Lecture 1 — Moral Precepts

^19:1^ And it came to pass when Jesus had finished these words, that he departed from Galilee, and came into the coasts of Judea, beyond Jordan. [n. 1544]

^19:2^ And great multitudes followed him, and he healed them there. [n. 1546]

^19:3^ And there came to him the Pharisees tempting him, and saying: is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? [n. 1547]

^19:4^ Answering, he said to them: have you not read, that he who made man from the beginning, made them male and female? [n. 1548]

^19:5^ And said: for this cause will a man leave father and mother, and will cleave to his wife, and they two will be in one flesh. [n. 1552]

^19:6^ Therefore, now they are not two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man put asunder. [n. 1553]

^19:7^ They say to him: why then did Moses command to give a bill of divorce, and to put away? [n. 1555]

^19:8^ He said to them: because Moses by reason of the hardness of your heart permitted you to put away your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. [n. 1556]

^19:9^ And I say to you, that whoever puts away his wife, unless it be for fornication, and marries another, commits adultery; and he who marries her who is put away, commits adultery. [n. 1558]

^19:10^ His disciples say to him: if the case of a man with his wife is so, it is not expedient to marry. [n. 1562]

^19:11^ He said to them: all men do not take this word, but they to whom it is given. [n. 1564]

^19:12^ For there are eunuchs, who were born so from their mother’s womb, and there are eunuchs, who were made so by men, and there are eunuchs, who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven. He who can take, let him take it. [n. 1566]

^19:13^ Then little children were presented to him, that he should impose hands upon them and pray. And the disciples rebuked them. [n. 1573]

^19:14^ But Jesus said to them: allow the little children, and do not forbid them to come to me, for the kingdom of heaven is for such. [n. 1577]

^19:15^ And when he had imposed hands upon them, he departed from there. [n. 1578]

^19:16^ And behold one came and said to him: good Master, what good should I do that I may have life everlasting? [n. 1579]

^19:17^ He said to him: why do you ask me concerning good? One is good, God. But if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments. [n. 1581]

^19:18^ He said to him: which? And Jesus said: do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not bear false witness. [n. 1584]

^19:19^ Honor your father and your mother and, love your neighbor as yourself. [n. 1584]

^19:20^ The young man said to him: all these I have kept from my youth, what is still wanting to me? [n. 1586]

^19:21^ Jesus said to him: if you will be perfect, go sell what you have, and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven, and come follow me. [n. 1589]

^19:22^ And when the young man had heard this word, he went away sad, for he had great possessions. [n. 1599]

^19:23^ Then Jesus said to his disciples: amen, I say to you, that a rich man will hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. [n. 1600]

^19:24^ And again I say to you: it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven. [n. 1602]

^19:25^ And when they had heard this, the disciples wondered very much, saying: who then can be saved? [n. 1603]

^19:26^ And Jesus looking, said to them: with men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible. [n. 1605]

^19:27^ Then Peter answering, said to him: behold we have left all things, and have followed you; what therefore will we have? [n. 1607]

^19:28^ And Jesus said to them: amen, I say to you, that you, who have followed me, in the regeneration, when the Son of man will sit on the seat of his majesty, you also will sit on twelve seats judging the twelve tribes of Israel. [n. 1609]

^19:29^ And every one who has left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands for my name’s sake, will receive a hundredfold, and will possess life everlasting. [n. 1616]

^19:30^ And many who are first, will be last, and the last will be first. [n. 1619]

1543. Above, it was shown how one comes to eternal life by the common way; here he teaches how one comes by the way of perfection, which is touched upon with regard to two things: with regard to abstinence, and with regard to voluntary poverty.

Concerning the first, he does two things:

first, he treats of the coming;

second, of abstinence, at his disciples say to him.

Concerning the first, he does three things.

First, the Pharisees’ temptation is set out;

second, Christ’s solution;

third, an objection against the solution.

The second is at answering, he said to them; the third, why then did Moses command to give a bill of divorce?

Concerning the first, three things:

first, the place is described;

second, the occasion for tempting;

third, the temptation.

1544. He says then, and it came to pass, because his words are done. For he spoke and they were made: he commanded and they were created (Ps 32:9). And it came to pass when Jesus had finished these words, namely about avoiding scandal, that he departed from Galilee, and came into the coasts of Judea, beyond Jordan. Judea sometimes means the whole land which the Jews occupy, and sometimes the land which fell to the lot of the tribes of Judah, and in this way it is divided against the others, and this is what it means here. For he who wished to go to Jerusalem, which was in the tribe of Benjamin, in the borders of Judea, had to pass through Judea.

1545. But why did he depart from Galilee? For three reasons. To give an example to preachers that one should not preach only in one place, but in many; hence, to other cities also I must preach the kingdom of God (Luke 4:43). Also, because the time of the passion was already drawing near, and so he wished to approach the place where he ought to suffer. And has delivered himself for us, an oblation and a sacrifice to God for an odour of sweetness (Eph 5:2). Or he wished to return to the Jews, to signify that in the end he will turn to converting the Jews.

1546. And great multitudes followed him. It is a sign of the crowds’ devotion that they followed him, like children following a wandering father. My sheep hear my voice (John 10:27). **And he healed them. He will strike, and he will cure us (Hos 6:2). Sometimes the Lord healed, sometimes he worked signs. He worked signs to strengthen; Jesus began to do and to teach (Acts 1:1).

Someone could think that, since he crossed over to the Jews, he abandoned the gentiles. So to indicate that he did not abandon the gentiles, it says, great multitudes followed him, i.e., to salvation, because when they were a wild-olive tree, they were ingrafted, and were made olives (Rom 11:17). Or that they followed him across the Jordan signifies that sins are forgiven through baptism.

1547. And there came to him the Pharisees tempting him. And in this they are reproached, because while the crowds followed, the Pharisees plotted. I will go therefore to the great men, and I will speak to them: for they have known the way of the Lord, the judgment of their God: and behold these have together broken the yoke more (Jer 5:5).

Hence they approached, saying, is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? There appears in these words first malicious cunning, because they came to Christ to bring slander on Christ: for either he would say that she is to be sent away, or not. If he said that she was, he would seem contrary to himself, because he himself was a preacher of chastity. If he said that she was not, we will accuse him, because this is against Moses the lawgiver. As Chrysostom says, they are convicted of lack of restraint, because if someone freely hears talk about separation from a wife, he is lacking in restraint. Hence since these men were speaking of divorce, they showed themselves to be incontinent. The Lord had given the cause for which she should be sent away, namely for baseness; but these men were asking not only if she could be sent away for this cause, but whether she could be sent away for any cause whatever. Hence they wished to have the free power of sending away a wife.

1548. So there follows the response: answering, he said to them. The Lord gives the very best manner of responding. For when someone asks in order to learn, the truth should be spoken right away; but the truth should not be spoken right away to him who asks in order to slander, but first, something which they cannot deny should be said. So first, the Lord asks about the law; hence

first, he takes up the words of Scripture;

second, he says how this relates the matter at hand;

third, he concludes the principal thing intended.

And concerning the first, he does three things:

first, he points out the society of male and female, which God established;

second, the affection imparted;

third, the manner in which he conjoined them.

1549. He intends to prove that the union of male and female is established by God. Have you not read, that he who made man from the beginning, made them male and female? For this is written: and God created man to his own image (Gen 1:27). This should not be understood, as some have understood it, that first he made man male, and afterwards female, and later separated them; but first he made one man, and in that one he made that from which the woman would come.

1550. But why did the Lord will it to happen this way, namely that a multitude of men should arise from a man and a woman? I respond, to signify that the form of matrimony was from God. Likewise, that they might love one another more.

But then Chrysostom asks why he does not always do it this way, that a man and a woman might be born at the same time. He responds that if it were so, it would seem necessary to enter matrimony. And since the Lord willed it to be lawful to enter matrimony or not to enter, and that it not be necessary, first he created male and female, to signify that matrimony was lawful, but afterward he willed that a male be born without a woman, and vice versa, that they might have the free opportunity both of entering matrimony and of not entering.

1551. In accord with this, two errors are excluded. For some said that matrimony is not from God. And he excludes this, for if he made them male and female, and it is agreed that he made nothing in vain, then neither did he make something of these in vain, and they could be for nothing other than the society of matrimony. Others said that if man had not sinned, God would not have made the female, but rather men would have been multiplied in another way; but this amounts to nothing, because they were created before the sin. And he says male and female in the singular, that one might have one.

1552. ‘For this cause will a man leave father and mother.’ Here the affection which he imparted is set out. And he said. Who said? The one who made them. But this does not seem true, because it seems that Adam said it.

Augustine says that the Lord sent a deep sleep into Adam, and took one of his ribs. This deep sleep was ecstasy; hence he revealed there many good things. Hence the Lord also revealed to him what is said here. Hence above, it was said, for it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father who speaks in you (Matt 10:20). Since therefore Adam spoke, with God ruling over him, then it is said that God spoke: hence, a man leaves his father who raised him (Ezra 2:4).

1553. ‘And will cleave to his wife.’

What is the reason? Brother and sister are born from one parent, and they separate themselves; but husband and wife are born from different parents, and yet do not separate themselves.

Chrysostom says that this is by divine ordination. Also, every cause naturally has a tendency toward its effect, as the sap from the root toward the branches; hence fathers love children more than the other way around. For this reason, man and wife, although they are from different parents, are yet united in one effect.

‘And they two will be in one flesh.’ Jerome: namely in the flesh of the offspring. And this is the fruit of matrimony. Chrysostom explains: ‘in one flesh’, i.e., in one carnal affection, just as unity comes about in spiritual affection, as in Acts, and the multitude of believers had but one heart and one soul (Acts 4:32). Or ‘they two will be in one flesh’, i.e., in one carnal work. The Philosopher says that a man and a woman are always related in this work in such a way that, just as the active power and the passive are always conjoined in the effect, so action and passion are conjoined in this action. Therefore, now they are not two, but one flesh.

1554. Then he concludes the thing principally intended: what therefore God has joined together, let no man put asunder, because it was done by the will of God. If it is from God, a man cannot separate them, because if God conjoined, only God may separate. For the separation can come from God or from man: and this either for the sake of pleasure, or that one may have some other, and this is no use. Or it can come about by mutual consent, that one may serve God more freely, and in this way it is from God.

1555. They say to him: why then did Moses command to give a bill of divorce, and to put away? Here is set out their objection against the general law; for they disclose what was in their mind. Why then did Moses command to give a bill of divorce, and to put away? Moses did not command them to put away their wives, but rather he wished to restrain it, for Moses wished that she not be sent away unless she be given a bill of divorce. And this pertained more to restraint, because a bill was only given by the common hand; hence he left it to the wise men to see if they had a reason why they should send her away.

1556. He said to them. Here he responds to the objection. And first, he sets out the response; second, a confirmation, for the Lord proves that she is not to be sent away from the authority of God, which is greater; therefore the authority of Moses is not against the authority of God.

But against this: did not the Lord give the law through Moses?

See, as the Apostle says, now concerning virgins, I have no commandment of the Lord; but I give counsel (1 Cor 7:25). Hence sometimes he spoke what he had received from the Lord, and sometimes, out of diligence, what was inspired in him: so also Moses. And he permitted this, not because he had heard from the Lord, but by divine inspiration, yet not with firm authority.

1557. Because Moses by reason of the hardness of your heart permitted you to put away your wives. These men had said that Moses commanded it; but he did not command it, but rather permitted it. About their hardness it says, you stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, you always resist the Holy Spirit (Acts 7:51).

Here there is usually a question, whether those who send away their wives sin mortally.

Some have said that those who sent them away sinned mortally. Something is said to be permitted when the contrary is not commanded, as a lesser good is permitted because the greater good is not commanded, as the Apostle says, but I speak this by indulgence, not by commandment (1 Cor 7:6). Sometimes also through lack of a prohibition; and in this way, venial sins are permitted. But sometimes through lack of an impediment, and in this way all the evil things which happen in the present are also sometimes called ‘permitted,’ because no punishment is applied. Therefore, certain things had been permitted to the Jews which were mortal sins, because no punishment was inflicted on them.

But this holds true only in earthly affairs. For in this way we see that simple fornication is not punished according to human laws; hence if the old law looked only to the present life, then the solution is good. But since, although according to its outer shell it pertains to the present life, yet according to its inner kernel it pertains also to eternal life: and I gave them my statutes (Ezek 20:11); and the Lord says the same thing to the young man, below: but if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments. For this reason, others say that this people would be badly provided for if it did not know what was a sin, while yet it is written, cry, cease not, lift up your voice like a trumpet, and show my people their wicked doings (Isa 58:1). So Chrysostom says that he took from the sin the guilt of sin. And although it was something disordered, yet he did not will that it be reckoned to them as guilt, just as the Lord commanded Hosea to have children of fornication (Hos 1:2). Hence the permission was not by commandment, but for avoiding a greater evil.

But from the beginning it was not so. Hence it was practical, not established from the beginning. Hence for many years, no one sent his wife away.

1558. And I say to you, that whoever puts away his wife. Here he brings in the law.

First, for a man;

second, for a woman.

1559. He says then, whoever puts away his wife. But fornication is excepted.

But see that there are two kinds of fornication, i.e., bodily and spiritual. Hence one can put away one’s wife on account of either: if one is an unbeliever, the other a believer, the believer can put away the unbeliever (1 Cor 7:11).

One should note that the bond of matrimony cannot be dissolved by any impediment coming afterward, because it signifies the union of Christ and the Church; hence because the union of Christ and the Church cannot be dissolved, neither can the union of matrimony. But a partnership can be divided on account of fornication, and a man should not retain her with him, lest he seem to be an accomplice in her baseness; but the partnership cannot be divided for other basenesses, as for drunkenness. Likewise, if she wishes to lead a man into unbelief, he can put her away.

But why is bodily fornication mentioned more than spiritual? Because it is against the faith of matrimony, and the faith of one who breaks faith is not to be preserved. Another reason is what Origen sets down, for above, the Lord said, whoever will put away his wife, except for the cause of fornication, makes her commit adultery (Matt 5:32), and so gives her an occasion of committing adultery; but after she herself has sinned, he does not give her an occasion of committing adultery. Therefore he can put her away afterward, but not before.

1560. And marries another, commits adultery. But why does he not commit adultery unless he marries another? Because the same is bound by the things through which it is dissolved. Hence when a man is separated from his wife, and does not have another, there still remains hope that they can be united, either through a similar sin, or through the consent of souls; but when he marries another, then the heart entirely separates, and sets itself away from her.

Another reason is that if in addition to fornication one could put away his wife, it would sometimes happen that a man would bring a charge against his wife in order to be separated from her, and joined to another. For this reason, the Lord willed that he not have another. Hence he expressly forbids that a man should have different wives, because, having put one away and taken another, he commits adultery.

1561. And he who marries her who is put away, commits adultery. Here he sets out the law as regards the woman: hence he does not will that a wife who has been put away should have a husband.

But why does he forbid a man to marry her, and not forbid the woman to marry? I respond that women are more prone toward evil. You had a harlot’s forehead (Jer 3:3). Therefore she would be hastened on toward greater evil by this prohibition. So he commands the man that he not marry, but does not forbid the woman.

But why? Was it not lawful for her who had been rejected to take another? Some say that it was not, because the bond still remained. And they bring in that which is written: that she could not return to her prior husband, because she was defiled; but if she had not sinned, she could go back (Deut 24). Others say that she was able to marry another, but not this man, because if she could return to him, he would reject her more easily.

So why do you say that she was defiled? I say that she is defiled for this man, because she cannot go back to him. Or it can be understood as about the uncleanness of the law, because the priest could not have her.

1562. His disciples say to him: if the case of a man with his wife is so, it is not expedient to marry. After the Lord treated of the indissolubility of matrimony, here he treats of the perfection of abstinence.

And concerning this he does two things:

first, he sets out the disciples’ thought;

second, Christ’s thought, at he said to them: all men do not take this word.

1563. His disciples say to him: if the case of a man with his wife is so, it is not expedient to marry. They were moved to say this because they had heard that a man could not put away a wife except for one cause, while yet many other causes render matrimony burdensome, such as some uncleanness, like leprosy and suchlike; so that it is fulfilled which is said: it will be more agreeable to abide with a lion and a dragon, than to dwell with a wicked woman (Sir 25:23). Likewise, it introduces anxiety; but she who is married thinks on the things of the world (1 Cor 7:34). Therefore, they argued from this that it is expedient for any man not to marry. So the Lord tempers this conclusion, because something can be better in two ways: either simply, or in a certain respect. Thus to abstain belongs to some and not to others; for, as the Apostle says, for it is better to marry than to be burnt (1 Cor 7:9).

1564. He said to them. He approves the disciples’ thought. And

first, in words;

second, in deeds, at then little children were presented to him.

And first, he approves abstinence;

second, he gives the differences of abstinence, at for there are eunuchs;

third, the difficulty, at he who can take, let him take it.

1565. It says then he said to them: all men do not take this word. Thus you say that it is not expedient to marry. This is true for some, but it is not true with regard to all, because not all have such great virtue that they may abstain, but they to whom it is given, because to some it is given not from their own deed, but by the gift of grace. And as I knew that I could not otherwise be continent, except God gave it (Wis 8:21). For that a man in the flesh should live beyond the flesh is not of man, but of God; for I would that all men were even as myself: but every one has his proper gift from God; one after this manner, and another after that (1 Cor 7:7).

1566. And because they could think that all can abstain, he says, for there are eunuchs. Hence he makes the distinction that there is abstinence in some by nature, sometimes by violence, and sometimes by will. Therefore he touches upon three kinds of eunuchs. For some are eunuchs by nature, who were born so from their mother’s womb. As some are born monstrously, because of a defect of the hand, so also some are born without genitals. And this is from God’s providence, because if all things happened according to the common course of nature, the whole would be attributed to nature, and not to divine providence; hence, she knows signs and monsters before they are done (Wis 8:8).

1567. Likewise, there are some who are eunuchs by violence, such as those who are castrated by tyrants or barbarians, or who are castrated for the sake of guarding women. Who were made so by men, namely those whom either the cruelty of men or the preservation of women has castrated. And Jerome says that he knows this, because boys were taken and castrated, and placed in the house of Nabuchodonosor.

1568. But some are eunuchs by will, as he says: and there are eunuchs, who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven. Some have understood these words in a bad way, saying that the genitals should be cut off, and it is written that some have done this, of whom one is said to have been Origen. But this should be reproved, and should be kept out of the clergy (Decrees, I, 20, 3).

From this an occasion is given for the error of the Manichees, who said that the bodily creation is the cause of evil. Likewise, an occasion is given for the error of the gentiles, because some are made eunuchs in their sacrifices. Likewise, this is not useful when done, because such men, even though they do not have the act, still they are not free from concupiscence. Hence, the lust of an eunuch shall devour a young maiden (Sir 20:2). Therefore it is better that a man impose restraint on himself than that he cut off a member to restrain evil thoughts and desires. Remove the evil thoughts from your hearts (Isa 1:16).

1569. Who have made themselves eunuchs, who have given themselves continually to chastity, and this for the kingdom of heaven. For sometimes, a member is understood by its action, as above, **and if your eye scandalize you, pluck it out, and cast it from you **(Matt 18:9). In the same way, the genital members are taken here for their action. Hence that man castrates himself who dedicates himself to chastity. Or, according to Jerome, because those who keep abstinence are born that way, with a frigidity, namely of nature, such that they are not moved to that act. Hence they are called eunuchs on account of the act of eunuchs, which they have on account of the nature which they have from the womb. For some men naturally have a disposition toward some particular virtue, as Job toward mercy, who says, for from my infancy mercy grew up with me (Job 31:18). But some are disposed toward a virtue by their will, or for the sake of pretense or the one taught by heretics; they are made so by men. Having an appearance indeed of godliness, but denying the power thereof (2 Tim 3:5). But some, for the sake of the reward of eternal life.

The first two, namely those who are castrated naturally or violently, do not have the merit of eternal life, but only the third.

But is it true of the first ones, that they do not merit? I say that they merit as regards the will, although they do not merit as regards the act; for although they cannot act, yet they can wish they could act.

1570. He who can take, let him take it. The differences of abstinence being set down, here an exhortation is set down, as Jerome says. The Lord does as a leader in the army does who, when a city is to be taken, says: I will give this or that to the one who shall enter the city, as David said to Joab. Thus, he who can take and abstain, let him take it, and not draw himself back. The Apostle: but be zealous for the better gifts (1 Cor 12:31).

1571. But why does he say this? Is not everyone bound to preserve virginity? It seems so, because a man is bound to what is better.

One should say that it is not a commandment, but a counsel, as the Apostle says, now concerning virgins, I have no commandment of the Lord; but I give counsel (1 Cor 7:25).

But what is this? Is not a man bound to what is better? I say that one should distinguish what is better with regard to the act, and what is better with regard to disposition. One is not bound to what is better as regards act, but as regards disposition, because every rule and every act is determined to something limited and certain; and if one is bound to the better thing, one is bound to what is uncertain. Hence with regard to the exterior act, since one is not bound to what is uncertain, one is not bound to the better thing; but with regard to disposition, one is bound to the better thing. Hence he who does not always will to be better is unable to will without contempt.

1572. But why does he say, he who can take, let him take it? For it is either by a natural power, and thus no one can; or it is by the power of grace, and thus anyone can, since it says, ask, and it will be given you (Luke 11:9). Likewise, the grace of God can do all things.

I say that this can includes the power of the will: for there is a firm will, and a weak will. Now, it is agreed that when a man has a firm will, he is not afraid of many impulses, but when he does not have a firm will, he falls from an easy impulse. Hence **he who can **by firmness of will take, let him take it, and not from nature, but from God. Hence he who has this from God, we consider that he may receive and abstain. Or, he who can according to the opportuneness of the time, or of condition, as with Abraham: hence John’s celibacy is not preferred to Abraham’s marriage. Likewise, according to condition, because the one who is married cannot abstain; hence they are excluded either by reason of time or of condition.

1573. Then little children were presented to him. Here he shows what he said by deed. And

first, the offering of the little children is set out;

second, the disciples’ zeal;

third, Christ satisfies.

The second is at and the disciples rebuked them; the third, at but Jesus said to them: allow the little children.

1574. It says then, then little children were presented to him. The Lord had commended chastity, and since there is chastity and purity in little children, then, seeing that purity would please him, they presented little children to him that he should impose hands upon them and pray.

One should note that it was customary that children were offered to the elderly, and the elderly blessed them, and prayed, as a sign that blessing is from God. Also, they knew from experience that his touch carried salvation, because he had cured the leper and many others. They also offered the little children because they believed that the one who was touched by him would not be disturbed by demons in the future. Hence the Church received it as a custom that the sacraments of the Church are presented to little children, that they might be more strengthened.

1575. And the disciples rebuked them. Here the disciples’ zeal is touched upon. But why did they rebuke them? Because they thought that he, as a true man, was tired out by a large attendance of men; for this reason, wishing to spare his labor, etc. Another reason, because they had a great opinion of Christ, so it seemed to them that it was disrespectful for little children to approach him. Origen: because by this is signified that there are in the Church certain little, unrefined ones. The perfect are signified by the disciples. Hence such men are disdainful when they see the little ones, namely the unrefined ones, come to Christ, not knowing that he wishes all men to be saved. The Apostle: to the Greeks and to the barbarians, to the wise and to the unwise, I am a debtor (Rom 1:14).

1576. Next, he satisfies both. And

first, the zeal for justice;

second, he satisfies the devotion of those offering the children.

1577. He says then, allow the little children to come to me, i.e., the humble, or the little; brethren, do not become children in sense: but in malice be children (1 Cor 14:20). And do not forbid them, namely those who are little through innocence. For the imperfect should not be forbidden to come to perfection. For the kingdom of heaven is for such. He says, for such, not of these, namely those who are children this way through innocence. Above, unless you be converted, and become like little children, you will not enter into the kingdom of heaven (Matt 18:3). For he who has been humbled, shall be in glory (Job 22:29).

1578. Next, he satisfies their devotion: and when he had imposed hands upon them, through which he supports their strength. It is he who gives strength to the weary (Isa 40:29).

He departed from there. Sometimes Christ lays a hand on and does not depart from there; sometimes he lays a hand on and does depart, because some are so steadfast that they do not fall away. And he called Peter and Andrew, and remained with them (John 1:38). Therefore, since they were still imperfect, nor suited for following him, he departed from there.

1579. And behold one came. Here he treats of the perfection of poverty, and that there are two ways, the common way and the special way, as is abstinence. The first way is the way of salvation, the second the way of perfection. Therefore,

first, he treats of the first;

second, of the second.

And

first, a questioning is set down;

second, Christ’s response;

third, an explanation of the response.

1580. The questioning is set down: and behold one came and said to him: good Master.

There are different opinions about this man, for Jerome says that he was corrupt at heart; and this is clear, because he went away sad. Hence if he had approached with a good heart, he would not have gone away sad. Chrysostom says that he was hindered by the passion of avarice; therefore he could not bear the Lord’s words. And this is clear, because he did not come in order to tempt the Lord; for when men came to Jesus to tempt him, the Lord always responded to their malice by saying, why do you tempt me? or something of the kind; but he sets down nothing of that sort here. Hence it is clear that the one who approached God that he might be made perfect was not a tempter, but imperfect. Come to him and be enlightened (Ps 33:6).

Good Master, what good should I do. He calls him Master, as though one who knows: for a master should be the sort of man who knows. Likewise, he called him good: it belongs to the notion of the good to communicate itself; hence, which I have learned without guile, and communicate without envy (Wis 7:13). For he is truly good; you are good; and in your goodness teach me your justifications (Ps 118:68). What good should I do that I may have life everlasting? He had heard many things about eternal life. He had heard well, decline from evil and do good (Ps 36:27); but in the law he had not heard that eternal life was promised, but temporal things only. You shall eat the good things of the land (Isa 1:19).

1581. He said to him: why do you ask me? Here he sets out the response. First, he responds, as is had in Mark, why do you call me good? (Mark 10:18). But here, why do you ask me? It can be understood either way.

But what Matthew says, why do you ask me? does not have a wrong interpretation; but following what Mark says, the Arians took up an error, saying that the Father is good by essence, and the Son by participation; therefore, they posited that the Son is not equal to the Father.

But one should notice that he says, one is good, God. But the name of God indicates the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Hence other creatures are excluded, because they are not good by essence.

1582. But why does he respond this way? Jerome says that he responds to his mind, for he commended that goodness which is usually in men; for they clung more to the traditions of men than of God, as it says above, **you have made void the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition **(Matt 15:6). For this reason, he reproached him, because he asked of him as though of a good man, but not as though of God.

But why does he say, why do you ask me concerning good? He says this as though aware of his emotions, that his soul was not ready to submit to the good, and every temporal good is imperfect and a shadow with respect to the divine good; and all our justices as the rag of a menstruous woman (Isa 64:6). Hence all these good things are from God, so if you wish to have them, ask of him; for he alone is good; praise the Lord, for he is good (Ps 135:1). Therefore, have recourse to God.

1583. But if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments. For some have imperfect life, some perfect life, and some are entirely outside of life, such as those who are in sin, or unbelievers, for my just man lives by faith (Heb 10:38). So some have a beginning and imperfect life, as do the just in this world; but those who are in eternal life have perfect life; hence, if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments, because a man is brought in through the commandments. And I gave them my statutes, and I showed them my judgments, which if a man do, he will live in them (Ezek 20:11).

But were the commandments enough for salvation? I say not, except on the basis of faith in the Mediator, and charity; hence the Apostle: for if justice be by the law, then Christ died in vain (Gal 2:21). Also, keep my commandments, and you shall live (Prov 7:2).

1584. He said to him: which? There follows the explanation of the response, in which he repeats the commandments. And first, he sets out the commandments; second, the root, at ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’

It says then, and Jesus said: ‘do not murder.’ And why did not he mention the commandments of the first tablet? Because he seemed inclined toward the love of God, so it was not necessary. Also, these commandments lead the way toward love. And first, he sets out the negative; second, the affirmative. First, he begins from what is greater: ‘do not murder’, which is against an actual life; ‘do not commit adultery’, which is against a potential life; ‘do not steal’, which is against a person’s goods; ‘do not bear false witness’, which is against a person. Likewise, sets out an affirmative: ‘honor your father.’

1585. Then he sets out the root: ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’ For he who loves his neighbor, has fulfilled the law (Rom 13:8).

1586. The young man said to him: all these I have kept from my youth. After the Lord handed down the teaching on common salvation, here he hands down the teaching on perfection. And

first, he hands down the teaching;

second, the necessity of this teaching;

third, the reward of observing it.

The second is at then Jesus said to his disciples; the third, at then Peter answering, said to him: behold. And

first, the occasion for giving this teaching is set out;

second, the proclamation;

third, the effect.

The second is at Jesus says to him; the third, at and when the young man had heard this word, he went away sad.

The occasion for proclaiming this teaching is the young man’s question. And

first, he professes to be an observer of the law;

second, he asks what perfection he can come to, at what is still wanting to me?

1587. He says then, all these I have kept from my youth; and he says all, because it is not enough to do only one, if all are not kept; and whosoever shall keep the whole law, but offend in one point, is become guilty of all (Jas 2:10). Likewise, he says, **from my youth; a young man according to his way, even when he is old he will not depart from it (Prov 22:6). Hence what is said in Job is fitting to him: I have not departed from the commandments of his lips (Job 23:12).

But whether he spoke the truth is a question. Jerome says that he lied: which is clear, because immediately before this came ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’ If he had loved in this way, he would not have gone away sad, since the Lord said, go sell what you have, and give to the poor. Chrysostom says that he spoke the truth, that he had kept the legal commandments; and this is confirmed by what is said in Mark, that when Jesus had looked upon him, he loved him, which he would not have done unless he had been good (Mark 10:21).

For there are two ways. One, sufficient for salvation; and this is the love of God and of neighbor with one’s own benefit, without burden to self, according to what is said, but if any love God, the same is known by him (1 Cor 8:3); and this he had kept. The other is the way of perfection, to love neighbor with one’s own detriment; and this he had not kept. For this reason, when it was told him, he went away sad.

1588. He was not content with the first things, so he asked: what is still wanting to me? Everyone is bound to ask this question, according to what is said, O Lord, make me know my end. And what is the number of my days: that I may know what is wanting to me (Ps 38:5). For he alone knows what is lacking to us. Your eyes saw my imperfect being (Ps 138:16).

1589. Jesus says to him: if you will be perfect, go.

First, zeal is set down;

second, the way;

third, because of the difficulty, the reward is set down;

fourth, the consummation of perfection.

1590. He says then, if you will be perfect, go sell what you have, and give to the poor. For we should strive toward perfection; wherefore leaving the word of the beginning of Christ, let us go on to things more perfect (Heb 6:1).

But Origen asks: the perfection of the law is love; but he had said, ***‘love your neighbor as yourself’; why then did he say*, if you will be perfect, when he was already perfect?

Some say that ‘love your neighbor as yourself’ is not set down in some books. And this is clear, because it is not set down in Mark. In another way, it can be said that he said this, but not in this order, because it is this way in the Gospel of the Nazarenes: the Lord said, ‘do not murder’, up to the part about love. And after that follows, all these, I have kept. And then there follows, ‘love your neighbor.’

Yet the solution is plain, that there are two ways of loving one’s neighbor, namely love according to the common way, and the love of perfection.

1591. Hence he says, go sell what you have, not a part, as Ananias and Saphira did (Acts 5:2). And give to the poor, not to the rich. And if I should distribute all my goods to feed the poor (1 Cor 13:3). He has distributed, he has given to the poor (Ps 111:9). And not to one, but to many.

1592. But what is this? Would such a man be perfect immediately? It seems not, because there are still passions in him; therefore he is not perfect in virtue.

Origen says that he is immediately perfect, just as those to whom he distributes his goods are perfect. Let your abundance supply their want, that their abundance also may supply your want (2 Cor 8:14). Hence their perfection passes over into him, just as he who receives a prophet in the name of a prophet receives a prophet’s reward (Matt 10:41). Hence the way of perfection is not go sell what you have, but only that which follows: and give to the poor.

Another response is that if you will be perfect, not that you will be perfect right away, but you will have a certain principle of perfection, because being unburdened of these things, you will be able to contemplate heavenly things more easily. Augustine says that vigils and suchlike are instruments of perfection; but perfection is in what follows: and come follow me. Hence above, Peter and Andrew left everything and **followed him **(Matt 4:20). And Matthew also, in the same way (Matt 9:9). But when you abandon all these things, the better use is to give to the poor, and in this one’s neighbor should be considered.

1593. Hence if perfection is not in these things, in what does it consist?

One should say that it consists in the perfection of charity; but above all these things have charity, which is the bond of perfection (Col 3:14). Hence the love of God is perfection, but the abandonment of things is the way toward perfection. And how? Augustine says, in the book of 83 Questions, that the growth of charity is the diminution of greed, and the perfection of charity is no greed. Therefore, that man is perfect in charity who loves God even to the contempt of self and of his own things. Hence it is difficult and as though impossible that someone should possess riches without being gently drawn by them. And this is clear concerning Gregory, of whom it is written that, when he had thought it better that he serve Christ under a secular appearance, they began to grow up against him so much that he was hindered by them not only in appearance, but in mind also. Therefore, there is nothing that makes the soul so free as not being occupied with riches: and this is the way of perfection. Hence it is one thing to be perfect, and another thing to have the state of perfection. Whoever has perfect charity even to the contempt of himself and his things has perfection.

1594. The state of perfection is twofold, that of prelates and that of religious; but equivocally, because the state of the religious is for acquiring perfection. Hence it was said to this man, if you will be perfect, and if you wish to come to the state of perfection. But the prelate’s state is not for acquiring perfection for himself, but for communicating what he has. Hence the Lord said to Peter, Simon, son of John, do you love me? Feed my sheep (John 21:17); and he did not say, if you will be perfect.

Hence the difference between the perfection of a religious and of a prelate is like the difference between a disciple and a teacher. Hence to the disciple it is said: if you wish to learn, enter a school that you may learn. To the teacher it is said: lecture, and perfect. Hence the state of the religious is more secure, because ignorance is not imputed to them as it is to a prelate. Hence just as it would be ridiculous for a teacher not to know anything, so likewise a prelate.

But given that each performs as much as pertains to him and uses his office well, I say that there is no comparison, just as there is no comparison between a disciple and a teacher. Hence in state, a prelate is more perfect, even if you bring up Elijah, or whomever.

1595. But there is a question: if a prelate is more perfect, is he not obliged to sell all that he has?

I say that this would follow if go sell what you have were perfection; but it is not, but rather is a way and a preamble for acquiring perfection. Therefore it is not necessary that he sell all that he has. But since it rarely happens that someone has perfection along with riches, he who comes to perfection should relinquish everything. So the Lord gives what is easier. Hence if a prelate were able, and tended well to his responsibility, I say that it would be more perfect. Just as someone can say: I wish to enter school that I may learn; but it is presumptuous for someone to say, while he knows nothing, I wish to be a teacher. Hence Augustine, in The City of God: the state is higher, without which the people cannot be ruled, and though becomingly conducted, it is unbecomingly desired.

Likewise, it is one thing to be a prelate, and another thing to be in the state of a prelate.

1596. Are priests of the common people or curates in the state of perfection?

I say that they are not in the state, because they do not make the state. Every state is given with solemnity, as the episcopal or religious orders. But when the simple priesthood is given, it is not given with solemnity; hence they do not have the state of perfection. Which is evident, because if a duty and administration is entrusted to someone, and he is not promoted, he can abandon it and take a wife, and sometimes is made a religious. But a bishop may not abandon a bishopric without the permission of a superior; the curate can abandon his position by entering religion. But if he were in the state of perfection, he would then fall from the state, and thus would sin: hence he can have perfection according to action, but not according to state, because the state is only given with solemnity.

1597. So go sell what you have, and give to the poor, because by this you shall have a great reward, since the reward corresponds to the merit. And you will have treasure in heaven. There are two things in a treasure: stability and abundance. You will have treasure and an abundance of spiritual things. Glory and wealth will be in his house (Ps 111:3). And there will be faith in your times: riches of salvation, wisdom and knowledge (Isa 33:6).

1598. And come follow me. Here is the end of perfection. Hence those are perfect who follow God with their whole heart. Hence walk before me, and be perfect (Gen 17:1). And come follow me, i.e., imitate the life of Christ; hence above, **if any man wants to come after me, let him deny himself **(Matt 16:24). For the imitation is solicitude for preaching, teaching, and having care. Hence Chrysostom: it was said to Peter, ‘follow me,’ namely in undertaking the care of the whole world. As it is written: my foot has followed his steps (Job 23:11).

1599. And when the young man had heard this word, he went away sad. The emotion is shown: he went away sad. This happens when we desire something and cannot have it as we wish; hence this man desired perfection, and heard what he should have through this. And because he was greedy, he went away sad.

And why? For he had great possessions. Augustine: he who gave up the will to have things has great merit, because it is attributed to him that could have had; but it is of greater merit to give up what he has already acquired, because it is more difficult to uproot things which are already united with him, than to uproot things which are not so united. And this is clear, for this man, who had many things, was unable to be separated from them.

1600. Then Jesus said to his disciples. Here the reason for the aforesaid teaching is set out. And

first, he gives the reason;

second, he satisfies the wonderment of the disciples, at and when they had heard this, the disciples wondered very much.

1601. It says, then Jesus said to his disciples. The occasion for speaking this word was that the man went away sad because he had said, go sell what you have. Now he says, a rich man will hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven: he does not say it is impossible.

And he says, a rich man, not one who has riches. For some men have riches and do not love them, while some have and love and place hope in them. These who have and do not love can enter into the kingdom of heaven. For if this were not so, Paul would not have said, charge the rich of this world not to be highminded, nor to trust in the uncertainty of riches (1 Tim 6:17). But he who has and loves riches will hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. Above, **the care of this world and the deceitfulness of riches chokes up the word **(Matt 13:22). He who makes haste to be rich, will not be innocent (Prov 28:20). Blessed is the rich man who is found without blemish: and who has not gone after gold (Sir 31:8). But this is difficult, so there follows: who is he, and we will praise him? For he has done wonderful things in his life (Sir 31:9).

1602. He adds something which seems to pertain to impossibility; hence he says, and again I say to you: it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Above, the Lord had said that the rich man would enter into the kingdom of heaven with difficulty; here, that it is impossible, just as it is impossible that a camel pass through the eye of a needle. Hence take it that it is difficult for a rich man who has riches and does not love them, but it is impossible for the one who loves and places hope in them to enter into the kingdom of heaven. For that a camel cannot enter through the eye of a needle, this is from nature; but that a rich man who loves riches cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven, this is from the divine justice. But all things could be overturned before the divine justice could be changed.

Others, as Jerome: impossibility is not indicated, but difficulty. It is found in a certain Gloss, whose author is unknown, that there was a certain gate in Jerusalem which was called ‘the eye of the needle,’ through which camels carrying burdens could not pass. In this way, a rich man cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven unless he unburden himself of affection for riches. But it is easier for a camel to be unburdened than for a rich man to lay aside this affection.

Chrysostom explains it mystically: the camel signifies the gentiles, who are burdened with the sin of idolatry, and the rich men signify the Jews; and Christ is the needle, and the passion is the eye of the needle. Hence it was easier for the gentile people to pass through the passion of Christ than the Jews, because they could only come by giving up the ceremonies of the law, and this they did not do. Hence it was asked of a demon what is the heavier sin, and he said: to have something from another’s belongings. To which it was responded: you are lying! Oh, but indeed, he says, for I often lose other sinners, but these I do not lose.

Or thus: it is easier for a camel, as by the rich man we understand the proud man; by the camel Christ, by the eye of the needle Christ’s passion; therefore, it was easier for the camel to pass through the eye of the needle than for the proud man to be humbled.

1603. And when they had heard this, the disciples wondered very much, saying: who then can be saved? Above, the Lord gave the reason for his teaching; here he satisfies the disciples’ wonderment. And

first, the wonderment is set out;

second, the satisfaction, at and Jesus looking, said to them.

1604. It says then, and when they had heard this, the disciples wondered very much, saying: who then can be saved?

But here there is a literal question. Since there are more poor men than rich men, and rich men are saved with difficulty, how can they say, who then can be saved?

It is responded that they had understood that he meant it even of the poor who are rich in desire; for there are many poor men who are rich in desire. Also, they were already made solicitous for the whole world: so that solicitude was coming over them (2 Cor 11:28), as they were the rulers of all creatures.

1605. And Jesus looking, said to them: with men this is impossible. Here he satisfies their wonderment, saying: with men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.

But why does he say this? For it seems that he destroys free will, if it is impossible with men. It is true that man has from himself that he can sin; but to rise again, and do the works of salvation, this he does not have from himself without the help of God’s grace: for God is the one who can accomplish these things. So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy (Rom 9:16). Hence, I know that you can do all things, and no thought is hid from you (Job 42:2). Hence according to human power it is impossible that a man be saved; because human power does not change the will, but it belongs only to God to change it, as is written, for it is God who works in you, both to will and to accomplish (Phil 2:13).

1606. Next, he determines about the reward of the perfect. And

first, a question is set down;

second, the response, at and Jesus said to them.

1607. Peter had heard poverty be praised, and he had heard go sell what you have, and give to the poor. He had also heard that a rich man will hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. For this reason, Peter considered that he had done a great thing, because he had left everything; hence it says, then Peter answering, said to him: behold we have left all things. And since he had heard not only go sell, but beyond that, and come follow me, Peter added, and have followed you. To leave everything does not make for perfection, but to leave everything and follow Christ, because many philosophers have left everything. But Peter had left a boat and a net! But Peter is praised more for his affection than for what he left, because he left his possessions with a will so inclined that he would also have left it all if he had had more. Also, he knew that Christ knew his will, so he said, behold, we have left all things.

By which he gave an example, that those who have left what they had should not be considered to have left little, even if they had little.

1608. And Jerome says that to leave possessions does not make for perfection, but to follow the Lord. And one follows God in many ways. With the mind, through contemplation; we will know, and we will follow on, that we may know the Lord (Hos 6:3). Hence those follow God who have God before their eyes, and know God by way of contemplation. Likewise, one follows the Lord by observing the commandments; my sheep hear my voice: and I know them, and they follow me (John 10:27). Likewise, through imitation of his works; my foot has followed his steps (Job 23:11). Likewise, through contempt of self and of one’s own; above, if any man wants to come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me (Matt 16:24). Likewise through purity of mind and body; these are they who were not defiled with women: for they are virgins. These follow the Lamb wherever he goes (Rev 14:4). Voluntary poverty disposes one to this following.

1609. And Jesus said to them: amen, I say to you. Here he treats of the reward of perfection. And

first, he sets out the reward of the apostles’ perfection;

second, the reward of others’ perfection;

third, he excludes a certain objection.

The second is at and every one who has left house, or brethren; the third, at and many who are first, will be last.

1610. He says then, amen I say to you. For since he willed that what he had said be certain, he professes to have spoken the truth, by saying, amen. And to show that perfection is not in go sell what you have, but in follow me, he says that you, who have followed me, in the regeneration . . . also will sit on twelve seats.

There are two regenerations. One is of the spirit, which comes about through grace in baptism, about which Peter says, who according to his great mercy has regenerated us unto a lively hope (1 Pet 1:3). Likewise, there is a regeneration of the body, for just as the spirit is regenerated by grace, so also in the resurrection he will revive our bodies. Who will reform the body of our lowness, made like to the body of his glory (Phil 3:21).

Some explain this as about the first regeneration, and punctuate it this way: you who have followed me in the regeneration, i.e., you have been regenerated by grace, will sit.

Chrysostom explains it the same way, but he does not punctuate it that way; hence he says that he promised them a reward in the present, this way: you who have followed me . . . will sit. The present Church is the faith of Christ. In the Church there are different states of men. And although all the virtues are necessary for salvation, yet one man is more praiseworthy in the act of one virtue than another: one in faith, another in chastity, another in charity. And just as it is in the various faithful, so it is also in the apostles, because Peter was the most fervent zealot for the faith, but John was strong in chastity, and so with the others. Thus those who are fervent in faith are seats of Peter, those who are fervent in chastity are seats of John, and so with the others. But all are seats of Christ, because all the virtues were in him; therefore he promised them that they would be future pastors of the Church.

In another way, according to Augustine, it is taken as about the regeneration, namely for the resurrection: amen I say to you . . . in the regeneration, i.e., in the resurrection, when they will be called back in body and soul, you also will sit, namely in the seat of majesty, i.e., you will have the judiciary power, judging the twelve tribes of Israel, because just as God gave judgment to the Son, so also it is given to those who have followed him.

1611. But why does he say, judging the twelve tribes of Israel? Will they not judge others? Why then does he say rather, the twelve tribes of Israel? The whole people of the faithful of the whole world is understood, because the gentility entered into the fatness of the olive tree, and was made a partner in the promises made to the fathers (Rom 11:17). But they will not judge those who are infidels: for Gregory says that some are damned and are not judged, as the infidels; but some are damned and are judged, as those who have believed and were corrupted. And, as Jerome sets out, the enemies are condemned in one way, those who remained in the faith in another way; for the enemies are condemned while absent, but the others are condemned while present. Therefore you will judge the twelve tribes of Israel. Since the apostles passed their lives with the Jews, then it is said that they will judge the twelve tribes.

And how? By comparison, because they warned them. They could say: how could we believe that you are God, you who lived among us as a mortal? But the Lord will say: you were wise in the law, and you did not believe; they were fishermen, and they believed.

1612. Chrysostom asks what great thing is given to the apostles. Was not this also given to the Ninivites and to the queen of the south (Matt 12:41)?

Chrysostom says that the manner of judging itself shows that the authority of judging was given to the apostles, because those who judge with authority judge sitting down, while those advocates and accusers condemn while standing up; therefore, to indicate that the apostles shall judge with authority, he says, you also will sit. But about the Ninivites he says, **the men of Niniveh will rise in judgment with this generation, and will condemn it **(Matt 12:41).

1613. But here there is a question, because some will be damned and will not be judged; in the same way, some will be saved and will not be judged, such as the apostles and the apostolic men; but others to be saved will be judged, and their merits will be examined. And how will they judge?

Some say that they will judge by comparison. But this is not enough, because even the queen of the south will judge in this way. Some say that they will judge through Christ’s judgment. But this is not enough, because all the saints will approve in this way. The just will rejoice when he will see the revenge (Ps 57:11). Likewise, some say that the apostles will judge through a certain venerable justice, because the just will be raised up in the air to meet Christ, and they will be Christ’s counselors. But even this is not enough, because he says, you also will sit and judging. Some say that they will judge as a book judges: for it judges, since laws which judge one are written in it; as the hearts of the apostles and the just, who will have kept God’s commandments, will be a book condemning them. And the dead were judged with books open (Rev 20:12). But it is more, because they will administer something else. Hence, and two-edged swords in their hands (Ps 149:6).

So how will they judge? Attend. There will be a mental judgment, for it will come about by the divine power that for each man all his sins will be brought back to memory. Hence Lactantius was deceived: he held that the resurrection would happen one thousand years before the judgment. So it will be a mental judgment, because by the divine power those things which each man has done will be brought back to memory. But it is not unfitting that someone should receive some light from someone, since the angels receive light from God, and men from angels; therefore, it is no marvel that men shall be enlightened by the apostles, who will be full. Therefore, they will not only judge, but also the other just men will receive a certain light from them. But Christ and the apostles will judge in different ways, because Christ will judge with authority, but they as promulgators; as the law was given through angels, so also the execution of judgment will come about through angels, for behold, those are called angels, he gives judgment to the poor (Job 36:6), who have followed after justice and have left everything.

1614. And why will they judge? One reason, because sins are from the world. Hence those who should judge should be from outside the world, and such were the apostles and the apostolic men; hence, I have chosen you out of the world (John 15:19). Likewise, the Philosopher says that the virtuous man is the judge of all men, as taste is the judge of all tastable things. So just as he who wishes to taste something gives it to someone who has a healthy sense of taste for tasting, so, since the virtuous man has a healthy sense of taste, he himself is the measure of all actions. Therefore perfect men will judge as measures.

Likewise another reason: since they are foreign to the world, they follow Christ more fervently. Therefore, these men should judge, because they are more heated about the things to be considered. My heart grew hot within me: and in my meditation a fire shall flame out (Ps 38:4). For this reason also, since they are more familiar, they are more fervent. Likewise also, because they were poor men and more downcast, but the reward of being downcast is exaltation; therefore they will be exalted. For this reason, he says, you also will sit on twelve seats judging.

1615. But will Judas judge? No, because these promises are always under a condition; for this reason the Lord says, you, who have followed me, in the regeneration. Hence he who will have followed, and persevered, will judge.

But if these men will judge, what will Paul do? If the seats are already full, then where will Paul sit? Augustine says that universality is signified by twelve, which is unfolded by seven. The number twelve comes from the multitude seven, because the number seven consists of three and four, and three fours are twelve, or four threes; so by this number the universality of the elect is signified.

1616. And every one who has left house, or brethren. The apostles’ reward being set out, here is set out the others’ reward. And there are questions here. First, why did he promise nothing temporal to the apostles, but to the others something temporal? For they will receive a hundredfold. And this is clear, because in Mark, it says that the hundredfold is in the present (Mark 10:30).

According to Chrysostom, something temporal had been promised to the apostles, namely judgment in God’s Church, as was said before. Or in another way, the things which are in the world do not entice him who has left the world and the things which are in the world; but the others, who are bound to secular things, are drawn by those things. Therefore he promised nothing temporal to the apostles, who had left all; but he promised something temporal to the others, since they had an affection for temporal things. For this reason, he promised judgment to the apostles. Or, according to Origen, what was said before, in the regeneration, this is the reward of those who have left all for Christ’s sake.

But someone could say: I do not want to leave all things for your sake, but I will leave one house, or one field. I say that if you relinquish something, you will have something; but if you relinquish all things, you will be a judge.

1617. But there is another question. He said, house, and there is no doubt about this; but he says, father, or mother, or wife, or children. He who orders father or mother to be abandoned, orders a sin. Likewise, he himself commanded that a wife not be sent away, and that parents should be honored.

One should say that in these matters two things are considered: natural affinity, and this is not to be despised, but one should do well for them if they are in need. But sometimes they draw one back from God’s service: hence then they are like a member which scandalizes, and then that member should be cut off. And for this reason he commanded them to leave these. Likewise another reason, because the Lord foresaw the time of the future persecution, that brother would rise up against brother, so he willed that men be separated from them.

1618. Another question is when he says, will receive a hundredfold, how it is understood.

Some have said that the saints will rise one thousand years before the judgment, and then Christ will have complete rule. And then he who has left a home, will have a hundred. Jerome disproves this, because they will not have one hundred fathers, etc. Likewise, baseness is indicated, because they will not have one hundred wives.

So Augustine says that it is understood with regard to spiritual things. Hence, has not God chosen the poor in this world . . . and heirs of the kingdom? (Jas. 2:5): hence the grace of God is understood, which outweighs all that you have left, and infinitely. So he sets down the finite for the infinite. Hence they will receive a hundredfold, i.e., something which is worth a hundred.

Origen says that it should also be understood literally. You have left a field, and it will be, by God’s providence, that you will find many at your service; hence, it can be applied to them: as having nothing, and possessing all things (2 Cor 6:10). Likewise, you will find brothers, i.e., every spiritual man. Likewise, beyond this, eternal life; my sheep hear my voice: and I know them, and they follow me and I give them eternal life (John 10:27).

1619. Next, cutting in, he brings in, and many who are first, will be last: and the last will be first. Those who leave something for Christ’s sake, or all things, if they live negligently, will they have this reward?

I say not, because they received imperfectly, and they will not be first, but last. Or in another way, because they could say: we have left all things, thus we will judge. Those who were first, lifted up by pride, are last. Origen says that it can be understood of those who come to Christ, and live tepidly; afterward come others who are fervent, and by their fervor they transcend the others. Or, the first means those who are born from Christians, who were born last with respect to others who were born from the gentiles or the Jews. Or it can be referred to men and angels: for those who are first in the order of angels are made last through guilt; and the last, i.e., men, shall be made first, and higher.