagarum autem periculum manifestat per ipsa perpessa a suis, scilicet Iudaeis. Et ideo dicit a Iudaeis quinquies, et cetera. Notandum est autem, sicut dicitur Deut. c. XXV, 2 s., pro mensura delicti erit plagarum modus. Ita dumtaxat, ut quadragenarium numerum non excedant, et cetera. Ex quo habetur quod homines pro minoribus peccatis debent flagellari, ita tamen, quod flagellatus non reciperet ultra quadraginta plagas. Iudaei autem, ut viderentur misericordes, semper faciebant citra mandatum legis, dantes pauciores quam quadraginta, secundum quod eis videbatur. Quia ergo odio habebant Paulum, quando flagellabant eum, dimittebant sibi de numero praedicto quantominus poterant, scilicet unam tantum minus, dantes sibi trigintanovem. Et hoc est, quod quinque vicibus accepit, id est recepit quadraginta plagas, minus una, plaga, id est trigintanovem. Secundo manifestat pericula perpessa ab extraneis, scilicet a gentibus, dicens ter virgis caesus sum. Act. XVI, 22: magistratus, scissis eorum tunicis, iussit eos virgis caedi. Item XXII, 24: iussit eum tribunus duci in castra, et flagellis caedi, et torqueri eum, et cetera. 425. – But he shows the danger of lashes by citing those he suffered from his own, that is, from the Jews. Hence he says, Five times I have received at the hands of the Jews the forty lashes less one. It should be noted that, as it says in Deut. (25:2): “A number of stripes in proportion to his offense. Forty stripes may be given him, but not more; lest, if one should go on to beat him with more stripes than these, your brother be degraded in your sight.” This shows that men should be whipped for lesser sins, yet so that the victim never receive more than forty stripes. But the Jews, to appear merciful, always acted short of the Law, giving less than forty, according as it appeared to them. Therefore, because they hated Paul, whenever they flogged him, they omitted the least possible number of strokes below the Law’s limit, namely, giving only one less, i.e., thirty-nine. And this is what he received five times, namely, forty lashes less one. Secondly, he indicates the perils he endured from outsiders, namely, the Gentiles, saying: Three times I have been beaten with rods: “The magistrates tore the garments off them and gave orders to beat them with rods” (Ac. 16:22); “The tribune commanded him to be brought into the barracks, and ordered him to be examined by scourging”(Ac. 22:14). Pericula vero mortis illata, et primo pericula mortis illata ab hominibus ostendit, dicens semel lapidatus sum. Hoc fuit in civitate Licaoniae, ibi obrutus lapidibus fuit quasi mortuus. Act. XIV, 18: lapidantes Paulum eiecerunt eum extra civitatem, credentes eum mortuum. Secundo pericula mortis illata a periculis naturae, et haec sunt specialiter maris, et aggravat ea, primo, ex numero, quia ter naufragium feci, id est pertuli; secundo ex continuitate, quia nocte et die in profundo maris fui, quod est gravius; quia ad litteram dicit, quod cum pluries passus sit naufragium, tamen semel stetit sub aqua per diem et noctem, divina eum virtute protegente. Unde poterat dicere illud Ionae II, 4: et proiicite me in profundum, et cetera. 426. – Then he discloses the perils of death he faced; and first of all those inflicted by men, saying: Once I was stoned. This happened in the city of Lycaonia, where he was struck down with stones and almost killed: “They stoned Paul and dragged him out of the city, supposing that he was dead” (Ac. 14:18). Secondly, the perils endured from the works of nature, and particularly from the sea. He amplifies these, first from their number, because three times I have been shipwrecked; secondly, from their duration, because a night and a day I have been adrift at sea, which is more grievous; for the text says that although he suffered shipwreck a number of times, he remained in the water for a day and a half under the protection of God’s power. Hence he could say with Jonah (2:4): “For you cast me into the deep, into the heart of the seas, and the flood was round about me.” Enumeratis autem malis illatis, enumerat consequenter etiam mala assumpta, cum dicit in itineribus. Et primo exteriora, secundo interiora, ibi praeter illa quae extrinsecus, et cetera. Mala exteriora exprimit, et primo quantum ad mala, quae contingunt in itineribus; secundo quantum ad ea quae eveniunt in domibus. 427. – Having listed the evils inflicted from without, he then lists those he voluntarily assumed, when he says, on frequent journeys: first, external evils; secondly, internal evils (v. 28). He describes the external evils: first as to the evils that occur on journeys; secondly, as to those in houses (v. 27). Quantum ad primum, primo, ponit multiplicitatem itinerum, dicens in itineribus saepe, scilicet ostensus sum minister Christi, sustinendo multa dura et gravia patienter. Rom. XV, 19: ab Ierusalem usque in Illyricum, et cetera. Et cum hoc multas alias vias fecit, et Romam, et Hispaniam vadens. Psalmo XVI, 4: propter verba labiorum tuorum, et cetera. Secundo enumerat periculum itinerum. Et primo praemittit minora, secundo subdit gravius periculum, quod in falsis fratribus. Praemittit autem tria, secundum quae multa pericula passus est. Primo pericula secundum causas. Et hoc, vel ex causa naturali, et ideo dicit periculis fluminum. Naturaliter enim flumina hyeme excrescunt, et sunt rapida et valde periculosa, et cetera. Vel ex malitia violenta, et quantum ad hoc dicit periculis latronum, quos excitabat ei Diabolus, ut vel vestes ei auferrent. Iob XIX, 2: simul venerunt latrones, et cetera. Secundo enumerat pericula metum inferentia, et hoc vel ex suis, unde dicit periculis ex genere, id est, a Iudaeis procuratis; vel ab extraneis, et ideo dicit periculis ex gentibus, propter unius Dei praedicationem, qui eum capere volebant; et sic in suis et in aliis non habebat requiem. Ier. XV, 10: ut quid me genuisti, mater mea, virum doloris? et cetera. Tertio enumerat pericula quantum ad loca, et hoc, vel quantum ad civitates, unde dicit periculis in civitate, id est, in commotionibus civitatum contra me sicut fuit Ephesi et apud Corinthum, ut patet Act. XVIII, 12 et XIX, 23; vel quantum ad solitudines, et quantum ad hoc dicit periculis in solitudine, quae erant vel a bestiis malis, sicut quando vipera momordit manum suam, Act. ult., quando congregavit sarmenta, vel ex penuria ciborum. Vel quantum ad maria, et ideo dicit periculis in mari, non ex mari, sicut supra, sed in mari, ut pericula quae proveniunt ex praedonibus et piratis. Eccli. XLIII, 26: qui navigant mare, et cetera. Sed gravius periculum subdit, dicens periculis in falsis fratribus, id est in falsis Christianis et haereticis, et in pseudo. Ier. c. IX, 4: unusquisque a fratre suo se custodiat. 428. – In regard to the first he mentions his frequent journeys, saying on frequent journeys, namely, I am proved a minister of Christ by enduring many hard and difficult things patiently: “From Jerusalem and as far round as Illyricum I have fully preached the gospel of Christ” Rom. 15:19). Along with these he traveled along many roads, going to Rome and into Spain: “For the sake of the words of your lips, I have kept hard ways” (Ps. 17:4, Vulgate). Secondly, he mentions the dangers from journeys: first, the lesser ones; secondly, the more serious danger from false brethren. Among the lesser dangers he mentions three things, in regard to which he suffered many dangers. First, in regard to their causes, and these either from natural causes; hence he says, dangers from rivers, for streams naturally rise in the winter and are swift and very dangerous; or from malicious violence; as to this he says, in danger from robbers, whom the devil roused against him to rob him of his clothing: “His troops come on together; they have cast up siegeworks against me, and encamp round about my tent” (Job 19:12). Secondly, he lists the dangers that inspire fear either from his own; hence he says, in danger from my own people, i.e., managed by the Jews: or from outsiders; hence he says, in danger from Gentiles, who wanted to capture him for preaching the one true God. Consequently, he had no rest from his own or from others: “My mother, you bore me, a man of strife and contention to the whole land!” (Jer. 15:10). Thirdly, he lists the dangers as to their places. First, as to cities he says, danger in the city, i.e., in cities stirred up against me, as at Ephesus and Corinth (Ac. 18 & 19); or as to a desert place; hence he says, danger in the wilderness, either from evil beasts, as when a viper bit his hand (Ac. 28:3) as he was collecting sticks; or from want of food. Secondly, as to danger at sea, such as perils from plunderers and pirates: “Let those who sail the sea tell of its dangers” (Sir. 43:26, Vulgate). But he mentions a more serious danger, saying, danger from false brethren, i.e., from false Christians and heretics and false apostles: “Let every man beware of his neighbor” (Jer. 9:4).
11-6
2 Cor. 11:27-33Hic consequenter enumerat mala sponte assumpta, quae sustinentur in domibus. Et enumerat tria mala opposita tribus bonis, quae sunt necessaria ad vitam domesticam. Primum bonum est requies somni, secundum est sustentatio cibi, tertium est fomentum vestis. Requiei ergo somni, opponit laborem et vigilias. Quantum ad laborem dicit in labore, scilicet manuum. Act. XX, 34: ad ea quae mihi opus erant, et cetera. Et ideo dicit supra VI, v. 5: in laboribus, quia, ad litteram, ut dictum est supra, manu sua victum quaerebat. Et II Thess. III, 8: nocte et die laborantes, et cetera. Quantum ad laboris defectum dicit aerumna, quae est defectus et languor consequens ex labore, vel ex morbo naturali. Ps. c. XXXI, 4: conversus sum in aerumna, et cetera. Quantum vero ad vigilias dicit in vigiliis multis, vel in vacando praedicationibus de nocte, vel operi manuali. Act. XX, 7 dicitur quod protraxit sermonem usque ad mediam noctem. 429. – Here he lists the evils voluntarily assumed, namely, those endured in homes, and he lists three evils opposed to the three goods which are necessary for domestic life. The first good is restful sleep; the second is sustenance from food; the third is the warmth of clothing. To restful sleep he opposes labor and watchings, in regard to which he says, in toil, i.e., manual labor: “You yourselves know that these hands ministered to my necessities, and to those who were with me” (Ac. 20:34), because he literally made his living with his own hands: “With toil and labor we worked night and day, that we might not burden any of you.” (2 Th. 3:8). As to the weakness resulting from labor he says, and hardship [tiredness], which is a weakness and tiredness that follows upon labor or from a natural sickness: “My strength was dried up as by the heat of summer” (Ps. 32:4). But in regard to watchings he says, through many a sleepless night, because he devoted himself either to preaching at night or to manual labor. In Ac. (20:7) it says that he prolonged his sermon until midnight. Sustentationi vero cibi opponit duplicem subtractionem cibi, unam quae est ex necessitate; unde dicit in fame et siti, quia scilicet, ad litteram, deficiebat sibi aliquando cibus et potus. I Cor. IV, 11: usque in hanc horam, et cetera. Aliam quae est ex voluntate, unde dicit in ieiuniis multis, scilicet voluntarie assumptis, et propter exemplum bonum et propter macerationem carnis. I Cor. IX, 27: castigo corpus meum, et cetera. Sed contra, Matth. VI, 33: haec omnia adiicientur vobis, scilicet temporalia. Quare ergo in fame et siti? Respondeo. Dicendum est quod quando expedit, adiiciuntur nobis, scilicet temporalia, et propter utilitatem nostram, sed aliquando expedit carere eis. 430. – To sustenance from food he opposes two forms of being denied food. One is due to necessity; hence he says, in hunger and thirst, namely, because he was unable frequently to obtain food and drink: “To the present hour we hunger and thirst” (1 Cor. 4:11); the other is voluntary; hence he says, often without food, i.e., voluntarily undertaken both for the good example and to tame the flesh: “I pommel my body and subdue it” (1 Cor. 9:27). But this seems to be out of harmony with Matt. (6:33): “But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things shall be yours as well.” Why then in hunger and thirst? I answer that when it is expedient and for our benefit, they are added, i.e., temporal things; but sometimes it is expedient to lack them. Fomento vero vestis opponit duo, unum ex parte naturae, unde dicit in frigore, aliud ex parte inopiae, unde dicit et nuditate, scilicet ostensus sum, scilicet minister Christi. I Cor. IV, 11: nudi et instabiles, etc. supra VI, 4: in necessitatibus, et cetera. 431. – To the warmth of clothing he opposes two things: one on the part of nature; hence he says, in cold; the other on the part of poverty, hence he says, and exposure. I am proved a minister of Christ: “We are ill-clad and buffeted and homeless” (1 Cor. 4:11); “In afflictions, hardships, calamities” (2 Cor. 6:4). Consequenter cum dicit praeter illa, etc., enumerat mala assumpta interiora, quae causantur ex sollicitudine cordis pro pseudo. Bonus autem praelatus dupliciter affligitur pro subditis. Et primo sollicitudine conservationis subditorum, secundo pro defectu ipsorum. Et istam duplicem afflictionem passus est apostolus. Primam cum dicit praeter illa, quae extrinsecus, etc., quasi dicat: praeter omnia quae exterius patior et passus sum, angit me gravius interior afflictio, scilicet sollicitudo subditorum. Et ideo dicit instantia omnium Ecclesiarum magna est et multum gravat, quia multum sollicitat. Lc. X, 41: Martha, Martha, sollicita es, et turbaris erga plurima, et cetera. Rom. XII, 8: qui praeest in sollicitudine. 432. – Then when he says, And, apart from other things, he lists the internal evils he assumed, namely, those caused by anxiety of heart because of the activities of the false apostles. Now a good prelate is concerned about two things affecting his subjects, namely, their safety and the defection. And the Apostle suffered affliction in regard to both; the first, when he says, and, apart from other things, there is the daily pressure upon me of my anxiety for all the churches. As if to say: in addition to what I suffer and have suffered from outside, the internal affliction is more oppressive, that is, solicitude for his subjects. Hence, he says, the daily pressure for all the churches is great and lies heavily upon him, because he was very solicitous: “Martha, Martha, you are anxious and troubled about many things” (Lk. 10:41); “He that rules, with solicitude” (Rom. 12:8, Vulgate). Secundam afflictionem passus est pro defectu subditorum, et hoc dupliciter, scilicet pro defectu spiritualium; unde dicit quis infirmatur, scilicet in fide et bono, et ego non infirmor? In corde dolens de eo, sicut de me. I Cor. IX, 22: factus sum infirmis infirmus, et cetera. Ier. IX, 1: quis dabit capiti meo aquam, et cetera. Item pro defectu corporalium; unde dicit quis scandalizatur, malo poenae, id est quis patitur tribulationes, et ego non uror? Igne compassionis. Iste est ignis, quem dominus venit mittere in terram, Lc. XII, 49. 433. – The second affliction he suffered concerned the failings of his subjects, and this he does in two ways, namely for spiritual failings; hence he says, Who is weak, namely, in faith and in goodness, and I am not weak? In heart, grieving over them as though over myself? “To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak.” (1 Cor. 9:22); “O that my head were waters, and my eyes a fountain of tears, that I might weep day and night for the slain of the daughter of my people!” (Jer. 9:1). And for bodily failings; hence he says, Who is made to fall with the evil of punishment, i.e., who suffers afflictions, and I am not indignant [on fire] with the fire of compassion? This is the fire which the Lord came to cast upon the earth (Lk. 12:49). Et attende, quod congrue utitur hoc verbo uror, quia compassio procedit ex amore Dei et proximi, qui est ignis consumens, dum movet ad sublevandas miserias proximorum, et purgat ex affectu compassionis, et per quem nobis peccata relaxantur: charitas autem illius compassionis operit multitudinem peccatorum. Vel, aliter, aliquando enim labitur homo in peccatum ex seipso, et tunc infirmatur; aliquando autem ex malo exemplo aliorum, et tunc scandalizatur. Lc. XVII, 1 et Matth. c. XVIII, 7: vae homini illi per quem scandalum venit, et cetera. 434. – And notice that he fittingly uses the word, “on fire”, because compassion proceeds from the love of God and neighbor, which is a consuming fire, because it moves one to alleviate the misfortunes of one’s neighbor, and it cleanses the soul with the compassion it engenders. Furthermore, our sins are loosed, while the charity of that compassion covers a multitude of sins. For a person sometimes falls into sin of himself, and then he is weakened; sometimes by the example of others, and then he is scandalized: “Woe to the man by whom the temptation comes!” (Matt. 18:7). Deinde cum dicit si gloriari oportet, etc., confirmat quaedam dictorum superius. Vel dic quod supra loquitur quantum ad mala, quae pertulit commendabiliter, hic autem quantum ad mala, quae vitavit prudenter. Sed quia vitare pericula, quae surgunt propter fidem, videtur pertinere ad infirmitatem, ideo primo praemittit, quod in illis, quae infirmitatis sunt, vult gloriari; secundo proponit iuramentum ad confirmationem dicendorum, ibi Deus et pater, etc.; tertio ostendit modum vitandi, ibi Damasci, et cetera. 435. – Then when he says, if I must boast, he confirms some of the statements made above. Or say that above he speaks about the evils he commendably suffered; but here about the evils he prudently avoided. But because the avoidance of evils that arise against the faith seems to imply weakness, therefore, first, he states that he wishes to glory in those that imply weakness; secondly, he proposes an oath to confirm his statements (v. 31); thirdly, he shows how he avoided some evils (v. 32). Proponit ergo primo de quibus gloriatur, si debet gloriari, dicens si, pro quia, oportet gloriari, quae sunt infirmitatis meae gloriabor; quasi dicat: alii gloriantur in genere et in aliis mundanis rebus. Phil. c. III, 19: gloria in confusione, et cetera. Et ego etiam coactus gloriatus sum in eis. Tamen si gloriari oportet, gloriabor in infirmitatibus meis. Infra XII, 9: libenter gloriabor in infirmitatibus meis, et cetera. 436. – First, therefore, he suggests that the things in which one should glory, if he must glory, saying: If, i.e., because I must, I must boast [glory], I will boast of the things that show my weakness. As if to say: others may glory in their race and other worldly things: “They glory in their shame, with minds set on earthly things” (Phil. 3:19), and I when compelled gloried in them. Yet if I must glory, I will glory in my weakness: “I will all the more gladly boast of my weaknesses, that the power of Christ may rest upon me” (2 Cor. 12:9). Secundo subdit, quod non mentitur invocans testimonium divinum per modum iuramenti, ut credatur sibi, dicens Deus et pater, et cetera. Ubi tria ponit: unum per quod inducit ad amorem, unde dicit, Deus, Ier. X, 7: quis non timebit te, et cetera. Aliud per quod excitavit ad amorem, unde dicit: pater, Iac. I, 17: omne datum optimum, etc.; Mal. I, 6: si ego pater, ubi est amor meus? Vel, secundum aliam litteram, honor meus. Tertium per quod movet ad reverentiam et laudem; unde dicit qui est benedictus Deus in saecula, supra I, 3: benedictus Deus et pater, et cetera. Iste ergo tam reverendus, tam diligendus, tam timendus scit, quod non mentior, scilicet in his quae dixi et dicturus sum. Supra c. I, 18: non enim est apud nos est, et non, et cetera. 437. – Secondly, he states that he is not lying and is calling on God to witness after the manner of an oath, so that they will believe his, saying, The God and Father of the Lord Jesus, he who is blessed for ever, knows that I do not lie. Here he lays down three things. One by which to induce fear; hence he says, God: “Who would not fear thee, O King of the nations?” (Jer. 10:7); one by which he excites love, when he says, Father: “Every good endowment and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights” (Jas. 1:17); “If then I am a father, where is my love?”, or according to another version, “my honor?” (Mal. 1:5); thirdly, to inspire reverence and praise, who is blessed forever: “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” (2 Cor. 1:3). He, therefore, so revered, so worthy of love, so worthy of fear, knows that I do not lie, namely, in what I have said and will say: “Our word to you has not been Yes and No” (2 Cor. 1:17). Consequenter cum dicit Damasci praepositus, etc., ostendit quanta mala vitavit, et hoc in quodam particulari periculo. Ubi sciendum est, quod apostolus primo coepit praedicare Christum in Damasco, ubi dum pergeret Christianos capere, prostratus est et ad fidem conversus. Et ideo Iudaei ad praepositum illius civitatis, qui erat ibi pro Aretha rege, confugerunt, ut Paulum caperent et occiderent. Et ideo ille faciebat custodiri nocte et die portas civitatis, ut dicitur Act. IX, v. 24. Christiani autem, qui erant ibi, volentes servare Paulum, eum submiserunt in sporta per murum, et sic evasit. Hunc ergo modum evadendi tangit apostolus, dicens: vere non mentior de hoc quod dico etiam modo, nam Damasci praepositus, qui sub Aretha rege, genti Damascenorum praeerat, custodiri faciebat, inductus a Iudaeis, civitatem Damascenorum, ad hoc scilicet ut me comprehenderet, et comprehensum assignaret Iudaeis, ne amplius praedicarem; sed ego per fenestram submissus sum per murum, et sic effugi manus eius, scilicet praepositi. Et hoc fuit de mandato domini dicentis Matth. X, 23: si vos persecuti fuerint, et cetera. Sic Michol David deposuit per fenestram, ne caperetur a Saule, I Reg. c. XIX, 2. Sic Rahab exploratores demisit cum fune per fenestram, Ios. II, 15. 438. – Then when he says, At Damascus, he shows the evils he avoided, and this in a certain particular danger. Here it should be noted that the Apostle first began to preach Christ in Damascus, where he was thrown to the ground and converted to the faith, as he was on his way to arrest Christians. Therefore, the Jews appealed to the governor of that city, who was representing Aretas the king, to arrest Paul and put him to death. So the governor ordered the city-gates to be watched day and night, as it says in Ac. (chap. 9). But the Christians who were there, desiring to save Paul, lowered him by the wall in a basket. This form of escape the Apostle touches on, when he says: truly I am not lying about what I am telling you now: for at Damascus, the governor under King Aretas, i.e., the governor who ruled at Damascus under king Aretas, was induced by the Jews to guard the city of the Damascenes to seize me, so that after I was apprehended, I would be delivered to the Jews and prevented from preaching. But I was let down in a basket through a window in the wall, and escaped his hands, namely, the governor’s. This was done in keeping with the Lord’s command: “When they persecute you in one town, flee to the next” (Matt. 10:23). In this way too did Michel let David down through a window to escape from Saul (1 Sam. 19:12), and Rahab let the spies down with a cord out of a window (Jos. 2:15). Sed hic obiicitur contra apostolum, primo, quia videtur quod non fuerit sufficienter confisus in domino, sed fugit. Respondeo. Dicendum est, quod quamdiu adest humanum auxilium, homo non debet confugere ad auxilium divinum, quia hoc esset tentare Deum, sed debet illo uti auxilio quantum potest. Apostolo autem nondum deerat humanum auxilium. Secundo obiicitur, quia Io. X, 12 dicitur: mercenarius autem et qui non est pastor, videt lupum venientem, et fugit. Unde videtur quod non fuerit bonus pastor. Respondeo. Dicendum est, quod aliquando quaeritur persona praelati tantum, aliquando cum praelato totus populus. Quando ergo quaeritur praelatus solus, tunc debet committere curam alteri, et absentare se. Et sic fecit hic Paulus. Et ideo dicit Glossa quod licet fugeret, tamen fuit ei cura de ovibus, bono pastori in caelo sedenti eas commendando, et utilitati eorum se, per fugam, praeservando. Quando vero quaeritur totus grex, tunc debet praeponere utilitatem et salutem gregis saluti corporis sui. Nota autem, quod est quaedam fuga humilitatis, quando quis fugit honores, sicut Christus fugit Io. VI, 15, cum vidisset quod vellent eum eligere in regem. Sic Saul cum electus fuit in regem, abscondit se domi, I Reg. X, 22. Quaedam vero fuga est cautelae, quando scilicet fugit pericula, ut praeservetur ad maiora. Sic Helias fugit propter Iezabel, III Reg. XIX, 3; et sic apostolus hic fugit manus praepositi. 439. – But some object against the Apostle’s conduct: first, because he seems to have lacked confidence in the Lord and fled. I answer that as long as human help is available, a man should not run for divine help, because this would be tempting God; but he should use human help as much as he can. But the Apostle was not yet lacking human help. The second objection is based on Jn. (10:12): “He who is a hireling and not a shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees.” Hence, it seems that Paul was not a good shepherd. I answer that sometimes the person of the prelate alone is sought, and sometimes the prelate along with all the people. When the prelate alone is sought, then he should entrust his duties to another and absent himself. This is what Paul did. Hence, a Gloss says that although he fled, he still took care of his people by commending them to the Good Shepherd seated in heaven and saving himself for their benefit by flight. But when the entire flock is sought, then he should prefer the benefit and safety of the flock to his own bodily safety. But note that there is a flight inspired by humility, when a person flees honors, as Christ fled when they sought to make him king (Jn. 6:15). In the same way Saul, when chosen, concealed himself at home (1 Sam. 10:22). Another is inspired by caution, namely, when a person flees dangers in order to be saved for greater ones. This is the way Elijah fled from Jezebel (1 Kg. 19:3), and the way the Apostle fled from the hands of the governor.
12-1
2 Cor. 12:1-2Posita sua commendatione quantum ad mala perpessa, hic consequenter apostolus commendans se, ostendit praeeminentiam suae dignitatis quantum ad bona divinitus recepta. Prima autem gloriatio fuit de infirmitatibus; ista vero est de bonis eius. Unde circa hoc duo facit. Primo commendat se de bonis susceptis divinitus; secundo excusat se de hac commendatione, quod hoc fecerit quasi coactus, ibi factus sum insipiens, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo extollit magnitudinem eorum quae sunt sibi collata a Deo; secundo manifestat remedium infirmitatis sibi adhibitum contra periculum superbiae, ibi et ne magnitudo, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo ponit bonum sibi divinitus collatum; secundo ostendit quomodo se habuit in gloriando de huiusmodi bono, ibi pro huiusmodi, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo ostendit quod hoc sit sibi collatum divinitus in generali; secundo vero in speciali, ibi scio hominem, et cetera. 440. – Having commended himself for the evils he suffered, the Apostle continues to commend himself and shows the pre-eminence of his dignity in regard to good things received from God. For he first gloried in his weaknesses, but now in his good things. In regard to this he does two things. First, he commends himself on the good things received from God; secondly, he begs pardon for this commendation, alleging that he is compelled to do this (v. 11). In regard to the first he does two things. First, he extols the greatness of the things conferred on him by God; secondly, he discloses the remedy given to him against the danger of pride (v. 7). In regard to the first he does two things: first, he mentions a good divinely conferred; secondly, he shows how he behaved in regard to glorying in it (v. 5). In regard to the first he does two things. First, he shows in general that this was divinely bestowed; secondly, in particular (v. 2). Bonum autem apostolo collatum divinitus, sunt revelationes sibi divinitus factae, et de istis vult hic gloriari. Unde dicit si gloriari oportet, id est quia gloriari oportet propter vos, tamen secundum se non expedit, quia qui gloriatur de bono recepto, incidit in periculum amittendi quod habet. Eccli. XLIII, 15: aperti sunt thesauri, scilicet virtutum, per gloriationem inanem, et evanuerunt nebulae sicut aves. Et hoc significatur in Ezechia, Is. XXXIX, 2, quando ostendit thesauros domus domini nuntiis regis Babylonis. Et licet simpliciter non expediat gloriari, tamen aliquando propter aliquam specialem causam potest homo gloriari, sicut ex praemissis manifestum est. Et ideo dicit: quia gloriari oportet, ideo dimissis commendationibus de infirmitatibus, veniam, commendando me, ad visiones et revelationes domini. 441. – The good divinely bestowed on the Apostle are revelations made to him by God; it is of these that he wishes to glory. Hence he says: If I must boast [glory], i.e., because I must glory for your sake, although in itself there is nothing to be gained by it, because a person who glories in a good he has received runs the risk of losing what he has: “Through this,” i.e., by vain glory, “are the treasures of the virtues opened, and the clouds fly out like birds.” (Sir. 43:15, Aquinas Latin). And this is signified in Hezekiah, when he showed the treasures of the Lord’s house to the messengers of the king in Babylon (Is. 39:2). And although, absolutely speaking, it is not expedient to glory, nevertheless, for some special reason a man may glory, as is clear from what has been stated above. Therefore he says: because I must boast [glory], I will leave off commending myself on my infirmities and come by commending myself to visions and revelations of the Lord. Ubi notandum est, quod differentia est inter visionem et revelationem. Nam revelatio includit visionem, et non e converso. Nam aliquando videntur aliqua, quorum intellectus et significatio est occulta videnti et tunc est visio solum. Sicut fuit visio Pharaonis et Nabuchodonosor Daniel II, 1 et Gen. XLI, 1. Sed quando cum visione habetur significatio intellectus eorum quae videntur, tunc est revelatio. Unde quantum ad Pharaonem et Nabuchodonosor visio de spicis et de statua, fuit solum visio; sed quantum ad Ioseph et Danielem, qui significationem visorum habuerunt, fuit revelatio et prophetia. Utrumque tamen, scilicet visio et revelatio, quandoque quidem fit a Deo. Dan. II, 28: est Deus in caelo revelans mysteria. Os. XII, v. 10: ego visiones multiplicavi eis. Ps. CXVIII, v. 18: revela oculos meos, et cetera. Quandoque vero a malo spiritu. Ier. XXIII, 13: prophetae prophetabant in Baal. Apostolo autem facta est et visio, et revelatio, quia secreta, quae vidit, plene intellexit a domino, non a malo spiritu. Unde dicit veniam autem ad visiones et revelationes domini. Est autem revelatio amotio velamenti. Potest autem esse duplex velamen. Unum ex parte videntis, et hoc est infidelitas, vel peccatum, vel duritia cordis; et de hoc supra III, v. 14: usque in hodiernum diem velamen, et cetera. Aliud ex parte rei visae, quando scilicet res spiritualis proponitur alicui sub figuris rerum sensibilium, et de hoc dicitur Num. IV, v. 15, quod sacerdotes tradebant Levitis vasa sanctuarii velata, quia scilicet debiliores non possunt spiritualia capere, secundum quod in seipsis sunt. Et ideo dominus loquebatur turbis in parabolis, Matth. XIII, 13. 442. – Here it should be noted the difference between a vision and a revelation. For a revelation includes a vision, but not vice versa. For sometimes things are seen, the understanding and significance of which are hidden from the beholder; in that case it is only a vision, as in the visions of Pharaoh and Nebuchadnezzar, the vision of the ears of corn and of the statue was only a vision. But in regard to Joseph and Daniel, who understood the meaning of what was seen, it was a revelation and a prophecy. Both, however, namely vision and revelation, are sometimes produced by God: “There is a God in heaven who reveals mysteries” (Dan. 2:28); “It was I who multiplied visions” (Hos. 12:10); “Open my eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out of your law” (Ps. 119:18); but sometimes by an evil spirit: “They prophesied by Baal and led my people Israel astray” (Jer. 23:13). To the Apostle were made both vision and revelation, because he fully understood the secret things he saw. They were produced by the Lord and not by an evil spirit. Hence he says: I will go on to visions and revelations of the Lord. Now a revelation is a removing of a veil. But a veil can be of two kinds: one on the part of the beholder, and this is unbelief or sin or hardness of heart. Of this veil he said above (3:15): “Yes, to this day whenever Moses is read a veil lies over their minds”; the other is on the part of the object seen, namely, when spiritual things are proposed to someone under the figures of sense-perceptible objects. Concerning this it says in Num. (chap. 4) that the priests delivered the vessels of the sanctuary veiled to the Levites, because weaker persons cannot grasp spiritual things as they are in themselves. This is why the Lord spoke to the multitudes in parables (Matt. 13:13). Consequenter visiones et revelationes huiusmodi, manifestat apostolus in speciali, loquens de se tamquam de alio. Unde dicit scio hominem in Christo, et cetera. Et ponit duas visiones. Prima incipit hic, secunda vero incipit ibi et scio huiusmodi hominem in Christo, et cetera. 443. – Then the Apostle describes these visions and revelations in details, speaking of himself as though of another person; hence he says, I know a man in Christ. He mentions two visions: the first begins here; the second at v. 3. Circa primam autem visionem utitur apostolus quadam distinctione. Dicit enim se, circa huiusmodi revelationem, scire quaedam et quaedam nescire. Dicit autem se scire tria, scilicet videntis conditionem unde scio hominem in Christo; visionis tempus quia ante annos quatuordecim; et visionis fastigium quia raptus usque ad tertium caelum. Dicit autem se nescire videntis dispositionem, quia sive in corpore, sive extra corpus, nescio. 444. – When speaking of the first vision, the Apostle makes use of a distinction, for he says in regard to this revelation that he knew certain things and other things not. But he knew three things, namely, the condition of the beholder; hence he says: I know a man in Christ; the time of the vision, that is, who fourteen years ago; and the high point of the vision, because he was caught up to the third heaven. And he says that he did not know the disposition of the beholder, whether in the body or out of the body I do not know. Videamus ergo ea quae scivit, ut, per nota ad ignota, facilius pervenire possimus. Et primo videntis conditionem, quae est laudabilis, quia in Christo, id est conformem Christo. Sed contra: in Christo nullus est, nisi qui habet charitatem, quia I Io. IV, 16 dicitur: qui manet in charitate, in Deo manet. Ergo scivit se habere charitatem, quod est contra illud: nescit homo utrum odio, vel amore dignus sit, et cetera. Respondeo, quod esse in Christo potest intelligi dupliciter. Uno modo per fidem et fidei sacramentum, secundum illud apostoli, Gal. III, 27: quotquot baptizati estis, Christum induistis, scilicet per fidem et fidei sacramentum. Et hoc modo scivit se apostolus in Christo esse. Alio modo dicitur aliquis esse in Christo per charitatem, et hoc modo nullus scit se esse in Christo certitudinaliter, nisi per quaedam experimenta et signa, inquantum sentit se dispositum et coniunctum in Christo, ita quod nullo modo, etiam propter mortem, permitteret se separari ab eo. Et hoc de se expertus erat apostolus, cum dicebat Rom. c. VIII, 38: certus enim sum, quod neque mors, neque vita, etc., separabit nos a charitate. Unde potuit habere huiusmodi signa, quod esset in charitate Christi. 445. – Therefore let us see what he knew, so that through what is known we may more easily attain to what was not known. First of all, the condition of the beholder, which is praiseworthy, because he was in Christ, i.e., conformed to Christ. But on the contrary, no one is in Christ, unless he has charity, because “He who abides in love abides in God” (1 Jn. 4:16). Therefore, he knew that he had charity, which is contrary to what is stated in Ec. (9:1): “The righteous and the wise and their deeds are in the hand of God; whether it is love or hate man does not know.” I answer that being in Christ can be taken in two ways: in one way by faith and the sacrament of faith according to Gal. (3:27): “For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ,” namely, by faith and the sacrament of faith. This is the sense in which the Apostle knew that he was in Christ. In another way a person is said to be in Christ through charity, and in this way no one knows for certain that he is in Christ, except by certain tests and signs, inasmuch as he feels himself disposed and joined to Christ in such a way that he would not permit himself to be separated from him for any reason including death. This the Apostle experienced in regard to himself, when he said: “For I am sure that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.” (Rom. 8:38). Hence, he could have had such signs that he was in the charity of Christ. Secundo visionis tempus, quod fuit conveniens, quia ante annos quatuordecim, quia quatuordecim anni transacti erant ab eo tempore quo viderat visionem usque ad tempus quo scripsit hanc epistolam. Quando enim hanc epistolam scripsit, nondum apostolus erat positus in carcerem. Et sic videtur, quod fuit circa principium imperii Neronis, a quo post multum tempus occisus fuit. Unde si computemus annos descendentes a principio imperii Neronis usque ad quatuordecim annos, manifeste apparet, quod apostolus habuit has visiones in principio suae conversionis. Ipse enim conversus fuit ad Christum anno quo Christus passus est. Christus autem passus est circa finem Tiberii Caesaris, quo mortuo successit ei Gaius imperator, qui vixit quatuor annis, post quem Nero factus est imperator. Et sic inter Tiberium et Neronem fluxerunt quatuor anni. Et sic, additis duobus annis de tempore Tiberii, quia nondum mortuus erat quando Paulus fuit conversus, et octo de tempore Neronis, quod fluxerat usque ad tempus quando scripsit hanc epistolam, relinquitur quod a tempore suae conversionis, usque ad tempus quo hanc epistolam scripsit, fuerunt anni quatuordecim. Et ideo quidam dicunt satis probabiliter, quod apostolus has visiones habuit in illo triduo, quo post prostrationem suam a domino stetit neque videns, neque manducans, neque bibens, Act. IX, 9. Commemorat autem tempus suae conversionis apostolus ut ostendat, quod si a tempore suae conversionis tantum erat gratus Christo, ut talia sibi ostenderet, quanto magis post quatuordecim annos, cum profecerit et in auctoritate apud Deum, et in virtutibus, et gratia? 446. – Secondly, the time of the vision, which was fitting, because it was fourteen years ago; for fourteen years had elapsed from the time he saw the vision, until he wrote this epistle, because when he wrote this epistle he had not yet been cast into prison. Hence it seems to have been written at the beginning of Nero’s reign, by whom he was killed much later. Hence if we go back fourteen years from the beginning of Nero’s reign, it is clear that the Apostle had these visions at the beginning of his conversion. For he had been converted to Christ in the same year that the Lord suffered. But Christ suffered near the end of Tiberius Caesar’s reign, who was succeeded at death by the emperor Caius, who lived four years, after which Nero became emperor. Therefore, between Tiberius and Nero there were four years. Adding two years from Tiberius’ reign, because he was not yet dead, when Paul was converted, and from Nero’s reign the eight years which had passed until he wrote this epistle, there were fourteen years between the time of his conversion to the time he wrote this epistle. Therefore, some say quite probably that the Apostle had these visions during those three days after he was struck down by the Lord, when he remained neither seeing nor eating nor drinking (Ac. 9:9). But he recalls the time of his conversion to show that if he was so pleasing to Christ from the time of his conversion that he revealed such things to him, then how much more pleasing was he after fourteen years, when he had grown in charity before God and in the virtues and graces? Tertio videamus fastigium visionis, quod quidem est excellens, quia raptus usque ad tertium caelum. Sed sciendum quod aliud est furari et aliud rapi. Furari quidem proprie est, cum res alicui latenter aufertur. Unde Gen. XL, 15 dicebat Ioseph: furtim sublatus sum. Sed rapi proprie dicitur quod subito et per violentiam aufertur. Iob VI, 15: sicut torrens raptim, id est subito et rapide, transit in convallibus. Inde est quod praedones, qui violenter expoliant, dicuntur raptores. Sed attende quod aliquis homo dicitur rapi ab hominibus, sicut Enoch. Sap. IV, 11: raptus est, ne malitia, et cetera. Aliquando rapitur anima a corpore. Lc. XII, 20: stulte, hac nocte animam tuam, et cetera. Aliquando aliquis dicitur rapi a seipso, quando propter aliquid homo efficitur extra se ipsum, et hoc est idem quod extasis. Sed et extra se ipsum efficitur homo et per appetitivam virtutem et cognitivam. Per appetitivam enim virtutem homo est solum in se ipso, quando curat quae sunt sua tantum. Efficitur vero extra se ipsum, quando non curat quae sua sunt, sed quae perveniunt ad bona aliorum, et hoc facit charitas. I Cor. c. XIII, 4: charitas non quaerit quae sua sunt. Et de hac extasi dicit Dionysius, IV cap. de divinis nominibus: est autem extasim faciens divinus amor non sinens amatorem sui ipsius esse, sed amatorum, scilicet rerum amatarum. Secundum cognitivam vero aliquis efficitur extra se, quando aliquis extra naturalem modum hominis elevatur ad aliquid videndum, et de isto raptu loquitur hic apostolus. 447. – Thirdly, let us see the high point of the vision, because he was caught up (raptus) to the third heaven. But it should be noted that it is one thing to be the victim of thievery and another to be rapt. Properly speaking, the former takes place when something is taken away from another in a secret way, hence, in Gen. (40:13) Joseph said: “For I was indeed stolen out of the land of the Hebrews.” A person is properly speaking rapt when something is taken suddenly and by force: “As the torrent that passes swiftly (raptim)”, i.e., suddenly and rapidly, “in the valleys” (Job 6:15). Hence it is that plunderers who despoil violently are called ravagers (raptores). But note that a man is said to be rapt from men, as Enoch: “He was caught up (raptim) lest evil change his understanding or guile deceive his soul” (Wis. 4:11); sometimes the soul is rapt from the body: “Fool! This night your soul is required of you” (Lk. 12:20). Sometimes a person is said to be rapt by himself, when for some reason he is made to be outside himself; and this is the same as ecstasy. But a man is made to be outside himself both by his appetitive power and by his cognitive power. For by the former a person is in himself, when he cares only for things that are his own; but he is made to be outside himself when he does not care about things that are his own, but about things that pertain to others; and this is the work of charity: “Love does not insist on its own way” (1 Cor. 13:5). Concerning this ecstasy Dionysius says in the Divine Names (chap. 4): “Ecstasy is produced by divine love not permitting one to be a lover of self but of the beloved,” i.e., of the things loved. But a person is made to be outside himself according to the cognitive power when he is raised up above the human mode to see something. This is the rapture about which the Apostle is speaking here. Sed sciendum quod modus naturalis humanae cognitionis est, ut cognoscat simul per vim mentalem quae est intellectus, et corporalem quae est sensus. Et inde est quod homo non habet in cognoscendo liberum iudicium intellectus, nisi quando sensus fuerint in suo vigore bene dispositi, absque aliquo ligationis impedimento, alias, cum impediuntur, etiam iudicium intellectus impeditur, sicut in dormientibus patet. Tunc ergo homo efficitur extra se secundum cognitivam, quando removetur ab hac naturali dispositione cognitionis, quae est ut intellectus, ab usu sensuum et sensibilium rerum abstractus, ad aliqua videnda moveatur. Quod quidem contingit dupliciter, uno modo per defectum virtutis, undecumque talis defectus contingat, sicut accidit in phreneticis et aliis mente captis, et haec quidem abstractio a sensibus non est elevatio hominis, sed potius depressio, quia virtus eorum debilitatur. Alio vero modo per virtutem divinam, et tunc proprie dicitur elevatio, quia cum agens assimilet sibi patiens, abstractio quae fit virtute divina et est supra hominem, est aliquid altius, quam sit hominis natura. 448. – But it should be noted that a mode natural to human knowing is that a man know simultaneously with his mental power, which is the intellect, and with a bodily one, which is a sense. This is why a man in knowing has a free judgment of the intellect, when the senses are well disposed in their vigor and not hindered by a fettering, as happens during sleep. Therefore a man is made to be outside himself when he is removed from this natural disposition for knowing, namely, when the intellect, being withdrawn from the use of the senses and sense-perceptible things, is moved to see certain things. This occurs in two ways: first, by a lack of power, no matter how it is produced. This happens in phrenitis and other mental cases, so that this withdrawal from the senses is not a state of being elevated, but of being cast down, because their power has been weakened. But the other way is by divine power, and then it is, properly speaking, an elevation, because since the agent makes the thing it works on to be like itself, a withdrawal produced by divine power and above men is something higher than man’s nature. Et ideo raptus, sic acceptus, diffinitur sic: raptus est ab eo quod est secundum naturam in id quod est supra naturam, vi superioris naturae, elevatio. In qua quidem definitione tangitur eius genus, dum dicitur elevatio; causa efficiens, quia vi superioris naturae; et duo termini motus, scilicet a quo et in quem, cum dicitur ab eo quod est secundum naturam, in id quod est supra naturam. Sic ergo patet de raptu. 449. – Therefore, a rapture of this sort is defined as “an elevation from that which is according to nature into that which is above nature, produced in virtue of a higher nature.” In this definition are mentioned its genus, when it is called an elevation; the efficient cause, because it is by the power of a higher nature; and the two termini of the change, namely, the terminus from which and into which, when it is described as being from that which is according to nature into what is above nature. Thus it is clear what rapture is. Sequitur de termino raptus, scilicet ad quem, cum dicitur usque in tertium caelum. Notandum est autem, quod tertium caelum tripliciter accipitur. Uno modo secundum ea, quae sunt infra animam; alio modo secundum ea, quae sunt in anima; tertio modo secundum ea, quae sunt supra animam. Infra animam sunt omnia corpora, ut dicit Augustinus in libro de vera religione. Et sic possumus accipere triplex caelum corporeum, scilicet aereum, sydereum et Empyreum. Et hoc modo dicitur quod apostolus erat raptus usque ad tertium caelum, id est usque ad videndum ea quae sunt in caelo Empyreo, non ut existeret ibi, quia sic sciret si fuisset sive in corpore, sive extra corpus. Vel secundum Damascenum, qui non ponit caelum Empyreum, possumus dicere quod tertium caelum, ad quod raptus est apostolus, est supra octavam sphaeram, ut scilicet evidenter videret ea quae sunt supra totam naturam corporalem. 450. – Then he mentions the terminus reached by the rapture, when he says, to the third heaven. But it should be noted that the third heaven is taken in three ways: in one way according to the things below the soul; in another way according to the things in the soul; and in a third way according to things above the soul. Below the soul are all bodies, as Augustine says in the book On The True Religion. And so we can think of a threefold heaven: the ethereal, sidereal, and empyrean. In this way the Apostle is said to have been rapt to the third heaven, i.e., to see things in the empyrean heaven; not to exist there, because then he would have known whether he was in the body or out of the body. Or according to Damascene, who does not admit an empyrean heaven, we can say that the third heaven, to which the Apostle was rapt, is above the eighth sphere, so that he could clearly see the things which exist above all corporeal nature. Si autem accipiamus caelum secundum ea, quae sunt in ipsa anima, sic caelum debemus dicere aliquam altitudinem cognitionis, quae excedit naturalem cognitionem humanam. Est autem triplex visio, scilicet corporalis, per quam videmus et cognoscimus corporalia, sive imaginaria, qua videmus similitudines corporum, et intellectualis, qua cognoscimus naturas rerum in seipsis. Nam proprie obiectum intellectus est, quod quid est. Huiusmodi autem visiones, si fiant secundum naturalem modum, puta, si video aliquid sensibile, si imaginor aliquid prius visum, si intelligo per phantasmata, non possunt dici caelum. Sed tunc quaelibet istorum dicitur caelum, quando est supra naturalem facultatem humanae cognitionis, puta, si aliquid vides oculis corporalibus, supra facultatem naturae, sic es raptus ad primum caelum. Sicut Baltassar raptus est videns manum scribentis in pariete, ut dicitur Dan. V, 6. Si vero eleveris per imaginationem, vel per spiritum ad aliquid supernaturaliter cognoscendum, sic es raptus ad secundum caelum. Sic raptus fuit Petrus, quando vidit linteum immissum de caelo, ut dicitur Act. X, 10. Sed si aliquis videret ipsa intelligibilia et naturas ipsorum, non per sensibilia, nec per phantasmata, sic esset raptus usque ad tertium caelum. 451. – But if we take heaven according to the things in the soul itself, then we should call heaven some altitude of mind which transcends natural human knowledge. Now there are three kinds of sight, namely, bodily, by which we can see and know bodies; spiritual or imaginary, by which we see likenesses of bodies; and intellectual, by which we know the nature of things in themselves. For the proper object of the intellect is the “what it is” (quod quid est) of things. But such a sight of things, if it takes place according to the natural mode (e.g. if I see something visible, if I imagine something previously seen, or if I understand through phantasms) cannot be called heaven. But each of these is called heaven when they are above the natural faculty of human knowledge. For example, if you see something with your bodily eyes above the faculty of nature, then you are rapt into the first heaven. This is the way Belshazzar was rapt, when he saw the handwriting on the wall, as it is stated in Dan. (5:5). But if you are raised up by the imagination or spirit to know something supernaturally, then you are rapt to the second heaven. This is the way Peter was rapt, when he saw the linen sheet descending from heaven (Ac. 10:11). But if a person were to see intelligible things themselves and their nature, not through sense-perceptible things not through phantasms, he would be rapt to the third heaven. Sed sciendum est, quod rapi ad primum caelum, est alienari a sensibus corporalibus. Unde cum nullus possit abstrahi totaliter a sensibus corporeis, manifestum est quod nullus potest dici simpliciter raptus in primum caelum, sed secundum quid, inquantum contingit aliquando aliquem sic esse intentum ad unum sensum quod abstrahitur ab actu aliorum. Rapi ad secundum caelum est, quando aliquis alienatur a sensu ad videndum quaedam imaginabilia, unde tales semper consueverunt fieri in extasi. Et ideo, Act. X, 10, quando Petrus vidit linteum, dicitur quod factus fuit in extasi. Paulus vero dicitur raptus ad tertium caelum, quia sic fuit alienatus a sensibus, et sublimatus ab omnibus corporalibus, ut videret intelligibilia nuda et pura eo modo quo vident Angeli et anima separata, et, quod plus est, etiam ipsum Deum per essentiam, ut Augustinus expresse dicit XII super Genesim ad litteram, et in Glossa, et ad Paulin. in Libr. de videndo Deum. Nec etiam est probabile, ut Moyses, minister veteris testamenti ad Iudaeos, viderit Deum, et minister novi testamenti ad gentes et doctor gentium, hoc dono fuerit privatus. Unde dicit ipse supra III, 7: si ministratio damnationis fuit in gloria, et cetera. De Moyse autem quod viderit Deum per essentiam, patet. Nam ipse a domino petivit Ex. XXXIII, v. 13: ostende mihi faciem tuam. Et licet tunc negatum fuerit sibi, non tamen dicitur, quod dominus finaliter negaverit ei. Unde dicit Augustinus, quod concessum fuit ei per hoc quod dicitur Num. XII, 6 ss.: si quis fuerit inter vos propheta domini, et cetera. At vero non talis servus meus Moyses, et cetera. Palam enim et non per aenigmata vidit Deum. 452. – But it should be noted that to be rapt to the first heaven is to be alienated from the bodily senses. Hence, since no one can be totally withdrawn from the bodily senses, it is obvious that no one can be rapt in the strict sense to the first heaven, but only in a qualified sense, inasmuch as it sometimes happens that a person is so engrossed in one sense that he is withdrawn from the act of the others. One is rapt to the second heaven when he is alienated from sense to see imaginable things; hence, such a person is always said to be in ecstasy. And so when Peter saw the linen sheet (Ac. 10:11), it is said that he was in ecstasy. But Paul is said to have been rapt to the third heaven, because he was so alienated from the senses and lifted above all bodily things that he saw intelligible things naked and pure in the way angels and separated souls see them. What is more, he saw God in his essence, as Augustine expressly says in Gen. ad Litt.12 and in a Gloss, and ad Paulinus in the book, De Videndo Deum. Furthermore, it is not probable that Moses, the minister of the Old Testament to the Jews saw God, and the minister of the New Testament to the Gentiles, the teacher of the Gentiles, was deprived of this gift. Hence he says above (3:9): “For if there was splendor in the dispensation of condemnation, the dispensation of righteousness must far exceed it in splendor.” That Moses saw God in his essence is clear, for he begged God: “Show me your face” (Ex. 33:13, Vulgate). And although it was denied him at that time, it is not stated that the Lord finally denied him. Hence, Augustine says that this was granted him by reason of what is stated in Num. (12:6): “If there is a prophet among you, I the LORD make myself known to him in a vision, I speak with him in a dream. Not so with my servant Moses; he is entrusted with all my house.” For he saw God openly and not in a dark manner. Sed numquid fieri potuisset Paulo, ut non raptus videret Deum? Dicendum quod non. Nam impossibile est, quod Deus videatur in vita ista ab homine non alienato a sensibus, quia nulla imago, nullum phantasma est sufficiens medium ad Dei essentiam ostendendam, ideo oportet quod abstrahatur et alienetur a sensibus. 453. – But would it have been possible for Paul to see God without being rapt? I answer: No, for it is impossible that God be seen in this life by a man not alienated from his senses, because no image or phantasm is a sufficient medium for showing God’s essence; therefore, he must be abstracted and alienated from the senses. Tertio modo accipiendo caelum secundum ea quae sunt supra animam: et sic triplex caelum est triplex hierarchia Angelorum, et secundum hoc apostolus raptus fuit usque ad tertium caelum, id est ad hoc, ut videret essentiam Dei ita clare, sicut vident eum Angeli superioris et primae hierarchiae, qui sic vident Deum, quod immediate in ipso Deo recipiunt illuminationes, et cognoscunt divina mysteria. Et sic vidit Paulus. 454. – In a third way, by taking heaven according to things above the soul; in this way the three heavens are the three hierarchies of angels. According to this the Apostle was rapt to the third heaven, i.e., to see God’s essence as clearly as the angels of the higher and first hierarchy see him, because they see God in such a way as to receive illumination in God himself and to know the divine mysteries. This is the way Paul saw. Sic ergo vidit Dei essentiam sicut Angeli superioris hierarchiae. Ergo bene videtur, quod apostolus fuerit beatus, et per consequens fuerit immortalis. Respondeo, quod licet viderit Deum per essentiam, non tamen fuit beatus simpliciter, sed solum secundum quid. Sciendum est autem, quod visio Dei per essentiam fit per lumen aliquod, scilicet per lumen gloriae, de quo dicitur in Ps. XXXV, v. 10: in lumine tuo videbimus lumen. Sed aliquod lumen communicatur alicui per modum passionis, alicui vero per modum formae inhaerentis, sicut lumen solis invenitur in carbunculo et in stellis, ut forma inhaerens, id est connaturalis effecta, sed in aere invenitur ut forma transiens, et non permanens, quia transit, abeunte sole. Similiter et lumen gloriae dupliciter menti infunditur. Uno modo per modum formae connaturalis factae et permanentis, et sic facit mentem simpliciter beatam. Et hoc modo infunditur beatis in patria, et ideo dicuntur comprehensores, et, ut ita dicam, visores. Alio modo contingit lumen gloriae mentem humanam sicut quaedam passio transiens, et sic mens Pauli fuit in raptu lumine gloriae illustrata. Unde etiam ipsum nomen raptus ostendit transeundo hoc esse factum. Et ideo non fuit simpliciter glorificatus, nec habuit dotem gloriae, cum illa claritas non fuerit effecta proprietas. Et propter hoc non fuit derivata ab anima in corpus, nec in hoc statu perpetuo permansit. Unde solum actum beati habuit in ipso raptu, sed non fuit beatus. Sic per hoc patet quid apostolus scivit in suo raptu, scilicet videntis conditionem, visionis tempus et visionis fastigium. 455. – But if he saw God as the angels of the higher and first hierarchy do, then it seems that the Apostle was beatified and, consequently, was immortal. I answer that although he saw God in his essence, he was not absolutely beatified, but only in a qualified sense. Yet it should be noted that the vision of God by essence takes place by means of a certain light, namely, the light of glory, of which it says in Ps. 36 (9): “In your light we see light.” But light is communicated to some things after the manner of a passing quality and to others after the manner of an inhering form, i.e., connaturally produced; but it is found in the air as a passing form and not as a permanent form, because it vanishes when the sun is absent. Similarly, the light of glory is infused in the mind in two ways: in one way, after the manner of a form connaturally made and permanent, and then it makes a mind beatified in the strict sense. This is the way it is infused in the beatified in heaven. Hence they are called comprehenders and, so to say, seers. In another way the light of glory affects a human mind as a passing quality; this is the way Paul’s mind in rapture was enlightened by the light of glory. Hence, the very name, “rapture,” suggests that this was done in a passing manner. Consequently, he was not glorified in the strict sense or had the mark of glory, because that brightness was not produced as a property. As a result it was not derived from the soul in the body, nor did he remain in this state permanently. Hence, when he was in rapture, he had only the act of the beatified, but he was not beatified. Thus it is clear what the Apostle saw in his rapture, namely, the condition of the beholder, the time of the vision, and the high point of the vision. Sequitur quid nescivit, scilicet utrum esset in corpore, vel extra corpus, quod tamen dicit Deum scire. Unde dicit sive in corpore, sive extra corpus, nescio, Deus scit; quod quidam intelligere voluerunt, ut raptus referatur ad corpus, dicentes apostolum dixisse se nescire, non quidem an anima esset coniuncta corpori in illo raptu an non, sed esset raptus secundum animam et corpus simul, ut simul corporaliter portaretur in caelum, sicut Habacuc portatus fuit Dan. ult.; an secundum animam tantum esset in visionibus Dei, ut dicitur Ez. c. VIII, 3: in visione adduxit me in terram Israel. Et iste fuit intellectus cuiusdam Iudaei, quem exponit Hieronymus in prologo super Danielem, ubi dicit: denique et apostolum nostrum dicit non fuisse ausum affirmare se raptum in corpore, sed dixisse: sive in corpore, et cetera. Sed hunc intellectum Augustinus maxime improbat II super Genesim ad litteram, quia non conveniunt cum aliis verbis apostoli. Apostolus enim dicit se raptum usque in tertium caelum; unde scivit pro certo, illud fuisse verum caelum. Scivit ergo an illud caelum esset corporeum an incorporeum, id est res incorporea. Sed si fuit incorporeum, scivit quod corporaliter ibi rapi non potuit, quia in re incorporea non potest esse corpus. Si vero corporeum fuerat, scivit quod non fuit ibi anima sine corpore; quia anima coniuncta corpori non potest esse in loco ubi non est corpus, nisi caelum incorporeum dicatur similitudo caeli corporei. Sed si sic, apostolus non dixisset se scire quod esset raptus in tertium caelum, id est in similitudinem caeli, quia, pari ratione, dicere potuisset quod fuisset raptus in corpore, id est in similitudine corporis. 456. – Then he tells what he did not know, namely, whether he was in the body or out of the body, although he says that God knew. Hence he says, whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, God knows. Some interpret this as meaning that the rapture referred to his body, saying that the Apostle did not say he did not know whether the soul was joined to the body in that rapture, but whether he was rapt according to the soul and body simultaneously, so as to have been transported bodily into heaven as Habakkuk was transported (Dan. 14:35-39), or whether it was according to the soul only that he enjoyed the vision of God, as it says in Ez. (8:3): “He brought me in visions of God to Jerusalem.” This was the way a certain Jew understood, as Jerome mentions in the Prol. to Dan. 3ff., where he says: “Finally, he says that even our Apostle does not dare to say that he was rapt in the body, but he said: whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, God knows.” But Augustine disproves this interpretation in Gen. ad Litt.12, because it does not agree with the other words of the Apostle. For the Apostle says that he was rapt to the third heaven; hence he knew for certain that it was the third heaven. Consequently, he knew whether that heaven was corporeal or incorporeal, i.e., an incorporeal thing. But if it was incorporeal, he knew that he could not have been rapt there bodily, because a body cannot exist in an incorporeal thing. But if it had been corporeal, he knew that the soul was not there without the body, because the soul joined to the body cannot be in a place where there is no body, unless the incorporeal heaven is called a likeness of the bodily heaven. But if that were the case, the Apostle would not have said that he knew he was rapt to the third heaven, i.e., to a likeness of heaven, because by that same token it could be said that he was rapt in the body, i.e., in the likeness of a body. Dicendum est ergo, secundum Augustinum, quod divinam essentiam nullus in hac vita positus, et in hac mortali vita vivens, videre potest. Unde dicit dominus Ex. c. XXXIII, 20: non videbit me homo, et vivet, id est non videbit me homo, nisi totaliter separetur a corpore, ita scilicet quod anima eius non insit corpori, ut forma, vel si inest ut forma, tamen mens eius omnino in huiusmodi visione totaliter alienetur a sensibus. Et ideo dicendum est, quod hoc quod apostolus dicit se nescire, utrum scilicet in illa visione anima eius fuerit totaliter separata a corpore, unde dicit sive extra corpus; vel utrum anima eius extiterit in corpore, ut forma, tamen mens eius fuerit a sensibus corporeis alienata, unde dicit sive in corpore. Et hoc etiam alii concedunt. 457. – Therefore it must be admitted according to Augustine that no one set in this life and living this mortal life can see the divine essence. Hence, the Lord says: “For man shall not see me and live” (Ex. 33:20), i.e., no man will see me, unless he is entirely separated from the body, namely, in such a way that his soul is not in the body as a form, or if it is as a form, nevertheless his mind is totally and altogether alienated from the sense in such a vision. Therefore, it must be said that the Apostle says he does not know whether the soul was entirely separated from the body in that vision. Hence he says, whether out of the body, or whether his soul existed in the body as a form, but his mind was alienated from the bodily senses; hence, he says, whether in the body. Even others concede this.
12-2
2 Cor. 12:3-6Posito primo raptu, ponitur consequenter secundus raptus. Et duo facit: primo ponitur raptus, secundo raptus excellentia, ibi audivit arcana, et cetera. 458. – Having spoken of the first rapture, the Apostle speaks of a second rapture. First, he mentions the rapture; secondly, its excellence (v. 4b). Sed notandum, quod Glossa dicit istum raptum esse alium a primo. Et si bene consideretur, bis legitur aliquid de apostolo, ad quod possunt isti duo raptus referri. Nam Act. IX, 9 legitur de eo quod stetit tribus diebus non videns et nihil manducans, neque bibens, et ad hoc potest referri primus raptus, ut scilicet tunc fuerit raptus usque ad tertium caelum. Sed Act. XXII, 17 legitur quod factus est in templo in stupore mentis, et ad hoc refertur iste secundus raptus. Sed hoc non videtur verisimile, quia quando in stupore mentis factus fuit, missus iam fuerat in carcerem apostolus; sed hanc epistolam scripsit apostolus diu ante, unde prius scripta fuit haec epistola, quam apostolus fuisset in stupore. Et ideo dicendum est, quod differt iste raptus a primo, quantum ad id in quod raptus est. Nam in primo raptus est in tertium caelum; in secundo vero in Paradisum Dei. 459. – It should be noted that a Gloss says that this rapture was distinct from the first, and if one considers the matter well, two things are written of the Apostle to which these two raptures can be referred. For in Acts (chap. 9) it is recorded that he remained for three days without seeing and without taking food or drink; and the first rapture can be referred to this event, namely, that he was rapt to the third heaven at that time. But in Acts (chap. 22) it says that he was in a trance in the temple; hence the second rapture can refer to this. But this does not seem to be a similar case, because when he was in the trance, the Apostle had been cast into prison; but the Apostle wrote this epistle long before that. Therefore it must be said that this rapture differs from the first in regard to that into which he was rapt. For in the first rapture he had been rapt to the third heaven, but in the second to the paradise of God Si vero aliquis tertium caelum acciperet corporaliter, secundum primam acceptionem caelorum superius positam, vel si fuerit visio imaginaria, posset similiter dicere Paradisum corporalem, ut diceretur quod fuerit raptus in Paradisum terrestrem. Sed hoc est contra intentionem Augustini, secundum quem dicimus, quod fuit raptus in tertium caelum, id est visionem intelligibilium, secundum quod in se ipsis et in propriis naturis videntur, ut supra dictum est. Unde secundum hoc oportet non aliud intelligere per caelum, et aliud per Paradisum, sed unum et idem per utrumque, scilicet gloriam sanctorum, sed secundum aliud et aliud. Caelum enim dicit altitudinem quamdam cum claritate, Paradisus vero quamdam iucundam suavitatem. In sanctis autem beatis et Angelis Deum videntibus sunt excellenter haec duo, quia est in eis excellentissima claritas, qua Deum vident, et summa suavitas, qua Deo fruuntur. Et ideo dicuntur esse in caelo quantum ad claritatem, et in Paradiso quantum ad suavitatem. Is. LXVI, 14: videbitis et gaudebitis, et cetera. Fuit ergo utrumque collatum apostolo, ut scilicet sublimaretur ad illam altissimam claritatem cognitionis, et hoc significat cum dicit ad tertium caelum, et ut sentiret suavitatem divinae dulcedinis, unde dicit in Paradisum. Ps. XXX, 20: magna multitudo dulcedinis tuae, et cetera. Apoc. II, 17: vincenti dabo manna absconditum, et cetera. Et ista dulcedo est gaudium de divina fruitione, de qua Matth. XXV, 21 dicitur intra in gaudium domini tui. Sic ergo patet terminus raptus, quia in Paradisum, id est in eam dulcedinem, qua indeficienter reficiuntur illi, qui sunt in caelesti Ierusalem. 460. – But if you take the third heaven in a corporeal sense according to the first acceptation of the heavens, as mentioned above, or if it was an imaginary vision, it could be called a bodily paradise, so that he was rapt to an earthly paradise. But this is against the author’s intention, according to whom we say that he was rapt to the third heaven, i.e., to a vision of intelligible things according to which they are seen in themselves and in their own natures, as has been said above. Hence, according to this we must not understand one thing by heaven and another by paradise, but one and the same thing by both, namely, the glory of the saints, but according to one thing in one case and according to another thing in the other case. For heaven suggests a certain loftiness accompanied by brightness, but paradise a certain joyful pleasantness. Now these two things are present in an excellent way in the saints and angels who see God, because there is present in them a most excellent brightness by which they see God, and a supreme agreeableness by which they enjoy God. Therefore, they are said to be in heaven as to the brightness and in paradise as to the pleasantness: “You shall see, and your heart shall rejoice” (Is. 66:14). Therefore, both of these were conferred on the Apostle, namely to be raised up to that most excellent clearness of knowledge, which he signifies when he says, to the third heaven, and to experience the agreeableness of the divine sweetness; hence he says, into paradise: “O how great is the multitude of thy sweetness, O Lord” (Ps. 31:20); “To him who conquers I will give some of the hidden manna” (Rev. 2:17). This sweetness is the delight experienced in enjoying God, and is mentioned in Matt. (25:13): “Enter into the joy of your master.” Thus the terminus of the rapture is clear, namely, into paradise, i.e., into that sweetness with which those who are in the heavenly Jerusalem are unceasingly refreshed. Sequitur consequenter ipsius raptus excellentia, quia audivit arcana verba, quae non licet homini loqui. Et hoc potest dupliciter exponi. Uno modo, ut ly homini construatur cum licet et loqui; et sensus est: audivit arcana verba, id est percepit intima cognitione, secreta de Dei essentia quasi per verba, quae scilicet verba non est licitum ut homini dicantur. Alio modo, ut ly homini construatur solum cum non licet, et tunc est sensus: audivit verba, etc., quae verba non licet homini loqui, homini scilicet imperfecto. 461. – Then he mentions the excellence of that rapture, because he heard things that cannot be told, which man may not utter. This can be explained in two ways: in one way so that the word, “man,” is construed with “may” and “utter.” Then the sense is this: he heard secret words, i.e., he perceived an intimate understanding of God’s secret essence, as though by words, which words it is not lawful to be uttered by a man. In the other way, so that “man” is construed only with “may not”. Then the sense is this: he heard words, which it is not lawful to utter to a man, i.e., to an imperfect man. Sciendum autem, quod secundum Augustinum, Paulus est raptus ad videndum divinam essentiam, quae quidem non potest videri per aliquam similitudinem creatam. Unde manifestum est, quod illud quod Paulus vidit de essentia divina nulla lingua humana potest dici, alias Deus non esset incomprehensibilis. Et ideo secundum primam expositionem dicendum est audivit, id est consideravit arcana verba, id est magnificentiam divinitatis, quam nullus homo potest loqui. Dicit autem audivit pro vidit, quia illa consideratio fuit secundum interiorem actum animae, in quo idem est auditus et visus, secundum quod dicitur Num. XII, 8: ore ad os loquitur ei et palam, et cetera. Dicitur autem illa consideratio visio, inquantum Deus videtur in hoc, et locutio, inquantum homo in ipsa instruitur de divinis. 462. – But it should be noted according to Augustine that Paul was rapt to a vision of the divine essence, which of course, cannot be seen by any created likeness. Hence, it is clear that what Paul saw of the divine essence cannot be described by any human tongue; otherwise, God would not be incomprehensible. Therefore, according to the first explanation it must be said: he heard, i.e., considered, secret words, i.e., the magnificence of the godhead, which no man can utter. He says “heard” for “saw” because that consideration was according to an interior act of the soul, in which the same is heard and seen, as it says in Num. (12:8): “For I speak to him mouth to mouth.” That consideration is called a vision, inasmuch as God is seen in it; and an utterance inasmuch as man in instructed about divine things in it. Et quia huiusmodi spiritualia non sunt pandenda simplicibus et imperfectis, sed perfectis, secundum quod dicitur I Cor. II, 6: sapientiam loquimur inter perfectos, ideo, secundo modo, exponitur quod secreta, quae ibi audivit, non licet mihi loqui homini, id est imperfectis, sed spiritualibus, inter quos loquimur sapientiam. Prov. XXV, 2: gloria Dei est celare verbum, id est hoc ipsum, quod necesse est celare magnalia Dei, pertinet ad gloriam Dei. Psalmus secundum translationem Hieronymi: tibi silet laus, Deus, id est quod incomprehensibilis est verbis nostris. 463. – And because such spiritual things are not to be disclosed to the simple and imperfect, but to the perfect, as it says in 1 Cor. (2:6): “Yet among the mature we do impart wisdom,” it is explained in the second way, so that the secrets he heard there it is not lawful to man to utter, i.e., to the imperfect, but to the spiritual, among whom we speak wisdom: “It is the glory of God to conceal things” (Prov. 25:2), i.e., the fact that it is necessary to conceal the marvelous things of God pertains to God’s glory. The Psalm is according to the translation of Jerome: “Your praise , O God, is silent to you” (cf. Ps. 108:2, Vulgate), that is, cannot be comprehended by our words. Deinde cum dicit pro huiusmodi gloriabor, etc., ostendit quomodo se habet ad gloriam. Et circa hoc tria facit. Primo ostendit se non gloriari de huiusmodi revelationibus; secundo insinuat se habere aliquid praeter illud unde gloriari possit, ibi nam et si voluero, etc.; tertio assignat causam, quare non gloriatur de omnibus, ibi parco autem, ne quis, et cetera. 464. – Then when he says, On behalf of this man I will boast, he shows how he reacted to this glory. In regard to this he does three things. First, he shows that he did not glory in such revelations; secondly, he suggests that he has something else in which to glory (v. 6). Circa primum sciendum est, quod hoc quod dicit pro huiusmodi autem gloriabor, etc., potest dupliciter legi. Uno modo, ut apostolus ostendat se esse ipsum pro quo gloriatur, ut scilicet ipse sit qui vidit has visiones; alio modo, ut ostendat quod alius sit qui vidit has visiones. Sciendum est enim, quod in homine duo possunt considerari, scilicet donum Dei et humana conditio. Si ergo aliquis gloriatur in aliquo dono Dei, ut a Deo accepto, illa est bona gloria, quia sic in domino gloriatur, ut dictum est supra, X, 17. Sed si gloriatur de illo dono, sicut a se habito, tunc mala est gloriatio huiusmodi. I Cor. IV, 7: quid habes quod non accepisti? Si autem accepisti, quid gloriaris quasi non acceperis? Dicit ergo apostolus, secundum hoc: pro huiusmodi, scilicet visionibus et donis Dei mihi collatis, gloriabor, pro me autem non, id est non gloriabor inde, quasi a me acceperim, quia a Deo habui. Sed si pro me oportet gloriari, nihil gloriabor, nisi in infirmitatibus meis, id est non habeo unde possim gloriari, nisi de infirma conditione mea. 465. – In regard to the first it should be noted that the statement, on behalf of this man I will boast [glory], but on my own behalf I will not boast, can be read in two ways. In one way so that the Apostle is showing that he is the one in whom he glories, i.e., that he is the one who saw these visions. In another way, to show that it was someone else who saw these visions. For it should be noted that there are two things to consider in man, namely, the gift of God and the human condition. If a person glories in a gift of God as received from God, that glorying is good, as has been state above (10:17). But if he glories in that gift as though he had it of himself, then such glorying is evil: “What have you that you did not receive? If then you received it, why do you boast as if it were not a gift?” (1 Cor. 4:7). According to this, therefore, the Apostle says, on behalf of this man, namely, for the visions and gifts conferred on me by God, I will boast, but on my own behalf I will not boast, i.e., will not glory in them as though I were their source, because I had them from God. But if I must glory, I will glory in nothing except my weaknesses, i.e., I have nothing in which I can glory save in my own condition. Si autem exponatur, ut ostendat alium esse, qui vidit, etsi ipse sit, tunc est sensus, ut quasi loquatur de quodam alio, dicens pro huiusmodi gloriabor, id est pro illo homine, qui hoc vidit et qui haec dona recepit, gloriabor; sed pro me, quasi velim manifestare me esse talem, nihil gloriabor, nisi in infirmitatibus meis, id est de tribulationibus quas patior. 466. – But if it is explained as showing that it was someone else who saw, even if it was he, then the sense is as though he were speaking of someone, saying, on behalf of this man I will boast, i.e., for the man who saw this and who received these gifts I will glory; but on my own behalf, as wishing to show that I am such a one, I will not boast except of my weaknesses, i.e., in the tribulations I suffer. Sed quia isti possent sibi dicere: o apostole, non est mirum si non gloriaris, quia non habes unde glorieris; ideo apostolus ostendit quod etiam praeter illas visiones habet aliquid unde possit gloriari, dicens: licet pro huiusmodi homine glorier, et non pro me, tamen etiam bene pro me possum gloriari. Nam, si voluero gloriari, etc., vel pro huiusmodi tribulationibus, vel pro aliis mihi a Deo collatis, vel etiam pro infirmitatibus, non ero insipiens, id est non insipienter agam. Et quare? Veritatem enim dicam de aliis, de quibus praeter dictas visiones gloriari possum. Dicit autem non ero insipiens, quia gloriabatur de his quae habebat. Quando enim gloriatur quis de his quae non habet, stulte gloriatur. Apoc. III, 17: dicis quia dives sum, et nullius egeo, et nescis, et cetera. Et quia gloriabatur ex causa sufficienti, ut ex praedictis est manifestum. 467. – But because they could say to him, “O Apostle, it is not strange that you do not glory, because you have nothing in which to glory,” he shows that even besides these visions he has something in which to glory. Although I might glory in such a man and not in myself, yet I can rightfully glory in myself, for if I should wish to boast either in such tribulations or in other things bestowed on me by God, or even for my infirmity, I shall not be a fool, i.e., I will not act foolishly. Why? For I will be speaking the truth about the other things in which I can glory besides those visions. He says, I shall not be a fool, because he gloried in the things he had; for when a person glories in things he does not have, he is speaking foolishly: “For you say, I am rich, I have prospered, and I need nothing; not knowing that you are wretched, pitiable, poor, blind, and naked” (Rev. 3:17); and because he gloried with sufficient reason, as is clear from the foregoing. Consequenter autem cum dicit parco autem, etc., ostendit rationem quare non gloriatur de omnibus si potest gloriari; quae quidem ratio est, ut eis parcat. Unde dicit parco autem, etc., quasi dicat: possem de pluribus aliis gloriari, sed parco, id est parce glorior, vel parco vobis commendando me, nolens esse onerosus vobis. Nam talia mihi Deus concessit, quae si sciretis, reputaretis me multo maiorem, et haec sunt dona gratuita multa, quae habebat apostolus. Ex quibus homines huius mundi consueverunt plus commendare homines, et maiores eos reputare quam ex gratum facientibus. Et ideo dicit: nolo ex gratuitis commendari, et ideo parco, id est non glorior. Et quare? Ne quis existimet me, commendare, vel gloriari, supra id quod videt, et cetera. 468. – Then when he says, But I refrain from it, he indicates the reason he does not glory in everything, if he can glory, the reason being that he wishes to spare them. Hence he says, I refrain from it, so that no one may think more of me than he sees in me or hears from me. As if to say: I could glory in many other things, but I forbear, i.e., I glory sparingly, of I forbear commending myself, lest I become burdensome to you. For God has conferred on me such things that if you knew them, you would regard me as much greater; and these are the many charismatic gifts which the Apostle had and for which the men of this world are wont to commend others and regard them as great more than for doing something pleasing. Hence he says, I do not wish to be commended on these gifts; therefore I refrain, i.e., I do not glory. Why? So that no one may think more of me than what he sees in me or hears from me. Vel aliter: homo dupliciter cognoscitur, per conversationem et doctrinam suam; apostolus autem nolebat aliqua de se dicere, licet posset, quae excedebant et vitam et doctrinam suam. Et ideo parco autem, ne quis existimet me esse supra id quod videt, de conversatione mea exteriori, aut audit aliquid ex me, id est ex doctrina praedicationis, et exhortationis, et instructionis meae: quia forte crederent eum esse vel immortalem, vel Angelum. Prov. XI, 12: vir prudens tacebit. Prov. XXIX, 11: totum spiritum suum profert stultus, sapiens differt, et cetera. 469. – Or another way: man is known in two ways: by his manner of life and by his doctrine. Although he could have done so, the Apostle did not wish to say about himself certain things which went beyond his life and doctrine. Consequently, I refrain, so that no one may think more of me than he sees in me, i.e., in my outward conduct, or hears from me, i.e., from the doctrine of my preaching and exhortation and instruction, because they might perhaps think him immortal or an angel: “A man of understanding remains silent” (Prov. 11:12): “A fool gives full vent to his anger, but a wise man quietly holds it back” (Prov. 29:11). Vel dicit parco autem, etc., pro detractoribus, scilicet pseudo, qui dicebant eum gloriari ex elatione et non ex causa, neque de his quae in ipso erant. Et ideo dicit parco autem, id est parce glorior, ne quis pseudo existimet me excedere elationis spiritu, supra id, id est in aliquid, quod videt in me, vel audit ex me, id est supra posse meritorium. Ps. CXXX, 1: domine, non est exaltatum cor meum, et cetera. Eccli. c. III, 20: quanto magnus es, et cetera. 470. – Or he says: But I refrain, on account of his detractors, namely, the false apostles, who said that he glories from elation without cause or for things that were not in him. Therefore, he says, But I refrain, i.e., I glory sparingly, so that no one, i.e., the false apostles, think of me as having an excessive spirit of elation, more than that which he sees in me or has heard from me, i.e., above the power of my merits: “O LORD, my heart is not lifted up, my eyes are not raised too high” (Ps. 131:1); “The greater you are, the more humble yourself in all things” (Sir. 3:10, Vulgate).
12-3
2 Cor. 12:7-10Hic agit de remedio adhibito contra superbiam. Et circa hoc tria facit. Primo enim ponit remedium adhibitum; secundo manifestat suam orationem de remedio removendo, ibi propter quod ter dominum, etc.; tertio insinuat domini responsionem assignantis rationem de adhibito remedio, ibi et dixit mihi dominus, et cetera. 471. – Here he speaks of the remedy against pride. In regard to this he does three things. First, he mentions the remedy applied; secondly, he discloses his prayer to have the remedy removed (v. 8); thirdly, he tells the Lord’s answer giving the reason for the remedy applied (v. 9). Circa primum sciendum est quod plerumque sapiens medicus procurat et permittit supervenire infirmo minorem morbum, ut maiorem curet, vel vitet, sicut ut curet spasmum, procurat febrem; hoc evidenter in se beatus apostolus a medico animarum domino nostro Iesu Christo factum ostendit. Christus enim, velut medicus animarum summus, ad curandum graves animae morbos permittit plurimos electos suos et magnos in morbis corporum graviter affligi, et, quod plus est, ad curandum maiora crimina, permittit incidere in minora etiam mortalia. Inter omnia vero peccata gravius peccatum est superbia. Nam sicut charitas est radix et initium virtutum, sic superbia est radix et initium omnium vitiorum. Eccli. X, 15: initium omnis peccati superbia. Quod sic patet: charitas enim ideo dicitur radix omnium virtutum, quia coniungit Deo, qui est ultimus finis. Unde sicut finis est principium omnium operabilium, ita charitas est principium omnium virtutum. Superbia autem avertit a Deo. Superbia enim est appetitus inordinatus propriae excellentiae. Si enim aliquis appetit aliquam excellentiam sub Deo, si moderate quidem appetit, et propter bonum, sustineri potest; si vero non debito ordine, potest quidem alia vitia incurrere, scilicet ambitionis, avaritiae, seu inanis gloriae, et huiusmodi, tamen non est proprie superbia, nisi quando quis appetit excellentiam, non ordinando illam ad Deum. Et ideo superbia proprie dicta separat a Deo, et est radix omnium vitiorum, et pessimum omnium; propter quod Deus resistit superbis, ut dicitur Iac. IV, 6. Quia ergo in bonis est maxime materia huius vitii, scilicet superbiae, quia eius materia est bonum, permittit aliquando electos suos impediri, ex aliqua sui parte, ut per infirmitatem, vel per aliquem defectum, et aliquando etiam per peccatum mortale, ab huiusmodi bono, ut sic ex hac parte humilientur, quod ex illa non superbiant, et homo sic humiliatus recognoscat se suis viribus stare non posse. Unde dicitur Rom. VIII, 28: diligentibus Deum omnia, etc., non quidem ex eorum peccato, sed ex ordinatione Dei. 472. – In regard to the first it should be noted that very often a wise physician procures and permits a lesser disease to come over a person in order to cure or avoid a greater one. Thus, to cure a spasm he procures a fever. This the Apostle shows was done to him by the physician of souls, our Lord Jesus Christ. For Christ, as the supreme physician of souls, in order to cure greater sins, permits them to fall into lesser, and even mortal sins. But among all the sins the gravest is pride, for just as charity is the root and beginning of the virtues, so pride is the root and beginning of all vices: “Pride is the beginning of all sin” (Sir. 10:15, Vulgate). This is made clear in the following way. Charity is called the root of all the virtues, because it unites one to God, who is the ultimate end. Hence, just as the end is the beginning of all actions to be performed, so charity is the beginning of all the virtues. But pride turns away from God, for pride is an inordinate desire for one’s own excellence. For if a person seeks some excellence under God, if he seeks it moderately and for a good end, it can be endured. But if it is not done with due order, he can even fall into other vices, such as ambition, avarice, vainglory and the like. Yet it is not, properly speaking, pride, unless a person seeks excellence without ordaining it to God. Therefore pride, properly called, separates from God and is the root of all vices and the worst of them. This is why God resists the proud, as it says in Jas. (4:6). Therefore, because the matter of this vice, that is, pride, is mainly found in things that are good, because its matter is something good, God sometimes permits his elect to be prevented by something on their part, e.g. infirmity or some other defect, and sometimes even mortal sin, from obtaining such a good, in order that they be so humbled on this account that they will not take pride in it, and that being thus humiliated, they may recognize that they cannot stand by their own powers. Hence it says in Rom. (8:28): “We know that in everything God works for good with those who love him,” not by reason of their sin, but by God’s providence. Quia igitur apostolus magnam habebat superbiendi materiam, et quantum ad specialem electionem, qua a domino electus est, Act. IX, 15: vas electionis est, etc., et quantum ad secretorum Dei cognitionem, quia hic dicit se raptum in tertium caelum et in Paradisum, ubi audivit arcana verba quae non licet homini loqui, et quantum ad malorum perpessionem, quia supra XI, 23: in carceribus plurimis, in infirmitatibus, ter virgis caesus sum, etc., et quantum ad virginalem integritatem, quia volo omnes esse sicut et ego, I Cor. VII, 7, et quantum ad bonorum operationem, quia, supra, plus omnibus laboravi, et specialiter quantum ad maximam scientiam qua emicuit, quae specialiter inflat: ideo dominus adhibuit ei remedium, ne in superbiam extolleretur. Et hoc est quod dicit et ne magnitudo revelationis mihi factae extollat me, in superbiam. Eccli. VI, 2: non te extollas in cogitatione animae tuae velut taurus, et cetera. Ps. LXXXVII, 16: exaltatus autem humiliatus, et cetera. Et dicit, ut ostendat sibi factas fuisse revelationes praedictas, datus est mihi, id est ad meam utilitatem et humiliationem. Iob XXX, v. 22: elevasti me, et quasi super ventum ponens, et cetera. Datus est, inquam, mihi stimulus, crucians corpus meum per infirmitatem corporis, ut anima sanetur; quia, ad litteram, dicitur quod fuit vehementer afflictus dolore iliaco. Vel stimulus carnis meae, id est concupiscentiae surgentis ex carne mea, a qua multum infestabatur. Rom. VII, 15: non enim, quod volo, etc.: igitur ego ipse mente servio legi Dei, et cetera. Unde Augustinus dicit quod inerant ei motus concupiscentiae, quos tamen divina gratia refraenabat. 473. – Therefore, because the Apostle had good reason for glorying in the spiritual choice by which he was chosen by God: “He is a chosen instrument of mine” (Ac. 9:15), and in his knowledge of God’s secrets, because he says that he was caught up into the third heaven where he heard secret words, which it is not granted to man to utter, and in enduring evils because he had “far more imprisonments, with countless floggings, and often near death” (2 Cor. 11:23), and in his virginal integrity, because “I wish that all were as I myself am” (1 Cor. 7:7), and especially in the outstanding knowledge with which he shone and which especially puffs one up: for these reasons the Lord applied a remedy, lest he be lifted up with pride. And this is what he says: to keep me from being too elated by the abundance of revelations: “Do not exalt yourself through your soul’s counsel, lest your soul be torn in pieces like a bull” (Sir. 6:2); “Being exalted I have been humbled and troubled” (Ps. 88:15, Vulgate). Furthermore, to show that these revelations were made to him, he says: a thorn was given me, i.e., for my benefit and my humiliation: “You have lifted me up and set me as it were upon the wind” (Job 31:22); there was given, I say, to me a thorn tormenting my body with bodily weakness, that the soul might be healed. For it is said that he literally suffered a great deal from pain in the ileum [pelvis]. Or a thorn in the flesh, i.e., of concupiscence arising from my flesh, because he was troubled a great deal: “For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I do. . . So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand. . . So then, I of myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin” (Rom. 7:19, 21, 25). Hence, Augustine says that there existed in him movements of concupiscence which God’s grace, nevertheless, restrained. Iste, inquam, stimulus est Angelus Satanae, id est Angelus malignus. Est autem Angelus a Deo missus seu permissus, sed Satanae, quia Satanae intentio est ut subvertat, Dei vero ut humiliet et probatum reddat. Timeat peccator, si apostolus et vas electionis securus non erat. 474. – That thorn, I say, is a messenger of Satan, i.e., a wicked angel, for it was an angel sent by God or permitted, but it was Satan’s because Satan’s intention is to subvert, but God’s is to humble and to render approved. Let the sinner beware, if the Apostle and vessel of election was not secure. De remotione autem huius stimuli removendi sollicitus erat apostolus. Unde propter hoc orabat. Et hoc est quod subdit propter quod ter, et cetera. Ubi sciendum est, quod infirmus nesciens processum medici apponentis mordax emplastrum, rogat medicum, ut removeat; quod tamen sciens medicus causam quare faciat, scilicet propter sanitatem, non exaudit eum quantum ad voluntatem petentis, magis curans de eius utilitate. Sic apostolus sentiens stimulum sibi gravem esse, ad singularis medici confugit auxilium, ut eum removeat. Ter enim expresse et devote rogavit, ut Deus tolleret ab eo, scilicet stimulum. II Par. c. XX, 12: cum ignoremus quod agere debeamus, et cetera. Forte pluries hoc petiit, sed expresse et instanter ter eum petiit, vel ter, id est multoties. Ternarius enim est numerus perfectus. Et vere ipse rogandus est, quia ipse vulnerat, et medetur, Iob V, 18. Lc. XXII, v. 40: orate ne intretis in tentationem, et cetera. 475. – Now the Apostle was anxious to have this thorn removed and prayed that it might; hence he says: Three times I besought the Lord about this, that it should leave me. Here it should be noted a sick person, ignorant of the reason why a physician supplies a stinging plaster, asks him to remove it. But the physician, knowing its purpose, that is, for health, does not oblige him, caring more for his improvement. Similarly the Apostle, feeling that the sting was painful to him, sought the help of the unique physician to remove it. For he expressly and devoutly asked God three times to remove it, the thorn, from him: “We do not know what to do, but our eyes are upon you” (2 Chr. 20:12). Perhaps he asked this many times, but he asked him expressly and earnestly three times, or three times, namely, many times. For three is a perfect number. And of course it was right to ask, because “For he wounds, but he binds up” (Job 5:18); “Pray that you may not enter into temptation” (Lk. 22:46). Sequitur responsio domini et dixit mihi dominus, et cetera. Ubi duo facit. Primo ponit domini responsionem; secundo responsionis rationem assignat, ibi nam virtus, et cetera. 476. – Then he states the Lord’s answer: but he, i.e., the Lord, said to me: My grace is sufficient for you. Here he does two things. First, he states the Lord’s answer; secondly, the reason for the answer (v. 9b). Dicit ergo: ego rogavi, sed dominus dixit mihi sufficit tibi, etc., quasi dicat: non est tibi necessarium, quod infirmitas corporis recedat a te, quia non est periculosa, quia non duceris ad impatientiam, cum gratia mea confortet te; nec infirmitas concupiscentiae, quia non protrahet te ad peccatum, quia gratia mea proteget te. Rom. c. III, 24: iustificati gratis, et cetera. Et vere sufficit gratia Dei ad mala vitanda, ad bona facienda, et ad vitam consequendam aeternam. I Cor. XV, 10: gratia Dei sum id quod sum, et cetera. Rom. VI, 23: gratia Dei vita aeterna. 477. – He says therefore, I asked, but the Lord said to me, my grace is sufficient for you. As if to say: it is not necessary that this bodily weakness leave you, because it is not dangerous, for you will not be led into impatience, since my grace strengthens you; or that this weakness of concupiscence depart, because it will not lead you to sin, for my grace will protect you: “Justified by his grace as a gift” (Rom. 3:24). And of course, God’s grace is sufficient for avoiding evil, doing good, and attaining to eternal life: “By the grace of God I am what I am” (1 Cor. 15:10); “But the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Rom. 6:25). Sed contra Io. XV, 16: quidquid petieritis patrem in nomine meo, dabit vobis, et cetera. Aut ergo Paulus discrete petivit, et tunc debuit exaudiri; aut indiscrete, et tunc peccavit. Respondeo. Dicendum est quod de una et eadem re potest homo dupliciter loqui. Uno modo secundum se et naturam illius rei; alio modo secundum ordinem ad aliud. Et sic contingit, quod illud quod est malum secundum se, est vitandum: secundum ordinem ad aliud est appetendum. Sicut potio inquantum secundum se est amara, est vitanda, tamen qui considerat eam secundum ordinem ad sanitatem, appetit eam. Ergo et stimulus carnis secundum se est vitandus ut affligens, inquantum vero est via ad virtutem et exercitium virtutis, est appetendus. Apostolus autem, quia nondum revelatum ei erat illud secretum divinae providentiae, ut ad utilitatem suam cederet, considerabat sibi malum quantum in se est, et ideo petierat suam amotionem, nec in eo peccavit; sed Deus, qui ordinaverat hoc ad bonum humilitatis suae, non exaudivit eum quantum ad eius voluntatem; quod tamen sciens, postmodum apostolus gloriabatur cum diceret: libenter gloriabor in infirmitatibus meis, et cetera. Et licet non exaudierit eum quantum ad voluntatem, exaudivit tamen eum, et exaudit sanctos suos, quantum ad eius utilitatem. Unde dicit Hieronymus in epistola ad Paulinum: bonus dominus, qui saepe non tribuit quod volumus, ut tribuat quod mallemus. 478. – But on the other hand it says in Jn. (15:16): “Whatever you ask the Father in my name, he may give it to you.” Therefore, Paul either asked discreetly and deserved to be heard, or indiscreetly and hence sinned. I answer that a man can speak of one and the same thing in two ways: in one way according to itself and the nature of things; in another way according to its relation to something else. Hence, it happens that something evil according to itself and to be avoided is in relation to something else able to be sought. Thus, a medicine, inasmuch as it is bitter should be avoided, yet, when it is considered in relation to health, a person seeks it. Therefore a thorn in the flesh according to itself is to be avoided as troublesome, but inasmuch as it is a means to virtue and an exercise of virtue, it should be desired. But because that secret of divine providence, namely, that it would turn out to his advantage, had not been revealed to him yet, the Apostle considered that in itself it was bad for him. But God who had ordained this to the good of his humility did not oblige him, as far as his wish was concerned; indeed, once he understood its purpose, the Apostle gloried in it, saying, I will all the more gladly boast of my weaknesses, that the power of Christ may rest upon [dwell in] me. And although he did not oblige him as to his wish, yet he heard him and does hear his saints to their advantage. Hence, Jerome says in the Letter to Paulinus: “The good Lord frequently does not grant what we wish, in order to bestow what we should prefer.” Rationem autem suae responsionis subdit consequenter, cum dicit nam virtus, et cetera. Mirus modus loquendi. Virtus in infirmitate perficitur: ignis in aqua crescit. Intelligi vero potest hoc, quod dicitur virtus perficitur in infirmitate, dupliciter, scilicet materialiter et occasionaliter. Si accipiatur materialiter, tunc est sensus: virtus in infirmitate perficitur, id est infirmitas est materia exercendae virtutis. Et primo humilitatis, ut supra dictum est, secundo patientiae, Iac. I, 3: tribulatio patientiam operatur, tertio temperantiae, quia ex infirmitate debilitatur fomes, et temperatus efficitur quis. Si vero accipiatur occasionaliter, tunc virtus in infirmitate perficitur, id est occasio perveniendi ad perfectam virtutem, quia homo sciens se infirmum, magis sollicitatur ad resistendum, et ex hoc, quod magis resistit et pugnat, efficitur exercitatior et per consequens fortior. Et ideo Levit. legitur et Iudic. c. III, 1 s., quod dominus noluit destruere omnes habitatores terrae; sed aliquos reservavit, ut scilicet filii Israel exercitarentur pugnando cum eis. Sic etiam Scipio nolebat destructionem civitatis Carthaginensis, ut scilicet dum Romani haberent hostes exterius, non sentirent hostes interiores, contra quos durius bellum est, quam contra exteriores, ut ipse dicebat. 479. – Then he gives the reason for the Lord’s response when he says, for my power is made perfect in weakness [infirmity]. This is a remarkable expression: virtue is made perfect in infirmity; fire grows in water. But this can be understood in two ways, namely, materially and by way of occasion. If it is taken materially, the sense is this: infirmity is the material on which to exercise virtue; first, humility, as stated above; secondly, patience: “The testing of your faith produces steadfastness” (Jas. 1:3); thirdly, temperance, because hunger is weakened by infirmity and a person is made temperate. But if it is taken as an occasion, infirmity is the occasion for arriving at perfect virtue, because a man who knows that he is weak is more careful when resisting, and as a result of fighting and resisting more he is better exercised and, therefore, stronger. Hence it says in Jdg. (3:1) that the Lord was not willing to destroy all the inhabitants of the land, but preserved some in order that the children of Israel might be exercised by fighting against them. In the same way, Scipio also did not wish to destroy the city of Carthage, in order that the Romans, having external enemies, would not have internal enemies, against whom it is more painful to wage war than against outsiders, as he said. Consequenter ponit apostolus effectum huius responsionis dominicae, dicens libenter gloriabor, et cetera. Ponit autem duplicem effectum. Unus est gloriationis; unde dicit: quia virtus mea perficitur in infirmitatibus, igitur libenter gloriabor in infirmitatibus meis, id est mihi ad utilitatem meam datis. Et hoc, quia magis coniungitur Christo. Mihi autem absit gloriari, nisi in cruce, etc., Gal. ult. Eccli. c. X, 34: qui in paupertate gloriatur, et cetera. Et ratio quod libenter gloriabor, ut inhabitet in me virtus Christi, ut scilicet per infirmitates inhabitet et consummetur in me gratia Christi. Is. XL, 29: qui dat lapso virtutem, et cetera. 480. – Then the Apostle mentions the effect of this answer from the Lord, saying: I will all the more gladly boast of my weaknesses, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. He mentions two effects. One is glorying; hence he says: because my virtue is made perfect in infirmity, I will all the more gladly boast of my weaknesses, i.e., given to me for my profit; and this because it joins me closer to Christ: “But far be it from me to glory except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Gal. 6:14); “But he that is glorified in poverty, how much more in wealth?” (Sir. 10:34. Vulgate). The reason I will glory gladly is that the power of Christ may rest upon me [dwell in me], i.e., that through infirmity the grace of Christ may dwell and be made perfect in me: “He gives power to the faint, and to him who has no might he increases strength” (Is. 40:29). Alius effectus est gaudii, unde dicit propter quod complaceo, et cetera. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo ponit huiusmodi effectum; secundo huius effectus rationem assignat, ibi cum enim infirmor, et cetera. 481. – The other effect is joy. Hence he says: For the sake of Christ, then, I am content with weaknesses. In regard to this he does two things. First, he mentions the effect of joy; secondly, he assigns the reason for it (v. 10b). Ponit autem effectum gaudii et materiam gaudii. Dicit ergo propter quod, quia virtus Christi habitat in me in infirmitatibus et in tribulationibus omnibus, et ideo complaceo mihi, id est multum delector et gaudeo dictis infirmitatibus meis. Iac. I, 2: omne gaudium existimate, fratres, et cetera. Defectus autem in quibus propter gratiam Christi abundanter delectatur, enumerat. Et primo illos, qui sunt a causa interiori, et huiusmodi sunt infirmitates, et ideo dicit in infirmitatibus. Ps. XV, 4: multiplicatae sunt infirmitates eorum, postea acceleraverunt, scilicet ad gratiam. Secundo, illos qui sunt a causa exteriori. Et hos quidem quantum ad verbum, cum dicit in contumeliis, scilicet mihi illatis. Act. V, v. 41: ibant apostoli gaudentes, etc.; et quantum ad factum, et hoc, vel quantum ad defectum bonorum, cum dicit in necessitatibus, id est in penuriis necessariorum et in paupertate qua premebatur. Et hoc modo accipitur necessitas, cum dicitur Rom. XII, v. 13: necessitatibus sanctorum communicantes. Vel quantum ad experimentum malorum illatorum, et hoc quantum ad exteriora, Matth. V, 10: beati qui persecutionem, etc. cum dicit in persecutionibus, scilicet corporis, quas de loco ad locum et ubique experimur. Et quantum ad interiora, dicens in angustiis, id est in anxietatibus animi. Dan. c. XIII, 22: angustiae sunt mihi undique, et cetera. Sed materia omnium horum, quae faciunt ad gaudium est, quia pro Christo, quasi dicat: ideo complaceo, quia propter Christum patior. I Petr. IV, 15: nemo vestrum patiatur quasi homicida, vel fur. 482. – He mentions the effect of joy and the matter of joy. He says therefore: because the power of Christ dwells in me in all tribulations, I am content, i.e., I am greatly pleased and take joy in the infirmities I mentioned: “Count it all joy, my brethren, when you meet various trials” (Jas. 1:2). The weaknesses in which he rejoices abundantly on account of Christ’s grace are then listed. First, those which come from an internal cause, namely, his infirmities; hence he says, in my weaknesses: “Their infirmities were multiplied: afterwards they made haste” (Ps. 16:5, Vulgate), namely, toward grace. Secondly, those that come from an external cause: first, as to the word, when he says, in insults: “Then they left the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer dishonor for the name” (Ac. 15:4); then as to deed, and this either as to a lack of good things, when he says, in hardships, i.e., in the lack of things necessary and in the poverty by which he was pressed: “Contribute to the needs of the saints” (Rom. 12:13). Or as to experiencing evils inflicted, and this as to external things: “Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake” (Matt. 5:10), when he says, in bodily persecutions, which we experience from place to place and everywhere, as well as to internal things, saying, in calamities, i.e., in anxieties of soul: “I am straitened on every side” (Dan. 13:22, Vulgate). But in all these things the material which makes for joy is that they are for Christ. As if to say: I am pleased because I suffer for Christ: “But let none of you suffer as a murderer, or a thief” (1 Pet. 4:15). Et huius gaudii rationem assignat, dicens cum enim infirmor, etc., quasi dicat: merito complaceo mihi in illis, quia quando infirmor, etc., id est quando ex his, quae in me sunt, vel ex persecutione aliorum incido in aliquod praedictorum, adhibetur mihi auxilium divinum, per quod confirmor. Ps. XCIII, 19: consolationes tuae laetificaverunt animam meam. Ioel III, 10: infirmus dicat, quia ego fortis sum. Supra IV, 16: licet is qui foris est, noster homo corrumpatur, et cetera. Ex. I, 12 legitur, quod quanto plus premebantur filii Israel, tanto plus multiplicabantur. 483. – He assigns the reason for this joy, when he says, for when I am weak, then I am strong, i.e., when as a result of what is in me or as a result of persecutions, I fall into any of the aforesaid, God’s help is applied to me to strengthen me: “Your consolations cheer my soul” (Ps. 94:19); “Let the weak say, I am strong” (Jl. 3:10, Vulgate); “Though our outer nature is wasting away, our inner nature is being renewed every day” (2 Cor. 4:16). And in Ex. (1:12) it says that the more the Israelites were oppressed, the more they multiplied.
12-4
2 Cor. 12:11-13Posita commendatione sua consequenter apostolus excusat se de his quae dixit, ostendens se coactum hoc dixisse, quae ad gloriam suam pertinent. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo imponit Corinthiis causam eiusmodi gloriationis; secundo exponit et manifestat hanc causam, ibi ego enim debui, et cetera. 484. – Having commended himself, the Apostle now asks pardon for what he has said, showing that he was compelled to say these things which pertain to his glory. First, he lays the blame for his glorying on the Corinthians; secondly, he explains and clarifies this (v. 11b). Dicit ergo: confiteor quod in his omnibus commendationibus meis factus sum insipiens, id est videtur vobis, quod opus insipientis fecerim, sed hoc non ex me, nec sponte, immo coactus feci, et vestra culpa fuit, quia vos me coegistis, id est dedistis mihi occasionem. Frequenter enim subditi cogunt praelatos aliqua facere, quae insipienter facta esse iudicari possunt, sed tamen pro loco et tempore sapienter facta sunt. 485. – First, therefore, he says: I confess that in all these commendations I have been a fool, i.e., it seems to you that I have performed the work of a fool. But this was not done of myself or willingly; rather, I was compelled, and it was your fault, because you forced me to it, i.e., gave me the occasion. For subjects frequently compel their prelates to do things which seem unwise to do, although considering the time and place, they were done wisely. Hoc autem quod dixerat in communi, scilicet quod ipsi fuerant causa suae commendationis, exponit consequenter, cum dicit ego enim debui, etc.; ubi dicit quod ipsi fuerunt causa suae commendationis, primo omittendo bona quae facere debuissent, in quo exaggerat eorum ingratitudinem; secundo committendo mala, in quo detestatur eorum malitiam, ibi timeo enim ne forte, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo commemorat quid facere debuissent, ostendens causam, ibi nihil enim minus, etc.; secundo removet ipsorum excusationem, ibi quid est enim quod minus, et cetera. 486. – Then he explains what he had said in a general way, namely, that they were the cause of his commending himself, when he says: for I ought to have been commended by you. Here he says that they were the cause of his commending himself: first, by neglecting the good they should have done, in which he enlarges upon their ingratitude; secondly, by committing evil, in which he execrates their malice (v. 20). In regard to the first he does two things. First, he reminds them what they ought to have done by showing the cause (v. 11c); secondly, he rejects their excuse (v. 13). Dicit ergo: vere vos me coegistis, quia vos debuissetis facere illud quod ego feci. Unde dicit ego debui commendari a vobis, quod non fecistis quando necesse erat, scilicet quando pseudo vilipendendo me, et praeferendo se reddebant vilem doctrinam et Evangelium Christi a me praedicatum. Unde quia vos non commendastis me, ne deperiret fides Christi in vobis, prorupi in commendationem propriam. Sed contra supra III, 1 dicit: numquid egemus commendatitiis epistolis, et cetera. Quare ergo voluit commendari ab istis? Respondeo. Dicendum est quod apostolus propter se non egebat commendationibus sed propter alios, ut scilicet dum commendaretur, doctrina sua esset in maiori auctoritate, et pseudo confutarentur. 487. – He says therefore: yes, you compelled me, because you should have done what I have done; hence he says: for I ought to have been commended by you, which you have not done when in was necessary, that is, when the false apostles by belittling me and preferring themselves rendered vile the doctrine and gospel of Christ delivered by me. Hence, because you did not commend me, then in order that the faith of Christ not die among you, I undertook to commend myself. But this is in conflict with his earlier statement (3:1): “Do we need, as some do, letters of recommendation to you, or from you?” So why would he wish to be commended by them? I answer that the Apostle did not need commendations for himself, but for others, namely, that in commending himself his doctrine would be held in greater authority and the false apostles refuted. Sed quia possent isti dicere: ideo non commendavimus te, quia non est in te aliquid commendatione dignum, propter hoc apostolus probat eis, quod bene poterant eum commendare, cum dicit nihil enim, etc., ostendens esse in se multa commendatione digna. Et primo quantum ad praeterita bona, quae fecit; secundo quantum ad futura, quae facere intendit, ibi ecce tertio hoc paratus, et cetera. Ostendit autem praeterita commendabilia, quae fecit primo in generali, quantum ad omnes Ecclesias; secundo in speciali, quantum ad ea, quae egit apud eos, ibi tametsi nihil, etc.; tertio excludit obiectionem, ibi quid est enim, et cetera. 488. – But because they could say: “we did not commend you, because there is nothing commendable about you,” the Apostle proves to them that they had good cause to commend him, when he says: For I am not at all inferior to these superlative apostles, thus showing that there was much in him commendable. First, as to the past good things he did; secondly, as to the good things he intends to do (v. 14). First, in general as to all the churches; secondly, in particular as to what he did among them (v. 11d); thirdly he excludes an objection (v. 13). Dicit ergo: merito debui commendari a vobis, quia multa sunt in me commendatione digna. Nam nihil minus feci ab eis, scilicet Petro et Iacobo et Ioanne, qui sunt supra modum apostoli, id est qui videntur a quibusdam digniores apostoli, quam ego sum. Pseudo enim dicebant, quod erant docti a Petro et Ioanne, qui fuerunt docti a Christo, et quod Petrus et Ioannes servabant legalia, unde et ipsi debebant servare. Sed quia nihil minus feci ab eis, nec quantum ad praedicationem, nec quantum ad conversionem fidelium, ostensiones miraculorum, et perpessionem laborum, immo plus, quia ut supra plus omnibus laboravi, I Cor. c. XV, 10: abundantius omnibus, etc.; ideo magis sum commendandus. Vel dicuntur supra modum apostoli, scilicet Petrus, Ioannes et Iacobus, quia fuerunt primo conversi ad Christum. I Cor. XV, 8: novissime autem visus est et mihi, et cetera. Si secundum hoc accipiatur, nihil tamen minus fecit eis, quia in modico tempore, et postquam conversus fuit, plus laboravit. 489. – He says therefore: I deserved to be commended by you, because there are many things in me worthy of commendation, for I am not at all inferior, namely, Peter and James and John, who are superlative apostles, i.e., who seem to some to be worthier apostles than I. For the false apostles said that they had been taught by Peter and John, who had been taught by Christ, and that Peter and John observed the ceremonies of the Law; hence, that they too should observe them. But because I have done nothing else among you, either as to preaching or to converting believers or performing miracles and undertaking labours, but rather have done more, because “I worked harder than any of them” (1 Cor. 15:10), for that reason I am more to be commended. Or they were called superlative apostles, that is, Peter, James and John, because they were the first ones converted to Christ: “Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me” (1 Cor. 15:8). If it is taken in this sense, even then I have done nothing less than they, because in the short time after I was converted, I labored more. Sed esto quod nihil fecerim quantum ad Ecclesias, per quod possem commendari, multa tamen specialia egi apud vos, de quibus potuissetis me commendare. Et ideo dicit tametsi nihil, id est, dato, quod nihil fecerim in comparatione ad eos, tamen effectus meae virtutis manifeste apparent in vobis, et, primo, quantum ad praedicationem nostram, qua conversi estis ad fidem. Et sum apostolus vester. Et ideo dicit signa apostolatus mei, id est meae praedicationis, facta sunt supra vos, a Deo, inquantum credentes conversi estis. I Cor. IX, v. 2: signaculum apostolatus mei vos estis. I Cor. IV, 15: in Christo Iesu per Evangelium ego vos genui. Secundo per conversationem, per quam confirmatur fides, quia quando vita concordat doctrinae, maioris auctoritatis est doctrina. Et virtus praedicatoris magis apparet per patientiam. Prov. XIX, 11: doctrina viri per patientiam noscitur. Et ideo dicit in omni patientia. Tertio quantum ad operationem miraculorum. Et ideo dicit in signis, et cetera. Mc. ult. illi autem profecti, et cetera. 490. – But granting that I did nothing in regard to the other churches for which I might be commended, nevertheless I have done many special things among you, and for these you could have commended me; hence he says, even though I am nothing, i.e., granting that I did nothing in comparison to them, nevertheless, the effect of my power is present among you. First, as to our preaching, by which you were converted to the faith, and I am your apostle. Yet the signs of a true apostle, i.e., of my preaching, were performed among you by God, inasmuch as believing, you were converted: “You are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord” (1 Cor. 9:2); “For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel” (1 Cor. 4:15). Secondly, by the manner of life through which faith is strengthened, because when one’s life agrees with his doctrine, the doctrine has greater authority, and the virtue of the preacher is more apparent through patience: “The learning of a man is known by patience” (Prov. 19:11, Vulgate); therefore he says, in all patience. Thirdly, as to working miracles; hence he says, with signs and wonders and mighty works: “And they went forth and preached everywhere, while the Lord worked with them and confirmed the message by the signs that attended it” (Mk. 16:20) Et haec tria distinguuntur, quia virtus est commune ad omnia miracula. Nam virtus est ultimum de potentia. Et ideo aliquid dicitur virtuosum, quia ex magna virtute. Quia ergo miracula fiunt ex magna virtute, scilicet divina, ideo dicuntur virtutes. Signum vero refertur ad minus miraculum. Prodigium autem ad maximum. Vel dicit signa quantum ad miracula facta de praesenti, prodigia quantum ad miracula de futuris. Vel signa et prodigia dicit miracula quae fiunt contra naturam, sicut illuminatio caeci, suscitatio mortui, et cetera. Virtutes vero dicit, quae sunt secundum naturam, sed non eo modo quo natura facit, sicut quod ad impositionem manus statim sanentur infirmi, quod etiam natura facit, sed successive. Vel virtutes dicit virtutes mentis, sicut est castitas et huiusmodi. 491. – These three things are distinct, because “might” [virtus] is common to all miracles, for might is the full extent of a power. Therefore, something is called mighty [virtuosum] because it proceeds from great power [virtute]. Therefore, because miracles come from great power, namely the divine, they are therefore called “powers” [virtutes]. But “sign” refers to a lesser miracle, and “wonder” to a greater one. Or he says “signs” as to miracles performed in regard to the present and “wonders” in regard to miracles concerning the future. Or signs and wonders refer to miracles done contrary to nature; for example, giving sight to the blind, raising from the dead, and so on. But mighty deeds are things according to nature, not performed in the way nature does, as for a sick man to be healed immediately, when one’s hands are placed on him; for nature produces the same effect step by step. Or mighty deeds mean the virtues of the mind, such as chastity and so on. Consequenter excludit obiectionem cum dicit quid enim est quod minus, et cetera. Possent enim Corinthii respondere ad praedicta, et dicere: verum est quod multa bona fecisti et magna, et tamen alii fecerunt plura et maiora quam tu, et ideo apud eos et in eorum comparatione nolumus te commendare. Et ideo hoc excludit, ostendens quod nihil minus fecit quam illi, sed plus. Et ideo dicit quid est enim quod minus habuistis a me prae caeteris Ecclesiis, id est quam aliae Ecclesiae Christi habuerunt per illos quantum ad spiritualia? Quasi dicat: nihil; quia ipsi praedicaverunt fidem, et apostolus praedicavit; illi ostenderunt signa et virtutes, et apostolus similiter. Et non solum non minus habuistis, sed plus, quia alii apostoli vivebant de sumptibus illorum quibus praedicabant; sed apostolus non, quia nihil accepit a Corinthiis. Et ideo dicit nisi quod ego ipse non gravavi vos, accipiendo vestra, quasi dicat: nihil habuistis minus, nisi hoc forte reputetis minus, quia nihil accepi a vobis, quod tamen plus est. Act. XX, 34: ad ea quae mihi opus erant, et his qui mecum sunt, necessaria ministraverunt, et cetera. II Thess. III, 8: nocte ac die laborantes, et cetera. Is. XXXIII, 15: qui excutit manus suas, et cetera. Quod si hoc ipsum reputatis iniuriam, scilicet quod nolui vestra recipere, quod feci, quia non dilexi vos, et videtur vobis quod male fecerim, parcatis mihi. Et ideo dicit ironice loquendo donate, id est parcite, mihi hanc iniuriam. Hoc modo accipitur donare Eph. IV, 32: donantes invicem, sicut et Christus vobis donavit. 492. – Then he excludes an objection, when he says, For in what were you less favored than the rest of the churches? For the Corinthians could answer and say: it is true that you have done many good and great things, but others have done more and greater things than you. Therefore, we are not willing to commend you to them or in comparison with them. But he excludes this, saying: For in what were you less favored than the rest of the churches? i.e., than the other churches of Christ have obtained through him in spiritual matters. As if to say: nothing, because they preached the faith and the Apostle preached the faith; they showed signs and wonders, and so did the Apostle. In fact not only do you not have less, but even more, because the other apostles live on the revenues of those to whom they preached, but not the Apostle. For he took nothing from the Corinthians; hence he says: except that I myself did not burden you by taking what was yours. As if to say: you received nothing less, unless perhaps you count it as less that I have not taken anything from you, which however is more: “You yourselves know that these hands ministered to my necessities, and to those who were with me” (Ac. 20:34); “With toil and labor we worked night and day” (2 Th. 3:8); “Who shakes his hands, lest they hold a bribe” (Is. 33:15). But if you count this an injury, namely, that I refused to take anything from you (as I did not), because I did not love you, and it seems to you that I have done wrong, spare me. Hence he says in irony, forgive, that is, spare me this wrong! In this manner it says in Eph. (4:32): “Forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you.”
12-5
2 Cor. 12:14-19Hic ostendit se esse commendabilem quantum ad bona futura, quae facere intendit. Et tria facit. Primo ostendit suum propositum de futuro bono, quod intendit; secundo propositi huius rationem assignat, ibi non enim quaero quae vestra sunt, etc.; tertio ad rationem, similitudinem adhibet, ibi nec enim debent, et cetera. 493. – Here he shows that he is worthy of commendation in regard to good things he intends to do. He does three things. First, he states his resolution concerning the future good he intends to do; secondly, he assigns the reason for this resolution (v. 14c); thirdly, he applies a likeness to his reason (v. 14d). Sciendum est circa primum, quod aliquando contingit, quod ideo aliqui non accipiunt uno tempore, ut reservent se ad aliud tempus, in quo possint et plus recipere et audacius. Ne ergo isti simile crederent de apostolo, ut ideo noluisset prima vice recipere ab eis, ut postmodum reciperet plus, dicit, quod non solum hoc fecit olim, sed etiam paratus est facere in futurum. Unde dicit ecce iam tertio, id est tertia vice, paratus sum venire ad vos, et non ero vobis gravis; quasi dicat: nec etiam tunc gravabo vos, accipiendo vestra. Supra II: in omnibus sine onere me servavi et servabo. Iob XXVII, 6: iustificationem quam coepi tenere, et cetera. Dicit autem tertio paratus sum venire, et non dicit tertio venio, quia bene ter paratus fuit ire ad eos, sed tamen non ivit nisi bis. Paratus enim fuit ire prima vice, et tunc ivit, et conversi sunt. Secunda vice fuit paratus, et fuit impeditus propter peccatum eorum, et tunc non ivit, de quo excusat se in principio huius epistolae. Modo est paratus ire tertio, et ivit, unde bis ivit, et ter fuit paratus ire. 494. – It should be noted in regard to the first that sometimes it happens that the reason why some do not receive at one time is that they might be keeping themselves in reserve for another time, in which they can receive both more and more boldly. Therefore, lest they suppose something like this of the Apostle, namely, that he refused to take anything from them the first time, in order that he might receive more the second time, he says that he not only did this in the past, but is prepared to do the same in the future; hence he says, Here for the third time I am ready to come to you. And I will not be a burden. As if to say: not even then will I burden you by taking what is yours: “So I refrained and will refrain from burdening you in any way” (2 Cor. 11:9); “I hold fast my righteousness, and will not let it go” (Job. 27:6). He says, here for the third time I am ready to come, and not “this third time I am coming,” because he certainly was prepared to go to them a third time, yet he went only twice. For he was prepared to go the first time; he went and they were converted. He was ready a second time, but he was prevented on account of their sin. It was for this that he apologized in the beginning of this letter. Now he was ready to go a third time, and he went. Hence he went twice, but he was ready to go three times. Rationem autem huius boni propositi subdit, dicens non enim quaero, etc., quae talis est: constat quod artifex disponit opus suum secundum finem quem intendit; praedicatores autem in praedicando, aliqui intendunt quaestum et bona temporalia, et ideo totam praedicationem ad hoc ordinant et disponunt; aliqui vero intendunt salutem animarum, et ideo hoc modo disponunt praedicationem suam, secundum quod vident expedire saluti illorum quibus praedicant. Quia ergo apostolus intendebat in praedicatione sua salutem Corinthiorum, et videbat, quod non expediebat quod reciperet ab eis sumptus, tum ut confutaret pseudo, tum etiam quia avari erant, ideo noluit accipere sumptus. Et ideo huius rationem assignat, dicens: ideo non gravabo vos, sumptus accipiendo, quia non quaero quae vestra sunt, in praedicatione mea, sed vos, et vestram salutem procurare intendo. Phil. IV, 17: non quaero datum, sed fructum. Et ideo dominus dixit apostolis: faciam vos fieri piscatores hominum, non pecuniae. Hoc etiam figuratur Gen. XLVII, 19, ubi legitur, quod Ioseph emit Aegyptios in servitutem regis, quia bonus praedicator debet ad hoc studere, ut infideles convertat ad servitium Christi. 495. – Then he gives the reason for this good resolution, when he says: for I seek not what is yours but you. The reasoning is this: it is clear that an artisan arranges his work according to the end he has in view, but when preachers preach, some intend revenue and temporal goods; consequently they arrange and direct all their preaching to this. Others intend the salvation of souls; consequently, they arrange their preaching according as they deem it expedient for the salvation of souls. Therefore, because the Apostle in his preaching aimed at the salvation of the Corinthians and he saw that it was expedient to take no revenue from them, both in order to shame the false apostles and also because they were covetous, he refused to take any revenue. Hence he assigns this reason: I will not burden you by taking anything, because I seek not what is yours by my preaching, but you and your salvation are what I aim to procure: “Not that I seek the gift; but I seek the fruit” (Phil. 4:17). Therefore the Lord said to the apostles: “I will make you fishers of men” (Matt. 4:19), not of money. This is also prefigured in Gen. (chap. 47), where we read that Joseph brought some Egyptians for the service of the king, because the good preacher should be intent upon converting believers to the service of Christ. Sed huiusmodi rationi adaptat similitudinem, cum dicit nec enim debent, et cetera. Et primo ponit similitudinem; secundo adaptat eam, ibi ego autem libentissime, etc.; tertio arguit eorum ingratitudinem, ibi licet plus vos, et cetera. 496. – He adapts a simile to this reasoning, when he says: for children ought not to lay up for their parents, but parents for their children. First, he presents the simile; secondly, he adapts it (v. 15); thirdly, he criticizes their ingratitude (v. 15b). Dicit ergo: quod autem non quaeram vestra, patet per simile. Videmus enim, quod parentes carnales debent thesaurizare filiis carnalibus, quia filii non debent thesaurizare parentibus, sed parentes filiis. Cum ergo ego sim pater vester spiritualis, et vos sitis filii mei, nolo quod vos thesaurizetis mihi, sed ego vobis. 497. – He says therefore: I do not seek what is yours. This is clear from a simile. For we observe that parents according to the flesh should lay up for their children, because children ought not to lay up for their parents, but parents for their children. Therefore, since I am your spiritual father and you are my children, I do not want you to lay up for me, but I for you. Sed hic est quaestio de patribus carnalibus. Nam Ex. XX, 12 dicitur: honora patrem tuum, et cetera. In quo etiam praecipitur nobis, quod ministremus eis necessaria. Ergo filii tenentur thesaurizare parentibus. Respondeo. Dicendum est quod ex praecepto tenentur filii ministrare et subvenire parentibus in necessariis, non autem congregare et thesaurizare eis. Nam thesaurizatio et congregatio fit in posterum. Sed nos videmus quod secundum naturam filii succedunt parentibus, et non e contrario, nisi in aliquo tristi eventu; et ideo naturaliter amor parentum est ad hoc, ut congregent filiis. Et hoc modo loquitur apostolus. Exodi autem c. XX, 12 loquitur dominus de subventione in necessariis. 498. – But there is a question here about parents according to the flesh, for it says in Ex. (20:12): “Honor your father and your mother,” which includes that we must minister to their needs. Therefore the children are bound to lay up for their parents. I answer that this precept binds children to minister to and help their parents in necessity, but not to gather and lay up for them. For laying up and gathering have an eye on the future. But in nature the children succeed the parents and not vice versa, except in some sad cases. Therefore the love of parents naturally induces them to lay up for the children. It is in this way that the Apostle speaks; but in Ex. (chap. 20) the Lord is speaking about helping them in case of necessity. Item quaestio oritur de hoc quod dicit parentes filiis, et cetera. Ergo cum praelati sint parentes nostri spirituales, videtur quod male fecerint principes et alii dando divitias praelatis. Responsio. Dicendum est quod non dederunt praelatis propter se, sed propter pauperes. Et ideo non dederunt eis, sed pauperibus. Et hoc dominus monet Matth. VI, 20: thesaurizate vobis thesauros in caelis, et cetera. Praelatis autem dantur tamquam pauperum dispensatoribus. 499. – Another question that arises concerns the statement that the children should not lay up for their parents, but the parents for the children. Therefore, since prelates are our spiritual parents, it seems that princes and others do wrong when they give their riches to prelates. I answer that they gave them to prelates not for themselves, but for the poor, and this is what the Lord teaches: “Lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust consumes and where thieves do not break in and steal” (Matt. 6:20). Hence they are given to prelates as dispensers to the poor. Consequenter positam similitudinem adaptat. In similitudine autem duo proposuit. Unum est, quod filii non debent thesaurizare parentibus, et hoc iam patet; et aliud est, quod parentes debent thesaurizare filiis, et dare. Et quantum ad hoc dicit: quia ergo ego sum pater vester, ideo paratus sum dare vobis. Et hoc est quod dicit ego libentissime impendam vobis bona, non solum bona spiritualia, praedicando et exempla monstrando, sed etiam temporalia, quod et faciebat, inquantum praedicabat et serviebat eis cum sumptibus aliarum Ecclesiarum. Haec tria ministrare debet quilibet praelatus suis subditis. Unde dominus dixit ter Petro Io. XXI, 17: pasce oves meas, id est pasce verbo, pasce exemplo, pasce temporali subsidio. Et non solum ista impendam vobis, sed paratus sum mori pro salute animarum vestrarum. Unde dicit et superimpendar pro animabus vestris. Io. XV, 13: maiorem charitatem nemo habet, et cetera. I Io. III, 16: si Christus animam suam pro nobis posuit, et vos debetis, et cetera. Io. X, 11: bonus pastor animam suam, et cetera. 500. – Then he applies the simile, in which he proposed two things: one is that the children should not lay up for the parents, and this is now clear. The other is that parents should lay up for and give to the children; in regard to this he says: therefore, because I am your father, I am ready to give to you, and this is what he says: I will most gladly spend good things on you, not only spiritual goods by preaching and giving examples, but even temporal goods, which he did, inasmuch as he preached to them and served them with the revenues of other churches. Every prelate should minister these three things to his subjects; hence the Lord said to Peter three times: “Feed my sheep” (Jn. 21:17), i.e., food them by word, feed them by example, feed them by temporal subsidies. Not only will I give those things to you, but I am ready to die for your salvation; hence he says, and be spent for your souls: “Greater love has no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends” (Jn. 15:13); “He laid down his life for us; and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren” (1 Jn. 3:16); “The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep” (Jn. 10:11). Ingratitudinem istorum increpat consequenter, dicens licet plus vos diligens, etc., quasi dicat: libenter impendar pro vobis, licet sitis ingrati, quia licet plus vos diligens, et cetera. Et haec comparatio potest exponi dupliciter. Uno modo sic: licet plus diligam vos quam pseudo, tamen minus diligor, scilicet a vobis, quam diligantur pseudo, quos plus diligitis quam me. Et sic patet, quod ego plus vos diligo, quam illi; quia ego quaero salutem vestram tantum, illi vero bona vestra solum. Alio modo sic: licet plus diligam, scilicet vos, quam alias Ecclesias, tamen minus diligor a vobis, quam ab aliis Ecclesiis. Phil. I, v. 8: testis est mihi Deus quomodo cupiam, et cetera. Et quod plus dilexerit Corinthienses, quam alias Ecclesias, patet, quia plus pro eis laboravit. Illud autem in quo plus laboramus, magis consuevimus diligere. 501. – Then he criticizes their ingratitude when he says, If I love you the more, am I to be loved the less? As if to say: gladly will I be spent for you, although you are ungrateful, because although I love you the more, I am loved the less. This comparison can be explained in two ways. First, in this way: although I love you the more than the other apostles, yet I am loved the less, namely, by you, than the false apostles are loved, whom you love more than me. Thus it is evident that I love you more than they, because I seek only your salvation, but they seek only your goods. In another way thus: although I love you the more than the other churches, nevertheless I am love less by you than by the other churches: “For God is my witness, how I yearn for you all with the affection of Christ Jesus” (Phil. 1:8). That he loved the Corinthians more than he loved the other churches is clear from the fact that he labored more for them. But that for which we labor more, we love more. Consequenter cum dicit esto, ego vos, etc., removet suspicionem. Et primo ponit suspicionem ipsam; secundo excludit eam, ibi numquid per aliquem, etc.; tertio rationem exclusionis assignat, ibi olim putatis quod excusemus, et cetera. 502. – Then when he says, But granting that I myself did not burden you, he removes a suspicion. First, he mentions the suspicion; secondly, he excludes it (v. 17); thirdly, he assigns the reason for the exclusion (v. 19). Posset autem esse istorum suspicio talis, quod ideo ipse ab eis per se ipsum non acceperit, ut per alios dolose ab eis plus accipiat. Et ideo dicit, hoc ponens, esto, id est dato et concesso, quod ego, in persona mea et eorum qui mecum sunt, aliquid accipiendo non gravavi vos, sed, sicut credidistis, cum essem astutus, dolo, etc., id est per alios detraxi vobis bona vestra plurima: sed hoc est falsum, quia nihil ex dolo feci. I Thess. II, 3: exhortatio nostra non de errore, neque de immunditia, neque in dolo. Nam ipse erat verus Israelita, in quo dolus non fuit, Io. I, 47. 503. – Their suspicion might be that the reason he did not take anything for himself was that others might take more from them. Therefore, he says: But granting, that is, granting that I myself, in my person and in those who are with me, did not burden you by taking anything, but as you believed, I was crafty and got the better of you by guile, i.e., I took many more of your goods through other persons. But this is false, because I have done nothing by guile: “For our appeal does not spring from error or uncleanness, nor is it made with guile” (1 Th. 2:3). For he was an Israelite indeed, in whom there was no guile (Jn. 1:47). Hanc ergo suspicionem excludit consequenter, cum dicit numquid per aliquem, et cetera. Et primo in generali, secundo in speciali. In generali sic: si per alios voluissem surripere vestra, misissem aliquos, qui hoc procurarent apud vos. Sed numquid per aliquem eorum quem misi ad vos, circumveni vos, extorquendo per eos vestra? Quasi dicat: non. Supra VII, 2: neminem circumvenimus, et cetera. I Thess. IV, 6: ne quis circumveniat in negotio fratrem suum. 504. – Then he excludes this suspicion when he says, Did I take advantage of you through any of those whom I sent to you? First, in general; secondly, in particular. In general in the following way: if I had wanted to snatch anything from you by others, I would have sent those who might obtain these things. But did I take advantage of you through any of those whom I sent to you, by using them to extort your goods? As if to say: No: “We have taken advantage of no one”(2 Cor. 7:2); “That no man transgress, and wrong his brother in this matter” (1 Th. 4:6). In speciali vero excludit suspicionem praedictam, cum dicit rogavi Titum, etc., quasi dicat: nullus eorum in speciali, quem misi ad vos, circumvenit vos. Titum enim cum precibus misi ad vos. Et hoc est, quod dicit rogavi Titum, et cetera. De isto habetur supra VIII, 18. Misi etiam cum illo fratrem, scilicet Barnabam, vel Lucam. Supra c. VIII, 18: misimus cum illo, scilicet Tito, fratrem (scilicet alterum dictorum) cuius laus est in Evangelio. Sed numquid Titus circumvenit vos, etc., quasi dicat: non. Supra VIII, 16: gratias ago Deo meo, qui dedit eamdem sollicitudinem pro vobis in corde Titi, et cetera. Et quod Titus non circumvenerit eos, probat per conformitatem Titi ad seipsum apostolum, et ponit duplicem conformitatem, scilicet cordis. Et ideo dicit nonne eodem spiritu ambulavimus, id est eamdem voluntatem habemus? Vel eodem spiritu instigamur ad bene et recte agendum? Supra IV, 13: habentes autem eumdem spiritum, et cetera. Item conformitatem operis. Et ideo dicit nonne eisdem vestigiis, id est operibus intendimus, scilicet vestigiis Christi? Nam ego sequor vestigia Christi. Iob XXIII, 11: vestigia eius, scilicet Christi, secutus est pes meus, et cetera. I Petr. II, 21: Christus passus est, etc., ut sequamini vestigia eius. Et Titus sequitur vestigia mea. I Cor. XI, 1: imitatores mei estote, et cetera. Et sic patet, quod si conformis est mihi in voluntate et opere, et ego non circumveni vos, nec intendo circumvenire; quod autem nec ipse circumvenerit vos, patet per illud Matth. VII, 16: a fructibus eorum cognoscetis, et cetera. 505. – He excludes their suspicion in particular when he says: I urged Titus to go, and sent the brother with him. As if to say: none of those whom I sent to you overreached you. For I sent Titus to you with entreaties. And this is what he says: I urged Titus to go, and sent the brother with him, namely, Barnabas or Luke: “With him,” namely Titus, “we are sending the brother,” namely one of those mentioned, “who is famous among all the churches for his preaching of the gospel” (2 Cor. 8:18). But did Titus take advantage of you? As if to say: No: “But thanks be to God who puts the same earnest care for you into the heart of Titus” (2 Cor. 8:16). That Titus did not overreach them he proves by showing that Titus was of the same mind as the Apostle, and he mentions two points of similarity: first, in the heart; hence he says: Did we not act in the same spirit?, i.e., have the same will; or we were inspired by the same spirit to act well and correctly: “Since we have the same spirit of faith as he had who wrote, ‘I believed, and so I spoke,’ we too believe, and so we speak” (2 Cor. 4:13). Secondly, in work; hence he says: Did we not take the same steps, i.e., intent on the same works? That is to say, in the steps of Christ, for I walk in the steps of Christ: “I have kept his way,” namely, Christ’s, “and have not turned aside” (Job 23:11); “Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps” (1 Pet. 2:21). And Titus follows my steps: “Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ” (1 Cor. 11:1). Therefore, if he agrees with me in will and in work, and I have not overreached you and do not intend to overreach you, the conclusion is evident. That he did not overreach them is clear from Matt. (7:16): “By their fruits you shall know them.” Rationem autem exclusionis subdit, dicens olim, seu rursus, putatis, et cetera. Et primo ponit eorum opinionem, secundo excludit eam. Opinio autem istorum erat, quod apostolus quasi reus et culpabilis omnia verba ista epistolae diceret ad excusationem suam, et quod non essent vera sed ad excusandum tantum inventa; 506. – The he adds the reason, which excludes their opinion. First, he states their opinion; secondly, he excludes it (v. 19). Their opinion was that the Apostle, as one guilty and culpable, was writing all the words of this epistle to justify himself, and that they were not true, but merely invented to justify himself. Therefore, he sets down their opinion, saying: Have you been thinking all along, i.e., from the beginning of this epistle, that we have been defending ourselves before you, i.e., that the words of this epistle are not true, but are fabricated as an excuse? et ideo ponens hanc opinionem ipsorum, dicit vos putatis olim, id est a principio huius epistolae, quod excusemus nos apud vos, id est quod haec verba non sint vera, sed sint ad excusandum conficta. Hanc autem excludit sic: qui enim sic excusat se, duo habet; unum est, quod non utitur verbis veris, sed confictis; aliud est, quia non vult pati detrimentum famae suae et gloriae. Unde specialiter propter dispendium famae aliqui excusant se. Sed neutrum istorum est in nobis; non ergo vera est opinio vestra. Quod autem neutrum istorum sit in nobis, patet. Non enim dicimus verba falsa; quod probo, primo per testimonium Dei, quia coram Deo loquimur. Quasi dicat: teste Deo, hoc in veritate dico. Iob XVI, 20: ecce in caelo testis meus, et cetera. Secundo per testimonium Christi, quia in Christo loquimur, id est per Christum, in quo nulla est falsitas. Supra II, 17: ex sinceritate sicut ex Deo in Christo loquimur. Item non quaerimus gloriam nostram, nec timemus infamiam, quia omnia, quae dixi et de revelationibus et de tribulationibus, facio, seu dico, propter vestram aedificationem, ut scilicet permaneatis in virtute, et expellatis pseudo. Io. XIV: quae aedificationis sunt invicem, et cetera. I Cor. XIV, v. 26: omnia ad aedificationem fiant. Io. XII, v. 30: non propter me haec vox venit, sed propter vos, et cetera. 507. – But he excludes this: for a person who excuses himself in that way has two things: one is that he does not use true words, but fabrications; the other is that he was not wont to suffer the loss of reputation and glory. Hence, it is especially because of the loss of reputation that they make excuses. But neither of these is verified in us. Therefore, your opinion is not true. That neither of these is verified in us is clear, because we do not employ false words. This he proves first by God’s testimony, because it is in the sight of God that we are speaking. As if to say: God is my witness, that I speak the truth: “Even now, behold, my witness is in heaven” (Job 16:19) Secondly, by the testimony of Christ, because we have been speaking in Christ, i.e., by Christ in whom there is not falsity: “But as men of sincerity, as commissioned by God, in the sight of God we speak in Christ” (2 Cor. 2:17). Furthermore, we do not seek our own glory or fear loss of reputation, because all things which I have said about my revelations and tribulations, I do or say for your upbuilding, namely, that you continue in virtue and expel the false apostles: “Let us then pursue what makes for peace and for mutual upbuilding.” (Rom. 14:19); “Let all things be done for edification.” (1 Cor. 14:26); “This voice has come for your sake, not for mine” (Jn. 12:30).
12-6
2 Cor. 12:20-21Posita una causa commendationis, quae provenit ex omissione Corinthiorum, quantum ad ea bona quae facere debuissent, in qua detestatur eorum ingratitudinem, hic consequenter ponit aliam causam, quae provenit ex eorum commissione quantum ad mala quae debuissent vitare, in qua exaggerat eorum malitiam. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo ponit eorum culpam in generali; secundo explanat eam in speciali, ibi ne forte, et cetera. 508. – Having cited as one of the causes for commending the failure of the Corinthians to do the good things they should have done and for which he rebuked their ingratitude, he now states the other cause which arose from what they did in regard to the evils they should have avoided. In regard to this he amplifies their wickedness and does two things. First, he mentions their fault in general; secondly, he explains it in detail (v. 20b). Dicit ergo: non solum laudavi me propter hoc, quod vos omisistis me laudare, sed etiam propter periculum vestrum, quod est in hoc quod vos adhaeretis pseudo, quia, dum fovent vos in peccatis, exponunt vos in magno periculo. Et ideo dicit timeo, scilicet ne forte cum venero, ad vos personaliter, non inveniam vos quales vos volo, scilicet iustos sed peccatores et incorrectos, et displiceatis mihi et ego vobis, quia iusto non placent peccatores, inquantum peccatores. Et inveniar talis a vobis, scilicet contristatus et puniens, qualem me non vultis habere. Mali enim odiunt correctionem, et veritatem. Ergo inimicus factus sum vobis, verum dicens vobis? etc., Gal. IV, 16. Sic patet eorum malitia in generali, scilicet quod timebat ne nondum plene poenituerint. 509. – He says therefore: I have praised myself not only because you have failed to praise me, but also because of your danger, which consists in clinging to the false apostles, because by fostering sin among you they were exposing you to great danger. Therefore he says, I fear that perhaps I may come and find you not what I wish, namely, just, but sinners and uncorrected, and that you will be displeasing to me and I to you, because sinners as sinners are not pleasing to a just man; and that you may find me, i.e., sad and meting out punishment, not what you wish to have me. For evil persons hate correction and the truth: “Have I then become your enemy by telling you the truth?” (Gal. 4:16). Thus their evil is clear in general, namely, that he feared lest they were not yet fully repentant. In speciali etiam manifestat eorum malitiam, cum dicit ne forte contentiones, et cetera. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo enim enumerat eorum mala praesentia; secundo commemorat praeterita mala, de quibus nondum poenituerunt, ibi ne iterum cum venero, et cetera. 510. – Then he manifests their sinfulness in particular, when he says, that perhaps there may be quarreling, jealousy, anger, selfishness, slander, gossip, conceit, and disorder. In regard to this he does two things. First, he enumerates their present evils; secondly, he reminds them of past evils of which they have not yet repented. Sciendum est autem, circa primum, quod Corinthienses post conversionem inciderunt in peccatum carnale, ut patet de illo qui uxorem patris habuit, et de hoc in hac parte correcti sunt per primam epistolam, non tamen plene sed adhuc aliquid in eis remansit, et supra hoc remanserunt in eis multa peccata spiritualia, quae proprie opponuntur charitati. Charitas vero duo facit. Primo enim facit corda hominum ad invicem consentientia; secundo inducit homines ad mutuum profectum. Et ideo, peccata spiritualia, e contrario, primo, faciunt homines ad invicem dissentientes; secundo faciunt eos invicem offendentes. Et ideo primo enumerat peccata spiritualia quae pertinent ad dissensionem; secundo ea quae faciunt ad offensionem, ibi detractiones, et cetera. In dissensionibus autem procedit ordine retrogrado. Nam, secundum rectum ordinem, homines primo dissentiunt, inquantum unus vult unum, alius vult contrarium; secundo, ex hoc procedunt ad inferendum nocumenta, inquantum quilibet vellet obtinere in proposito suo; tertio, quando non potest obtinere in proposito suo, sed succumbit, accenditur zelo invidiae; quarto, ex hoc prorumpit ad contentiones verborum. 511. – In regard to the first it should be noted that after their conversion the Corinthians fell into sins of the flesh, as is evident from the one who had his father’s wife; and for this they were corrected by the first epistle, although not completely, because something still remained among them. In addition to this there remained among them many spiritual sins which are directly opposed to charity. Now charity does two things: first, it makes men’s hearts consent to one another; secondly, it induces men to mutual progress. Spiritual sins, on the other hand, set men disagreeing and make them offend one another. First, therefore, he lists the spiritual sins which pertain to dissention; secondly, those which make for offense (v. 20c). In regard to dissensions he proceeds in reverse order. For according to the right order, men first disagree, inasmuch as one wants one thing and another the contrary; secondly, they pass from this to inflicting injury, inasmuch as each one wants to obtain his desire; thirdly, when he cannot obtain his desire but fails, he burns with the zeal of jealousy [envy]; fourthly, the result of this is verbal argument. Et ab isto ultimo incipit apostolus, dicens ne forte contentiones, etc., quasi dicat: non solum timeo mala vestra in generali, sed in speciali, ne forte sint in vobis contentiones de meritis praelatorum, et de Baptistis, et cetera. Prov. XX, 3: honor est homini qui separat se a contentionibus, et cetera. Ambrosius: contentio est impugnatio veritatis, cum confidentia clamoris. Et haec contentio venit ab aemulatione; et ideo dicit et aemulationes, id est invidiae, in his qui minores sunt, et minus habent. Iac. c. III, 16: ubi zelus et contentio, ibi inconstantia, et cetera. Iob V, 2: parvulum occidit invidia, et cetera. Sap. II, 24: invidia Diaboli, et cetera. Et aemulatio venit ab animositate, unde dicit animositates, in ultione et illatione nocumenti. Eccli. VIII, 18: cum audace ne eas, et cetera. Et animositas venit ex dissensionibus, et ideo dicit dissensiones, id est odia et contrarietas animorum. Rom. ult.: observetis eos qui dissensiones et offendicula, et cetera. I Cor. I, 10: idipsum dicatis omnes, et non sint in vobis schismata. 512. – It is from the last of these that the Apostle begins, saying, that perhaps there may be quarreling [contentions]. As if to say: not only do I fear your evils in general, but also in particular, lest perhaps there be among you contentions over the merits of prelates and baptizers: “It is an honor for a man to keep aloof from strife” (Prov. 20:3). “Contention is an attack on the truth, accompanied by the confidence of shouting” (Ambrose). This contention springs from jealousy; hence he says, and jealousy by those who are inferior and have less: “For where jealousy and selfish ambition exist, there will be disorder and every vile practice” (Jas. 3:16); “Jealousy slays the simple” (Job 5:2); “But through the devil’s envy death entered the world” (Wis. 2:24). Envy comes from animosity; hence he says, anger, in revenge and inflicting injury: “Go not on the way with a bold man, lest he burden you with his evils” (Sir. 8:18, Vulgate). Animosity comes from dissensions; hence he says, selfishness, i.e., hatreds and conflicts of spirits: “Take note of those who create dissensions and difficulties, in opposition to the doctrine which you have been taught” (Rom. 15:17); “All of you agree and that there be no dissensions among you” (1 Cor. 1:10). Consequenter enumerat eorum mala praesentia quantum ad offensionem. Et quia ista specialiter sunt mala in nocumentis verborum, et non factorum, ideo dimissis nocumentis factorum, enumerat nocumenta verborum, in quibus etiam procedit ordine retrogrado, incipiens a posteriore, et hoc est, cum quis expresse malum dicit de aliquo, et, siquidem in manifesto, sic est detractor, et ideo dicit detractiones, Rom. I, 30: detractores, Deo odibiles, etc.; si vero in occulto, tunc est susurro, et ideo dicit susurrationes. Sunt enim susurrones, qui latenter seminant discordias. Eccli. XXVIII, 15: susurro et bilinguis maledictus erit. Et haec duo procedunt ex superbia, quae animum inflatum contra aliquos prorumpere facit in mala verba. Et ideo dicit inflationes, I Cor. IV, 18: tamquam non sim venturus ad vos, sic inflati, et cetera. Et hae inflationes veniunt ex seditionibus, quae sunt praeparationes partium ad pugnam, quia inter superbos semper iurgia sunt, Prov. c. XIII, 10. Et ideo dicit seditiones, id est, tumultus ad pugnam. Prov. XVII, 11: semper iurgia quaerit malus. Sic ergo patet eorum malitia quantum ad mala praesentia, quae multa sunt et in dissensionibus et in nocumentis. 513. – Then he lists their present evils in regard to offending. But because such evils consist mainly in injuries from words and not from deeds, he passes over injuries from deeds and lists those from words. Here too he proceeds in reverse order, beginning from the last; and this is when a person explicitly says something evil of another. If this is in public, he is a detractor; hence he says, slander [detraction]: “Slanderers, haters of God” (Rom. 1:30). If it is in secret, he is a whisperer; hence he says, gossip [whisperings]. For whisperers are persons who discreetly sow discord: “The whisperer and the double tongue is accursed” (Sir. 28:5, Vulgate). These two proceed from evil words against others; therefore he says, conceit [swelling]. These swellings arise from seditions, which are the preparations made by the parties to a fight, because they are always quarrels among the proud; hence he says, disorder, i.e., uproars for fights: “An evil man always seek quarrels” (Prov. 17:11, Vulgate). Thus their wickedness is made clear in regard to present evils, which are many both in dissensions and in injuries. Manifestat autem eorum malitiam quantum ad mala praeterita, de quibus non poenituerunt, cum dicit ne iterum cum venero, humiliet me Deus, id est affligat, apud vos, ita quod et lugeam multos vestrum, ex his qui ante peccaverunt, id est ante primam epistolam, et non egerunt poenitentiam, plene post primam epistolam. Et merito lugeam, quia, sicut gloria patris est gloria filiorum, ita confusio patris est confusio filiorum. Sic Samuel lugebat Saul, I Reg. XVI, 1: usquequo luges Saul, et cetera. Et hoc quia non poenituerunt, nec egerunt poenitentiam de peccatis carnalibus praedictis, quorum quaedam sunt contra naturam, et ideo dicit super immunditia, id est luxuria contra naturam. Quaedam sunt, quae committuntur cum mulieribus corruptis, scilicet viduis seu coniugatis, et ideo dicit et fornicatione. Quaedam sunt, quae fiunt in corruptione virginum, et ideo dicit et impudicitia quam gesserunt. Gal. V, 19: manifesta sunt opera carnis, quae sunt fornicatio, immunditia, impudicitia, et cetera. 514. – Then he manifests their wickedness in regard to past evils for which they have not repented, when he says: I fear that when I come again my God may humble me, i.e., afflict me, before you and I may have to mourn over many of those who sinned before, i.e., before the first epistle. And rightly do I mourn, because just as the glory of the father is in the glory of his children, so the father’s shame is the shame of the children. Thus did Samuel mourn over Saul: “How long will you grieve over Saul, seeing I have rejected him from being king over Israel?” (1 Sam. 16:1). And this because they have not repented or done penance for their past carnal sins, some of which are contrary to nature; hence he says, and have not repented of the impurity, i.e., lust contrary to nature. Some are committed with women no longer virgins, namely, widows or married women; hence he says, immorality [fornication]; others are committed by deflowering virgins; hence he says, and licentiousness which they have practiced continually: “Now the works of the flesh are plain: fornication, impurity, licentiousness” (Gal. 5:19).
13-1
2 Cor. 13:1-4In praecedentibus apostolus multa locutus est ad detestationem pseudo, hic consequenter loquitur contra illos qui a pseudo sunt seducti. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo increpat seductos; secundo consolatur persistentes, ibi de caetero, fratres, gaudete, et cetera. Circa primum, primo comminatur sententiae severitatem; secundo ostendit suam iudiciariam potestatem, ibi an experimentum quaeritis, etc.; tertio monet ad correctionem, ibi vosmetipsos tentate, et cetera. Circa primum, primo promittit suam praesentiam; secundo praedeterminat sui iudicii formam, ibi in ore duorum vel trium, etc.; tertio comminatur severam sententiam, ibi praedixi enim, et praedico, et cetera. 515. – Having said many things to the disadvantage of the false apostles, the Apostle now speaks against those who have been misled by them. In regard to this he does two things. First, he rebukes those who have been misled; secondly, he congratulates those who remained faithful (v. 11). In regard to the first he does three things. First, he threatens a severe sentence; secondly, he discloses his judiciary power (v. 3); thirdly, he warns them to amend themselves (v. 5). In regard to the first he does three things. First, he promises his presence; secondly, he indicates the form of his judgment (v. 1b); thirdly, he threatens a severe sentence. Promittit ergo, primo, suum adventum, dicens ecce ego venio, quasi dicat: certum sit vobis, quod venio ad vos, et ideo cavete vobis ne inveniam vos imparatos. Et dicit tertio, non quod tertio iverit, sed quia tertio iam paraverat ire, etsi non iverat nisi semel, in secundo apparatu impeditus. I Cor. IV, 19: veniam ad vos cito, et cetera. 516. – Therefore, he first promises to come, saying, behold I am coming to you. As if to say: be assured that I am coming to you, so take care that I do not find you unprepared. He says: This is the third time, not that he had come a third time, but because he was prepared a third time to come; for he actually came only once so far, although he was ready to come the second time but was prevented: “But I will come to you soon, if the Lord wills” (1 Cor. 4:19). Veniam, inquam, et iudicabo malos, secundum ordinem tamen, ita scilicet quod in ore duorum vel trium testium, accusantium seu testantium contra aliquem, sit omne verbum, accusatorum; quod quidem dicitur Deut. XVII, 6: nemo occidetur, uno teste dicente testimonium, et eiusdem XIX, 15: non stabit testis unus contra aliquem. Vel aliter in ore duorum, etc., quasi dicat: hoc quod dico de adventu meo ad vos, ita est certum, sicut testimonium duorum, vel trium. Sic ergo ordo iudicii erit. 517. – I will come, I say, and judge the wicked; in an orderly fashion, however, that by the evidence of two or three witnesses accusing or bearing witness against anyone, any charge of the accusers must be sustained. This is based on Deut. (17:6): “A person shall not be put to death on the evidence of one witness,” and Deut. (19:15): “A single witness shall not prevail against a man.” Or another way: in the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word stand. As if to say: that which I say about my coming to you is as certain as the testimony of two or three. Thus there will be an order in the judgment. Sed severitatem sententiae comminatur, dicens praedixi enim, et cetera. Ubi, primo, insinuat ordinem iudiciarium quo est procedendum, in quo exigitur ut praecedat trina admonitio. Et quantum ad hoc dicit praedixi vobis ut praesens, bis, quando scilicet eram vobiscum, et nunc absens praedico, ut sic ter admoneat. Praedico, inquam, his qui ante peccaverunt, et omnibus aliis; quasi dicat: omnes moneo. Secundo, praemissa monitione, comminatur sententiam. Unde dicit quoniam si venero, non parcam iterum, quasi dicat: illis qui peccaverunt peperci prima vice, sed, si iterum peccaverint, vel si non egerint poenitentiam, non parcam eis iterum. Et hoc iuste fit, quia ille cui semel remittitur et iterum peccat, si remitteretur sibi, cresceret in malitia, et efficeretur insolens. Et ideo dicit sapiens Prov. XIII, 24: qui parcit virgae, odit filium suum, et cetera. Ex hoc ergo ordinatum est in Ecclesia, ut praecedat trina monitio antequam quis sententiam excommunicationis fulminet, quia contingit, quod aliqui, licet sint in peccatis et offendant, tamen ex solo verbo admonitionis corriguntur et satisfaciunt. Et etiam a levioribus semper incipiendum est. Quod si admonitione non ducitur, ne magis insolescat, adhibenda est severitas sententiae. Eccle. VIII, v. 11: ex eo quod non profertur cito contra malos sententia, et cetera. 518. – But he threatens a severe sentence, saying: I warned those who sinned before and all the others. Here he first suggests the judicial process to be followed, which requires that three warnings have been given. In regard to this he says: I have warned you before twice, as I warned them when present, namely, when I was among you, so I warn them now, that is, while absent. Thus he warns them three times. I warn, I say, those who sinned before and all the others. As if to say: I warn everyone. Secondly, having given the warning, he threatens the sentence; hence, he says, that if I come again I will not spare them. As if to say: those who sinned I spared the first time; but if they sin again, or have not done penance, I will not spare them again. This would be just, because a person who is forgiven once and sins again, if he were forgiven, would grow in malice and become insolent. Hence the wise man says in Prov. (13:24): “He that spares the rod hates his son.” As a result the Church has decreed that three admonitions must be given before it declares one excommunicated, because it happens that some, although they are in sin and offend, are corrected by a mere word of warning and make satisfaction. But if they are not influenced by warnings, the severity of sentence must be applied, lest they grow more insolent: “Because sentence against an evil deed is not executed speedily, the heart of the sons of men is fully set to do evil” (Ec. 8:11). Consequenter ne possent calumniari de potestate apostoli, ostendit apostolus suam iudiciariam potestatem, dicens an experimentum, et cetera. Ubi tria facit. Primo ostendit se habere legationem et potestatem iudicandi a Christo; secundo ostendit virtutem Christi, ibi qui in vobis non infirmatur, etc.; tertio ostendit, quod virtus Christi etiam ad alios derivatur, ibi nam et nos infirmi sumus in illo. 519. – Then, lest they belittle the Apostle’s power, he discloses his judicial power, saying: Do you desire proof that Christ is speaking in me? Here he does three things. First, he shows that he has delegation and power to judge from Christ; secondly, he shows Christ’s power (v. 3b); thirdly, he shows that Christ’s power is distributed to others Dicit ergo: si venero, non parcam, immo severissime iudicabo, et hoc bene possum, quia habeo auctoritatem Christi in puniendo et remittendo. Supra II, 10: nam si quid donavi, et cetera. Supra V, 20: pro Christo legatione fungimur, et cetera. Et ideo dicit an experimentum, etc., quasi dicat: non est dubitandum de potestate mea, quia quidquid ego loquor, vel proferendo sententias, vel remittendo, vel praedicando, loquor a Christo. Ex. IV, 12: perge, ergo, ego ero in ore tuo. Lc. XXI, 15: ego dabo vobis os et sapientiam, et cetera. Quae ergo homo facit ex instinctu spiritus sancti, dicitur quod spiritus sanctus facit; ideo apostolus quia a Christo motus hoc loquebatur, attribuit Christo tamquam principali, dicens qui in me loquitur Christus, et cetera. 520. – He says therefore: if I come, I shall not spare; rather, I shall judge most severely. And I can do this, because I have Christ’s authority to punish and forgive: “What I have forgiven, if I have forgiven anything, has been for your sake in the presence of Christ” (2 Cor. 2:8); “So we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us” (2 Cor. 5:20). Therefore, he says: Do you desire proof that Christ is speaking in me? As if to say: have no doubts about my power, because whatever I utter either by passing sentence or forgiving or preaching, I say from Christ: “Now therefore go, and I will be with your mouth” (Ex. 4:12); “For I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which none of your adversaries will be able to withstand or contradict” (Lk. 21:15). Therefore, whatever a man says under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit is said to do. Therefore, the Apostle, because he was moved by Christ to say this, attributed it to Christ as to the principal cause, saying, that Christ is speaking in me. Sed ne dubitetur de potestate et virtute Christi, ideo consequenter apostolus ostendit virtutem Christi, cum dicit qui in vobis, et cetera. Ubi primo ostendit virtutem Christi, quantum ad ea quae in eis apparuerunt; secundo quantum ad ea quae in Christo sunt, ibi nam etsi, et cetera. Dicit ergo: habeo potestatem iudiciariam a Christo, qui in me loquitur, qui magnae virtutis est in vobis, dando dona gratiarum, distributionem spiritus et alia multa, quae experti estis; et non solum non infirmatur, sed potens est in vobis, quia potenter vos liberavit a peccato, potenter vos convertit ad bonum. Ps. XXIII, 8: dominus fortis et potens, et cetera. Sap. XII, 18: subest tibi cum volueris posse. Et paulo ante: virtutem enim ostendis tu, et cetera. 521. – But lest there be any doubt about Christ’s power and might, and Apostle discusses the might of Christ, when he says, He is not weak in dealing with you, but is powerful in you. Herein he shows Christ’s power as to things which are manifested in them; secondly, as to things which are in Christ: For he was crucified in weakness, but lives by the power of God. He says therefore: I have judiciary power from Christ, who speaks in me, who is mighty in you by giving the gifts of grace, the distribution of the Spirit and many other things you have experienced; and not only is he not weak in dealing with you, but is powerful in you, because he has mightily delivered you from sin and turned you to good: “The LORD, strong and mighty” (Ps. 24:8); “Your power is at hand when you will” (Wis. 12:18, Vulgate); and a little before (v. 17): “For you show your strength when men doubt the completeness of your power.” Et non solum potentia Christi apparuit in vobis, sed etiam in seipso, scilicet inquantum a morte crucis, quam sustinuit ex infirmitate humana, quam assumpsit infirmatam in paupertate, surrexit, et vivit ex virtute Dei, quae est ipse Deus. Talis enim erat illa susceptio, quae Deum hominem faceret, et hominem Deum. I Cor. I, 25: quod infirmum est Dei, fortius est hominibus, et cetera. Vel, ex virtute Dei, scilicet patris, qui est etiam virtus Christi, quia eadem est virtus patris et filii. Apoc. I, 18: fuit mortuus, et cetera. Haec etiam virtus Christi derivatur ad nos. Nam et nos infirmi, etc., quasi dicat: ad nos etiam pertinet illa virtus, quia et nos infirmi sumus in illo, id est ad intentionem illius, inquantum propter ipsum multa patimur, et mortificamus nosmetipsos, et humiliamus nos. I Cor. IV, 10: nos infirmi propter Christum, et cetera. Supra X, 10: praesentia corporis infirma. Supra IV, 10: semper mortificationem, et cetera. Et ideo vivemus, id est vivificabimur, ex virtute Dei in vobis, iudicandis. Gal. I, 1: qui suscitavit Iesum Christum, et cetera. Et est sensus: nos ex virtute qua Christus vivit, resuscitamur; et illa virtute habemus etiam potestatem iudicandi in vobis, vel vivemus, simili beatitudine, cum eo, et hoc ex virtute Dei, quae quidem virtus Dei est in vobis, id est in conscientiis vestris. 522. – Not only in you has Christ’s power appeared, but also in himself, inasmuch as he rose from the death of the cross, which he endured from human weakness, which he assumed in poverty and lives by the power of God, which is God: “The weakness of God is stronger than men” (1 Cor. 1:25). Or by the power of God, namely, of the Father who is also the power of Christ, because the power of the Father and of the Son are the same: “I died, and behold, I am alive forevermore” (Rev. 1:18). But this power of Christ is also distributed to us, for we also are weak in him. As if to say: that power pertains to us also, because we are weak in him, i.e., as to its aim, inasmuch as we suffer many things and mortify ourselves and humiliate ourselves for him: “We are weak for Christ’s sake” (1 Cor. 4:10); “His bodily presence is weak” (2 Cor. 10:10); “Always carrying in the body the death of Jesus” (2 Cor. 4:10). Therefore, we shall live, i.e., shall be alive with him by the power of God in you, who are to be judged: “Through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead” (Gal. 1:1). The sense is this: we are raised by the power by which Christ lives, and from that power we also have the power to judge among you; hence, we shall live with a happiness similar to his, and this by the power of God, which power is in you, i.e., in your consciences.
13-2
2 Cor. 13:5-10Post comminationem severi Dei iudicii, subdit apostolus admonitionem ad praeparationem, ut iudicium severum non patiantur, et primo ponit ipsam admonitionem; secundo rationem admonitionis assignat, ibi ideo haec absens scribo, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo ponit admonitionem; secundo excludit falsam suspicionem, ibi oramus autem ad Deum, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo monet ut se examinent; secundo innuit quid per huiusmodi examinationem invenire possint, ibi an non cognoscitis, et cetera. 523. – After threatening God’s severe judgment, the Apostle warns them to be ready, so that they will not experience a severe judgment. First, he gives the admonition; secondly, he assigns the reason for it (v. 10). In regard to the first he does two things. First, he presents the admonition; secondly, he excludes a false suspicion (v. 7). In regard to the first he does two things. First, he advises them to examine themselves; secondly, he suggests what they will be able to find through such an examination (v. 5b). Circa primum sciendum est, quod ille, qui secure vult comparere in iudicio, debet se primo examinare de factis suis, et sic poterit scire utrum tute compareat. Et ideo apostolus monet ut antequam veniant ad iudicium, quod erit in adventu suo ad eos, examinent se, dicens vosmetipsos tentate, id est examinate et considerate actus vestros. I Thess. V, 21: omnia probate, quod bonum est tenete, et cetera. Monet autem, ut de duobus se examinent, scilicet de fide. Unde dicit si estis in fide, scilicet quam praedicavi vobis, et a me accepistis de domino Iesu Christo, an excideritis ab ea et sitis prolapsi in aliam. Et hoc necessarium est, quia I Cor. XI, 31 dicitur: si nosmetipsos iudicaremus, et cetera. Ier. II, 23: vide vias tuas, et cetera. Item de operibus. Unde dicit ipsi vos probate, scilicet an sitis in operibus bonis, et utrum conscientia remordeat vos aliquid mali fecisse. Et hoc utile est, quia I Cor. XI, v. 28 dicitur: probet autem seipsum homo, etc.; Gal. VI, 4: opus suum probet unusquisque. 524. – In regard to the first it should be noted that one who would appear in judgment securely should first examine himself on his deeds; in that way he can tell whether he will appear safely. Therefore the Apostle warns them that before they come to judgment, which will take place when he comes to them, they should examine themselves, saying: examine yourselves, i.e., examine and reflect on your acts: “Test everything; hold fast what is good” (1 Th. 5:21). He advises them to examine themselves on two points, namely, on faith; hence he says: to see whether you are holding to your faith, namely, which I have preached to you and you have received from me concerning the Lord Jesus Christ, or have fallen away and lapsed into another. This is necessary because in 1 Cor. (11:31) it says: “But if we judged ourselves truly, we should not be judged”; “Look at your way in the valley; know what you have done” (Jer. 2:23). Likewise all works, when he says: test yourselves, whether you be in good works, or whether your conscience bothers you for having done some evil. This is useful, because it says in 1 Cor. (2:28): “Let a man examine himself”; and in Gal. (6:4): “Let each one test his own work.” Consequenter cum dicit an non cognoscitis, etc., ostendit quid per huiusmodi examinationem invenire poterunt. Et primo quid inveniant in seipsis; secundo quid inveniant in apostolo, ibi spero autem, et cetera. 525. – Then when he says, Do you not realize that Jesus Christ is in you? he shows what they can find through such an examination. First, what they might find in themselves; secondly, what they might find in the Apostle (v. 6). In seipsis autem duo invenire poterunt per examinationem, quia aut scient se tenere fidem, et sic invenire poterunt et cognoscere, quod Christus sit in eis, et hoc est quod dicit an non cognoscitis vosmetipsos, quia Christus Iesus in vobis est? Id est numquid si examinaretis vos, sciretis vos habere fidem, et cognosceretis, quod Christus est in vobis? Quasi dicat: sic, quia ubi est fides Christi, ibi est Christus. Eph. III, 17: habitare Christum per fidem, et cetera. I Cor. VI, v. 19: nescitis quia corpora vestra templum, et cetera. Aut scient se non tenere fidem, et sic invenient quod sint reprobi. Et ideo dicit nisi forte reprobi estis, id est vere invenietis vos habere Christum, nisi forte dimiseritis fidem et reprobi sitis ab eo, quod prius habuistis per fidem. Ier. XV, 6: reliquisti me, retrorsum abiisti. Ier. VI, 29: malitiae eorum non sunt consumptae, argentum reprobum, et cetera. 526. – In themselves they will be able to discover two things by this examination, because they will either know that they are keeping the faith, and thus they will be able to find and know that Christ is in them; and this is what he says: Do you not realize that Jesus Christ is in you? i.e., if you were to examine yourselves, would you know that you have the faith and recognize that Christ is in you? As if to say: Yes, because where faith in Christ is, there Christ is: “That Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith” (Eph. 3:17); “Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, which you have from God?” (1 Cor. 6:19). Or they will know that they are not keeping the faith and will find themselves reprobates; hence he says, unless indeed you fail to meet the test! i.e., you will find that you have Christ, unless you have lost the faith and are fallen from the state of previously having had the faith: “You have rejected me, says the LORD, you keep going backward” (Jer. 15:6); “For the wicked are not removed. Refuse silver they are called” (Jer. 6:29). Sed hic quaestio est litteralis de hoc quod dicit an non cognoscitis, et cetera. Nam Christus in eis solum manet, qui habent charitatem, ut dicitur I Io. IV, 16: Deus charitas est, et cetera. Si ergo cognoscimus, quod Christus per fidem sit in nobis, oportet quod hoc sit per fidem formatam. Cognoscentes ergo hoc modo Christum esse in nobis, sciemus nos habere charitatem qua informatur fides, quod est contra illud Eccle. IX, 1: nemo scit utrum odio, et cetera. Respondeo. Dicendum est, quod habitare Christum in nobis, potest accipi dupliciter: vel quantum ad intellectum, vel quantum ad affectum. Si quantum ad intellectum, sic ipse habitat in nobis per fidem informem. Et hoc modo nihil prohibet nos per certitudinem scire, quod Christus habitet in nobis, scilicet cum scimus nos tenere fidem, quam Ecclesia Catholica docet et tenet. Si vero quantum ad affectum, sic habitat Christus in nobis per fidem formatam, et hoc modo nullus potest scire, quod Christus habitet in nobis, vel quod habeamus charitatem, nisi per revelationem et specialem gratiam alicui concedatur certitudo. Per quamdam tamen coniecturam nihil prohibet nos scire posse quod in charitate sumus, quando scilicet quis invenit se taliter paratum et dispositum, ut nullo modo propter aliquod temporale vellet aliquid facere contra Christum. I Io. III, 21: si cor nostrum non reprehenderit nos, et cetera. Patet ergo quod apostolus loquitur quantum ad primum modum. Vel etiam loquitur de cognitione, quae est per coniecturam quamdam, ut dictum est. Argumentum autem procedit quantum ad secundum modum, et de cognitione quae est per certitudinem. 527. – But here there is a literal question in regard to the statement: Do you not realize that Jesus Christ is in you? For Christ only remains in those who have charity, as it says in 1 Jn. (4:16): “God is love, and he who abides in love abides in God, and God abides in him” If therefore we know that Christ is in us by faith, it is required that this be by formed faith. But this is contrary to Ec. (9:1): “Their deeds are in the hand of God; whether it is love or hate man does not know.” I answer that “Christ dwelling in us” can be taken in two ways, namely, in regard to the intellect or in regard to the affections [affectum]. If it is taken in regard to the intellect, then he dwells in us by unformed faith; and in this way we know there is nothing to prevent our knowing with certainty that Christ dwells in us, namely, when we know that we hold the faith which the Catholic Church teaches and holds. But if it is taken in regard to the affectivity, then Christ dwells in us by formed faith; and in this way no one can know that Christ dwells in him, or that he has charity, unless this certainty be granted to a person by revelation and a special grace. But there is nothing to prevent us from having a conjecture [coniecturum] that we are in charity, namely, when a person finds himself so ready and disposed that he would not wish to do anything against Christ in any way for something temporal: “Beloved, if our hearts do not condemn us, we have confidence before God” (1 Jn. 3:21). It is clear, therefore, that the Apostle is speaking in regard to the first way. Or he is even speaking of knowledge which is by a conjecture, as has been said. But his argument proceeds as to the second way and in regard to knowledge which is certain. Quid autem in apostolo possint invenire subdit, dicens spero autem, et cetera. Nam quia isti Corinthii possent dicere: nos non sumus reprobi, sed ideo non tenemus documenta tua, quia non sunt recta, sed reprobanda. Et ideo dicit: quidquid sit de vobis, tamen spero, quod ex vita et doctrina nostra, quam ostendi vobis, cognoscetis, quia non sumus reprobi, et non docuimus mala, nec exclusi sumus a potestate quam dicimus nos habere. Eccli. XIX, 26: ex visu cognoscitur vir. Matth. VII, 16: a fructibus eorum, et cetera. 528. – What they might find in the Apostle is mentioned when he says, I hope you will find out that we have not failed. For since those Corinthians could say, “We are not reprobates, but we do not on that account hold to your teachings, because you are not right and should be repudiated.” Therefore he says, whatever the case may be with yourselves, I hope that from our life and doctrine, which we have disclosed to you, you will find out that we have not failed and have not taught evil or are excluded from the power we say we have: “A wise man, when you meet him, is known by his countenance” (Sir. 19:26, Vulgate); “You will know them by their fruits” (Matt. 7:16). Consequenter cum dicit oramus, etc., excludit suspicionem. Comminatus enim fuerat eis iudicium severum, cum ostenderat potestatem suam in iudicando, et indixerat examinationem, credens Christum in eis esse, nisi ipsi essent reprobi. Sed tamen hoc dimittit sub dubio, utrum sit Christus in eis. Et quia ipsi possent credere et suspicari, quod apostolus gauderet de hoc quod essent reprobi, ut ipse in comparatione ad eos maior appareat et ut in eis posset exercere severius iudicium: ideo apostolus hanc suspicionem removet hic, primo, per orationem, quam pro eis ad Deum dirigit; secundo per gaudium, quod de eis concepit, ibi gaudemus enim, et cetera. 529. – Then when he says, But we pray God, he excludes the suspicion. For he had threatened them with a severe judgment when he mentioned his power to judge, and suggested an examination, trusting that Christ was in them, unless they were reprobate. Nevertheless he leaves in doubt the question whether Christ be in them. And because they might believe and suspect that the Apostle would rejoice in their being reprobates, in order to appear greater in comparison to them and to exercise a more severe judgment, the Apostle removes this suspicion here: first, with a prayer he directs to God on their behalf; secondly, by the joy he conceived in their regard (v. 9). Orat autem, ut ipsi inveniantur innocentes, ut non examinentur ex severitate iudicii. Et ideo dicit oramus autem, scilicet Deum, ut vos nihil mali faciatis; quasi dicat: non credatis, quod velimus, quod sitis reprobi, sed oramus, ut nihil, et cetera. Item orat, quod ipse appareat infirmus, per quod excluditur appetitus excellentiae apostoli in comparatione ad eos. Et ideo dicit non, scilicet oramus, ut probati appareamus, id est non ut nos commendemur probati in comparatione ad vos, sed magis, ut vos quod bonum est, faciatis, Gal. VI, 9: bonum autem facientes, et cetera. Ps. XXVI: viriliter agite et confortetur cor vestrum; nos autem, ut reprobi simus, amittendo potestatem puniendi et iudicandi, quia ubi non est culpa, omnes sumus pares, et unus non habet potestatem iudicandi super alios. Magis ergo vult apostolus, ut sint boni, quam ut subiaceant potestati iudicii sui. 530. – He prays, therefore, that they may be found innocent and not be examined with the severity of a judgment; therefore he says, But we pray, namely to God, that you may not do wrong. As if to say: do not suppose that we desire you to be reprobates, but we pray that you may do no evil. He prays also that he may appear weak, thus excluding any desire on the part of the Apostle for excellence in comparison to them; hence he says, not that we may appear to have met the test, i.e., we do not pray that we may be commended as approved in comparison to you, but rather that you may do what is right [good]: “And let us not grow weary in well-doing” (Gal. 6:9); “Be strong, and let your heart take courage” (Ps. 27:14), though we may seem to have failed, by losing the power to punish and judge, because where there is no guilt, we are all equal and one does not have power over another to judge. Therefore, the Apostle rather wishes that they be good than be subject to the power of his judgment. Et quod careat potestate iudicandi si boni sint, ostendit cum dicit non enim possumus, etc., quasi dicat: nos non laboramus nisi pro veritate et pro ipsa stamus. Constat autem, quod si puniremus innocentes, faceremus contra veritatem, et contra iustitiam. Unde cum apostolus non possit facere contra veritatem sed pro veritate, id est pro iustitia, manifestum est, quod non puniet innocentes. Notandum est, secundum Augustinum in Glossa, quod ad vitandum peccata, necessaria sunt duo, scilicet liberum arbitrium, et gratia Dei. Si enim liberum arbitrium non esset necessarium, numquam darentur homini praecepta, nec prohibitiones, nec exhortationes. Frustra etiam darentur poenae. Gratia etiam est necessaria, quia nisi Deus omnes regeret per gratiam suam, non posset homo stare. Frustra etiam oraremus, quod non inducat nos in tentationem. Et ideo apostolus ostendens utrumque esse necessarium, et orat Deum pro gratia obtinenda, et monet ut per liberum arbitrium recedant a malo et faciant bonum. Unde dicit oramus quantum ad primum, ut nihil mali faciatis quantum ad secundum. 531. – That he would lack this power of judging, if they are good, is shown when he says: For we cannot do anything against the truth. As if to say: we do not labor for anything but the truth, and for it we stand. But it is obvious that if we were to punish the innocent, we would be standing against the truth and against justice. Hence, since the Apostle could not do anything against the truth, but for the truth and for justice, it is clear that he will not punish the innocent. It should be noted, according to Augustine in a Gloss [Lombard], that two things are necessary for avoiding sins, namely, free will and God’s grace. For if free will were not needed, neither precepts nor prohibitions nor exhortations would ever be given to men; further, punishments would be given in vain. But grace, too, is necessary, because unless God ruled all by his grace, a man could not stand; furthermore, it would be in vain to pray that he not lead us into temptation. Consequently, the Apostle, indicating that both are necessary, prays God to obtain grace, and advises that they withdraw from evil with their free will, and do good; hence he says, we pray, as to the first, that you may not do wrong, as to the second. Consequenter cum dicit gaudemus, etc., removet falsam suspicionem propter gaudium de bono ipsorum conceptum. Et primo ponit gaudium, quod de ipsorum innocentia concepit; secundo orationem quam pro ipsorum perfectione emittit, ibi hoc autem oramus, vestram, et cetera. 532. – Then when he says, For we are glad, he removes the false suspicion on account of the joy conceived over their good. First, he mentions the joy he conceives over their innocence; secondly, the prayer he utters for their perfection (v. 9b). Dicit ergo: oramus quod vos probati appareatis, sed nos infirmi, et hoc apparet ex affectu nostro, quia gaudemus, quod scilicet aliqui sint inter vos boni et innocentes, ex quo subtrahatur nobis potestas iudicandi et videamur infirmi. Et hoc est quod dicit gaudemus, quoniam nos infirmi sumus, id est non exercentes potestatem nostram, vos autem potentes, id est sic bene agentes et vitia vincentes, quod subtrahitis vos a potestate nostra iudicandi. Cum enim aliquis male agit, subdit se potestati iudicis, sed bene faciendo repellit illam a se. Rom. c. XIII, 3: vis non timere potestatem? Benefac, et cetera. I Cor. IV, 10: nos infirmi, vos fortes. De isto gaudio dicitur Phil. II, 17: gaudeo et congratulor vobis, et cetera. 533. – He says therefore: we pray that you may appear approved, but we infirm; and this is clear from our emotion, because we rejoice that some among you are good and innocent, thus taking from us the power to judge and making us seem weak; and this is what he says: For we are glad when we are weak, i.e., not exercising our power, and you are strong, i.e., acting so well and overcoming vices that you take away our power to judge. For when a person does evil, he subjects himself to the power of a judge; but by acting well, he casts it away from him: “Would you have no fear of him who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval” (Rom. 13:3); “We are weak, but you are strong” (1 Cor. 4:10). Concerning that joy, it says in Phil. (2:17): “I am glad and rejoice with you all.” Et non solum de his gaudemus, sed etiam super hoc oramus vestram consummationem, id est perfectionem. In rebus enim naturalibus videmus quod quaelibet res naturalis naturaliter tendit ad suam perfectionem, ad quam habet naturale desiderium. Et ideo cuilibet rei datur virtus naturalis, ut ad suam perfectionem naturalem possit pervenire. Gratia autem datur homini a Deo, per quam homo perveniat ad suam ultimam et perfectam consummationem, id est beatitudinem, ad quam habet naturale desiderium. Unde quando aliquis non tendit ad suam perfectionem, signum est, quod non habet satis de gratia Dei. Et ideo apostolus, ut isti possint in gratia crescere, orat ut perficiantur. Et Phil. I, 9: oro ut charitas, et cetera. Eph. VI, 13: ut possitis resistere in die malo, et cetera. 534. – And not only do we rejoice in these things, but besides this what we pray for is your improvement. For in natural things we notice that each natural thing tends towards its own perfection, for which is had a natural desire; hence, to each thing is given the natural power to enable it to attain to its perfection. But God gives man grace, by which he may attain to his ultimate and perfect consummation, i.e., happiness, towards which he has a natural desire. Hence, when a person does not tend toward perfection, it is a sign that he does not have a sufficiency of God’s grace. Therefore, the Apostle, in order that they might grow in grace, prays that they be perfected: “And it is my prayer that your love may abound more and more, with knowledge and all discernment” (Phil. 1:9); “That you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand” (Eph. 6:13). Consequenter posita admonitione, causam admonitionis assignat, dicens ideo haec absens scribo, etc., id est ideo absens scribo vobis haec, monendo vos, ne scilicet cogar aliquid facere contra voluntatem meam, quae est ut nihil dure agam contra vos, nisi quatenus per vos compellar. Et ideo dicit ut non praesens vobis durius agam contra vos quam velim vel quam velitis. Sap. XI, 11: hos quidem tamquam pater monens probasti, et cetera. Supra X, 1: absens confido in vobis. Rogo autem vos ne praesens audeam, et cetera. Sed quia Corinthii possent dicere: numquid etiam si benefecerimus, non poteris contra nos, o apostole, dure agere? Ideo respondet, dicens: non, quia non propono nec possum agere, nisi secundum quod recepi a Deo potestatem. Deus autem dedit mihi hanc potestatem, scilicet ligandi atque solvendi, in aedificationem, non in destructionem, id est ut vos aedificemini, et non ut destruamini. Et si dure vos corrigerem, non aedificarem, sed destruerem. Supra X, v. 8: de potestate nostra, quam dedit nobis dominus ad aedificationem, et cetera. Hanc autem potestatem dedit dominus Paulo, Act. IX: segregate mihi Barnabam et Paulum ad opus, et cetera. 535. – Then, having given the admonition, he assigns the reason for it, saying, I write this while I am away from you, in order that when I come I may not have to be severe, i.e., I write these things to you in my absence to warn you, lest I be forced to do something against my will, which is that I may do nothing severe against you, except to the extent that I am compelled by you. Hence he says, that when I come among you I may not have to be more severe against you than I would wish or than you would wish: “For you admonished them and tried them as a father” (Wis. 11:11, Vulgate); “I who am humble when face to face with you, but bold to you when I am away!— I beg of you that when I am present I may not have to show boldness with such confidence as I count on showing against some” (2 Cor. 10:1). But because the Corinthians might say, “But supposing that we have acted well, would you be able to deal severely against us?” Therefore he answers, saying: No, because I neither plan nor am able to act except in my use of the authority which the Lord has given me. But God gave me this power, namely, of binding and loosing, for building up and not for tearing down, i.e., that you might be built up and not that you be destroyed. And if I were to correct you severely, I would not be building up but destroying: “Our authority, which the Lord gave for building you up and not for destroying you” (2 Cor. 10:8). But the Lord gave this power to Paul: “Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them” (Ac. 13:2).
13-3
2 Cor. 13:11-14In praecedentibus apostolus increpavit seductos a pseudo, hic vero consolatur persistentes in fide et doctrina sua. Et primo ponit monitionem; secundo subdit salutationem, ibi salutate in osculo, et cetera. Circa primum, primo ponit monitionem; secundo praemium impletae monitionis, ibi et Deus pacis, et cetera. Monet autem ad tria. Primo qualiter se habeant in seipsis; secundo qualiter se habeant ad proximos; tertio qualiter debent esse omnes ad invicem. 536. – Having rebuked those deceived by false apostles, the Apostle now comforts those who have persisted in his faith and doctrine. First, he gives an admonition; secondly, he adds a greeting (v. 12). In regard to the first he does two things. First, he gives the salutation; secondly, the reward of a fulfilled admonition (v. 11d). But he admonishes them on three points: first, what they should have been in themselves; secondly, in regard to their neighbor (v. 11b); thirdly, how all should act towards one another (v. 11c). In seipsis autem debent bona duo habere. Primo gaudium de bono habito, et quantum ad hoc dicit de caetero, fratres, qui constantes fuistis, gaudete, in his quae ad servitium Dei facitis. Et hoc est necessarium ad hoc quod sitis iusti et virtuosi, quia nullus est virtuosus, seu iustus, qui non gaudet iusta et virtuosa operatione. Et ideo dicitur in Ps. XCIX, 2: iubilate Deo, omnis terra, servite domino in laetitia; Phil. IV, 4: gaudete in domino semper; iterum dico, gaudete, et cetera. Et vere semper est gaudendum, quia gaudium conservat hominem in bono habitu, quia nullus potest esse diu in eo quod contristat. Secundo debent habere boni in seipsis aemulationem perfectionis, et quantum ad hoc dicit perfecti estote, id est semper tendatis ad profectum. Hebr. VI, 1: quapropter intermittentes inchoationis Christi sermonem, ad perfectionem, et cetera. Non est autem hoc, quod hic dicitur, praeceptum, scilicet quod homo sit perfectus, sed hoc, quod semper tendat ad perfectionem. Et hoc est necessarium, quia qui non studet ad proficiendum, est in periculo deficiendi. Videmus enim quod nisi remiges conentur ascendere, navis semper descendit. Et ideo dicebat dominus Mc. ult.: estote perfecti, et cetera. 537. – They should have two qualities in themselves. The first is joy in the good they had; hence he says: finally brethren, who have been constant, farewell [rejoice] in the things you have done for God’s service. This is necessary, if you are to be just and virtuous, because no one is just or virtuous who does not take joy in just and virtuous activities. Therefore it says in Ps. 100 (2, Vulgate): “Sing joyfully to God, all the earth: serve the Lord with gladness”; “Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, Rejoice” (Phil. 4:4). Indeed, a person should always rejoice because joy keeps a man in good condition, whereas one cannot continue long that which causes sorrow. Secondly, the good should have in themselves a zeal for perfection; in regard to this he says, mend your ways [be perfect], i.e., always tend to what is perfect: “Therefore let us leave the elementary doctrine of Christ and go on to maturity [perfectionem]” (Heb. 6:1). What is said here is not a precept to be perfect, but always tend toward perfection. And this is necessary because a person who does not aim at progressing is in danger of falling back. For we notice that unless the rowers strive to go forward, the ship always goes backward. This is what the Lord said: “You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect” (Matt. 5:48). Proximis autem est impendenda exhortatio ad bona. Et quantum ad hoc dicit exhortamini, et cetera. Eccli. XVII, 12: unicuique mandavit Deus de proximo, et cetera. Rom. c. XII, 8: qui exhortatur in exhortando, Apoc. ult.: qui audit, dicat, veni. 538. – To our neighbor we must give exhortations to good; in regard to this he says, heed my appeal: “And he gave to every one of them commandment concerning his neighbour” (Sir. 17:12, Vulgate); “He who exhorts, in his exhortation” (Rom. 12:8); “And let him who hears say ‘Come’” (Rev. 22:17). Communia autem omnibus debent esse duo, scilicet ut idem sapiant, et ideo dicit idem sapite, et ut pacem habeant, et ideo dicit pacem habete. Et haec duo ita se habent, quod unum est exterius, aliud interius. Constat enim quod corpora non possunt servari et ordinari, nisi membra ordinentur ad invicem. Similiter nec Ecclesia, nec Ecclesiae membra, nisi ordinentur et uniantur ad invicem. Est autem duplex unio necessaria ad membra Ecclesiae unienda. Una est interior, ut scilicet idem sapiant per fidem, quantum ad intellectum, idem credendo, et per amorem, quantum ad affectum, idem diligendo. Et ideo dicit idem sapite, id est idem sentiatis de fide, et idem diligatis affectu charitatis. Quia tunc est vera sapientia, quando operatio intellectus perficitur et consummatur per quietationem et delectationem affectus. Unde sapientia dicitur, quasi sapida scientia. Rom. XV, 6: ut sic unanimes, uno ore honorificetis Deum, et cetera. I Cor. I, 10: idipsum dicatis, et cetera. Phil. c. II, 2: idem sapiatis, et cetera. Alia est exterior, scilicet pax, et ideo dicit pacem habete inter vos. Hebr. XII, 14: pacem sequimini, et cetera. Ps. XXXIII, 15: inquire pacem. II Thess. III, v. 16: ipse Deus pacis det vobis pacem sempiternam in omni loco. 539. – There are two things which should be common to all, namely, that they agree: therefore he says, agree with one another; and that they be at peace: hence he says, live in peace. These two things are so related that one is external and the other internal. For it is clear that bodies cannot be preserved and kept orderly unless the members are mutually coordinated. In like manner neither the Church nor the members of the Church, unless they are in proper order and united one with another. But there is a double union required for uniting the members of the Church: one is interior, that is, that they agree by faith in regard to the intellect by believing the same things, and by love in the will by loving the same things. Hence he says, agree with one another, i.e., agree in regard to matters of faith, and love the same things with the affection of charity. For true wisdom is present when the activity of the intellect is perfected and consummated by the repose and delight experienced by the affections: “That together you may with one voice glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Rom. 15:6); “That all of you agree” (1 Cor. 1:10); “Complete my joy by being of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind” (Phil. 2:2). The other is exterior, namely, peace: therefore he says, live in peace among yourselves: “Strive for peace with all men” (Heb. 12:14); “Seek peace, and pursue it” (Ps. 34:15); “Now may the Lord of peace himself give you peace at all times in all ways” (2 Th. 3:16). Consequenter cum dicit et Deus pacis et dilectionis erit vobiscum, ponit praemium quod redditur implentibus monitionem praedictam; quasi dicat: si servabitis pacem inter vos, Deus pacis et dilectionis erit vobiscum. Circa quod notandum est, quod apud gentiles consuetum erat, quod aliqui ex donis denominabant deos, quia licet esset unus Deus tantum, tamen singula dona sua denominabant deos ex illis donis, sicut ex dono pacis denominabant Deum pacis, et ex dono salutis, Deum salutis. Huic vocabulo alludens apostolus dicit Deus pacis, et cetera. Non quod pax sit unus Deus, sicut illi dicebant, sed ideo Christus dicitur Deus pacis, quia est dator pacis et amator. Io. XIV, 27: pacem meam do vobis, et cetera. I Cor. XIV, 33: non est Deus dissensionis, sed pacis. Rom. V, 5: charitas Dei diffusa est in cordibus nostris, et cetera. Ipse etiam est auctor pacis. Io. XVI, 33: in me pacem habebitis, et cetera. Ipse in pace habitat. Ps. LXXV, 3: in pace factus est locus eius, et cetera. Item non solum est Deus pacis, sed etiam dilectionis. Et ideo dicit Deus pacis et dilectionis erit vobiscum. Et hoc ideo est, quia qui est in vera pace cordis et corporis, est in charitate, et qui manet in charitate, in Deo manet et Deus in eo, ut dicitur I Io. IV, 16, et quia homo non meretur nisi per pacem et dilectionem. Io. XIV, 23: si quis diligit me, et cetera. 540. – Then when he says, the God of love and peace will be with you, he mentions the reward given to those who fulfil these admonitions. As if to say: if you keep peace among you, the God of love and peace will be with you. In regard to this it should be noted that among the Gentiles was a custom that certain gifts be used as names for the gods, because although there is but one God, nevertheless certain special gifts were used for naming the gods from those gifts. Thus, from the gift of peace they call a god the god of peace, and from the gift of salvation, the god of salvation. Alluding to this practice, the Apostle says: the God of love and peace will be with you, not that peace is one god, as they said, but Christ is called the God of peace because he is the giver of peace and is one who loves: “My peace I give to you” (Jn. 14:27); “For God is not a God of confusion but of peace” (1 Cor. 14:53); “God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit which has been given to us” (Rom. 5:5). He is also the author of peace: “In me you may have peace. In the world you have tribulation” (Jn. 16:33); “His abode has been established in peace” (Ps. 71:3, Vulgate). Furthermore, he is not only the God of peace, but also of love; hence, he says: the God of love and peace will be with you. This is so, because a person who exists in true peace of heart and body exists in charity, and “He who abides in love abides in God, and God abides in him” (1 Jn. 4:16); and because a person merits only through peace and love” “If a man loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him” (Jn. 14:23). Consequenter cum dicit salutate invicem in osculo, etc., ponit salutationem, et circa hoc primo indicit eis mutuam salutationem; secundo salutat eos ex parte aliorum, ibi salutant vos, etc.; tertio salutat eos ex parte sua, ibi gratia Dei, et cetera. 541. – Then when he says, Greet one another with a holy kiss, he gives the salutation. In regard to this he does three things. First, he enjoins on them a mutual greeting; secondly, he greets them on the part of others (v. 12b); thirdly, he greets them on his own part (v. 13). Mutuam salutationem indicit faciendam per osculum. Unde dicit salutate invicem, vos ipsos, in osculo sancto. Ubi notandum est, quod osculum est signum pacis. Nam per os in quo datur osculum, homo respirat. Et ideo quando homines dant sibi mutua oscula signum est quod uniunt spiritum suum ad pacem. Est autem pax simulata, et haec est eorum qui loquuntur pacem cum proximo suo, mala autem in cordibus eorum, etc., ut dicitur in Ps. XXVII, 3. Quae quidem fit per osculi fraudulentiam. Prov. XXVII, 6: meliora sunt verbera diligentis, et cetera. Est et pax mala et turpis, quando scilicet conveniunt ad malum faciendum. Sap. XIV, v. 22: in magno viventes inscientiae bello, et cetera. Et haec fit per osculum libidinosum. Prov. VII, 13 dicitur de mala muliere, quod apprehensum deosculatur iuvenem, et cetera. Est et pax sancta quam facit Deus. Phil. c. ult.: et pax Dei, quae exsuperat, et cetera. Et haec fit per osculum sanctum, quia unit spiritum ad sanctitatem. Et de hoc osculo dicitur hic in osculo sancto. Et ex hoc inolevit consuetudo, quod fideles et sancti viri, in signum charitatis et unionis, se invicem osculantur, et datur pax in Ecclesiis in osculo sancto. 542. – He requests that the mutual greeting be made with a kiss; hence he says: Greet one another with a holy kiss. Here it should be noted that a kiss is a sign of peace. For a man breathes through the mouth with which a kiss is given. Therefore, when men give one another kisses, it is a sign that they are uniting their spirit of peace. But there is a false peace, and this is done by those who “speak peace with their neighbors, while mischief is in their hearts” (Ps. 28:3), which is accomplished with the deceit of a kiss: “Better are the wounds of a friend, than the deceitful kisses of an enemy” (Prov. 27:6, Vulgate). There is also an evil and degrading peace, namely, when men come together to commit evil: “Afterward it was not enough for them to err about the knowledge of God, but they live in great strife due to ignorance, and they call such great evils peace” (Wis. 14:22). And this is sealed with a lustful kiss. In Prov. (7:13, Vulgate) it is said of an evil woman that “Catching the young man, she kisses him, and with an impudent face, flatters him.” There is also a holy peace which God produces: “And the peace of God, which passes all understanding, will keep your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus” (Phil. 4:7), and this is obtained by a holy kiss, because it unites the spirit with holiness. It is of this kiss that he says here: with a holy kiss. From this there arose the practice whereby believers and holy men kiss one another as a sign of charity and union Ex parte autem aliorum salutat eos, dicens salutant vos sancti omnes, quia omnes sancti et fideles sperant et desiderant, ac orationibus procurant salutem nostram; unde omnes fideles Christi ad invicem sperant et desiderant sibi salutem. Ps. CXVIII, participem me fac, Deus, et cetera. 543. – He greets them on the part of the others when he says, all the saints greet you, because all the saints and faithful hope and desire and procure our salvation with their prayers. Hence, all of Christ’s faithful hope and desire salvation for one another: “Make me a partaker, O God” (Ps. 119, Aquinas Latin). Ex parte autem sua salutat eos apostolus, dicens gratia domini nostri, et cetera. Ubi sciendum quod duplex est modus appropriandi aliquid divinis personis. Unus est essentialiter, alius causaliter; essentialiter autem appropriatur divinis personis, sicut patri potentia, quia ipse est potentia essentialiter, inquantum est principium; filio sapientia, inquantum est verbum; spiritui sancto amor, inquantum est bonitas. Hic vero apostolus non appropriat ista hoc modo, scilicet per essentiam, quia sic omnia appropriarentur spiritui sancto, sed appropriat per causam. Et ideo cum gratia sit donum, quo dimittuntur nobis peccata Rom. c. III, 24: iustificati gratis, etc., et remissio peccatorum sit nobis facta per filium, qui, carnem nostram accipiens, pro peccatis nostris satisfecit, Io. I, 17: gratia et veritas per Iesum Christum facta est, etc.; propter hoc apostolus attribuit gratiam Christo. Unde dicit gratia domini nostri, et cetera. Charitas autem est nobis necessaria, quia oportet nos uniri Deo. I Io. IV, 16: qui manet in charitate, in Deo manet, et cetera. Et quia hoc est a Deo patre, in quantum ipse sic dilexit mundum, ut filium suum unigenitum daret, ut dicitur Io. III, 16, Rom. V, 8: commendat autem Deus suam charitatem, ideo sibi, ut principio istius charitatis, attribuit charitatem cum dicit et charitas Dei, scilicet patris. Communicatio vero divinorum fit per spiritum sanctum, quia est distributor donorum spiritualium. I Cor. XII, 11: haec omnia operatur unus atque idem spiritus. Et ideo spiritui sancto attribuit communicationem, cum dicit et communicatio sancti spiritus. Vel attribuit sibi hoc, quia ipse est communis aliis duabus personis. 544. – He greets them on his own part, when he says: The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all. Here it should be noted that there are two modes of appropriating something to the divine persons: one is essentially [essentialiter] and the other causally [causaliter]. Essentially power [potentia] is appropriated to the Father because he is power essentially; inasmuch as he is the principle. To the Son, wisdom, inasmuch as he is the Word. To the Holy Spirit, love, inasmuch as he is goodness. But here the Apostle does not appropriate those things in this way, namely, by essence [per essentiam], because then all things would be appropriated to the Holy Spirit; rather, he appropriates by cause [per causam]. Therefore, since grace is a gift by which sins are forgiven: “Justified by his grace as a gift” (Rom. 3:24), and the remission of sin is accomplished in us by the Son who took our flesh and satisfied for our sins: “Grace and truth came through Jesus Christ” (Jn. 1:17): for this reason the Apostle attributes grace to Christ, when he says, the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ. But charity is necessary for us because we must become united to God: “He who abides in love abides in God, and God abides in him” (1 Jn. 4:16). And because this is from God the Father, inasmuch as he so loved the world as to send his only begotten Son (Jn. 3:16): “God shows his love for us” (Rom. 5:8), he attributes charity to him as to its source, when he says, and the love of God, namely, the Father. Finally, the communication of divine gifts is accomplished by the Holy Spirit: “All these are inspired by one and the same Spirit” (1 Cor. 12:11). Therefore he attributes communication to the Holy Spirit, when he says, and the fellowship [participation] of the Holy Spirit. Or, he attributes this to him because he is common to the other two persons. Sic ergo apostolus in salutatione sua optat omnia necessaria, cum dicit gratia domini nostri Iesu Christi, et charitas Dei, et communicatio spiritus sancti, sit semper cum omnibus vobis. Amen. Gratia Christi, qua iustificamur et salvamur; charitas Dei patris, qua sibi unimur; et communicatio spiritus sancti, divina nobis dona distribuentis. Amen. 545. – Thus therefore the Apostle in his greeting wishes them all things that are necessary when he says: The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all. The grace of Christ, by which we are made just and are saved; the charity of God the Father, by which we are united to him; and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit distributing divine gifts to us. Amen.