A letter from Jerome (late 4th or early 5th century?)

Translated letter:

PREFACE. Apodemus, my son, who points out the meaning of his name by coming to us on a long journey, and from the shore of the ocean and the farthest borders of Gaul, having passed over Rome, he sought Bethlehem so that he might find heavenly bread and, once sated, speak to the Lord and say: “My heart utters the good word, I am speaking my works for the king.” He brought me in a little note questions of the greatest importance, which he said were given by you and to be delivered to me. After reading them, I understood that the enthusiasm of the Queen of Sheba, who came from the borders of the land to hear the wisdom of Solomon, was fulfilled in you. Of course I am not Solomon (who is ranked first in wisdom over all men before and after him), but you should be called the Queen of Sheba, in whose mortal body sin does not hold sway and who, with your whole mind turned toward the Lord, will hear from him: “Return, return, Sunamite.” As a matter of fact “Saba” in our language means “turning.” And at the same time, pay attention, because your little questions put forth about the Gospel and the Apostle show to an extent that you either do not read the Old Testament enough or you do not understand it enough. The Old Testament is wrapped up in such obscurities and figurative senses of future things that all of it is in need of interpretation. The Eastern Gate, from which true light rises and through which the chief priest enters and departs, is always shut and lies open to Christ alone, “who has the key of David; he opens and no one shuts, he shuts and no one opens,” so that when he unlocks it, you may enter his chamber and say: “The king has led me into his chamber.” Moreover, I have fairly wondered why you have sought the currents of our spring so distant, when the purest spring is so nearby, and, having disregarded the waters of Shiloah, “which hurry by in silence,” you desire the waters of the Sior, which are dirtied by the murky vices of our age. There you have a holy man, Aletheius the priest, who as they say is able to answer what you are asking with a living voice and with wise and learned language, unless perhaps you desire foreign goods and because of the variety of taste, the sustenance of my spices also delights you. For some, sweet things are pleasing, for others, bitter things, for some, sour things refresh the stomach, for others, salty things. I myself have seen nausea and dizziness of the head often cured with a remedy (which is called pikra in Greek, a “bitter” antidote) and according to Hippocrates, opposites cure opposites. So cure our bitterness with the honey as sweet as nectar of Aletheius and throw the wood of the Cross into Marah and curb the aged phlegm with youthful rigor, so you may happily sing: “How sweet is your eloquence in my throat, more than honey in my mouth.” 1. Why does John the Baptist send his disciples to the Lord to ask: “Are you he who is to come, or are we waiting for someone else,” when earlier he himself said about the same man: “Behold the lamb of God, behold, the one who lifts the sins of the world”? I[we] have spoken more fully on this question in my commentaries on Matthew – from which it is evident (since you ask these things) that you do not have these books – nevertheless this question must be touched upon briefly lest I seem to have passed it over entirely. John, after he was bound in chains, sent his disciples to instruct them [by pretending] to inquire for himself, and, since he was about to be beheaded, to point out that Christ was the one to follow. For he was not able to disregard the one whom he had pointed out to the ignorant and about whom he had said: “He who has a spouse is a married man” and “Whose sandals I am not worthy of carrying” and “He must grow, while I must be diminished” and he had heard God the Father thundering: “This is my beloved Son with whom I am pleased.” But because he says: “Are you the one who is to come, or are we waiting for another,” it can have this meaning as well: I know that you yourself are the one who has come to remove the sins of the world, but, because I will descend to the lower regions, I also ask this, whether you would descend even to there or it would be impious to believe this about the Son of God and you would send another? Moreover, I desire to know this: since I have announced you to men on earth, should I also announce you in the lower regions, if perhaps you will come? You are the one who has come to cast off captivity and to release those who were being held in chains. The Lord, understanding his question, responded with deeds rather than speech and instructs John that it is to be announced that the blind can see, the lame can walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf can hear, the dead can rise and – what is greater than these – the poor can be evangelized, the poor either in humility or wealth, because there is no difference in salvation between the poor man and rich man, but all equally are called. He also adds this: “He is blessed, who shall not have been offended in me.” He does not reproach John, but his disciples, who earlier had approached him, saying: “Why are we and the Pharisees often fasting, but your disciples do not fast?” And in John: “Teacher, the one to whom you offered testimony across the Jordan, behold: his disciples are baptizing and many are coming to him.” With their remark they show their envy arising from the magnitude of the signs and from the sting of ill-will, because Jesus himself, baptized by John, dares to baptize and a far greater crowd comes running to him, which earlier had come to John. And so the people will not unknowingly think John is slighted by this utterance, he concludes with praises toward him and begins to speak about John to the crowd standing around: “What did you go to see in the desert? A reed shaken by the wind? And what did you go to see in the wilderness? A man dressed in soft clothing?” and the rest. This is the meaning of his statement: Surely you did not go to the wilderness so that you could see a man resembling a reed bent into various parts by the blowing of the winds? So that he might now doubt the one whom he had praised before, about whom earlier he had said: “Behold the lamb of God,” now he asks whether it is he himself or another who either came or will come. And because all false prophecy pursues gain and seeks human glory in order that profits may grow through glory, he declares that a man clothed in camelhair can succumb to no flattery and the man who feeds on locusts and wild honey does not seek riches, and that the hard and austere life avoids the halls of the palace, which they who are clothed in fine flax and silk and soft clothing have sought. And he says that John is not only a prophet who is accustomed to preaching things to come, but that he is more than a prophet, because this man pointed out that the one whom the prophets said was to come had come, saying: “Behold the lamb of God, who removes the sins of the world,” especially when he approached the prophetic height of baptist. Even though John had said: “I should be baptized by you,” he baptized Christ not with the presumption that he was greater, but with a disciple’s obedience and a servant’s fear. And when he asserts that no one greater than John had arisen among the sons of women, he reminds us that he himself, who was begotten from a virgin, is greater -- or that every angel, even the one who is the smallest in the heavens, surpasses all men on the earth. For we become like angels and angels do not become like us, just as certain people who snore dream in the deepest sleep. And this would not be sufficient praise of John, unless it is added that he was the first to have spoken of the baptism of repentance: “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has drawn near.” That is from the days of John’s preaching; the kingdom of heaven suffers violence so that he who was born a man may desire to be an angel, and an earthly animal may seek a heavenly home. For the law and the prophets preached up to the time of John not because he is the end of the prophets and of the law, but that it is Christ who was predicted in the testimony of John. Moreover, according to the mystery which is written in Malachi, John “is Elijah, who is to come,” not because the same spirit (as the heretics suspect) was both in Elijah and in John, but because John had the same grace of the holy spirit as Elijah, was girded with a belt like Elijah, was living in the desert like Elijah, suffered persecution from Herodias as Elijah had from Jezebel, so that just as Elijah arrived as a forerunner of his successor, so John announced by leaping and exulting that the Lord Savior would come in the flesh not only in the desert, but in the womb of a mother. 2. What is the meaning of what is written in Matthew: “He will not break the shaken rod and he will not extinguish the smoking wick”? For the explanation of this passage, which Matthew took from the prophet Isaiah, the testimony and the words of Isaiah must be set forth according to the Septuagint and the Hebrew, with which Theodotion, Aquila, and Symmachus agree. Thus, of the four evangelists, Matthew alone has written: “And Jesus, realizing this, withdrew from that place and many followed him and he cured all of them and instructed them not to reveal him, so what was written by Isaiah the prophet was fulfilled: ‘Behold my servant, whom I have chosen, my beloved, in whom my spirit is well-pleased. I will place my spirit upon him and he will proclaim judgment/justice to the nations. He will not dispute and he will not shout, nor will anyone in the streets hear his voice. He will not break the shaken reed and he will not extinguish the smoking wick, until he has brought justice to victory; and in his name the nations will place their hope.” Instead of this, in Isaiah according to the Septuagint it is written thus: “Jacob is my servant, I will take him up: Israel is my chosen one, my spirit has taken him up. I have placed my spirit upon him, he will bring justice to the nations. He will not shout nor falter nor will his voice be heard outside. He will not wear down the broken reed and he will not put out the smoking wick, but in truth he will put justice forward. He will be radiant and he will not be shaken, until he establishes justice upon the land.” Moreover I have translated it from the Hebrew thus: “Behold my servant, I will take him up, my chosen one, my spirit is pleased in him. I have placed my spirit upon him; he will put justice forward for the nations. He will not shout, and he will not have respect to person nor will his voice be heard outside. He will not wear down the shaken reed and he will not put out the smoking wick; he will lead justice into truth. He will neither be sad nor troublesome, until he establishes justice on the earth. And the islands will await his law.” From this it is clear that Matthew the evangelist, not constrained by the authority of an old interpretation, departed from the Hebrew original, but as if a Hebrew from the Hebrews, and most learned in the law of God, he translated for the Gentiles what he had read in the Hebrew. For if what the Septuagint put forth is to be accepted: “Jacob my servant, I will take him up; Israel is my chosen one, my soul has taken him up,” how are we to understand what is written about Jacob and Israel as being fulfilled in Jesus? We read that blessed Matthew has done this not only in this passage, but in another: “I have called my son from Egypt,” which the Septuagint translated: “He has called his sons from Egypt.” Surely it is clear that, unless we follow the Hebrew original, it does not pertain to our Lord Savior. For it follows: “Moreover they were sacrificing to Baal.” This was omitted from the quoted Gospel passage: “He will be radiant and he will not be shaken until he establishes justice upon the earth.” It seems to me that this happened because of a mistake of the first writer who, reading the above sentence ending in the word “judgment,” thought that the final word of the sentence below it was “judgment” and he passed over a few words in the middle (that is, between ‘judgment’ and ‘judgment’). And on the other hand, what is read in the Hebrew: “And in his law the islands will place hope,” Matthew, translating the sense rather than the words, instead of “law” and “islands” put “name” and “peoples.” And this is not only in the present place, but, wherever the evangelists and the apostles translated from the Old Testament, it should be rather carefully noticed that they do not follow the words but the sense and, where the Septuagint differs from the Hebrew, they expressed the sense of the Hebrew in their own language. Therefore, the servant of omnipotent God, according to the dispensation of the incarnation, through which he is sent to us, is called the Savior. And the Father says to him in another place: “It is a great thing for you to be called my servant so that you may gather the tribes of Jacob.” He is the vine of Sorech, which is translated as “chosen;” he is the most beloved son, in whom the spirit of God is pleased, not so God might have a soul, but because all of God’s affection is demonstrated in the soul. And it is not surprising if the soul is named in God, since all the limbs of the human body are said to have various ways of understanding, according to the laws of allegorical exposition. He also placed his spirit in him, a spirit of wisdom and understanding, a spirit of council and of fortitude, a spirit of knowledge and of piety and of fear of God who, in the likeness of a dove, descended upon him, about whom John the Baptist also relates that he had heard from God: “Upon whom you will see a holy spirit come down and remain in him, he is the one,” and “he will announce justice upon nations,” about whom we also read in the Psalms: “God, give your judgment to the king and your justice to the son of the king.” Even he himself says in the Gospel: “For the Father does not judge anyone, but he has given judgment to the Son, he will not contend” like a lamb led to sacrifice. “He will not contend” in the destruction of hearers, and “he will” not “shout” according to that which the apostle Paul writes: “Let all clamor and anger and bitterness be removed from you, he will not shout,” because Israel did not make a judgment, but a shout. “And none will hear his voice on the streets or outside” for “all glory of the king’s daughter is from within” and the road which leads to life is narrow and confined. Therefore, his voice will not be heard in the streets, where wisdom confidently leads, not entering the broad and spacious path, but accusing and condemning. Thus he also spoke not in his own voice, but through parables to those who were outside: “He will not break the shaken reed” he says, or, as the Septuagint translated: “He will not wear down the broken read.” The broken reed, which before was able to speak and sang the praises of the Lord, must be called Israel, which once dashed it on a corner stone and fell upon it and was broken on it; for this reason it is said of it: “Rebuke, Lord, the beasts in the reed” and in the book of Joshua, the torrent is called “Cane,” that is “of the reed,” which has turbid waters, which Israel chose. Disdaining the purest currents of the Jordan, having returned in mind to Egypt, and desiring the muddy and swampy region as well as melons, onions, and pots of Egyptian meat, most rightly according to Isaiah is called a “broken reed;” the man who wishes to lean on it will cut his hand. For, all the works of the man will be damaged who, after the arrival of the Lord Savior, neglects the spirit of interpretation and rests in the death of the Jewish letter. Also “he will not extinguish the smoking wick,” the people that were gathered from the nations, who, because the ardor of natural law was extinguished, were wrapped up in the errors of a shadowy darkness and of the most bitter smoke that is harmful to the eyes. He not only did not extinguish the smoking wick and reduce it to ashes, but he kindled such enormous flames from a small and almost dead spark that the whole world burned with the flame of the Lord Savior, a fire which he came to light upon the earth and which he desires to kindle in everyone. I have noted briefly in my little commentaries on Matthew what this passage seems to mean according to an allegorical reading. That man, who did not break the shaken reed and did not extinguish the smoking wick, also led judgment to victory, whose judgments are true and justified in themselves. Thus, he may be justified in his own speeches and may triumph when he is judged, and for a long time the light of his prediction may be resplendent in the world, not worn down and conquered by the snares of anyone, until he establishes judgment on the earth and what is written is fulfilled: “Let your will be done on earth just as it is in heaven. And in his name the peoples will place their hope” or “in his law the islands will place their hope.” For just as the islands are struck by a whirlwind, a blast of winds, and frequent storms, but are not overturned, like the example of the house of the Gospel, which was built on a rock with a firm foundation, so it is also for the churches which hope in the law and in the name of the Lord Savior, and speak through Isaiah: “I am a strong city, a city which is assaulted.” 3. What does the following mean which Matthew the Evangelist writes: “If anyone wishes to come after me, he should deny himself.” What is denial of the self or how does he who follows the Savior deny himself? I spoke about this briefly in the third book of my commentaries on Matthew: “He who puts aside the old man with his works, denies himself, saying: ‘I do not live as myself, rather Christ lives in me,’ and he raises his own cross and he is crucified by the world. Moreover, the one for whom the world has been crucified follows the crucified Lord.” To which we can now add this: “After he pointed out to his disciples that it was necessary for him to go to Jerusalem, to endure many things from the priests and scribes and heads of the priests, and to be killed, Peter, taking him aside, began to rebuke him and say to him: ‘God forbid this happen to you, Lord.’ Having turned to him, Christ says to Peter: ‘Get behind me, Satan, you are a temptation for me, because you do not know what the things of god are, but what the things of men are.’” Surely terrified with a human fear, Peter dreaded the suffering of the Lord. And just as he was afraid, hearing “to suffer many things” and “to be killed,” so hearing “on the third day he will rise” he should have rejoiced and soothed his sadness over the suffering with the glory of the resurrection. After he rebuked Peter because of his fear, he spoke to all the “disciples” or “called together a crowd with his disciples,” as Mark writes, or according to Luke: “He said to all: ‘If anyone wishes to come after me, let him deny himself and pick up his own cross and follow me’.” The sense of the exhortation is this: acknowledging God is not frivolous and free from care. He who believes in me should pour out his own blood. For, whoever has lost his soul in the present world will make this a source of gain in the future. Believing in Christ every day, he lifts his own cross and he denies himself. He, once unchaste, turned toward chastity and denies luxury through temperance; whoever was fearful and cowardly, after he has taken up the strength of courage, does not know his former self. The unjust man, if he follows justice, denies injustice; the fool, if he confesses that Christ is the virtue and wisdom of God, denies foolishness. Because we have knowledge not only in a time of persecution and in the necessity of martyrdom, but in all conduct, work, thought, and conversation, we should deny the very people whom we were before, and we should confess that we are those who have been reborn in Christ. It is for this reason the Lord was crucified, so that we, too, who believe in him and who were dead in sin, might be crucified with him and say what the Apostle Paul taught: “I have been crucified with Christ” and: “Let me not boast except in the cross of my Lord Jesus Christ, through whom the world has been crucified for me, and I for the world.” For he who has been crucified with Christ robs empires and powers and triumphs over them by the wood. Whence, in the Gospel according to John, in the figure of those who were about to believe in the Lord and about to crucify themselves with him, Simon of Cyrene carries his cross which, according to the other evangelists, he carried before. 4. What does the following, which is written in Matthew, mean: “Woe to the pregnant and the nursing in those days” and “Pray that your flight does not happen in winter or on the Sabbath”? It is clear that this depends on what was written in earlier verses. For, when the gospel of Christ has been proclaimed to all people and consummation has arrived and they have seen “the abomination of desolation, which was spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing on a holy place,” then the order is given to those who are in Judea to flee into the mountains, and those on the roof should not come down to raise up anything from their home, and those who are in the field should not turn back to carry off his tunic. I have spoken more fully about these things in my commentaries on Matthew. And immediately it is added: “Woe to the pregnant and the nursing in those days.” In which days? When the abomination of desolation stands in the holy place. Because according to the literal meaning no one can doubt that it is announcing the arrival of the antichrist: when the magnitude of persecution compels flight, both pregnancy and breastfeeding hinder escape, although certain people want it to signify the siege and battle of Titus and Vespasian against the Jews and especially against Jerusalem. They also interpret winter and the Sabbath in this way, lest they are compelled to flee in that time when the harshness of the cold in the desert fields does not permit the fleeing to lie hidden, and the observation of the Sabbath makes them transgressors if they flee, or they lie beneath the swords of enemies, if they observe the rest and precepts of the Sabbath. Hearing the Lord Savior say that those who are in Judea should flee to the mountains, we also raise our eyes to the mountains, about which it is written: “I have raised my eyes to the mountains, from where my help will come,” and in another place: “His foundations are on the holy mountains” and “his mountains roundabout and the Lord roundabout his people” and “the city placed upon the mountains cannot be concealed.” We put on the skin of the letter and with new feet we say that with Moses we are ascending Mount Sinai: “Crossing I will see this great vision,” so that we can understand the pregnant souls which from the seed of doctrines and of the word of God have conceived the beginnings of faith and say with Isaiah: “We have conceived from your fear, Lord, and we have been in labor and we have given birth, we have made the spirit of your salvation upon the land.” For just as seeds are gradually formed in wombs and for so long a time murder is not considered until mixed up elements take up their appearances and limbs, thus what is conceived, having been felt with reason, unless it bursts forth in labor, is still restrained in the stomach and dies through a quick miscarriage. When he saw the abomination of desolation standing in the church and Satan transformed into the angel of light, and speaking about fetuses of this manner, Paul says: “My little children, whom I am pregnant with a second time, until Christ is formed in you.” Therefore I think that these, in a mystical sense, are women, about whom the same apostle writes: “A woman was deceived in transgression; she will be saved, however, through the begetting of children, if she has remained in faith and charity and sanctity with purity.” If these women beget at some point because of divine speech, it is necessary that their children grow and receive the first milk of infancy, until they arrive at the solid food and the mature age of Christ’s plenitude. “For every man who is nourished by milk is unskilled in the reckoning of justice; for he is little.” Therefore, these souls, which have not yet given birth or which have not yet been able to feed their offspring, when they have seen the word of heretics standing in the church, quickly are scandalized and perish. They are not able to endure the storm and persecutions, especially if they abstain from good works and do not walk the path which is Christ. The apostle spoke about the abomination of heretical and perverse doctrine: the man of iniquity and the adversary raises himself up against all that is called God and religion, to such an extent that he dares to stand in the temple of God and to show that he is God himself; whose arrival, according to the working of Satan and those things which have been conceived, he causes to perish through miscarriage, and those which have been born are not able to arrive at childhood and at the mature age. For this reason the Lord is beseeched, so that a winter does not arise in the beginning of faith and growing age, about which it is written: “winter has passed, it has departed,” not so that we become lethargic through rest, but, if shipwreck threatens, we awaken the sleeping Lord and we say: “Teacher, save us, we are dying.” 5. What does the following which is written in the Gospel according to Luke mean: “And they did not receive him, since his face was going to Jerusalem”? The Lord, hastening to proceed to Jerusalem, so that the days of his assumption could be fulfilled and Passover could be celebrated, had said: “I have desired eagerly to eat with you this Passover,” and to drink the cup, about which he says: “The cup, which the Father gave to me, shall I not drink it?” And he strengthened all his teaching according to this, which is written: “When I am exalted, I will bring all things to me,” he strengthened his face, so that he might go to Jerusalem. For there was need of strength and courage for Christ as he was willingly hastening to his suffering; Ezekiel likewise, to whom the Lord had spoken: “Son of Man, you dwell in the midst of scorpions and do not fear them: I have strengthened,” he says, “your face and I have given you a brazen face and an iron brow” so that, if perhaps the hammer of the whole earth had risen up against him, like the hardest anvil he should resist the hammer, about which it is written: “How has the hammer of the entire earth been broken and worn down? And he sent messengers,” that is angels, before his face, for it was just that the angels should tend to the son of God; or he calls the angels apostles, because even John, the forerunner of the Lord, was called an angel. “And when they had entered the neighborhood of Samaria, so that they could make arrangements for him, they did not receive him, because his face was going to Jerusalem.” The Samaritans and Jews quarrel amongst themselves with hostile hatred, since they hate all Gentiles. With their own madness they act like bacchants against each other, while each contests the possession of the law and attack each other in turn to such an extent that, after the Jews returned from Babylon, the Samaritans prevented the building of the temple. And when they wished to build the temple with them, the Jews responded: “It is not permitted for us and for you to build the temple of the Lord.” Finally because of the greatest injury the Pharisees reproach the Lord: “Are you not demon-possessed and a Samaritan?” And in a parable about a man coming down from Jerusalem to Jericho, a Samaritan is put forth as a sign and a miracle because he did well; and at the well of a Samaritan woman it is written: “The Samaritans do not have dealings with the Jews,” therefore the Samaritans, seeing the Lord continue to Jerusalem, that is, toward enemies (because they had heard this from his disciples who had come to prepare his lodging), they recognize him to be a Jew, and like a Jew and a foreigner, they did not want to receive the one going toward enemies. But another meaning is suggested to us: that it was the will of the Lord to not be received by the Samaritans, because he was hastening to go to Jerusalem and to suffer there and to shed blood, lest he be seized by a Samaritan reception and by the instruction of the people put off the day of his passion, for which he had come to suffer. He speaks similarly in another place: “I have not come except for the lost sheep of the house of Israel” and he taught the apostles: “You will not enter the cities of the Samaritans,” wishing to remove every occasion for Jewish persecution, so they could not later say: “We crucified him because he had joined himself to our foes and enemies.” “Therefore, his face was going to Jerusalem” and for this reason, according to another meaning, the Samaritans did not receive him, because he was hastening to enter Jerusalem. Thus, it was the Lord’s will that the Samaritans did not receive him. Indeed the apostles, knowledgeable in the law in which the only justice they knew was “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth,” try to avenge the injury and imitate Elijah, at whose voice a fire carried off two commanders, and they say to the Lord: “Do you want us to speak so that fire comes down from heaven and consumes them?” They use the polite “we say”; for Elijah also had said: “If I am a man of God, may fire descend from heaven upon you.” Therefore it is the will of the Lord that the speech of the apostles has power. For unless he orders it, the apostles speak in vain for fire to descend upon them, and in a certain way they say this with other words: “If fire descends from heaven because of the injury done to Elijah, a servant, and the fire consumed not the Samaritans but the Jews, by how much more ought the flame savage the impious Samaritans for holding the son of God in contempt! On the contrary, the Lord, who had come not for judging, but for saving, not in power, but in humility, not in the glory of the father, but in the worthlessness of man, rebukes them, because they did not remember his teaching and the gospel of goodness, in which he had said: “He who shall have struck you on the cheek, offer him the other cheek” and “Love your enemies.” 6. You have proposed another little question about the gospel of Luke: “Who is the worker of injustice who was praised by the voice of Lord”? When I wished to know the explanation and from which source it came, I unrolled the gospel book and I learned (among other things) that for those drawing near the Savior, the tax collectors and the sinners, “as they were listening to him, the Pharisees and the scribes were whispering, saying: ‘Why does that man receive the sinners and eat with them?’” Jesus told them the parable of the hundred sheep and the one lost sheep, which, once it had been found, was brought back on the shoulders of the shepherd and he at once explained why this parable was put forth: “I say to you: thus there will be more joy in heaven over the one repentant sinner than over 99 just men, who do not have need of repentance.” When he had also set forth another parable of the ten drachmas and of the one drachma lost and found, he ended it similarly: “So I say to you: there will be joy in the presence of the angels of God for the one repentant sinner.” He also put forth the third parable of the man having two sons and dividing his wealth among them. And when the younger one had begun to be in need of the lost wealth and to eat the pods, the food of pigs, he returned to his father and was received by him. The older brother also, being jealous, is rebuked by the voice of his father, because he should have been glad and rejoiced that his brother had been dead and lived again, was lost and was found. He spoke these three parables against the Pharisees and the scribes, who did not want to accept that there was repentance for sinners and salvation for tax collectors. “And he said also to his disciples” -- without doubt a ‘parable’ -- just as he did earlier with the scribes and Pharisees, with which he encouraged his disciples toward mercy and he said this in other words: “Forgive and you will be forgiven,” so that in the Lord’s Prayer you can ask: “Forgive us our debts, just as we forgive our debtors” with a carefree brow. So what is the parable calling forth the disciples to clemency? “There was a certain rich man, who had a manager” or steward; for oikonomos means this. The manager is rightly the manager of the villa, and it is from “villa” that “vilicus” has taken its name. An oikonomos moreover is more a manager of money than of grain and everything which a master possesses. The title of Xenophon’s Oikonomikos, a most noble book, does not mean the manager of the villa, but the management of the entire house (according to Cicero’s interpretation). So this manager was accused before his master on the accusation that he had squandered his master’s wealth; when he was summoned, the master said to him: “What is this that I hear about you? Render an account of your management, for you will no longer be able to manage my wealth.” The manager said to himself: “‘What should I do, because my master removes me from managing? I cannot dig, I am ashamed to beg. I know, what I should do so that when the managing has been removed from me, they may receive me in their houses?’ And he called each of his master’s debtors and said to the first: ‘How much do you owe my master?’ The man said to him: ‘100 baths of oil.’ He says to this man: ‘Take your bill, and sitting down quickly, write 50.’ Then he said to another: ‘And you, how much do you owe?’ The man replied: ‘100 coros of wheat.’ He says to this man: ‘Take your bill and write down 80.’ And the master praised his steward” (or manager) “of injustice, because he acted wisely: because the children of this age are wiser in their generation than the sons of light. And I say to you: ‘Make friends for yourself of the mammon of iniquity, so that when it fails, they may receive you in the eternal dwellings. He who is faithful in little is also faithful in much, and he who is unjust in the least will be unjust in much. Therefore if you were not faithful in the mammon of iniquity, who will entrust what is true to you? And if you were not faithful toward someone else’s property, who will give that which is yours to you? No slave is able to serve two masters. He will either hate one or favor the other, or he will listen to one and treat the other with contempt. You are not able to serve God and money.’ And the Pharisees, who were greedy, were listening to all these words and were mocking him.” I have inserted the whole text of this parable, so that we do not seek its meaning elsewhere and so that we do not endeavor to find certain people in the parable, but that we understand it as a parable, that is a likeness, which takes its name from what others call a paraballetai, that is, similarity, and it is like a shadow or an introduction to the truth. Thus, if the manager of the mammon of iniquity is praised by the voice of master because he prepared justice for himself from an unjust matter, and, although having suffered losses, the master praises the wisdom of the manager because he indeed acted dishonestly toward his master but prudently for himself, by how much more will Christ, who is able to suffer no loss and is disposed toward clemency, praise his own disciples if they are merciful to those who have been entrusted to them! Indeed he said after the parable: “And I say to you: Make yourselves friends of the mammon of iniquity.” It is called “the mammon of iniquity,” which means “riches” not in Hebrew but in Syriac, because riches are gathered by unjust means. So if well-managed injustice is turned into justice, by how much more will divine word, (in which there is no injustice, which has also been entrusted to the apostles) if it has been well-managed, raise its own managers into heaven! Therefore, he follows: “He who is faithful in the least,” that is in worldly matters, “will be faithful in much,” that is, in spiritual matters. “And he who is unjust in little,” so that he does not give to his brothers for use what has been created by God for everyone; and that man will be unjust in the distribution of spiritual money, so that he does not distribute the teaching of the Lord according to need but according to persons. “But if” he says, “you do not dispense worldly riches, which are perishable, who will entrust the eternal riches of God’s teaching to you? And if you were unfaithful in what is someone else’s -- and that which is of the age is entirely foreign to us -- who will be able to entrust to you the things which are yours and rightfully assigned to man?” Therefore, he rebukes greediness and says that the man who loves money cannot love God. So the apostles, too, must shun money if they wish to love God. And the scribes and Pharisees, who were greedy, understanding the parable was spoken against them, were mocking him by preferring worldly things, being both fixed and present, to spiritual and future things, as being uncertain. Theophilus, the seventh bishop of the Antiochene church after Peter the Apostle who, compiling the words of the four evangelists into one work, left to us reminders of his talent, said these things about this parable in his own commentaries: “The rich man, who has a manager or steward, is God Almighty, than whom there is nothing richer. His steward Paul, who learned sacred letters at the feet of Gamaliel, had taken up God’s law of managing. When he had begun to persecute those believing in Christ, to bind them, to kill, and to squander all the fortune of the Lord, he was rebuked by the Lord: ‘Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me? It is hard to kick against the goad.’ And he said in his own heart: ‘What should I do? I, who was a teacher and a manager, am compelled to be a disciple and a laborer. I am not able to dig. For I see all the commandments of the law, which were lying upon the earth, as abolished, and the law and the prophets all the way up to John the Baptist is destroyed. I am ashamed to beg, since I, who had been a teacher of the Jews, will be compelled to beg for the doctrine of salvation and faith from Gentiles and from the disciple Ananias. I will therefore (since I understand that it is useful for me) see to it that, after I am cast out from my job as manager, Christians receive me in their homes.’ And those who earlier were living under the law and thus had believed in Christ so that they might consider themselves justified in the law, Paul began to teach them that the law was abolished, that the prophets passed by, that what before was thought to be profitable is regarded as rubbish. And so he summoned two from the many debtors. The first, who owed a hundred baths of oil, surely these which had gathered from the Gentiles and were in need of the great mercy of God, and instead of the number 100, which is a full and complete number, he made them write 50, which was rightfully the number for penitents, according to the law of Jubilee, and the parable in the Gospel, in which some are forgiven 500 and others 50 denarii. And the second man he called the people of the Jews, who had been nourished by the wheat of the God’s commandments and owed to him the number of 100. And he compelled him to make 80 from 100, that is to believe in the resurrection of Lord, which is contained in the number of the eighth day, and from eight is the completion of the decade: so that he could go from the Sabbath to the first of the Sabbath. For this reason he is praised by the Lord, because he did well and he exchanged the austerity of the law for the clemency of the gospel for his salvation. But if you ask why he is called the ‘worker of injustice’ in the law, which is God’s: he was a worker of injustice, who indeed sacrificed well, but did not distribute well, believing in the Father, but persecuting the Son, regarding God as all-powerful, but denying the Holy Spirit. And Paul the Apostle was wiser in the transgression of the law than they who were once the sons of light who, although they lived in observance of the law, lost Christ, who is the true light of the father.” You will be able to read how Ambrose, bishop of Milan, understood this passage in his commentaries. I was not able to find an explanation of this passage in Origen and Didymus; I am uncertain whether it is because it was obliterated by the long duration of time or because they did not write one. It seems to me (according to the earlier interpretation) that we ought to make for ourselves friends of the mammon of iniquity who are not just any poor people, but those who may be able to receive us into their homes and eternal dwellings so that, when we offer little things to them, we may receive great things from them. Also, by giving the property of others, we may take up our own and sow them in blessing in order to reap blessing; for he who sows sparingly also reaps sparingly. 7. In what sense should what we read in the letter to the Romans be understood: “For rarely does someone die for the just man; but perhaps on behalf of a good person someone would dare to die”? There are two heresies on the occasion of this passage that reproach what they do not understand with varying error, but with similar impiety. Marcion, who sees God as just and as the creator of the law and of the prophets, but moreover who wishes Christ, of the Gospels and apostles, to be God’s good son, introduces two gods: one is just, the other is good. And he asserts that for the just god either none or few meet death; yet for the good god, that is Christ, countless martyrs had come forth. But Arius refers to Christ as “just,” about whom it is said: “God, bestow your judgment upon the king and your justice to the son of the king” -- and he speaks about himself in the Gospel: “For the Father does not judge anyone, but all judgment he gave to the son” and “I, just as I hear, so I judge.” The “good” god, however, is the father, about whom his own son admits: “Why do you say that I am good? No one is good except the one-god-father.” And although up to this point he can find the erratic paths for his own blasphemy, he stumbles and falls on what follows. For how does someone dare to die on behalf of the father and hardly on behalf of the son, since on account of the name of Christ so much blood of the martyrs has been poured out? He who explains this passage simply can say this, that in the old law, in which there is justice, few have been found who poured out their own blood, but in the new covenant, in which is there is goodness and mercy, countless martyrs have arisen. But because of the fact that he said: “Perhaps even someone would dare to die” and tempered his statement with an uncertain step, he showed it should not be understood in this way, that some can be found who would dare to die for the gospel, but that the sense of this passage ought to be taken from what preceded and follows. For Paul the Apostle, saying that he glories in tribulations, because “tribulation makes patience, patience makes trial, trial makes hope, but hope does not confound,” since it has a certain promise, “because God’s love has been poured in our hearts through the holy spirit, which has been given to us,” according to this, which God had spoken through a prophet: “I will pour out from my spirit over all flesh,” he is marveling at the goodness of Christ, because he wished to die for the sick and the impious and the sinners and to die at the right time, about which he himself says: “At the right time I heard you and I was a help on the day of your salvation” and again: “Behold the acceptable time, behold the day of salvation.” When all have sinned and at the same time have been made useless, there was not one who did well, not even one. Therefore, it is remarkable goodness and unheard-of mercy to die on behalf of the impious -- for hardly would anyone shed his own blood for the just and the good man, since the fear of death deters all things; although sometimes it might be found that someone would dare to die for a just and good thing -- God’s love, moreover, which he had for us, is certainly shown after that, because “when we were still sinners, Christ died for us, and his life was removed from the earth, and he was put to death because of the injustices of the people, and he carried our sins, and the soul of that man was handed over to death, and he was reckoned with the unjust,” so that he could make us, impious and weak and sinners, pious and strong and just. Some interpret it as follows: If Christ died for us who were impious and sinners, by how much more should we die without any hesitation for the just and good Christ! And we should not think that the just and the good are different, nor that it marks any person in particular, but simply a just and good thing, on behalf of which -- sometimes and with difficultly -- someone can be found who would pour out his own blood. 8. What does what the Apostle wrote to the Romans mean: “But sin, taking the opportunity through the commandment, worked to make every desire in me”? Let me lay out the entire passage and, explaining individual details with Christ’s help, let me point out simply what seems correct to me, not passing judgment on your understanding of it, but briefly explaining my opinion. “Therefore what can we say? Is the law sinful? Far from it. But I did not recognize sin except through the law. For I would not have known desire, if the law had not said: ‘You shall not desire.’ But sin, taking the opportunity through the commandment, caused every desire to be in me. For without the law, sin was dead. And I was living without the law for some time, but, when the commandment came, sin lived again, but I died and I discovered that the commandment, which was supposed to lead to life, led to death. For sin, taking the opportunity through the commandment, seduced me and through it killed me. And so indeed the law is holy and the commandment is holy and just and good. Was that which is good therefore a cause of death for me? Far from it. But in order that sin may appear as sin, worked death in me through that which is good, so that, by means of the commandment, sinning might become utterly sinful. For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am of the flesh, having been sold under sin. For what I do, I do not know; I do not do that which I want to do, but I do that which I hate. But if I do what I do not wish to do, I consent to the law, because it is good. Now, however, it is not I that do it, but sin, which dwells in me. For I know that good does not dwell in me, that is, in my flesh. For the desire to do good is in me, but the ability to carry it out, not at all. For I do not do the good which I want to do, but I do evil, which I do not want to do. Moreover, if I do not want to do it, I do that, and it is not I that do it, but sin, which dwells in me. Thus, I find the law, when I am willing to do good, because evil is beside me. For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man. But I see another law in my limbs fighting back against the law of my mind and leading me captive in the law of sin, which is in my limbs. I am an unfortunate man; who will free me from the body of this death? The grace of God through Jesus Christ, our Lord.” Just as medicine is not the cause of death if it reveals deadly poisons (though wicked men use these for death and for either killing themselves or attacking their enemies), thus the law has been given in order to disclose the poisons of sinners as well as retain, with the bridle of the law, the man badly abusing his own freedom who, being unwary, was previously carried and was slipping headlong from the road. It also teaches him to proceed with ordered steps, “to the extent that we serve in the newness of the spirit and not in the oldness of the letter,” that is, so that we live under the precept, we who earlier in the manner of brute beasts used to say: “Let us eat and let us drink; for tomorrow we die.” But if the law should enter in secretly and, by our vice and inconstancy, we should be brought against the legal statutes that teach us what we should do and prohibit what we should not do, then the law seems to be a cause of sin, which, though it prohibits desire, in a certain way is discovered to inflame it. There is a secular saying among the Greeks: “Whatever is permitted is desired less.” Therefore, on the contrary, whatever is not permitted admits the kindling of desire. For this reason, even Cicero denies that Solon had written laws concerning the punishments for parricides among the Athenians so that he did not seem so much as to prohibit it as to remind them of it. So the law among the scofflaws and those who trample upon the precepts of the law seems to be an opportunity for transgressions, since by prohibiting what it does not wish to occur, it binds with chains of commandments those who, sinning apart from the law, were not regarded as criminals before. I said these things understanding the law which was given through Moses. But, because in the following it is written: “It is God’s law and the law of the flesh and members, which fights against the law of our mind and leads us as captives in the law of sin,” and I think that four laws, at the same time, fighting against themselves, have been written in one place, I do not think it irrelevant if I seek how many kinds of law are mentioned in the holy scripture. There is a law which was given through Moses, according to that which was written to the Galatians: “However many there are in the works of the law, they are under the curse. For it is written: every man has been cursed who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.” And again in the same letter: “The law was established on account of transgressions, until the seed should come to whom the promise was made, having been ordained through the angels by the hand of a mediator.” Again: “And so the law has been our teacher in Christ, so that we may be justified from faith. But after faith has come, we are in no way under a teacher, for all of you are children of God through faith which is in Christ Jesus.” History too, which does not contain precepts, but records what happens, is called a law by the apostle: “Tell me, you who wish to be under the law, have you not heard the law? For it has been written that Abraham had two sons, one from a slave and another from a freewoman. But the one born of the slave was born according to the flesh, and the one born of the freewoman was born according to a promise.” But the Psalms too are called the law, “so that the word might be fulfilled, which has been written in their law: because ‘they hated me for no reason’.” The apostle also calls the prophecy of Isaiah the law: “It has been written in the law, ‘since in other tongues and on other lips I will speak to this people and even so they will not hear me,’ says the Lord.” This is what I found written in the Hebrew and in Aquila’s version of Isaiah. It is also called the law in the mystical sense of the Scriptures: “We know that the law is spiritual.” And besides all these things the same apostle teaches that natural law is written in our hearts: “For when the Gentiles, who do not have the law, naturally do the things which are of the law, they, although not having the law for themselves, are a law unto themselves, who show that the work of the law has been written in their own hearts, with their consciences bearing witness.” That law, which is written in the heart, includes all peoples, and there is no man who does not know this law. Therefore the entire world is under sin and all men are transgressors of the law and for this reason the just judgment of God is written in the heart of the human race: “What you do not want done to you, do not do to another.” Who could not know that murder, adultery, theft, and all desire is evil since he does not wish them to happen to himself? For if he did not know that these things were evil, he would never come to grief when they are done to him. Because of this natural law, even Cain recognized his sin, saying: “My blame is greater than that I should be forgiven.” Both Adam and Eve recognized their sin and for this reason were hidden under the tree of life. Pharaoh, too, before the law was given through Moses, is incited by natural law and confesses his crimes, saying: “The Lord is just, but I and my people are impious.” Childhood does not know this law, infancy is ignorant of this law, and sinning with the commandment is not held by the law of sin. The child curses his father and strikes his parents and, because he has not yet received the law of wisdom, sin is dead in him. But when the commandment has come, that is the time to understand the one seeking good things and shunning evil things; then he begins to come to life again and dies and is guilty of sin, and thus it happens that the time of understanding, during which we become aware of the commandments of God, when we arrive at life, works death in us, if we act negligently, and the occasion for wisdom seduces us and trips us up and leads to death, not because the knowledge of the law is a sin (for the law of understanding is holy and just and good) but because by the understanding of sins and virtues, sin is born in me, which, before I understood, I did not recognize was sin. And so it happened that what was given to me as good is turned into evil through my fault and -- so I can explain it more forcefully and use a new expression to explain my meaning -- sin, which, before I had understanding, was without sin, by the transgression of the commandment, began to be a greater source of sin for me. First we seek what that covetousness is, about which the law says: “You shall not covet.” Others think of that commandment which was written in the Decalogue: “You shall not covet your neighbor’s goods.” But I think that all disturbances of the soul are signified through “covetousness” because of which we mourn and grieve, fear and desire. And the apostle (the vessel of election), whose body was a temple of the holy spirit and who said: “Or do you seek proof of Christ, who is speaking through me?” and in another place: “Christ atoned for us” and again: “Moreover I live now not as myself, but Christ lives in me,” he is not speaking about himself, but about the man who, after sinning, wishes to be penitent, and in his own person he describes the fragility of the human condition, which consists of two men: the inner and outer, enduring the wars of those fighting amongst themselves. The inner man consents to both written and natural law, because it is holy and just and spiritual; the outer man says, “I am of the flesh, sold under sin, since I do not know what I do and I do not do that which I want to, but what I hate.” If the outer man, moreover, does what he does not wish, and he does that which he hates, he shows that the commandment is good and that he is not the one committing evil deeds, but the sin dwelling in his flesh, that is, the incentive of the flesh and the desire for pleasure, which, because of our ancestors and offspring, is grafted into human bodies and, if it goes beyond the boundaries, turns into sin. Each one reflects on himself and he, his own accuser, recognizes the incentives of vices, how in talk and in thought and in the heat of the flesh he often speaks and thinks and suffers what he does not wish; I do not want to say “he does what he does not wish,” lest I seem to accuse holy men, about whom it is written: “That man was a true, unstained, just worshiper of God, retreating from every evil,” and about Zachariah and Elisabeth: “And both were just in the sight of God, walking in all the commandments and justifications of the Lord without blame.” And it is taught by the apostles: “Be perfect, just like your heavenly father is perfect.” He would not have commanded this of the apostles if he did not know that man can be perfected. Unless perhaps we say this: that “retreating from every evil” signifies a correction and a passage from the errors of childhood and the vices of a frisky age, to improvement and virtues, and it signifies that justice, which is praised in Zachariah and Elisabeth, is outside, but desire, which now is said to dwell in our limbs, is turned inside. But it is taught by apostles not to children, but to those already in the prime of life so that they may practice it to fulfillment, which we acknowledge exists in adulthood. In saying these things I do not flatter vices, but I follow the authority of the Scriptures, which state that no man is without sin and God restrains all men under sin, with the result that he pities everyone, except that one alone who “did not sin, and no deceit was found in his mouth.” Thus, too, it is said through Solomon, that the tracks of the serpent are not found on the rocks. And the Lord said of himself: “Behold,” he says, “the prince of this world comes and has no claim on me,” that is, of his own work and his own footsteps. For this reason we are ordered not to reproach the man turning from his sins and not to detest the Egyptians, because we ourselves were once in Egypt and we built cities made of mud and bricks for Pharaoh and because we were led as captives into Babylon through the law of sin, which was lingering in our limbs. And when despair seemed at its height, or, rather, an open confession that all mankind is entangled in the snares of the devil, the apostle, rather the man in the person of the apostle, having withdrawn into himself speaks and gives thanks to the Savior, because he was redeemed through his blood and cast off his dirt in baptism and took up the new clothing of Christ and from a dead old man, a new man was born who could say: “I am a wretched man, who will free me from this body of death? I give thanks to the Lord through Jesus Christ, our Lord,” who freed me from the body of death. But if it seems to someone that the apostle does not, in his own person, speak about others, let him explain how Daniel, whom we know to have been just, seems to be speaking about himself when he prays for others: “We have sinned, we have acted unjustly, we have carried on unjustly, we have acted impiously and we have retreated and turned away from your commandments and judgments and we have not obeyed your servants, the prophets, who spoke in your name to our kings and princes and fathers and all the people of the land.” That which is said in the 31st Psalm: “I have made my sin known to you and I have not hidden my iniquity. I have said: I will confess my injustice to the Lord against myself, and you have forgiven the impiety of my sin. Thus every holy man will pray for you at the right time,” applies not to David who was both a just man and, simply speaking, a prophet, whose words are related here, but to the sinner. And when the just man, under the guise of the penitent man, had poured forth such things, he deserved to hear from God: “I will make it so that you understand and I will teach you on the path which you will walk; I will fix my eyes upon you.” Also in the 31st Psalm is the title “In observance,” to teach to be always mindful of our sins and to be repentant and we read thus: “There is not peace in my bones because of my sins. Since my iniquities have been elevated over my head, like a heavy burden they were made heavy upon me. My wounds have been corrupted and have decayed because of my foolishness. I am afflicted and greatly stooped over.” This entire passage of the apostle and that which precedes and follows it, or rather his entire letter to the Romans, is wrapped up in excessive obscurity and, if I want to explain it all, I will have to write not just one book, but many long ones. 9. Why does Apostle Paul in the same letter to the Romans write: “I myself desired to be accursed from Christ on behalf of my brothers and my kinsmen according to the flesh, who are the Israelites. Theirs is the adoption and glory and covenants and receiving of the law and worship and promises. Theirs are the patriarchs, from whom Christ came according to the flesh, who is God over all, praised for ever, Amen”? Actually this is an important question concerning the apostle, who had spoken earlier: “Who will separate us from the love of Christ? Tribulation, dire straits, persecution, hunger, want, danger, or the sword?” and again: “For I am confident that neither death nor life nor the angels nor empires nor present things nor future things nor might nor height nor depth nor any other creature will be able to separate us from the love of God, which we possess in Christ Jesus, our Lord.” Now under oath he affirms and says: “I speak the truth in Christ; I do not lie, with my conscience bearing witness in the holy spirit, because my sadness is great and the grief of my heart is continuous, for I desired to be accursed from Christ on behalf of my brothers and my kinsmen according to the flesh” and the rest. For if there is so much love in the Lord that neither through fear of death nor hope of life nor persecution nor hunger nor want nor danger nor the sword can one be separated from his love, and, if the angels too and the rulers and either present things or future things and all the strength of the heavens and the height as well as the depth and all creatures at the same time march against him (which is entirely impossible), that one could not be separated from the love of God, which one possesses in Jesus Christ, what is this great change, this unheard-of wisdom, whereby, for the love of Christ, one does not wish to have Christ? And lest we perchance do not believe Paul, he swears and he affirms in Christ and he calls upon the holy spirit as the witness of his conscience that he does not have a frivolous and casual sadness, but a great and incredible sadness in his heart, not one which vexes him for an hour and passes, but one which abides constantly in his heart. Where does this sadness tend? Toward what does the unceasing grief lead? He desires to be accursed from Christ and to die so that others might be saved. But if we consider the voice of Moses begging God on behalf of the Jewish people and saying: “If you forgive their sin, forgive; but if you do not want to, blot me out from your book which you have written,” we will observe that the feeling of both Moses and Paul toward the flock entrusted to them is the same. Indeed, the good shepherd places his life on the line for his sheep, but the mercenary, when he sees the wolf coming, flees, because the sheep are not his. And this very thing is said: “I desired to be accursed from Christ” and “Blot me out from the book, which you have written.” For those who are blotted out from the book of the living and are not written with the just become accursed from the Lord. Also recognize how great is the apostle’s love for Christ, that for him he desires to die and to perish alone, so long as the entire race of mankind believes in him. And not dying in perpetuity, but dying for the present. For he who loses his life for Christ, achieves salvation. He thus takes up an example from the 43rd Psalm: “Since on your behalf we are killed all day, we are thought of as sheep for the slaughter.” Therefore, the apostle wishes to die in the flesh so that others might be saved in the spirit; he wishes to pour out his own blood so that the souls of many might be preserved. Moreover, it can be proven by many passages in the Old Testament that “a cursed thing” sometimes meant “slaughter.” And lest we think his sadness frivolous and a small cause for grief, he adds to his remarks and says: “On behalf of my brothers and relatives according to the flesh.” Since he calls them kinsmen and brothers according to the flesh, he demonstrates that they are apart from him in spirit. “Theirs is the adoption” he says, which is translated more clearly in Greek huiothesia, about whom the Lord once spoke: “My first-born son is Israel” and “I have given birth to sons and I have raised them on high.” Now he says: “The children that are strangers have deceived me.” And “theirs is the glory,” since from all peoples they were chosen in particular as the people of God. “And theirs are the witnesses,” one in the letter, the other in the spirit, so that they who earlier in the flesh had obeyed the rituals of the abolished law, afterwards obeyed in the spirit the commandments of the everlasting gospel. “And the giving of the law” responds to each: the New and Old Testaments. “And worship,” that is, true religion. “And promises” that, whatever was promised by the patriarchs, has been fulfilled in the children. And -- what is greater than all else-- “from whom Christ” came, having been born from the Virgin Mary. And in order that we might know who this Christ is, he expresses in one sentence the causes of grief: “God over all is praised forever, amen,” so that the one so great and of such a sort might not be learned to be received by people from whose flesh he was generated. And nonetheless the apostle praises the truth of the judgment, lest the sentence of God on his brothers and kinsmen seems to displease and to be either too bitter or too much. Therefore Paul grieves for those people in whom there had been so many good things, because there now are so many bad things. 10. What does what the same apostle writes to the Colossians mean: “Let no one trick you, willing in humility of mind and in worship of the angels, walking in the things which he has not seen, inflated in vain by the sense of his flesh and not holding the head, from which the whole body, by binds and joints, has been nourished and compacted, grows in the increase of the Lord” and the rest? That which I have frequently said: “Although he is unskilled in speech, nevertheless, he is not in knowledge,” I even now endorse that it is not at all from humility, but from the truth of conscience that Paul had spoken. For the language does not explain the deep and hidden meanings. And although he himself understands it, what he says cannot be carried over to foreign ears with plain language, although he was most eloquent -- surely as a Hebrew among Hebrews and one who was instructed at the feet of Gamaliel, a man most learned in the law – in his desire to express himself, he is obscure. But if this happened to him in the Greek language, which he had absorbed, having been raised in Tarsus in Cilicia from an early age, what should be said about the Latin speakers who, trying to translate word for word, make Paul’s thoughts more obscure, as if they are choking the abundance of fruits with growing weeds? Thus, I will try to explain his sense paraphrastikōs and translate the troubles of his complicated eloquence according to order and construction so that with a simple warp of words the threads can proceed, and with a pure woof of apostolic speech, the weaving can spring up. “Let no one surpass you.” “Let no one receive the prize to your disadvantage.” For this is said in Greek with “katabrabeuetō,” when someone in a contest loses the palm of victory owed to him because of the unfairness of the match’s president or the corruption of the referees. And there are many words which, in accordance with the custom of his city and province, the apostle rather habitually uses. A few of these, for the sake of example, need to be put forth: “It is a very small thing for me to be judged by a human day,” that is “apo anthropinēs hēmeras,” and: “I speak in human terms,” “anthrōpinon legō,” and: “ou katenarkēsa humas,” “I have not been a burden to you,” and, what is now spoken: “mēdeis humas katabrabeuetō,” that is “let no one receive the prize to your disadvantage.” The Cilicians use these and many other words all the way up to the present day. Nor should we be surprised at the apostle if he uses the custom of his language, in which he was born and raised, since Virgil, a second Homer for us, following the custom of his own native land refers to the cold as “wicked.” Therefore let no one surpass and conquer you in wishing to follow the humility of the letter, religion, and worship of the angels, with the result that you do not serve spiritual understanding, but examples of future things, which he himself has not seen, who desires to surpass you, or sees -- for both are signified in the Greek -- especially since he, puffed up, walks and goes about swollen with pride and offers arrogance of mind and in the carriage of body -- for this is what embateuōn means --, moreover, he is puffed up in vain and swollen in the feeling of his flesh, understanding all things carnally and searching everywhere for the absurdities of Jewish traditions and not holding on to that head of all scriptures, about which it is said: “Christ is the head of man.” And it is the head and beginning of the entire body, and of those who believe, and all spiritual understanding. It is from the head that the body of the church, through its structures and joints, receives the vital fluid of heavenly teaching so that all limbs gradually are stirred up. And, through hidden passages of veins, the purified blood of food is poured in and is administered and grows; rather, the moderation of the body is supported, so that from the font of the head the watered limbs grow into the perfection of God, so that the speech of the Savior is fulfilled: “Father, I wish that, just as you and I are one, these should be one in us, so that,” after Christ handed us over to the father, “God may be all in all.” Paul writes most obscurely to the Ephesians in words and senses and types of expression something such as this: “And speaking the truth in love, we may grow in love in every respect for Christ, who is the head, from whom the whole body, being compacted and joined together through every joint of support, according to the operation in the measurement of each member, makes an increase of the body in building itself in love.” I have spoken more fully about this in my commentaries on this same letter. Paul moreover speaks all these things against those Jewish converts, who, although believing in the Lord Savior, desired to observe Jewish rituals. Even in the Acts of the Apostles, a big question was stirred up concerning this issue. Whence Paul also spoke previously: “Let no one judge you” -- concerning those who boast that they are teachers of the law -- “in food and drink,” because some are clean, others unclean, “or on the issue of a holiday,” since they think that some days are holidays and other days are not -- while for us, who believe in the rising Christ, the festivity is continual and everlasting -- “or on the issue of the new moon,” that is, on the Kalends of the first day of the month, when the waning moon is done and is concealed by the shadows of night -- for the light of Christians is eternal and is always illuminated by the rays of the sun of justice -- “or on the issue of the Sabbath,” so that they may not do servile work and carry burdens, because we are bestowed with the freedom of Christ and we have ceased carrying the burdens of sins. “All these things” he says, “are a shadow of future things” and images of coming happiness, so that, in which Jews are stuck according to the letter and are held on the earth, we according to the spirit may go over to Christ who is now called “the body” as opposed to shadows. For, as there is truth in the body and falsehood in the shadow of the body, so in spiritual understanding, all food and drink is pure, the holiday is complete, the Kalends is perpetual, and eternal rest must be awaited. We ask what Paul means when he says: “in the humility and the worship of the angels,” or what sense it has. Since the Lord said to his disciples: “Get up, let us leave from here” and: “Your house, deserted, will be left for you,” and: “The place, where the Lord was crucified, is called spiritually ‘Egypt’ and ‘Sodom,’” all rituals of Jewish observances have been destroyed and, whichever victims they present, they offer not to God, but to the fleeing angels and unclean spirits. And it is not surprising if they do this after the suffering of the Lord, since it was said to them by Amos the prophet as well: “Did you offer me sacrifices and victims during the forty years in the desert, O House of Israel, and did you take up the tent of Moloch and the star of your god Remphan, images which you made so that you could worship them?” Stephen the martyr, explaining this more fully and unrolling the old history to an audience of Jews, spoke thus: “And in those days they made a calf and brought sacrifices to the idol and were delighted in the works of their own hands. But God turned from them and handed them over so that they might worship the host of heaven, just as it is written in the book of the prophets.” Moreover the host of heaven is not only called “sun” and “moon” and “reddening stars” but also the entire angelic multitude and their army, which are called in Hebrew “Sabaoth,” that is “of strength” or “of armies.” In the Gospel according to Luke we read: “And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying: ‘Glory to God in the highest and peace on earth for men of good will.’” For God makes his angels the spirit and his ministers the burning flame. And we know that they who worshipped idols, although they appeared to be offering burnt sacrifices in the temple, had always offered them not to god, but to the angels, as we learn more fully through Ezekiel: “I gave them justifications that were not good and commands that were not good.” For God does not seek the blood of he-goats and of bulls, but “the sacrifice for the Lord is a broken spirit; a crushed and humble heart the Lord does not despise.” And for this reason, they who made the calf in Horeb and worshipped the star of the god Remphan, about which I have discussed more fully on the prophet Amos, worshipped figures which they themselves made, and God handed them over, so that they might obey the host of heaven, which is now called by the apostle the “cult of the angels.” For “baseness” in Greek tapeinophrosunē is read, that is, “baseness” of the mind or feeling. For truly it is a base feeling and a pitiable suspicion to believe that God is pleased by the blood of he-goats and bulls and by the smell of incense, which often we humans do not like. As for what follows: “If you died with Christ from the elements of the world, why, as if still living in the world, do you decree ‘Do not touch nor taste nor handle,’ which are all things that perish in their use according to human precepts and teachings? These things indeed have the appearance of wisdom in superstition, baseness, and disregard for the body, but not in any honor for the filling of the flesh.” The following seems to me to be the sense of the passage. Let us run through individual points and, with Christ turning the key, let us unlock the obscurity of the words and their meanings. If you have been baptized in Christ and have died with Christ in baptism, but you have died “from the elements” of the world -- because it is “elements” -- why do you not say with me: “Moreover, let me not boast except in the cross of my Lord Jesus Christ, through whom the world was crucified for me and I for the world”? Have you not heard the Lord saying to the father: “They are not from the world, just as I, too, am not from the world,” and: “the world hates them, since they are not from the world, just as I, too, am not from the world”? But on the contrary, as though living in the world you decree: “Do not touch the body of a dead man, or the clothing and the seat in which a menstruating woman sat, and do not taste pork meat and the meat of hares and squid and cuttlefish and lampreys and eels and all fish that do not have scales and fins -- all things which are subject to decay and destruction through their very use and are carried off in excrement.” For “meat for the stomach and a stomach for meat,” and “everything which enters through the mouth does not defile a man, but the things which come out of us.” “According to precepts,” he says, “and principles of men,” according to which Isaiah said: “These people honor me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. Moreover, they worship me in vain, teaching the principles and precepts of men.” Thus the Lord also rebukes the Pharisees: “You have made the law of God useless, because you established your own traditions. For God says: ‘Honor your father and mother’ and: ‘He who curses his father and mother will be put to death.’ Moreover you say: ‘Whoever speaks to his father or mother: “A gift that has come from me is useful to you” and he has not honored his father or mother’” and the rest. To which he adds: “And you have made the command of God useless on account of your own tradition.” I am not able to repeat how many traditions of the Pharisees there are, which today they call deuterōseis in Greek, and how foolish the stories are. For the size of this book does not allow it and many of them are so base that I would be ashamed to relate them. Nevertheless, I will relate one to shame this hostile people. They have very wise overseers in the synagogues who have been appointed to a vile task: to prove by taste whether the blood of a virgin or of a menstruating woman is clean or unclean, if they cannot tell by sight. Moreover, since it was ordered that each person is to be in his own house on the days of the Sabbath and that he neither depart nor walk away from the place in which he lives, if ever we hold them according to the letter, that they should not lie down, walk, or stand, but only sit, if they want to follow the precepts, they are accustomed to reply: “Akiba and Shimon and Hillel, our teachers, have handed down to us that we may walk within 2,000 feet on the Sabbath” and other things of this kind, preferring the teachings of men to the teaching of God. It is not so that we may say one must always sit on the Sabbath and must not leave the place in which one is occupied, but that one must complete with spiritual observance that which is impossible in the law, in which there is a weakness in the flesh. It follows: “Things indeed have the appearance of wisdom.” Here the conjunction “indeed” is unnecessary, because we have found that the apostle has done this in many places, due to a lack of skill in grammatical art; and “but,” or another conjunction, which is accustomed to this preposition, does not follow where “indeed” has been placed. Therefore, Jewish rituals seem to the ignorant and worthless rabble to have the appearance of reason and human wisdom; thus, their learned men are called sophoi, or “wise men.” And whenever they explain their traditions on fixed days, they are accustomed to say to their students: “hoi sophoi deuterousin, or: “The wise men are teaching their traditions.” For “superstition,” the Greek ethelothrēskeia is used, that is “false religion,” and for “humility,” tapeinophrosunē is used which means strength more often than fault; but this tapeinophrosunē should thus be understood: that they feel base and earthly feelings. Apheidia sōmatos, whose name the Latin word does not explain, is translated in our language as “for not sparing the body.” The Jews do not spare their bodies in taking up foods, sometimes disdaining what they have, and seeking what they do not have -- because of this necessity they sometimes contract infirmities and diseases -- and they do not do honor to themselves, since all things are clean for the clean and nothing can be polluted, “which is received with thanksgiving,” and for that reason it was created by the Lord, to nourish and sustain human bodies with satiety and fullness. Moreover, the elements of the world by whom, or, rather, by which we are dead, the law of Moses and the entire Old Testament is meant to be understood, as if by which elements and beginnings of religion we get to know the Lord. For just as letters are called “elements” with which we connect syllables and words, and we proceed to the weaving of discourse through long practice, the art of music also has its own elements, and geometry takes its beginning from the elements of lines, and dialectic and medicine have their own eisagōgas (beginnings), thus holy men from their infancy are instructed by the elements of the Old Testament, so that they may come to the fullness of the Gospel. Thus, too, the 118th Psalm and all the others which are marked out with letters lead us through ethics to theology, and, from the elements of the letter that kills, which is destroyed, cause us to pass to a life-giving spirit. Therefore, we who are dead to the world and its elements should not observe those things which belong to the world, because in the first there is the beginning, in the second, there is completion. 11. What does what the same Apostle writes to the Thessalonians mean: “Unless a revolt comes first and the man of sin is revealed” and the rest? In the first letter to the Thessalonians, he had written: “About the time and the moment, brothers, you do not need me to write to you; for you yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord will come just like a thief in the night. For when they have said: ‘Peace and security,’ then sudden destruction will come upon them just like pain upon a pregnant woman, and they will not escape.” For he had written to them a little earlier in the letter: “We say this to you in the word of the Lord, that we, who are alive, who remain for the arrival of the Lord, we will not stop those who have fallen asleep, since the Lord himself will come down from heaven with an order and with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead, who are in Christ, will be the first to rise. Then we, who are alive, who remain, at once we will be snatched up with them in the cloud, face to face with God in the air and we will always be thus with the Lord. And so we console one another in these words.” Hearing this, the Macedonians did not understand whom the apostle calls living with him and who are said to remain, and who would be seized with him into the clouds, face to face with Lord. But they thought that, so long as Paul was still in his body and before he could taste death, Christ would return in his majesty. Hearing this, the apostle begs them and swears by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ that they should not be agitated so quickly -- and neither by the spirit nor by a speech nor by a letter written supposedly by him, as though the day of the Lord was at hand. Moreover, all the volumes of the prophets and the faith in the gospels teach that there are two arrivals of the Lord Savior: in the first, he will come in humility, and in the second, he will come in glory. The Lord himself attests to what must happen before the end of the world and how the antichrist will come, when he says to the apostles: “When you see the abomination of desolation, which was spoken of by the prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place -- let he who reads understand -- then, those who are in Judea, let them flee to the mountains, and the one on the rooftop not descend to take anything from his house.” And likewise: “Then, if anyone says to you, ‘Behold: Christ is here or there,’ do not believe it. For false Christs will rise and false prophets will give both great signs and prodigies, so that even the elect might be led into error, if it is possible. Behold: I have warned you. If therefore anyone says to you: ‘Behold: he is in the desert,’ do not go out there, ‘Behold: he is inside,’ do not believe him. For just as lightning proceeds from the east and appears even in the west, so too will be the arrival of the son of man.” And next: “Then the sign of the son of man will appear in heaven and they will see the son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with great strength and splendor. And he will send his angels with a trumpet blast and with a great voice and they will gather together his elect from the four winds from the farthest part of the heavens to their ends.” And again he speaks to the Jews about the antichrist: “I have come in the name of my father and you have not believed me. If another comes in his name, you will receive him.” Therefore, either the occasion of a misunderstood letter or a counterfeit revelation, which had deceived them in a dream as they were sleeping, or the suppositions of others interpreting the words of Isaiah and Daniel and the Gospels heralding the antichrist at that time had shaken up and disturbed the minds of the Thessalonians, so that they hoped that Christ in his splendor would come. The apostle remedies this error and explains the things which are to be expected before the arrival of the antichrist, so that, when they see that these things have happened, then they will know that the antichrist is about to come, that is, the man of sin and the son of perdition, “who is opposed and is raised above everything that is called God or that is worshipped” and who “sits in the temple of God.” “Unless,” he says, “revolt comes first,” which in Greek is called apostasia, so that all nations, which are subject to the Roman Empire, may withdraw from them -- “and he will be revealed” - that is, he will be shown, whom the words of all the prophets announce in advance -- “the man of sin” -- in whom lies the spring of all sins -- “and the son of perdition” -- that is, the devil; for he himself is the destruction of everything -- “who is opposed” to Christ and for that reason is called the antichrist “and he is raised above all that is called God,” so that he might trample with his foot the gods of all nations or every approved and true religion and “in the temple of God” -- or in the temple of Jerusalem, as some think, or in a church, as I think more correctly -- he might sit and show himself, as if he were Christ and the son of God. If, he says, the Roman Empire is not devastated and if the antichrist does not come first, Christ will not come, who is going to come to destroy the antichrist. You remember, he says, that these things which now I write in a letter, I said in person when I was with you, and I said to you that Christ will not come unless the antichrist had preceded him. “And now you know what detains him, so that he might be revealed in his time,” that is, you fully know what the reason is that the antichrist does not come in the present time. He does not mean to speak openly of the Roman Empire’s destruction, which its rulers think is eternal. Thus according to the Apocalypse of John, on the forehead of the whore dressed in purple the name of blasphemy is written, that is “To Eternal Rome.” For if openly and brazenly he had said: “The antichrist will not come until the Roman Empire is destroyed,” a reasonable cause for persecution against the church, which was rising at that time, seemed to spring up. What follows: “For already the mystery of iniquity is at work, that only he who now holds may do so, until he is taken out of the way, and then the wicked man will be revealed” has this sense: With the many evils and sins with which Nero, the most defiled of the Caesars, oppresses the world, the arrival of the antichrist is born and what the antichrist will use later is partially completed by Nero, to such an extent that the Roman Empire, which now holds all nations, will withdraw and be taken out of the way. And then the antichrist will come, the spring of iniquity, “whom the Lord Jesus will kill with the breath of his mouth;” that is to say, with divine power and the authority of his splendor, whose role it is to have issued orders, not in the multitude of the host, not in the strength of soldiers, not in the help of angels, but, as soon as Christ comes, the antichrist will be killed. And in the way that shadows are put to flight by the arrival of the sun, so “by the brightness of his arrival” the Lord will destroy and blot out the antichrist, whose works are the works of Satan, and, just as the fullness of divinity was bodily in Christ, thus in the antichrist will be all strength and signs and prodigies, but these will all be deceptions. For just as the magicians, with their own trickeries, opposed the signs of God, which were accomplished through Moses, and Moses’ staff devoured their staffs, so the truth of Christ will devour the deceit of the antichrist; moreover, they who have been prepared for destruction will be seduced by his trickery. And a silent question was able to be raised: “Why did God grant him to have all strength, signs, and prodigies through which even God’s elect could be seduced, if it were possible?” Paul prevents this question with a solution, and he dismisses what could be argued before it is argued. The antichrist will do, he says, all these things not by his own strength, but by God’s permission because of the Jews, since it was they who were not willing to receive the love of truth, that is Christ, because the love of God was spread out in the hearts of believers and he himself says: “I am the truth,” about whom it has been written in the psalms: “Truth has arisen from the land.” Therefore, they who did not receive love and truth so that they, upon receiving the savior, might be saved, God sends to them not a worker, but the work itself, that is, the source of error, so that they may trust in a deception, “because he and his father are deceitful.” And if, accordingly, the antichrist was born from a virgin and had come first into the world, the Jews could have an excuse and say that they thought it was truth and for that reason they took up a deception for truth; but now for this reason they must be judged -- rather, without doubt they must be condemned, because having despised truth, that is, Christ, they will later take up a deception, that is, the antichrist.

Original letter:

PRAEFATIO. Filius meus Apodemius, qui interpretationem nominis sui longa ad nos ueniens nauigatione signauit et de oceani litore atque ultimis finibus Galliarum Roma praeterita quaesiuit Bethleem, ut inueniret in ea caelestem panem et saturatus eructuaret in domino ac diceret: "eructauit cor meum uerbum bonam, dico ego opera mea regi," detulit mihi in parua scidula maximas quaestiones, quas a te datas mihique tradendas diceret. ad quarum lectionem intellexi studium reginae Saba in te esse conpletum, quae de finibus terrae sapientiam uenit audire Salomonis. non quidem ego Salomon, qui et ante se et post se cunctis hominibus praefertur in sapientia, sed tu regina appellanda es Saba, in cuius mortali corpore non regnat peccatum et quae ad dominum tota mente conuersa audies ab eo: "conuertere, conuertere, Sunamitis." etenim Saba in lingua nostra 'conuersionem' sonat. simulque animaduerti, quod quaestiunculae tuae de euangelio tantum et de apostolo positae indicant te ueterem scripturam aut non satis legere aut non satis intellegere, quae tantis obscuritatibus et futurorum typis inuoluta est, ut omnis interpretatione egeat et porta orientalis, de qua uerum lumen exoritur et per quam pontifex ingreditur et egreditur, semper clausa sit et soli Christo pateat, "qui habet clauem Dauid, aperit et nemo claudit, claudit et nemo aperit," ut illo reserante introeas cubiculum eius et dicas: "introduxit me rex in cubiculum suum." praeterea satis miratus sum, cur purissimo fonte uicino nostri tam procul riuuli fluenta quaesieris et omissis aquis Siloe, "quae uadunt cum silentio," desideres aquas Sior, quae turbidis saeculi huius uitiis sordidantur. habes ibi sanctum uirum Alethium presbyterum, qui uiua, ut aiunt, uoce et prudenti disertoque sermone possit soluere, quae requiris, nisi forte peregrinas merces desideras et pro uarietate gustus nostrorum quoque condimentorum te alimenta delectant. aliis dulcia placent, nonnullos subamara delectant, horum stomachum acida renouant, illorum salsa sustentant. uidi ego nauseam et capitis uertiginem antidoto, quae appellator pikra [Greek letters], saepe sanari et iuxta Hippocraten contraria contrariorum remedia. itaque nostram amaritudinem illius nectareo melle curato et mitte in Merram lignum crucis senilemque pituitam iuuenili austeritate conpesce, ut possis laeta cantare: "quam dulcia gutturi meo eloquia tua, super mel ori meo."
1. Cur Iohannes discipulos suos mittit ad dominum, ut interrogent eum: tu es, qui uenturus es, an alium expectamus? cum prius ipse de eodem dixerit: ecce agnus dei, ecce, qui tollit peccata mundi? — De hac quaestione in commentariis Matthei plenius diximus — unde apparet, quae haec interrogas, ipsa te uolumina non habere —, tamen stringendum est breuiter, ne omnino tacuisse uideamur. Johannes mittebat discipulos suos in uinculis constitutus, ut sibi quaerens illis disceret et capite truncandus illum doceret esse sectandum, quem interrogatione sua magistrum omnium fatebatur. neque enim poterat ignorare, quem ignorantibus demonstrauerat et de quo dixerat: "qui habet sponsam, sponsus est et: cuius non sum dignus calciamenta porta re et: illum oportet crescere, me autem minui," deumque patrem audierat intonantem: "hic est filius meus dilectus, in quo mihi conplacui," quod autem dicit: "tu es, qui uenturus es, an alium expectamus?" hunc quoque sensum habere potest: scio, quod ipse sis, qui tollere uenisti peccata mundi, sed, quia ad inferos descensurus sum, etiam hoc interrogo, utrum et illuc ipse descendas an inpium sit hoc de filio dei credere aliumque missurus sis. hoc autem scire desidero, ut, qui te in terris hominibus nuntiaui, etiam in inferis nuntiem, si forte uenturus es. tu enim es, qui uenisti dimittere captiuitatem et soluere eos, qui in uinculis tenebantur. cuius sciscitationem dominus intellegens operibus magisquam sermone respondit et lohanni praecipit nuntiari, uidere caecos, ambulare claudos, leprosos mundari, surdos audire, mortuos surgere et — quod his maius est — pauperes euangelizari, pauperes uel humilitate uel diuitiis, ut nulla inter pauperem diuitemque distantia sit salutis, sed omnes uocentur aequaliter. quodque infert: "beatus, qui non fuerit scandalizatus in me," non Iohannem, sed discipulos eius percutit, qui prius accesserant ad eum dicentes: "quare nos et pharisaei ieiunamus frequenter, discipuli autem tui non ieiunant?" et ad Iohannem: "magister, cui tu praebuisti testimonium iuxta Iordanen, ecce discipuli eius baptizant et plures ueniunt ad eum." quo dicto liuorem significant de signorum magnitudine et inuidiae mordacitate uenientem, cur baptizatus a Iohanne ipse audeat baptizare et multo amplior ad eum turba concurrat, quam prius uenerat ad Iohannem. et ne forsitan plebs nesciens hoc dicto lohannem suggillari arbitraretur, in illius laudes perorat et coepit de Iohanne ad turbas dicere circumstantes: "quid existis ad desertum uidere? harundinem uento agitatam? et quid existis in solitudinem uidere? hominem mollibus uestitum?" et reliqua. cuius dicti hic sensus est: numquid ad hoc existis in heremum, ut uideretis hominem instar harundinis uentorum flatu in partes uarias inclinari? ut, quem ante laudauerat, de eo nunc dubitet et, de quo prius dixerat: ecce agnus dei, nunc interroget, utrum ipse an alius sit, qui uel uenerit uel uenturus sit. et quia omnis falsa praedicatio sectatur lucra et gloriam quaerit humanam. ut per gloriam nascantur conpendia, adserit eum camelorum uestitum pilis nulli posse adulationi succumbere et, qui lucustis uescitur ac melle siluestri, opes non quaerere rigidamque et austeram uitam aulas uitare palatii, quas quaerunt, qui bysso et serico et mollibus uestiuntur. dicitque eum non solum prophetam, qui soleat uentura praedicere, sed plus esse quam prophetam, quia, quem illi uenturum esse dixerunt, hic uenisse monstrauit dicens: "ecce agnus dei, qui tollit peccata mundi." praesertim cum ad fastigium prophetale baptistae accesserit; priuilegium, ut, cui dixerat: "ego a te debeo baptizari," ipse eum baptizauerit non praesumptione maioris, sed oboedientia discipuli ac timore seruili. cumque inter natos mulierum nullum adserat lohanne surrexisse maiorem, se, qui de uirgine procreatus est, maiorem esse commemorat siue omnem angelum, qui in caelis minimus est, in terris cunctos homines anteire. nos enim in angelos proficimus et non angeli in nos, sicut quidam stertentes sopore grauissimo somniant. nec sufficit hoc in Iohannis laudibus, nisi ipse praedicans baptismum paenitentiae primus dixisse referatur: "paenitentiam agite, adpropinquauit enim regnum caelorum." unde a diebus praedicationis eius regnum caelorum uim patitur, ut, qui homo natus est, angelus esse desideret et terrenum animal caeleste quaerat habitaculum. lex enim et prophetae usque ad Iohannem prophetauerunt, non quod Iohannes prophetarum sit finis et legis, sed ille, qui Iohannis testimonio praedicatus est. Johannes autem secundum mysterium, quod in Malachia scriptum est, "ipse est Helias," qui uenturus est, non quo eadem anima, ut heretici suspicantur, et in Helia et in lohanne fuerit, sed quod eandem habuerit sancti spiritus gratiam zona cinctus ut Helias, uiuens in heremo ut Helias, persecutionem passus ab Herodiade, ut ille sustinuit ab Iezabel, ut, quomodo Helias secundi praecursor aduentus est. ita Iohannes uenturum in carne dominum saluatorem non solum in heremo, sed et in matris utero saltu et exultatione corporis nuntiarit.
2. Quid siqnificet, quod in Mattheo scriptum est: harundinem quassatam non confringet et linum fumigans non extinguet. — Ad cuius expositionem loci totum, quod Mattheus de Esaia propheta adsumpsit, testimonium ponendum est et ipsius uerba Esaiae iuxta septuaginta interpretes ipsumque Hebraicum, cui Theodotio, Aquila Symmachusque consentiunt. sic ergo de quattuor euangelistis solus Mattheus posuit: "Iesus autem sciens recessit inde et secuti sunt eum multi et curauit eos omnes et praecepit eis, ne manifestum eum facerent, ut inpleretur, quod dictum est per Esaiam prophetam dicentem: ecce puer meus, quem elegi, dilectus meus, in quo bene conplacuit anima mea. ponam spiritum meum super eum et judicium gentibus nuntiabit. non contendet neque clamabit neque audiet quisquam in plateis uocem eius. harundinem quassatam non confringet et linum fumigans non extinguet, donec eiciat ad uictoriam iudicium; et in nomine eius gentes sperabunt." pro quo in Esaia iuxta septuaginta interpretes sic scriptum est: "Iacob puer meus, suscipiam eum; Israhel electus meus, suscepit eum anima mea. dedi spiritum meum super eum, iudicium gentibus proferet. non clamabit neque dimittet nec audietur foris uox eius. harundinem confractam non conteret et linum fumigans non extinguet, sed in ueritate proferet iudicium. splendebit et non quassabitur, donec ponat super terram iudicium; et in nomine eius. gentes sperabunt." nos autem ex Hebraeo ita uertimus: "ecce puer meus, suscipiam cum, e1ectus meus, conplacuit sibi in i1lo anima mea. dedi spiritum meum super eum; iudicium gentibus proferet. non clamabit neque accipiet personam nec audietur foris uox eius. calamum quassatum non conteret et linum fumigans non extinguet; in ueritate educet judicium, non erit tristis neque turbulentus, donec ponat in terra iudicium; et legem eius insulae expectabunt." ex quo apparet Mattheum euangelistam non ueteris interpretationis auctoritate constrictum dimisisse Hebraicam ueritatem, sed quasi Hebraeum ex Hebraeis et in domini lege doctissimum ea gentibus protulisse, quae in Hebraeo legerat. si enim sic accipiendum est, ut septuaginta interpretes ediderunt: "Iacob puer meus, suscipiam eum; Israhel electus meus, suscepit eum anima mea," quomodo in Iesu intellegimus esse conpletum, quod de Iacob et de Israhele scriptum est? quod beatum Mattheum non solum in hoc testimonio, sed et in alio fecisse legimus: "ex Aegypto uocaui filium meum." pro quo Septuaginta transtulerunt: "ex Aegypto uocauit filios suos." quod utique, nisi sequamur Hebraicam ueritatem, ad dominum saluatorem non pertinere manifestum est. sequitur enim: ipsi autem immolabant Baalim, quod autem de adsumpto testimonio in euangelio minus est: splendebit et non quassabitur, donec ponat super terram iudicium, uidetur mihi accidisse primi scriptoris errore, qui legens superiorem sententiam in uerbo iudicii esse finitam putauit inferioris sententiae ultimum uerbum esse ‘iudicium’ et pauca uerba, quae in medio, hoc est inter ‘iudicium’ et ‘iudicium’, fuerant, praetermisit. rursumque, quod apud Hebraeos legitur: et in lege eius sperabunt insulae, Mattheus sensum potius quam uerba interpretans pro lege et insulis nomen posuit et gentes. et hoc non solum in praesenti loco, sed, ubicumque de ueteri instrumento euangelistae et apostoli testimonia protulerunt, diligentius obseruandum est non eos uerba secutos esse, sed sensum et, ubi Septuaginta ab Hebraico discrepant, Hebraeum sensum suis expressisse sermonibus. puer igitur dei omnipotentis iuxta dispensationem carnis adsumptae, qua ad nos mittitur, saluator est appellatus. ad quem et in alio loco dicit pater: magnum tibi est uocari puerum meum, ut congreges tribus Iacob. hic est uinea Sorech, quae interpretatur ‘electa’, hic filius amantissimus, in quo sibi conplacuit anima dei, non quo deus animam habeat, sed quod in anima omnis dei monstretur affectus. et non mirum, si in deo anima nominetur, cum uniuersa humani corporis membra secundum leges tropologiae et diuersas intellegentias habere dicatur. posuit quoque spiritum suum super eum, spiritum sapientiae et intellegentiae, spiritum consilii et fortitudinis, spiritum scientiae et pietatis et timoris dei, qui in specie columbae descendit super eum, de quo et Iohannes Baptista a deo patre audisse se narrat: super quem uideris spiritum sanctum uenientem et manentem in eo, ipse est. et iudicium gentibus nuntiabit, de quo et in psalmis legimus: deus, iudicium tuum regi da et iustitiam tuam filio regis. qui et ipse loquitur in euangelio: non enim pater iudicat quemquam, sed omne iudicium dedit filio. non contendet sicut agnus ductus ad uictimam, non contendet in subuersione audientium. neque clamabit iuxta illud, quod Paulus apostolus scribit: omnis clamor et ira et amaritudo auferatur a nobis, non clamabit, quia Israhel non fecit iudicium, sed clamorem. neque audiet quisquam in plateis siue foris uoce in eius. omnis enim gloria filiae regis ab intus et arta et angusta uia est, quae ducit ad uitam. unde in plateis uox illius non audietur, in quibus confidenter agit sapientia latam spatiosamque uiam non ingrediens, sed arguens atque condemnans. unde et illis, qui foris erant, non sua uoce, sed per parabolas loquebatur: harundinem, inquit, quassatam non confringet siue, ut Septuaginta transtulerunt, calamum fractum non conteret. calamus fractus, qui fuit ante uocalis et in laudes domini concinebat, appellandus est Israhel, qui quondam inpegit in angularem lapidem et cecidit super eum fractusque in illo est; propterea dicitur de eo: increpa, domine, bestias calami et in Iesu uolumine torrens appellatur Cane, id est ‘calami’, qui aquas habet turbidas, quas elegit Israhel. purissima Iordanis fluenta contemnens reuersusque mente in Aegyptum et desiderans caenosam ac palustrem regionem peponesque et caepe et alia et cucumes ollasque Aegyptiarum carnium rectissime per Esaiam appellatur calamus fractus, cui qui inniti uoluerit, pertundetur manus eius. qui enim post aduentum domini saluatoris euangelicae interpretationis spiritum derelinquens in Iudaicae litterac morte requiescit, istius cuncta opera uulnerantur. linum quoque fumigans non extinguet, populum de gentibus congregatum, qui extincto legis naturalis ardore fumi amarissimi et qui noxius oculis est tenebrosaeque caliginis inuoluebatur erroribus. quem non solum non restinxit et redegit in cinerem, sed e contrario de parua scintilla et paene moriente maxima suscitauit incendia ita, ut totus orbis arderet igne domini saluatoris, quem uenit mittere super terram et in omnibus ardere desiderat. secundum tropologiam quid nobis uidetur de hoc loco, in commentariolis Matthei breuiter adnotauimus. iste autem, qui harundinem quassatam non confregit et linum fumigans non extinxit, iudicium quoque perduxit ad uictoriam, cuius indicia uera sunt, iustificata in semet ipsis, ut iustificetur in sermonibus suis et uincat. cum iudicatur, et tam diu lumen praedicationis eius in mundo resplendeat nulliusque conteratur et uincatur insidiis, donec ponat in terra iudicium et inpleatur illud, quod scriptum est: fiat uoluntas tua sicut in caelo et in terra, et in nomine eius gentes sperabunt sine in lege eius sperabunt insulae, quo modo enim insulae turbine flatuque uentorum et crebris tempestatibus feriuntur quidem, sed non subuertuntur in exemplum euangelicae domus, quae super petram robusta mole fundata est, ita et ecclesiae, quae sperant in lege et in nomine domini saluatoris, loquuntur per Esaiam: ego ciuitas firma, ciuitas, quae obpugnatur.
3. Quem sensum habeat, quod in euangelista Mattheo scriptum est: si quis uult post me uenire, abneget se ipsum. quae est sui abnegatio aut quomodo, qui seguitur saluatorem, se ipsum negat? — De quo in tertio commentariorum eiusdem Matthei libro ita breuiter locutus sum: qui deponit ueterem hominem cum operibus eius, negat se ipsum dicens: ‘uiuo autem non ego, uiuit uero in me Christus,’ tollitque crucem suam et mundo crucifigitur. cui autem mundus crucifixus est, sequitur dominum crucifixum. quibus nunc haec addere possumus: postquam ostendit discipulis suis, quod oporteret eum ire Hierusalem et multa pati a sacerdotibus et scribis et principibus sacerdotum et occidi, adsumens eum Petrus coepit incrcpare et dicere: absit a te, domine, non erit tibi hoc. qui conuersus dicit Petro: uade post me, satanas, scandalum es mihi, quia non sapis, quae dei sunt, sed quae hominum. humano quippe timore perterritus passionem domini formidabat. et quo modo audiens ‘multa pati‘ et ‘occidi’ timebat, sic audiens: et tertia die resurget gaudere debuerat et tristitiam passionis resurrectionis gloria mitigare. unde illo pro timore correpto loquebatur ad omnes ‘discipulos' siue conuocauit turbam cum discipulis suis, ut Marcus posuit, aut iuxta Lucam diccbat ad cunctos: si quis uult post me uenire, abneget se ipsum et tollet crucem suam et sequatur me. cuius exhortationis hic sensus est: non est delicata in deum et secura confessio. qui in me credit, debet suum sanguinem fundere. qui enim perdiderit animam suam in praesenti, lucri eam faciet in futuro. cottidie credens in Christo tollit crucem suam et negat se ipsum. qui inpudicus fuit, uersus ad castitatem temperantia luxuriam negat; qui formidolosus et timidus, adsumpto robore fortitudinis priorem esse se nescit. iniquus, si sequatur iustitiam, negat iniquitatem; stultus, si Christum confiteatur dei uirtutem deique sapientiam, negat stultitiam. quod scientes non solum in persecutionis tempore et necessitate martyrii, sed in omni conuersatione, opere, cogitatione, sermone negemus nosmet ipsos, qui ante fuimus, et confiteamur eos, qui in Christo renati sumus. idcirco enim dominus crucifixus est, ut et nos, qui credimus in eum et peccato mortui sumus, crucifigamur cum ipso dicamusque, quod Paulus apostolus docuit: cum Christo crucifixus sum et: mihi autem absit gloriari nisi in cruce domini mei Iesu Christi, per quem mihi mundus crucifixus est et ego mundo. qui cum Christo crucifixus est, despoliet principatus et potestates et triumphet eas in ligno. unde et [in euangelio secundum lohannem] in typum eorum, qui in domino credituri erant et se cum illo crucifixuri, Simon Cyrenaeus portat crucem eius [quam iuxta alios euangelistas prior ipse portauit].
4. Quid uuit siqnificare, quod in eodem Mattheo scriptum est: uae praegnantibus et nutrientibus in illis diebus et: orate, ne fiat fuqa uestra hieme uel sabbato? — Quod ex superioribus pendere manifestum est. cum enim euangelium Christi cunctis gentibus fuerit praedicatum et uenerit consummatio uiderintque abominationem desolationis, quae dicta est a Danihele propheta, stantem in loco sancto, tunc praecipitur his, qui in Judaea sunt, ut fugiant in montes, et, qui in tecto, ne descendant tollere aliquid de domo sua, et, qui in agro, ne reuertantur aufcrre tunicam suam. de quibus in commentariis eiusdem Matthei plenius diximus. statimque coniungitur: uae praegnantibus et nutrientibus in illis diebus. in quibus diebus? quando abominatio desolationis steterit in loco sancto. quod quidem iuxta litteram de aduentu antichristi praedicari nulli dubium est, quando persecutionis magnitudo conpellit fugere et graues uteri paruulique lactantes fugam retardant, licet quidam Titi et Uespasiani aduersus Iudaeos et praecipue Hierusalem obsidionem pugnamque significari uelint. hiemem quoque et sabbatum sic interpretantur, ne eo tempore fugere conpellantur, quando duritia frigoris in agris et in desertis locis fugientes latere non patitur et obseruatio sabbati aut praeuaricatores facit, si fugiant, aut hostium gladiis subiacere, si sabbati otium et praecepta seruauerint. nos autem audientes dominum saluatorem, ut, qui in Iudaea sunt, ad montana confugiant, ipsi quoque oculos leuamus ad montes, de quibus scriptum est : leuaui oculos meos ad montes, unde ueniet auxilium mihi, et in alio loco: fundamenta eius in montibus sanctis et: montes in circuitu eius et dominus in circuitu populi sui et: non potest abscondi ciuitas super montem posita, et discalciamus nos pellem litterae nudisque pedibus cum Moyse ascendentes montem Sina dicimus: transiens uidebo uisionem hanc magnam, ut possimus intellegere praegnantes animas, quae de semine doctrinarum et sermonis dei initia fidei conceperunt et dicunt cum Esaia: a timore tuo, domine, concepimus et parturiuimus et peperimus, spiritum salutis tuae fecimus super terram. sicuti enim semina paulatim formantur in uteris et tam diu non reputatur homicidium, donec elementa confusa suas imagines membraque suscipiant, ita sensus ratione conceptus, nisi in opera proruperit, adhuc uentre retinetur et cito abortio perit, cum uiderit abominationem desolationis stantem in ecclesia et satanan transfigurari in angelum lucis et de istius modi Paulus foetibus loquitur dicens: filioli mei, quos iterum parturio, donec Christus formetur in uobis. has ergo reor iuxta mysticos intellectus esse mulieres, de quibus idem apostolus scribit: mulier seducta in transgressione facta est; saluabitur autem per filiorum generationem, si permanserint in fide et caritate et sanctitate cum pudicitia. quae si de sermone diuino aliqnando generarint, necesse est, quae generata sunt, crescere et primum accipere lac infantiae, donec perueniant ad solidum cibum et ad maturam aetatem plenitudinis Christi, omnis enim, qui lacte alitur, inperitus est in ratione iustitiae; paruulus enim est. hae igitur animae, quae necdum pepererunt sine quae necdum potuerunt ea, quae generata sunt, alere, cum uiderint sermonem hereticum stantem in ecclesia, cito scandalizantur et pereunt et in tempestate atque in persecutionibus permanere non possunt, praesertim si otium habuerint bonorum operum et non ambulauerint in uia, quae Christus est. de hac abominatione hereticae peruersaeque doctrinae dicebat apostolus, quod homo iniquitatis et aduersarius eleuet se contra omne, quod dicitur deus et religio, ita ut audeat stare in templo dei et ostendere se, quod ipse sit deus; cuius aduentus secundum operationem satanae et ea, quae concepta sunt, facit perire abortio et, quae nata, ad pueritiam et ad perfectam aetatem peruenire non posse, quam ob rem orandus est dominus, ne in exordio fidei et crescentis aetatis oriatur hiems, de qua scriptum est: hiems transiit, abiit sibi, ne otio torpeamus, sed inminente naufragio suscitemus dormientem dominum atque dicamus: praeceptor, salua nos, perimus.
5.  Quid sibi velit , quod scriptum est in euangelios secundum Lucam: et non receperunt eum, quoniam facies eius erat uadens in Hierusalem. — Festinans dominus Hierusalem pergere, ut conplerentur dies adsumptionis eius et pascha celebraret, de quo dixerat: desiderio desideraui hoc pascha comedere uobiscum, et biberet calicem, de quo ait: calicem, quem dedit mihi pater, non bibam illum? omnemque doctrinam suam patibulo roboraret iuxta illud, quod scriptum est: cum exaltatus fuero, omnia traham ad me, obfirmauit faciem suam, ut iret Hierusalem. obfirmatione enim et fortitudine opus est ad passionem sponte properantis; unde et Ezechiheli, cui dixerat deus: fili hominis, in medio scorpionum tu habitas et ne timeas eos: obfirmaui, inquit, faciem tuam et dedi faciem tuam aeneam et frontem tuam ferream, ut, si forsitan surrexisset contra cum malleus uniuersae terrae, quasi incude durissima resisteret malleumque contererct, de quo scriptum est: quomodo confractus estet contritus malleus uniuersae terrae? et misit nuntios, id est angelos, ante faciem suam. iustum enim erat, ut dei filio angeli inistrarent; siue angelos apostolos uocat, quia et Johannes, praecursor domini, angelus appellatus est. cumque ingressi essent uicum Samariae, ut praepararent ei, non susceperunt illum, quia facies eius erat uadens in Hierusalem. hostili inter se Samaritani atque Iudaei discordant odio et, cum omnes oderint gentes, proprio contra se furore bacchantur, dum utrique de legis possessione contendunt et in tantum se mutuo persequuntur, ut, postquam Iudaei de Babylonia sunt reuersi. aedificationem templi Samaritani inpedierint. cumque nellent et ipsi cum eis aedificare templum, responderunt Iudaei: non licet nobis et uobis aedificare domum domini, denique pro summa iniuria pharisaei exprobrant domino: nonne daemonium habes et Samaritanus es? et in parabola de Hierusalem descendentis Hiericho Samaritanus ponitur pro signo atque miraculo, quod malus bene fecerit, et ad puteum Samaritanae scriptum est: non enim coutuntur Samaritani Iudaeis. uidentes ergo Samaritae dominum Hierusalem pergere, id est ad hostes suos, quod audierant a discipulis eius, qui ad parandum hospitium uenerant, Iudaeum esse cognoscunt et quasi Iudaeum atque alienum et eum, qui ad inimicos pergeret, suscipere noluerunt. quamquam et alia nobis subiciatur intellegentia, quod uoluntatis domini fuerit non suscipi a Samaritis, quia festinabat ire Hierusalem ibique pati et sanguinem fundere, ne occupatus susceptione Samaritica et doctrina gentis illius passionis differret diem, ad quam uenerat sustinendam. unde dicit et in alio loco: non ueni nisi ad oues perditas domus Israhel et apostolis praecepit: ciuitates Samaritanorum non intrabitis, uolens tollere omnem occasionem persecutions Iudaicae, ne postea dicerent: ‘crucifiximus eum, quia se inimicis nostris et hostibus iunxerat. facies igitur eius erat pergentis Hierusalem et idcirco iuxta alteram intellegentiam non receperunt eum Samaritae. quia festinabat ingredi Hierusalem. ut autem non reciperent, fuit dominicae uoluntatis. denique apostoli in lege uersati, in qua tantum iustitiam nouerant oculum pro oculo, dentem pro dente, ulcisci nituntur iniuriam et imitari Heliam, ad cuius uocem duos pentecontarchas militum ignis absumpserat, dicuntque ad dominum: uis dicimus, ut ignis descendat de caelo et consumat eos? pulchre uis, inquiunt, dicimus; nam et Helias dixerat: si homo dei sum, ignis descendat de caelo super uos. ergo, ut apostolorum sermo efficientiam habeat, uoluntatis est domini. nisi enim ille iusserit, frustra dicunt apostoli, ut ignis descendat super eos, et quodam modo uerbis aliis hoc loquuntur: ‘si ad serui Heliae iniuriam ignis descendit de caelo et non Samaritas, sed Iudaeos consumpsit incendium, quanto magis ad contemptum filii dei in inpios Samaritas debet flamma saeuire!’ e regione dominus, qui non ad iudicandum uenerat, sed ad saluandum, non in potestate, sed in humilitate, non in patris gloria, sed in hominis uiltate, increpat eos, quod non meminerint doctrinae suae et bonitatis euangelicae, in qua dixerat: qui te percusserit in maxillam, praebe ei et alteram et: diligite inimicos uestros.

6. Alteram de euangelio Lucae quaestiunculam proposuisti: qui  sit uilicus iniquitatis, qui domini uoce laudatus est. cuius cum uellem scire rationem et de quo fonte processerit, reuolui uolumen euangelicum et inter cetera repperi, quod adpropinquantibus saluatori publicanis et peccatoribus, ut audirenteum, murmurabant pharisaei et scribae dicentes: quare iste peccatores suscipit et comedit cum eis? qui locutus est eis parabolam centum ouium et unius perditae, quae inuenta pastoris humeris reportata est, et, cur esset proposita, statim intulit: dico uobis: sic erit gaudium in caelo super uno peccatore paenitentiam agente magis quam super nonaginta nouem iustis, qui non habent opus paenitentiam. aliam quoque parabolam decem dragmarum uniusque perditae et repertae cum proposuisset, simili eam fine conpleuit: sic dico uobis: gaudium erit coram angelis dei super uno peccatore paenitentiam agente. tertiam quoque parabolam proposuit hominis habentis duos filios et diuidentis inter eos substantiam. cumque minor facultatibus perditis egere coepisset et comedere siliquas, porcorum cibum, reuersus ad patrem susceptus ab eo est. frater quoque inuidens senior patris uoce corripitur, quod laetari debuerit et gaudere, quia frater eius mortuus fuerat et reuixit, perditus et inuentus est. has tres parabolas contra pharisaeos et scribas locutus est, qui nolebant recipere paenitentiam peccatorum et publicanorum salutem. dicebat autem, inquit, et ad discipulos suos — haud dubium, quin ‘parabolam—, sicut prius ad scribas et pharisaeos, qua parabola ad clementiam discipulos hortaretur et aliis uerbis diceret: dimittite et dimittetur uobis, ut in oratione dominica libera fronte poscatis: dimitte nobis debita nostra, sicut et nos dimittimus debitoribus nostris. quae est ergo parabola ad clementiam discipulos prouocantis? homo quidam erat diues, qui habebat uilicum siue dispensatorem; hoc enim oikonomos [Greek] significat. uilicus autem proprie uillae gubernator est, unde et a uilla ‘uilicus’ nomen accepit. oikonomos autem tam pecuniae quam frugum et omnium, quae dominus possidet, dispensator est. unde et oikonomikos Xenofontis pulcherrimus liber est, qui non gubernationem uillae, sed dispensationem uniuersae domus Tullio interpretante significat. iste igitur dispensator accusatus est ad dominum suum, quod dissipasset substantiam eius. quo uocato dixit: quid hoc audio de te? redde rationem dispensationis; neque enim ultra mea poteris dispensare. qui dixit in semet ipso: quid faciam, quia dominus meus aufert a me dispensationem? fodere non ualeo, mendicare erubesco. scio, quid faciam, ut, quando sublata mihi fuerit dispensatio, suscipiant me in domos suas. uocauitque singulos debitorum domini sui et dixit primo: quantum debes domino meo? qui dixit ei: centum batos olei. ait illi: tolle cautionem tuam et sedens cito scribe quinquaginta. deinde ad alium locutus est: tu autem quantum debes? ille respondit: centum coros tritici. dicit ei: tolle cautionem tuam et scribe octoginta. et laudauit dominus uilicum siue dispensatorem iniquitatis, quod, prudenter fecerit: quia filii saeculi huius prudentiores sunt filiis lucis in generatione sua. et ego dico uobis: facite uobis amicos de iniquo mamona, ut, quando defecerit, recipiant uos in aeterna tabernacula. qui fidelis est in paruo, et in multis fidelis est et, qui in minimo iniquus est, et in multis iniquus erit. si ergo in iniquo  mamona fideles non fuistis, quod uerum est, quis uobis credet? et si in alieno fideles non fuistis, quod nostrum est, quis dabit uobis? nemo seruus potest duobus dominis seruire. aut enim unum habebit, odio et alterum diliget aut unum audiet et alterum contemnet. non potestis deo seruire et mamonae. audiebant autem haec omnia pharisaei, qui erant auari, et subsannabant illum, totum parabolae huius textum posui, ut non nobis intellegentiam aliunde quaeramus et in parabola certas nitamur inuenire personas, sed interpretemur eam quasi parabolam, hoc est similitudinem, quae ab eo uocatur, quod alteri paraballetai, [Greek] hoc est adsimilatur, et quasi umbra prooemiumue ueritatis est. si ergo dispensator iniqui mamonae domini uoce laudatur, quod de re iniqua sibi iustitiam praepararit, et passus dispendia dominus laudat dispensatoris prudentiam, quod aduersus dominum quidem fraudulenter, sed pro se prudenter egerit, quanto magis Christus, qui nullum damnum sustinere potest et pronus est ad clementiam, laudabit discipulos suos, si in eos, qui sibi crediti sunt, misericordes fuerint! denique post parabolam intulit: et ego dico uobis: facite nobis amicos de iniquo mamona. iniquus autem mamona non Hebraeorum, sed Syrorum lingua diuitiae nuncupantur, quod de iniquitate collectae sint. si ergo iniquitas bene dispensata uertitur in iustitiam, quanto magis sermo diuinus, in quo nulla est iniquitas, qui et apostolis creditus est, si bene fuerit dispensatus, dispensatores suos leuabit in caelum! quam ob rem sequitur: qui fidelis est in minimo, hoc est in carnalibus, et in multis fidelis erit, id est in spiritalibus.qui autem in paruo iniquus est, ut non det fratribus ad utendum, quod a deo pro omnibus est creatum, iste et in spiritali pecunia diuidenda iniquus erit, ut non pro necessitate, sed pro personis doctrinam domini diuidat. ‘sin autem', inquit, ‘carnales diuitias, quae labuntur, non bene dispensetis, ueras aeternasque diuitias doctrinae dei quis credet uobis? et si in his, quae aliena sunt — alienum est autem nobis omne, quod saeculi est — infideles fuistis, ea, quae uestra sunt et proprie homini deputata, quis uobis credere poterit?' unde corripit auaritiam et dicit eum, qui amat pecuniam, deum amare non posse, igitur et apostolis, si uelint amare deum, esse pecunias contemnendas. unde scribae et pharisaei, qui erant auari, aduersum se dictam intellegentes parabolam subsannabant eum carnalia et certa et praesentia spiritalibus ac futuris et quasi incertis praeponentes. Theophilus, Antiochenae ecclesiae septimus post Petrum apostolum episcopus, qui quattuor euangelistarum in unum opus dicta conpingens ingenii sui nobis monumenta dimisit, haec super hac parabola in suis commentariis est locutus: diues, qui habebat uilicum siue dispensatorem, deus omnipotens est, quo nihil est ditius. huius dispensator Paulus, qui ad pedes Gamaliel sacras litteras didicit, legem dei susceperat dispensandam. qui cum coepisset credentes in Christo persequi, ligate, occidere et omnem domini sui dissipare substantiam, correptus a domino est: Saule, Saule, quid me persequeris? durum est tibi contra stimulum calcitrare. dixit que in corde suo: quid faciam? qui magister fui et uilicus, cogor esse discipulus et operarius. fodere non ualeo. omnia enim mandata legis, quae terrae incubabant, cerno destructa et legem et prophetas usque ad lohannem Baptistam esse finitos. mendicare erubesco, ut, qui doctor fueram Iudaeorum, cogar a gentibus et a discipulo Annania salutis et fidei mendicare doctrinam. faciam igitur, quod mihi utile esse intellego, ut, postquam proiectus fuero de uilicatione mea, recipiant me Christiani in domos suas. coepitque eos, qui prius uersabantur in lege et sic in Christo crediderant, ut arbitrarentur se in lege iustificandos, docere legem abolitam, prophetas praeterisse et, quae antea pro lucro fuerint, reputari in stercora. uocauit itaque duos de pluribus debitoribus. primum, qui debebat centum batos olei, eos uidelicet, qui fuerant ex gentibus congregati et magna indigebant misericordia dei, et de centenario numero, qui plenus est atque perfectus, fecit eos scribere quinquagenarium, qui proprie paenitentium est iuxta iubeleum et illam in euangelio parabolam, in qua alteri quingenti, alteri quinquaginta denarii dimittuntur. secundum autem uocauit populum Iudaeorum, qui tritico mandatorum dei nutritus erat et debebat ei centenarium numerum, et coegit, ut de centum octoginta faceret, id est crederet in domini resurrectionem, quae octauae diei numero continetur, et de octo conpleretur decadis, ut de sabbato transiret ad primam sabbati. ob hanc causam a domino praedicatur, quod bene fecerit et pro salute sua in euangelii clementiam de legis austeritate mutatus sit. quodsi quaesieris, quare uocetur ‘uilicus iniquitatis’ in lege, quae dei est: iniquus erat uilicus, qui bene quidem offerebat, sed non bene diuidebat credens in patre, sed filium persequens, habens deum omnipotentem, sed spiritum sanctum negans. prudentior itaque fuit Paulus apostolus in transgressione legis filiis quondam lucis, qui in legis obseruatione uersati Christum, qui dei patris uerum lumen est, perdiderunt. Ambrosius, Mediolanensis episcopus, quid de hoc loco senserit, in commentariis eius legere poteris. Origenis et Didymi in hanc parabolam explanationem inuenire non potui et, utrum abolita sit temporum uetustate an ipsi non scripserint, incertum habeo. mihi iuxta priorem interpretationem hoc uidetur, quod de iniquo mamona debeamus nobis amicos facere non quoslibet pauperes, sed eos, qui nos possint recipere in domos suas et in aetema tabernacula, ut, cum eis parua praebuerimus, recipiamus ab illis magna et dantes aliena nostra suscipiamus et seminemus in benedictione, ut metamus benedictionem; qui enim parce seminauerit, parce et metet.
7. Quo sensu accipiendum sit, quod in epistula legimus ad Romanos: uix enim pro iusto quis moritur; nam pro bono forsitan quis audeat mori. — Duae hereses ex occasione huius testimonii, quod non intellegunt, diuerso quidem errore, sed pari inpietate blasphemant. Marcion enim, qui iustum deum et creatorem legis facit et prophetarum, bonum autem euangeliorum et apostolorum, cuius uult esse filium Christum, duos introducit deos: alterum iustum et alterum bonum. et pro iusto adserit uel nullos uel paucos obpetisse mortem, pro bono autem, id est Christo, innumerabiles martyres extitisse. porro Arrius iustum ad Christum refert, de quo dictum est: deus, iudicium tuum regi da et iustitiam tuam filio regis — et ipse de se in euangelio: non enim pater iudicat quemquam, sed omne iudicium dedit filio et: ego, sicut audio, ita iudico —, bonum autem deum patrem, de quo ipse filius confitetur: quid me dicis bonum? nemo est bonus nisi unus deus pater, cumque hucusque blasphemiae suae deuios calles potuerit inuenire, in consequentibus inpingit et corruit. quomodo enim pro patre quis audet mori et pro filio uix moritur, cum propter nomen Christi tantus martyrum sanguis effusus sit? qui igitur simpliciter hunc exponit locum, hoc potest dicere, quod in ueteri lege, in qua iustitia est, uix pauci inuenti sint, qui suum fuderint sanguinem, in nouo autem instrumento, in quo bonitas est atque dementia, innumerabiles extiterint martyres. sed ex eo, quod posuit: forsitan quis etiam audeat mori et pendulo gradu sententiam temperauit, inueniri posse nonnullos, qui audeant mori pro euangelio, ostendit non sic accipiendum, sed ex superioribus et inferioribus sensum loci huius debere tractari. dicens enim Paulus apostolus se gloriari in tribulationibus, quia tribulatio patientiam operatur, paticntia probationem, probatio spem, spes uero non confundit, quae ex eo certam habeat promissionem, quia caritas dei effusa est in cordibus nostris per spiritum sanctum, qui datus estis nobis, secundum illud, quod deus dixerat per prophetam: effundam de spiritu meo super omnem carnem, miratur bonitatem Christi, quod pro infirmis et inpiis et peccatoribus mori uoluerit et mori oportuno tempore, de quo ipse dicit: tempore oportuno exaudiui te et in die salutis auxiliatus sum tui et rursum: ecce tempus acceptabile, ecce dies salutis. quando omnes peccauerunt, simul inutiles facti sunt, non fuit, qui faceret bonum, non fuit usque ad unum. incredibilis ergo bonitas et inaudita dementia mori pro inpiis — uix enim pro iusto aliquem et bono suum sanguinem fundere metu mortis cuncta terrente; nam inueniri interdum, ut aliquis pro re iusta et bona audeat mori —, caritas autem dei, quam in nobis habuit, hinc maxime conprobatur, quod, cum adhuc peccatores essemus, Christus pro nobis mortuus est et sublata est de terra uita eius et pro iniquitatibus populi ductus est ad mortem et portauit peccata nostra et tradita est in morte anima illius et cum iniquis reputatus est, ut nos inpios et infirmos et peccatores pios et robustos et iustos faceret. nonnulli ita interpretantur: si ille pro nobis inpiis mortuus est et peccatoribus, quanto magis nos absque ulla dubitatione pro iusto et bono Christo debemus occumbere! iustum autem et bonum non putemus esse diuersum nec aliquam proprie significare personam, sed absolute iustam rem et bonam, pro qua difficulter interdum aliquis inueniri potest, qui suum sanguinem fundat.
8. Quid sibi uelit, quod ad Romanos scribit apostolus: occasione accepta peccatum per mandatum operatum est in me omnem concupiscentiam. — Ponamus totum testimonium et singula Christi auxilio disserentes, quid nobis uideatur, simpliciter indicemus non praeiudicantes tuo sensui, quid uelis intellegere, sed nostram sententiam breuiter explicantes. quid ergo dicimus? lex peccatum est? absit. sed peccatum non cognoui nisi per legem, nam concupiscentiam nesciebam, nisi lex diceret: non concupisces. occasione autem accepta peccatum per mandatum operatum est in me omnem concupiscentiam. sine lege enim peccatum mortuum erat, ego autem uiuebam sine lege aliquando, sed, ubi uenit mandatum, peccatum reuixit. ego autem mortuus sum et inuentum est mihi mandatum, quod erat ad uitam, hoc esse ad mortem, peccatum enim occasione accepta per mandatum seduxit me et per illud occidit. itaque lex quidem sancta et mandatum sanctum et iustum et bonum. quod ergo bonum est, mihi mors est? absit. sed, ut peccatum apparent peccatum, per bonum mihi operatum est mortem, ut fiat supra modum peccans peccatum per mandatum. scimus enim, quia lex spiritalis est, ego autem carnalis sum, uenundatus sub peccato. quod enim operor, ignoro. non enim, quod uolo, hoc ago, sed, quod odi, illud facio. si autem, quod nolo, hoc facio, consentio legi, quia bona est. nunc autem iam non ego operor illud, sed, quod habitat in me, peccatum. scio enim, quia non habitat in me, hoc est in carne mea, bonum. uelle enim adiacet mihi, perficere autem bonum nequaquam. non enim, quod uolo, facio bonum, sed, quod nolo malum, hoc ago. si autem, quod nolo, hoc facio, non iam ego operor illud, sed, quod habitat in me, peccatum. inuenio igitur legem uolenti mihi facere bonum, quia mihi malum adiacet. condelector enim legi dei secundum interiorem hominem. uideo autem aliam legem in membris meis repugnantem legi mentis meae et captiuum me ducentem in lege peccati, quae est in membris meis. infelix ego homo, quis me liberabit de corpore mortis huius? gratia dei per Iesum Christum, dominum nostrum, quomodo medicina non est causa mortis, si ostendat uenena mortifera, licet his mali homines abutantur ad mortem et uel se interficiant uel insidientur inimicis, sic lex data est, ut peccatorum uenena demonstret et hominem male libertate sua abutentem, qui prius ferebatur inprouidus et praecipiti labebatur, freno legis retineat et conpositis doceat incedere gressibus, ita ut seruiamus in nouitate spiritus et non in uetustate litterae. id est uiuamus sub praecepto, qui prius in modum brutorum animalium dicebamus: manducemus et bibamus; cras enim moriemur. quodsi subintrante lege, quae docet, quid facere, et prohibet, quid non facere debeamus, uitio nostro et incontinentia feraramur contra scita legalia, uidetur lex causa esse peccati, quae, dum prohibet concupiscentiam, quodam modo eam inflammare cognoscitur. saecularis apud Graecos sententia est: quicquid licet, minus desideratur. ergo e contrario, quicquid non licet, fomentum accipit desiderii. unde et Tullius de parricidarum suppliciis apud Athenienses Solonem scripsisse negat, ne non tam prohibere quam commonere uideretur. igitur lex apud contemptores et legum praecepta calcantes uidetur esse occasio delictorum, dum prohibendo, quod non uult fieri, ligat eos uinculis mandatorum, qui prius absque lege peccantes non tenebantur criminibus. haec diximus legem, quae per Moysen data est, intellegentes. uerum, quia in consequentibus scriptum est: ‘lex dei et lex carnis atque membrorum, quae pugnat aduersum legem mentis nostrae et captiuos nos ducit in lege peccati, simulque quattuor leges contra se dimicantes in uno loco scriptas esse cognosco, non absque re arbitror, si requiram, quot genera legis in scripturis sanctis esse memorentur. dicitur lex, quae per Moysen data est, secundum illud, quod scriptum est ad Galatas: quotquot enim ex operibus legis sunt, sub maledicto sunt, scriptum est enim: maledictus omnis, qui non permanet in omnibus, quae scripta sunt in libro legis, ut faciat ea. et rursum in eadem epistula: lex propter praeuaricationes posita est, donec ueniret semen, cui repromissum est, disposita per angelos in manu mediatoris. et iterum: itaque lex paedagogus noster fuit in Christo, ut ex fide iustificemur. postquam autem uenit fides, nequaquam ultra sub paedagogo sumus. omnes enim filii dei estis per fidem, quae est in Christo Iesu. historia quoque, quae praecepta non continet, sed, quid factum sit, refert, ab apostolo lex appellatur: dicite mihi, qui sub lege uultis esse, non audistis legem? scriptum est enim, quia Abraham duos filios habuit, unum de ancilla et alterum de libera, sed qui ex anciIla, secundum carnem natus est, qui autem per repromissionem, delibera, sed et psalmi lex appellantur: ut conpleretur sermo, qui in lege eorum scriptus est: quia odierunt me gratis. Esaiae quoque prophetiam legem apostolus uocat: in lege scriptum est: quoniam in aliis linguis et in labiis aliis loquar populo huic et nec sic exaudient me, dicit dominus. quod iuxta Hebraicum et Aquilam in Esaia scriptum repperi. appellatur lex et mystica intellegentia scripturarum: scimus, quia lex spiritalis est. et extra haec omnia naturalem legem scriptam in cordibus nostris idem apostolus docet: cum enim gentes, quae non habent legem, naturaliter ea, quae legis sunt, faciunt, isti legem non habentes sibi ipsi sunt lex, qui indicant opus legis scriptum in cordibus suis testimonium praebente illis conscientia. ista lex, quae in corde scribitur, omnes continet nationes et nullus hominum est, qui hanc legem nesciat. unde omnis mundus sub peccato et uniuersi homines praeuaricatores legis sunt et idcirco iustum iudicium dei est scribentis in corde generis humani: ‘quod tibi fieri nolueris, alteri ne feceris’. quis ignoret homicidium, adulterium, furta et omnem concupiscentiam esse malum ex eo, quod sibi ea nolit fieri? si enim mala esse nesciret, numquam sibi doleret inlata. per hanc naturalem legem et Cain cognouit peccatum suum dicens: maior causa mea, quam ut dimittar. et Adam et Eua cognouerunt peccatum suum et propterea absconditi sunt sub ligno uitae. Pharao quoque, antequam lex daretur per Moysen, stimulatus lege naturae sua crimina confitetur et dicit: dominus iustus, ego autem et populus meus inpii. hanc legem nescit pueritia, ignorat infantia et peccans absque mandato non tenetur lege peccati. maledicit patri et parentes uerberat et, quia necdum accepit legem sapientiae, mortuum est in eo peccatum. cum autem mandatum uenerit, hoc est tempus intellegentiae adpetentis bona et uitantis mala, tunc incipit peccatum reuiuiscere et ille mori reusque esse peccati. atqne ita fit, ut tempus intellegentiae, quo dei mandata cognoscimus, ut perueniamus ad uitam, operetur in nobis mortem, si agamus neglegentius et occasio sapientiae, seducat nos atque subplantet et ducat ad mortem, non quo intellegentia peccatum sit — lex enim intellegentiae sancta et iusta et bona est — sed per intellegentiam peccatorum atque uirtutum mihi peccatum nascitur, quod, priusquam intellegerem, peccatum esse non noueram. atque ita factum est, ut, quod mihi pro bono datum est, meo uitio mutetur in malum et — ut hyperbolice dicam nouoque uerbo utar ad explicandum sensum meum — peccatum, quod, priusquam haberem intellegentiam, absque peccato erat, praeuaricatione mandati incipiat mihi esse peccatius. prius quaerimus, quae sit ista concupiscentia,de qua lex dicit: non concupisces. alii putant illud esse mandatum, quod in decalogo scriptum est: non concupisces rem proximi tui. nos autem per concupiscentiam omnes perturbationes animae significatas putamus, quibus maeremus et dolemus, timemus et concupiscimus. et hoc apostolus, uas electionis, cuius corpus templum erat spiritus sancti et qui dicebat: an experimentum quaeritis eius, qui in me loquitur, Christi? et in alio loco: Christus nos redemit et rursum: uiuo autem iam non ego, uiuit autem in me Christus, non de se loquitur, sed de eo, qui post peccata uult agere paenitentiam, et sub persona sua fragilitatem describit condicionis humanae, quae duorum hominum, interioris et exterioris, pugnantium inter se bclla perpetitur. interior homo consentit et scriptae et naturali legi, quod bona sit et sancta et iusta et spiritalis; exterior: ego, inquit, carnalis sum, uenundatus sub peccato. quod enim operor, nescio et non, quod uolo, hoc ago, sed, quod odi. si autem exterior facit, quod non uult, et operatur, quod odit, ostendit bonum esse mandatum et non se operari, quod est malum, sed habitans in sua carne peccatum, hoc est incentiua corporis et desideria uoluptatis, quae propter posteros et sobolem insita est humanis corporibus et, si fines fuerit egressa, uertitur in peccatum. se unusquisque consideret et, accusator sui, tractet incentiua uitiorum, quomodo et in sermone et in cogitatione et in calore corporis saepe loquatur et cogitet et patiatur, quod non uult; nolo dicere ‘faciat’, ne sanctos uiros uidear accusare, de quibus scriptum est: erat homo ille uerus, inmaculatus, iustus dei cultor, recedens ab omni opere malo, et de Zacharia et Elisabeth: erant autem iusti ambo in conspectu dei, ambulantcs in omnibus mandatis et iustificationibus domini absque querella. et praeceptum est apostolis: estote perfecti, sicut et pater uester caelestis perfectus est. numquam autem hoc apostolis imperaret, nisi sciret hominem posse esse perfectum. nisi forte hoc dicamus, quod ‘recedens ab omni malo’ emendationem significet et de erroribus pueritiae et uitiis lasciuientis aetatis transitum ad correctionem atque uirtutes, iustitiam quoque, quae in Zacharia et Elisabeth praedicatur, foris esse, concupiscentiam uero, quae nunc habitare in membris nostris dicitur, uersari intrinsecus. sed apostolis non pueris praecipitur, uerum iam aetatis robustae, ut adsumant perfectionem, quam et nos confitemur in aetate esse perfecta. nec haec dicentes adulamur uitiis, sed auctoritatem sequimur scripturarum, quod nullus homo absque peccato et conclusit deus omnes sub peccato, ut omnibus misereatur, absque eo solo, qui peccatum non fecit, nec dolus inuentus est in ore eius. unde et per Salomonem dicitur, quod serpentis uestigia non inueniantur in petra. et ipse de se dominus: ecce, inquit, uenit princeps mundi istius et nihil in me inuenit, id est sui operis suique uestigii. ob hanc causam iubetur nobis, ne exprobremus homini reuertenti a peccatis suis et ne abominemur Aegyptium, quia et ipsi quondam in Aegypto fuimus et de luto ac lateribus Pharaoni extruximus ciuitates et quia captiui ducti sumus in Babylonem lege peccati, quod in membris nostris morabatur. cumque uideretur extrema desperatio, immo aperta confessio omnem hominem diaboli laqueis inretiri, conuersus in se apostolus, immo homo, sub cuius persona apostolus loquitur, agit gratias saluatori, quod redemptus sit sanguine eius et sordes in baptismate deposuerit et nouum Christi adsumpserit uestimentum et mortuo uetere homine natus sit homo nouus, qui dicat: miser ego homo, quis me liberabit de corpore mortis huius? gratias ago deo per Iesum Christum, dominum nostrum, qui me de corpore mortis liberauit. quodsi cui non uidetur sub persona sua hoc apostolum de aliis dicere, exponat, quomodo Danihel, quem iustum fuisse nouimus, quasi de se dicat, cum pro aliis deprecetur: peccauimus, inique fecimus, iniuste gessimus, inpie egimus et recessimus ac declinauimus a mandatis tuis et iudiciis et non obaudiuimus seruos tuos prophetas, qui locuti sunt in nomine tuo ad reges nostros et principes et patres et ad omnem populum terrae. tibi, domine, iustitia, nobis autem confusio. illud quoque, quod in tricesimo primo psalmo dicitur: peccatum meum cognitum tibi feci et iniquitatem meam non abscondi. dixi: confitebor aduersum me iniustitiam meam domino, et tu remisisti inpietatem peccati mei. pro hoc orabit ad te omnis sanctus in tempore oportuno, non Dauid et iusto uiro et — ut simpliciter loquar — prophetae, cuius uerba narrantur, sed peccatori congruit. cumque iustus sub persona paenitentis talia profudisset, a deo meretur audire: intellegere te faciam et docebo te in uia hac, in qua ambulabis; confirmabo super te oculos meos. in tricesimo quoque septimo psalmo, cuius titulus est: in commemorationem, ut doceat nos semper peccatorum nostrorum memores esse debere et agere paenitentiam, tale quid legimus: non est pax ossibus meis a facie peccatorum meorum. quoniam iniquitates meae eleuatae sunt super caput meum, quasi onus graue adgrauatae sunt super me. corruptae sunt et putruerunt cicatrices meae a facie insipientiae meae. adflictus sum et incuruatus sum nimis. totus hic apostoli locus et in superioribus et in consequentibus, immo omnis epistula eius ad Romanos nimiis obscuritatibus inuoluta est et, si uoluero cuncta disserere, nequaquam mihi unus liber, sed multa et magna scribenda erunt uolumina.
9. Quare apostolus Paulus in eadem ad Romanos scribit epistula: obtabam ego ipse anathema esse a Christo pro fratribus meis et propinquis meis iuxta carnem, qui sunt Israhelitae, quorum adoptio et gloria et testamenta et legislatio et cultus et repromisisones, quorum patres, ex quibus est Christus iuxta carnem, qui est super omnis deus benedictus in saecula, amen? Re vera valida quaestio, quomodo apostolus, qui supra dixerat: quis nos separabit a caritate Christi? tribulatio an angustia an persecutio an fames an nuditas an periculum an gladius? et rursum: confido autem, quia neque mors neque uita neque angeli neque principatus neque praesentia neque futura neque fortitudines neque excelsa neque profundum neque alia creatura poterit nos separare a caritate dei, quam habemus in Christo Iesu, domino nostro, nunc sub iure iurando confirmet et dicat: ueritatem dico in Christo, non mentior, testimonium mihi perhibente conscientia mea in spiritu sancto, quoniam tristitia mihi est magna et continuus dolor cordi meo; optabam enim anathema esse ipse a Christo pro fratribus meis et propinquis iuxta carnem et reliqua. si enim tantae est in dominum caritatis, ut nec metu mortis nec spe uitae nec persecutione nec fame nec nuditate nec periculo nec gladio possit separari a caritate eius, et, si angeli qnoque et potestates et uel praesentia uel fntura et omnes caelorum fortitudines et excelsa pariter ac profunda et uniuersa simul creatura ei ingruat — quod nequaquam potest fieri —, tamen non separetur a caritate dei, quam habet in Christo Iesu, quae est ista tanta mutatio, immo inaudita prudentia, ut pro caritate Christi nolit habere Christum? et ne ei forsitan non credamus, iurat et confirmat in Christo et conscientiae suae testem inuocat spiritum sanctum, se habere tristitiam non leuem et fortuitam sed magnam et incredibilem et habere dolorem in corde, non qui ad horam pungat et transeat, sed qui iugiter in corde permaneat. quo tendit ista tristitia? ad quid proficit incessabilis dolor? optat anathema esse a Christo et perire, ut alii salui fiant. sed si consideremus Moysi uocem rogantis deum pro populo Iudaeorum atque dicentis: si dimittis eis peccatum suum, dimitte; sin autem non uis, dele me de libro tuo, quern scripsisti, perspiciemus eundem et Moysi et Pauli erga creditum sibi gregem affectum, pastor enim bonus ponit animam suam pro ouibus, mercennarius autem, cum uiderit lupum uenientem, fugit, quia non sunt eius oues. et hoc ipsum est dicere: optabam anathema esse a Christo et: dele me de libro, quem scripsisti. qui enim delentur de libro uiuentium et cum iustis non scribuntur, anathema fiunt a domino, simulque cerne apostolum, quantae caritatis in Christo sit, ut pro illo cupiat mori et solus perire, dum modo omne in illum credat hominum genus, perire autem non in perpetuum, sed inpraesentiarum. qui enim perdiderit animam suam pro Christo, saluam eam facit. unde et de quadragesimo tertio psalmo adsumit exemplum: quoniam propter te mortificamur tota die, reputati sumus ut oues occisionis. uult ergo apostolus perire in carne, ut alii saluentur in spiritu, suum sanguinem fundere, ut multorum animae conseruentur. quod autem anathema interdum occisionem sonet, multis ueteris instrumenti testimoniis probari potest, et ne leuem putemus esse tristitiam et modicam causam doloris, iungit et dicit: pro fratribus meis et propinquis iuxta carnem. quando propinquos appellat et fratres iuxta carnem, in spiritu a se ostendit alienos. quorum est, inquit, adoptio, quae significantius Graece dicitur huiothesia [Greek], de quibus quondam dominus loquebatur: filius primogenitus meus Israhel et: filios genui et exaltaui, nunc dicit: filii alieni mentiti sunt mihi. et quorum gloria, ut de cunctis gentibus eligerentur in peculiarem populum dei. et quorum testamenta, unum in littera, alterum in spiritu, ut, qui prius in carne seruierant caerimoniis legis abolitae, postea seruirent in spiritu mandatis euangelii sempiterni. et legislatio ad utrumque respondet: et noui et ueteris testamenti. et cultus, id est uera religio. et repromissiones, ut, quicquid repromissum est patribus, conpleretur in filiis. et — quod omnibus maius est — ex quibus Christus, de Maria generatus uirgine. et ut sciremus, quis iste sit Christus, causas doloris sui uno sermone conprehendit: qui est super omnia deus benedictus in saecula, amen, ut iste tantus ac talis ab eis non recipi perciperetur, de quorum stirpe generatus est. et nihilominus laudat iudicii ueritatem, ne sententia dei in fratres et propinquos displicere uideatur et uel austera esse uel nimia. in quibus igitur tanta fuerint bona, dolet, cur nunc tanta mala sint.
10. Quid uelit intellegi, quod idem apostolus scribit ad Colosenses: nemo uos superet uolens in humilitate mentis et religio ne angelorum, quae non uidit ambulan s frustra inflatus sensu carnis suae et non tenens caput, ex quo totum corpus per nexus et coniunctiones subministratum et con structum crescit iu augmentum dei et reliqua. — Illud, quod crebro diximus: etsi inperitus sermone, non tamen scientia, nequaquam Paulum de humilitate, sed de conscientiae ueritate dixisse etiam nunc adprobamus. profundos enim et reconditos sensus lingua non explicat et, cum ipse sentiat, quod loquatur, in alienas aures puro non potest transferre sermone. quem cum in uernacula lingua habeat disertissimum — quippe ut Hebraeus ex Hebraeis et eruditus ad pedes Gamalielis, uiri in lege doctissimi — se ipsum interpretari cupiens inuoluitur. sin autem in Graeca lingua hoc ei accidit, quam nutritus in Tarso Ciliciae a parua aetate inbiberat, quid de Latinis dicendum est, qui uerbum de uerbo exprimere conantes obscuriores faciunt eius sententias, ueluti herbis crescentibus frugum strangulant ubertatem? conabimur itaque paraphrastikos [Greek] sensum eius euoluere et tricas inplicati eloquii suo ordini reddere atque iuncturae, ut simplici stamine uerborum fila decurrant puroque subtegmine apostolici sermonis textura subcrescat. nemo uos superet: ‘nemo aduersum uos brauium accipiat’. hoc enim Graece dicitur katabrabeyeto, quando quis in certamine positus iniquitate agonothetae uel insidiis magistrorum brabeion et palmam sibi debitam perdit. multaque sunt uerba, quibus iuxta morem urbis et prouinciae suae familiarius apostolus utitur. e quibus exempli gratia pauca ponenda sunt: mihi autem parum est iudicari ab humana dico, hoc est apo anthropines hemeras, et: humanum dico, anthropinon lego, et: hou katenarkesa humas, hoc est ‘non grauaui uos‘, et, quod nunc dicitur: medeis humas katabrabaeyeto, id est ‘nullus aduersum uos brauium accipiat’. quibus et aliis multis uerbis usque hodie utuntur Cilices, nec hoc miremur in apostolo, si utatur eius linguae consuetudine, in qua natus est et nutritus, cum Uergilius, alter Homerus apud nos, patriae suae sequens consuetudinem ‘sceleratum’ frigus appellet. nemo ergo uos superet atque deuincat uolens humilitatem litterae sequi et angelorum religionem atque culturam, ut non seruiatis spiritali intellegentiae, sed exemplaribus futurorum, quae nec ipse uidit, qui uos superare desiderat, siue uidet — utrumque enim habetur in Graeco —, praesertim cum tumens ambulet et incedat inflatus mentisque superbiam et gestu corporis praeferat — hoc enim significat embatyeon [Greek] —, frustra autem infletur et tumeat sensu carnis suae carnaliter cuncta intellegens et traditionum Iudaicarum deliramenta perquirens et non tenens caput omnium scripturarum illud, de quo dictum est: caput uiri Christus est, caput autem atque principium totius corporis eorumque, qui credunt, et omnis intellegentiae spiritalis. ex quo capite corpus ecclesiae per suas conpages atque iuncturas uitalem doctrinae caelestis accipit sucum, ut omnia paulatim membra uegetentur et per occultos uenarum meatus fundatur defaecatus sanguis ciborum et ministretur atque subcrescat, immo teneatur temperantia corporis, ut de fonte capitis rigati artus crescant in perfectionem dei, ut inpleatur saluatoris oratio: pater, uolo, ut, sicut ego et tu unum sumus, sic et isti in nobis unum sint, ut, postquam nos Christus tradiderit patri, sit deus omnia in omnibus. tale quid et in uerbis et in sensibus et in genere elocutionis obscurissime scribit ad Ephesios: ueritatem autem loquentes in caritate crescamus in illo per omnia, qui est caput Christus, ex quo totum corpus conpactum et conexum per omnem iuncturam subministrationis secundum operationem in mensuram uniuscuiusque membri augmentum corporis facit in aedificationem sui in caritate. super quo in commentariis eiusdem epistulae diximus plenius. loquitur autem uniuersa contra eos, qui credentes ex Iudaeis in dominum saluatorem Iudaicas caerimonias obseruare cupiebant. super qua re et in Actibus apostolorum non parua quaestio concitata est. unde et supra Paulus ait: nemo uos iudicet — de his, qui magistros legis esse se iactant — in cibo et potu, quod alia munda sint, alia inmunda, aut in parte diei festi, ut alios dies festos putent, alios non festos — nobis enim, qui in Christum credimus resurgentem, iugis et aeterna festiuitas est — aut in parte neomeniae, hoc est kalendarum et mensis noui, quando decrescens luna finitur et noctis umbris tegitur — Christianorum enim lumen aeternum est et semper solis iustitiae radiis inlustratur — aut in parte sabbatorum, ut non faciant seruile opus et onera non portent, quia nos Christi sumus libertate donati et onera peccatorum gestare desiuimus. haec, inquit, omnia umbra sunt futurorum et imagines uenturae felicitatis, ut, in quibus Iudaei iuxta litteram haesitant et tenentur in terra, nos iuxta spiritum transeamus ad Christum, qui ad distinctionem umbrarum nunc corpus appellatur. quomodo enim in corpore ueritas est et in corporis umbra mendacium, sic in spiritali intellegentia mundus omnis cibus et potus et tota festiuitas et perpetuae kalendae et aeterna requies expectanda est. quaerimus, quid dicere uoluerit: in humilitate et religione angelorum aut quem sensum habeat. ex quo dominus locutus est ad discipulos: surgite, abeamus hinc et: relinquetur uobis domus uestra deserta, et: locus, in quo crucifixus est dominus, spiritaliter Aegyptus appelletur et Sodoma, omnis Iudaicarum obseruationum cultura destructa est et, quascumque offerunt uictimas, non deo offerunt, sed angelis refugis et spiritibus inmundis. nec mirum, si hoc post passionem domini faciant, cum per Amos quoque prophetam io dicatur ad eos: num quid hostias et uictimas obtulistis mihi quadraginta annis in deserto, domus Israhel, et adsumpsistis tabernaculum Moloch et sidus dei Rempham, figuras, quas fecistis, ut adoretis eas? quod plenius in contione Iudaica Stephanus martyr exponens et reuoluens historiam ueterem sic locutus est: et uitulum fecerunt in diebus illis et obtulerunt hostias idolo et laetabantur in operibus manuum suarum. conuersus autem est deus et tradidit eos, ut colerent militiam caeli, sicut scriptum est in libro prophetarum. militia autem caeli non tantum sol appellatur et luna et astra rutilantia, sed et omnis angelica multitudo eorumque exercitus, qui Hebraice appellantur sabaoth, id est ‘uirtutum siue ‘exercituum’. unde et in euangelio iuxta Lucam legimus: et subito facta est cum angelo multitudo militiae caelestis laudantium deum et dicentium: gloria in altissimis deo et in terra pax hominibus bonae uoluntatis. facit enim deus angelos suos spiritus et ministros suos ignem urentem. et ut sciamus semper eos, qui colebant idola, licet in templo hostias uiderentur offerre, non deo eas obtulisse, sed angelis, per Hiezechihel plenius discimus: dedi eis iustificationes non bonas et praecepta non bona, non enim sanguinem hircorum et taurorum quaerit deus, sed sacrificium domini est spiritus contribulatus, cor contritum et humiliatum deus non despicit. et propterea, qui uitulum fecerunt in Choreb et coluerunt sidus dei Bempham, de quo in propheta Amos plenius disseruimus, adorauerunt figuras, quas ipsi fecerunt, et tradidit eos deus, ut seruirent militiae caeli, quae nunc ab apostolo religio dicitur angelorum. pro ‘humilitate’ in Graeco tapenophrosune [Greek] legitur, id est humilitas mentis siue sensus. uere enim humilis sensus et miseranda suspicio deum credere hircorum atque taurorum sanguine delectari et nidore thymiamatis, quem saepe homines declinamus. quod autem sequitur: si mortui estis cum Christo ab elementis mundi, quid adhuc tamquam uiuentes in mundo decernitis ‘ne tetigeris neque gustaueris neque contrectaueris’, quae sunt omnia in interitum ipso usu secundum praecepta et doctrinas hominum? quae sunt rationem quidem habentia sapientiae in superstitione et humilitate et non ad parcendum corpori, non in honore aliquo ad saturitatem carnis, hunc nobis habere sensum uidetur. curramus per singula et obscuritatem sensuum atque uerborum Christo reserante pandamus. si baptizati estis in Christo et cum Christo in baptismate mortui, mortui autem ‘ab elementis’ mundi — pro eo, quod est ‘elementis’ —, cur mecum non dicitis: mihi autem absit gloriari nisi in cruce domini mei Iesu Christi, per quem mihi mundus crucifixus est et ego mundo, nec audistis dominum dicentem ad patrem: de mundo non sunt, sicut et ego non sum de mundo, et: ‘mundus odit eos, quoniam non sunt de mundo, sicut et ego non sum de mundo’, sed e contrario quasi uiuentes in mundo decernitis: ‘ne tetigeris corpus hominis mortui, ne uestimentum et scabellum, in quo sederit mulier menstruata, neque gustaueris suillam carnem et leporum et sepiarum et lolliginum, murenae et anguillae et uniuersorum piscium, qui squamas et pinnulas non habent’, quae omnia in corruptione et interitu sunt ipso usu et stercore degeruntur? esca enim uentri et uenteris escis, et omne, quod intrat per os, non communicat hominem, sed ea, quae de nobis exeunt. secundum praecepta, inquit, et doctrinas hominum secundum illud, quod Esaias loquitur: populus hic labiis me honorat, cor uero eius longe est a me. frustra autem colunt me docentes doctrinas et praecepta hominum, unde et dominus pharisaeos corripit dicens: irritum fecistis mandatum dei, ut traditiones uestras statueretis. deus enim dixit: honora patrem et matrem et: qui maledixerit patri et matri, morte morietur. uos autem dicitis: quicumque dixerit patri uel matri: ‘munus, quodcumque est ex me, tibi proderit' et non honorificauit patrem suum aut matrem et reliqua. quibus infert: et irritum fecistis mandatum dei propter traditioncm uestram. quantae traditiones pharisaeorum sint, quas hodie deuteroseis [Greek] uocant, et quam aniles fabulae, reuoluere nequeo. neque enim libri patitur magnitudo et pleraque tam turpia sunt, ut erubescam dicere. dicam tamen unum in ignominiam gentis inimicae: praepositos habent synagogis sapientissimos quosque foedo operi delegatos, ut sanguinem uirginis siue menstruatae mundum uel inmundum, si oculis discernere non potuerint, gustatu probent, praeterea, quia iussum est, ut diebus sabbatorum sedeat unusquisque in domo sua et non egrediatur nec ambulet de loco, in quo habitat, si quando eos iuxta litteram coeperimus artare, ut non iaceant, non ambulent, non stent, sed tantum sedeant, si uelint praecepta seruare, solent respondere et dicere: ‘Barachibas et Symeon et Helles, magistri nostri, tradiderunt nobis, ut duo milia pedes ambulemus in sabbato’ et cetera istius modi, doctrinas hominum praeferentes doctrinae dei. non quo dicamus sedendum esse semper in sabbato et de loco, in quo quis fuerit occupatus, penitus non recedendum, sed quo id, quod inpossibile legis est, in quo infirmatur per carnem, spiritali obseruatione conplendum sit.
Sequitur: quae sunt rationcm quidem habentia sapientiae. hoc loco ‘quidem’ coniunctio superflua est, quod in plerisque locis propter inperitiam artis grammaticae apostolum fecisse repperimus; neque enim ‘sed’ sequitur uel alia coniunctio, quae solet ei propositioni, ubi ‘quidem’ positum fuerit, respondere. uidentur igitur obseruationes Iudaicae apud inperitos et uilem plebiculam imaginem habere rationis humanaeque sapientiae, unde et doctores eorum sophoi [Greek], hoc est ‘sapientes’, uocantur. et si quando certis diebus traditiones suas exponunt, discipulis suis solent dicere: hoi sophoi deuteroousin, id est ‘sapientes docent traditiones’. pro ‘superstitione’ in Graeco etheloureskeia posita est, hoc est ‘falsa religio’, et pro ‘humilitate’ tapenophrosune, quae magis uirtutem solet sonare quam uitium; sed hic tapenophrosune sic intellegenda, quod humilia sentiant atque terrena. apheidia autem somatos, cuius nomen Latinus sermo non explicat, apud nos dicitur ‘ad non parcendum corpori’. non parcunt Iudaei corporibus suis in adsumptione ciborum contemnentes interdum, quae habent, et quaerentes, quae non habent— ex qua necessitate debilitates interdum et morbos contrahunt —, nec honorant semet ipsos, cum omnia munda sint mundis nihilque possit esse pollutum, quod cum gratiarum actione percipitur, et idcirco a domino sit creatum, ut saturitate et adinpletione carnis humanos artus uegetet atque sustentet. elementa autem mundi, a quibus, immo quibus mortui sumus, lex Moysi et omne uetus instrumentum intellegendum est, quibus quasi elementis et religionis exordiis dominum discimus. quomodo enim elementa appellantur litterae, per quas syllabas ac uerba coniungimus et ad texendam orationem longa meditatione procedimus, ars quoque musica habet elementa sua et geometrica ab elementis incipit linearum et dialectica atque medicina habent elsagogas suas, sic elementis ueteris testamenti, ut ad euangelicam plenitudinem ueniant, sancti uiri eruditur infantia. unde et centesimus octauus decimus psalmus et omnes alii, qui litteris praenotantur, per ethicam nos ducunt ad theologiam et ab elementis occidentis litterae, quae destruitur, transire faciunt ad spiritum uiuificantem. qui ergo mundo et elementis eius mortui sumus, non debemus ea obseruare, quae mundi sunt, quia in altero initium, in altero perfectio est.
11. Quid sibi uelit, quod idem apostolus ad Thessalonicenses scribit: nisi discessio uenerit primum et reuelatus fuerit homo peccati et reliqua. — In prima ad Thessalonicenses scripserat: de temporibus autem et momentis, fratres, non necesse habetis, ut uobis scribam; ipsi enim diligenter scitis, quia dies domini sicut fur in node ita ueniet. cum enim dixerint: ‘pax et securitas’, tunc repentinus illis instabit interitus sicut dolor in utero habenti et non effugient. supra enim ad eos scripserat: hoc uobis dicimus in uerbo domini, quia nos, qui uiuimus, qui residui sumus in aduentu domini, non praeueniemus eos, qui dormierunt, quoniam ipse dominus in iussu et in uoce archangeli et in tuba dei descendet de caelo et mortui, qui in Christo sunt, resurgent primi. deinde nos, qui uiuimus, qui residui sumus, simul rapiemur cum illis in nubibus obuiam domino in aera et sic semper cum domino erimus. itaque consolamini inuicem in uerbis istis. quod audientes Macedones non intellexerunt, quos secum uiuentes apostolus uocet et qui dicantur residui, qui cum illo rapiantur in nubibus obuiam domino, sed arbitrati sunt, dum adhuc esset in corpore et antequam gustaret mortem, Christum in sua maiestate uenturum. quod apostolus audiens rogat eos et adiurat per aduentum domini nostri Iesu Christi, ut non cito moueantur neque per spiritum neque per sermonem neque per epistulam tamquam ab eo scriptam, quasi instet dies domini. duos autem esse aduentus domini saluatoris et omnia prophetarum docent uolumina et euangeliorum fides, quod primum in humilitate uenerit et postea sit uenturus in gloria, ipso domino protestante, quae ante consummationem mundi futura sint et quomodo uenturus antichristus, quando loquitur ad apostolos: cum uideritis abominationem desolationis, quae dicta est a Danihele propheta, stantem in loco sancto — qui legit, intellegat — tunc, qui in Iudaea sunt, fugiant ad montes et, qui in tecto, non descendat tollere aliquid de domo sua. et iterum: tunc, si quis uobis dixerit: ‘ecce hic Christus aut illic’, nolite credere, surgent enim pseudo-christi et pseudoprophetae et dabunt signa magna et prodigia, ita ut in errorem inducantur, si fieri potest, etiam electi. ecce praedixi uobis. si ergo dixerint uobis: ‘ecce in deserto est‘, nolite exire, ‘ecce in penetralibus’, nolite credere, sicut enim fulgur exit ab oriente et paret usque in occidentem, ita erit et aduentus filii hominis. ac deinde: tunc apparebit signum filii hominis in caelo et uidebunt filium hominis uenientem in nubibus caeli cum uirtute multa et maiestate. et mittet angelos suos cum tuba et uoce magna et congregabunt electos eius a quattuor uentis a summo caelorum usque ad terminos eorum. rursumque de antichristo loquitur ad Iudaeos: ego ueni in nomine patris mei et non credidistis mihi. si alius uenerit in nomine suo, illum suscipietis. igitur Thessalonicensium animos uel occasio non intellectae epistulae uel ficta reuelatio, quae per somnium deceperat dormientes, uel aliquorum coniectura Esaiae et Danihelis euangeliorumque uerba de antichristo praenuntiantia in illud tempus interpretantium mouerat atque turbauerat, ut in maiestate sua tunc Christum sperarent esse uenturum. cui errori medetur apostolus et exponit, quae ante aduentum antichristi debeant praestolari, ut, cum illa facta uiderint, tunc sciant antichristum, id est hominem peccati et filium perditionis, qui aduersatur et extollitur super omne, quod dicitur deus aut quod colitur, et qui in templo dei sedeat, esse uenturum. nisi, inquit, uenerit discessio primum — quod Graece dicitur apostasia, ut omnes gentes, quae Romano imperio subiacent, recedant ab eis — et reuelatus fuerit —id est ostensus, quem omnium prophetarum uerba praenuntiant — homo peccati — in quo fons omnium peccatorum est — et filius perditionis — id est diaboli; ipse est enim uniuersorum perditio —, qui aduersatur Christo et ideo uocatur antichristus, et extollitur super omne, quod dicitur deus, ut cunctarum gentium deos siue omnem probatam et ueram religionem suo calcet pede et in templo dei — uel Hierosolymis, ut quidam putant, uel in ecclesia, ut uerius arbitramur—sederit ostendens se, tamquam ipse sit Christus et filius dei. nisi, inquit, ante Romanum imperium fuerit desolatum et antichristus praecesserit, Christus non ueniet, qui ideo ita uenturus est, ut antichristum destruat. meministis, ait, quod haec ipsa, quae nunc scribo per epistulam, cum apud uos essem, praesenti sermone narrabam et dicebam uobis Christum non esse uenturum, nisi praecessisset antichristus. et nunc quid detineat, scitis, ut reueletur in suo tempore, hoc est: quae causa sit, ut antichristus in praesentiarum non ueniat, optime nostis. nec uult aperte dicere Romanum imperium destruendum, quod ipsi, qui imperant, aeternum putant. unde secundum Apocalypsin Iohannis in fronte purpuratae meretricis scriptum est nomen blasphemiae, id est ‘Romae aetemae’. si enim aperte audacterque dixisset: ‘non ueniet antichristus, nisi prius Romanum deleatur imperium’, iusta causa persecutionis in orientem tunc ecclesiam consurgere uidebatur. Quodque sequitur: iam enim mysterium iniquitatis operatur, tantum ut, qui tenet nunc, teneat, donec de medio fiat, et tunc reuelabitur ille iniquus, hunc habet sensum: multis malis atque peccatis, quibus Nero, inpurissimus Caesarum, mundum premit, antichristi parturitur aduentus et, quod ille operaturus est postea, in isto ex parte conpletur, tantum ut Romanum imperium, quod nunc uniuersas gentes tenet, recedat et de medio fiat, et tunc antichristus ueniet, fons iniquitatis, quem dominus Iesus interficiet spiritu oris sui, diuina uidelicet potestate et suae maiestatis imperio, cuius iussisse fecisse est, non in exercitus multitudine, non in robore militum, non in angelorum auxilio, sed, statim ut ille aduenerit, interficietur antichristus. et quomodo tenebrae solis fugantur aduentu, sic inlustratione aduentus sui eum dominus destruet atque delebit, cuius opera satanae sunt opera, et, sicut in Christo plenitudo diuinitatis fuit corporaliter, ita et in antichristo omnes erunt fortitudines et signa atque prodigia, sed uniuersa mendacia. quomodo enim signis dei, quae operabatur per Moysen, magi suis resistebant mendaciis et uirga Moysi deuorauit uirgas eorum, ita mendacium antichristi Christi ueritas deuorabit; seducentur autem eius mendacio, qui perditioni sunt praeparati. et quia tacita quaestio poterat commoueri: ‘cur enim concessit deus omnem eum habere uirtutem et signa atque prodigia, per quae seducantur, si fieri potest, etiam electi dei?‘, solutione praeuenit quaestionem et, quod obponi poterat, antequam obponatur, absoluit. faciet, inquit, haec omnia non sua uirtute, sed concessione dei propter Iudaeos, ut qui noluerunt caritatem recipere ueritatis, hoc est Christum, quia caritas dei diffusa est in corda credentium et ipse dicit: ego sum ueritas, de quo in psalmis scriptum est: ueritas de terra orta est. qui ergo caritatem et ueritatem non receperunt, ut saluatore suscepto salui fierent, mittit illis deus non operatorem, sed ipsam operationem, id est fontem erroris, ut credant mendacio, quia mendax est ipse et pater eius. et siquidem antichristus de uirgine natus esset et primus uenisset in mundum, poterant habere Iudaei excusationem et dicere, quod putauerint ueritatem et idcirco mendacium pro ueritate susceperint; nunc autem ideo iudicandi sunt, immo procul dubio condemnandi, quia Christo ueritate contempta postea mendacium, id est antichristum, suscepturi sunt.

Historical context:

Though Jerome suggests that Algasia has not read the Jewish Bible (Old Testament) enough or has not fully understood it, he compares her to the Queen of Sheba, seeking wisdom from Solomon, a considerable compliment, and one which implies that she not only want his wisdom, but may be testing it. He draws on various authorities with whom she should either be or become acquainted. Jerome usually uses the first plural, the more authoritative "we," rather than "I." The Greek words he cites are written in Greek letters.

Scholarly notes:

1. The measure of oil is “batos,” which is nine gallons and three quarts; the measure of wheat is “coros,” which is about 14 bushels and a pottle. 2. Amy Oh provided this translation.

Printed source:

Sancti Eusebii Hieronymi Epistulae, ed. Isidorus Hilberg, 3 v. (New York: Johnson, 1970, repr. CSEL, 1910-18), 3. 1-55, ep.121.

Date:

late 4th or early 5th century?