Church Fathers Commentary John 5

St. Augustine of Hippo: After the miracle in Galilee, Jesus returned to Jerusalem: After this there was a feast of the Jews, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem.

St. John Chrysostom: This was the feast of Pentecost. Jesus always went up to Jerusalem at the time of the feasts, so that it could be seen that He was not an enemy to the Law, but an observer of it. This also gave Him the opportunity to impress the simple multitude with miracles and teaching, since great numbers used to gather then from the neighboring towns.

Alcuin of York: The pool by the sheep market was the place where the priests washed the animals that were going to be sacrificed.

St. John Chrysostom: This pool was one of many types of baptism, which was to purge away sin. First, God enjoined water for cleansing the filth of the body and for those impurities that were not actual but ceremonial—such as those from contact with death, leprosy, and the like. Later, illnesses were healed by water, as we read: In these (the porches) lay a great multitude of impotent folk, of blind, halt, withered, waiting for the moving of the water.

This was a closer parallel to the gift of baptism, where not only impurities are cleansed, but sicknesses are healed. Types exist in various ranks, just as in a royal court some officials are nearer to the prince while others are more distant. The water, however, did not heal by its own natural properties, for if it had, the effect would have been consistent. Instead, it healed by the descent of an angel: For an Angel went down at a certain season into the pool, and troubled the water. In the same way, in Baptism, water does not act simply as water but first receives the grace of the Holy Spirit, by which it cleanses us from all our sins.

The angel troubled the water and imparted a healing virtue to it in order to foreshadow for the Jews the far greater power of the Lord of the Angels to heal the diseases of the soul. But at that time, their illnesses prevented them from receiving the cure, for it follows, Whosoever then first after the troubling of the water stepped in, was made whole of whatsoever disease he had. But now everyone may attain this blessing, for it is not an angel that troubles the water, but the Lord of Angels, who works everywhere. Though the whole world may come, grace does not fail but remains as full as ever, like the sun’s rays which give light all day and every day, and yet are not spent. The sun’s light is not diminished by this bountiful expenditure; no more is the influence of the Holy Spirit diminished by the abundance of its outpourings.

Only one person could be cured at the pool. God’s design was to present the healing power of water to people's minds and compel them to dwell on it, so that from seeing its effect on the body, they might more readily believe in its power over the soul.

St. Augustine of Hippo: It was a greater act for Christ to heal the diseases of the soul than the sicknesses of the perishable body. But since the soul itself did not know its Restorer—for it had eyes in the flesh to perceive visible things, but not eyes in the heart with which to know God—our Lord performed cures that could be seen so that He might afterward work cures that could not be seen. He went to the place where a multitude of the sick lay, from whom He chose one to heal: And a certain man was there, which had an infirmity thirty and eight years.

St. John Chrysostom: He did not, however, proceed immediately to heal him, but first tried through conversation to bring him to a state of belief. He did not require faith at first, as He did from the blind man when He asked, Believe you that I am able to do this? This was because the lame man could not have known who Jesus was. This question was properly asked of people who, in various ways, had the means of knowing Him. But there were some who did not and could not yet know Him, but would be brought to know Him later by His miracles. In their case, the demand for faith was reserved until after those miracles had taken place.

When Jesus saw him lie, and knew that he had been a long time in that case, He said to him, Will you be made whole? He does not ask this question for His own information (for this was unnecessary), but to reveal the great patience of the man. For thirty-eight years he had sat year after year by that place, hoping to be cured, which sufficiently explains why Christ passed by the others and went to him. He does not say, “Do you wish Me to heal you?” for the man did not yet have any idea that He was such a great Person.

Nor did the lame man suspect any mockery in the question that would cause him to take offense and say, “Have you come to annoy me by asking if I want to be made whole?” Instead, he answered mildly, Sir, I have no man, when the water is troubled, to put me into the pool; but while I am coming, another steps down before me. He still had no idea that the Person asking this question would heal him, but thought that Christ might be able to help put him into the water. But Christ’s word is sufficient: Jesus said to him, Rise, take up your bed, and walk.

St. Augustine of Hippo: These are three distinct instructions. “Rise,” however, is not a command but the bestowal of the cure. Two commands were given upon his cure: “take up your bed” and “walk.”

St. John Chrysostom: Behold the richness of Divine Wisdom. He not only heals but also bids him carry his bed. This was to show that the cure was truly miraculous and not a mere effect of the imagination, for the man’s limbs must have become completely sound and strong to allow him to carry his bed. The sick man, for his part, did not mock Him and say, “The angel comes down and troubles the water, and he only cures one each time; do You, who are a mere man, think You can do more than an angel?” On the contrary, he heard, believed the One who commanded him, and was made whole: And immediately the man was made whole, and took up his bed, and walked.

The Venerable Bede: There is a wide difference between our Lord’s way of healing and a physician’s. He acts by His word and acts immediately; the other requires a long time for its completion.

St. John Chrysostom: This was wonderful, but what follows is even more so. As yet, he had faced no opposition. It becomes more wonderful when we see him obeying Christ afterward, in spite of the rage and condemnation of the Jews: And on the same day was the sabbath. The Jews therefore said to him that was cured, It is the sabbath day, it is not lawful for you to carry your bed.

St. Augustine of Hippo: They did not charge our Lord with healing on the Sabbath, for He would have replied that if one of their own oxen or donkeys had fallen into a pit, would they not have pulled it out on the Sabbath day? Instead, they addressed the man as he was carrying his bed, as if to say, “Even if the healing could not be delayed, why command the work?” He shields himself with the authority of his Healer: He that made me whole, the Same said to me, Take up your bed, and walk. This means, “Why should I not receive a command from Him, if I have received a cure from Him?”

St. John Chrysostom: Had he been inclined to be treacherous, he might have said, “If it is a crime, accuse the One who commanded it, and I will put down my bed.” He would have concealed his cure, knowing as he did that their real cause of offense was not the breaking of the Sabbath but the miracle itself. But he neither concealed it nor asked for pardon; instead, he boldly confessed the cure. They then ask spitefully: What man is that who said to you, Take up your bed, and walk. They do not ask, “Who is it that made you whole?” but only mention the supposed offense.

It follows, And he that was healed wist not who it was, for Jesus had conveyed Himself away, a multitude being in that place. Jesus had done this, first, because the man who had been healed was the best witness of the cure and could give his testimony with less suspicion in our Lord’s absence. Second, He did it so that the fury of the people would not be needlessly provoked. For the mere sight of the object of one's envy is a powerful incentive to more envy. For these reasons, He departed and left them to examine the event for themselves.

Some are of the opinion that this is the same man with palsy whom Matthew mentions, but he is not. The man in Matthew's account had many to attend to and carry him, whereas this man had no one. The place where the miracle was performed is also different.

St. Augustine of Hippo: Judging this miracle by low and human standards, it is not a striking display of power and only a moderate one of goodness. Of the many who lay sick, only one was healed, although He could have restored them all with a single word had He chosen. How must we account for this? We must suppose that His power and goodness were demonstrated more for imparting knowledge of eternal salvation to the soul than for working a temporal cure on the body. The body that received the temporal cure was certain to decay eventually when death arrived, whereas the soul that believed passed into eternal life. The pool and the water seem to me to signify the Jewish people, for John in the Apocalypse clearly uses water to represent people.

The Venerable Bede: It is fittingly described as a sheep pool. By “sheep,” people are meant, according to the passage, We are your people, and the sheep of your pasture.

St. Augustine of Hippo: The water, then (that is, the people), was enclosed within five porches, representing the five books of Moses. But those books only exposed the weakness of the people; they did not heal them. That is to say, the Law convicted the sinner but did not absolve him.

The Venerable Bede: Finally, many kinds of sick people lay near the pool: the blind, meaning those without the light of knowledge; the lame, meaning those who lack the strength to do what they are commanded; and the withered, meaning those who lack the substance of heavenly love.

St. Augustine of Hippo: So then, Christ came to the Jewish people and, by means of mighty works and profitable lessons, troubled the sinners (that is, the water), and this stirring continued until He brought about His own passion. But He troubled the water while being unknown to the world. For, had they known Him, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. The troubling of the water happened all at once, and it was not seen who troubled it. To go down into the troubled water is to believe humbly in our Lord’s passion.

Only one was healed, signifying the unity of the Church. Whoever came afterward was not healed, signifying that anyone outside this unity cannot be healed. Woe to those who hate unity and create sects. Furthermore, the man who was healed had his illness for thirty-eight years, a number that belongs more to sickness than to health. The number forty has a sacred character for us and signifies perfection. The Law was given in Ten Commandments and was to be preached throughout the whole world, which consists of four parts; four multiplied by ten makes forty. The Law is also fulfilled by the Gospel, which is contained in four books.

So then, if the number forty possesses the perfection of the Law, and nothing fulfills the Law except the twofold precept of love, why wonder at the weakness of him who was two short of forty? A man was necessary for his recovery, but it was a man who was God. He found the man falling short by the number two and therefore gave two commands to fill the deficiency. For our Lord's two precepts signify love: the love of God is first in the order of the command, and the love of our neighbor is first in the order of performance. “Take up your bed,” our Lord said, meaning, “When you were weak, your neighbor carried you; now that you are made whole, you must carry your neighbor.” And “walk”—but where, except to the Lord your God?

The Venerable Bede: What do the words “Arise, and walk” mean, except that you should raise yourself from your lethargy and idleness and strive to advance in good works? “Take up your bed” means to patiently bear your neighbor, by whom you are carried.

St. Augustine of Hippo: Carry, then, the one with whom you walk, so that you may come to Him with whom you desire to abide. As yet, however, he did not know who Jesus was, just as we too believe in Him though we do not see Him. Jesus again does not wish to be seen, but withdraws from the crowd. It is in a kind of solitude of the mind that God is seen. The crowd is noisy; this vision requires stillness.

St. John Chrysostom: The man, when healed, did not go to the marketplace or give himself up to pleasure or vainglory. Instead, in what was a great sign of his piety, he went to the temple. Afterward, Jesus finds him in the temple.

St. Augustine of Hippo: The Lord Jesus saw him both in the crowd and in the temple. The infirm man does not recognize Jesus in the crowd, but he does recognize Him in the temple, a sacred place.

Alcuin of York: For if we would know our Maker's grace and attain the sight of Him, we must avoid the crowd of evil thoughts and desires, remove ourselves from the company of the wicked, and flee to the temple.

St. Gregory the Great: We must do this so that we may make ourselves the temple of God—souls whom God will visit and in whom He will deign to dwell.

St. John Chrysostom: First, we learn here that this man's disease was the consequence of his sins. We tend to bear the diseases of our souls with great indifference, but if the body suffers even the slightest harm, we resort to the most powerful remedies. For this reason, God punishes the body for the offenses of the soul.

Second, we learn that there is truly a hell. Third, we learn that it is a place of eternal and infinite punishment. Indeed, some ask, "Since we have corrupted ourselves for only a short time, shall we be tormented eternally?" But see how long this man was tormented for his sins. Sin is not to be measured by length of time, but by the nature of the sin itself.

Beyond this, we also learn that if we fall into sin again after undergoing a heavy punishment, we will incur another, even heavier punishment—and justly so. For a person who has undergone punishment and is not made better by it proves himself to be hardened and defiant, and as such, deserves even greater torments. We should not be emboldened by the fact that we do not see everyone punished for their offenses in this life, for if people do not suffer for their sins here, it is only a sign that their punishment will be greater in the hereafter.

However, our diseases do not always arise from sin, though this is most commonly the case. Some illnesses spring from other lax habits, while some are sent for the sake of trial, as was the case with Job. But why does Christ mention the sins of this paralyzed man? Some say it is because he had been an accuser of Christ. But shall we say the same of the other man afflicted with palsy? For he too was told, Your sins are forgiven you. The truth is, Christ is not finding fault with the man for his past sins but is only warning him against future ones.

In healing others, however, He makes no mention of sin at all. It would seem, therefore, that this man's disease had arisen from his sins, whereas the illnesses of the others had come from natural causes only. Or perhaps, through this man, He admonishes all the rest. Or He may have admonished this man knowing his great patience and that he would bear the warning. This is also a disclosure of His divinity, for by saying, Sin no more, He implies that He knew what sins the man had committed.

St. Augustine of Hippo: Now that the man had seen Jesus and knew Him to be the author of his recovery, he was not slow in preaching Him to others: The man departed and told the Jews that it was Jesus who had made him well.

St. John Chrysostom: He was not so unappreciative of the benefit and the advice he had received as to have any malicious intent in sharing this news. Had his goal been to discredit Christ, he could have concealed the cure and highlighted the offense. But he does not mention Jesus' command, Take up your bed, which was an offense in the eyes of the Jews. Instead, he told the Jews that it was Jesus who had made him well.

St. Augustine of Hippo: This announcement enraged them. Therefore, the Jews persecuted Jesus, because He had done these things on the Sabbath day. A plain physical work had been done before their eyes, separate from the healing of the man's body, which would not have been necessary even if the healing was: namely, the carrying of the bed. For this reason, our Lord openly says that the sacrament of the Sabbath—the sign of observing one day out of seven—was only a temporary institution that had found its fulfillment in Him. But Jesus answered them, My Father works until now, and I work. It is as if He said, "Do not suppose that My Father rested on the Sabbath in the sense that He has ceased from working from that time onward. For He works even to this day, though without labor, and so I work also."

God's "rest" only means that He created no other creature after the initial creation was complete. Scripture calls it "rest" to remind us of the rest we shall enjoy after a life of good works here. Just as God rested on the seventh day only after He had made man in His own image and likeness, finished all His works, and seen that they were very good, so you should expect no rest unless you return to the likeness in which you were made—a likeness you have lost through sin. That is, you will find rest only if you do good works.

It may be said, then, that the observance of the Sabbath was imposed on the Jews as a shadow of something to come: namely, the spiritual rest that God, through the figure of His own rest, promised to all who would perform good works.

There will be a sabbath for the world when the six ages—that is, the six "days" of the world, so to speak—have passed. Then will come the rest that is promised to the saints.

The Lord Jesus Himself sealed the mystery of this rest by His burial, for He rested in His tomb on the Sabbath, having finished all His work on the sixth day when He said, It is finished. What wonder is it, then, that God rested one day from His works to prefigure the day on which Christ was to rest in the grave, only to carry on the work of governing the world afterward? We may also consider that when God rested, He rested simply from the work of creation—that is, He made no more new kinds of creatures. But from that time until now, He has been carrying on the work of governing those creatures.

His power to govern heaven and earth, and all the things He had made, did not cease on the seventh day. Without His governance, they would have perished immediately, because the existence of every creature depends on the power of the Creator. If He ceased to govern, every species of creation would cease to exist, and all nature would come to nothing. For the world is not like a building that stands after the architect has left; it could not stand for the twinkling of an eye if God withdrew His governing hand. Therefore, when our Lord says, My Father works until now, He means the continuation of this work: the sustaining and governing of creation. It might have been different if He had said, "Works even now." This would not have conveyed the sense of continuous action. As it is, we find, "Until now," which means from the time of creation onward.

He says, then, as it were, to the Jews, "Why do you think that I should not work on the Sabbath? The Sabbath day was instituted as a type of Me. You observe the works of God; by Me all things were made. The Father made light, but He spoke that it might be made. If He spoke, then He made it by the Word, and I am His Word. My Father worked when He made the world, and He works until now, governing it. And just as He made the world through Me when He created it, so He governs it through Me now."

St. John Chrysostom: Christ defended His disciples by putting forward the example of their fellow servant David, but He defends Himself by referring to the Father. We may also observe that He does not defend Himself as a mere man, nor yet purely as God, but sometimes as one and sometimes as the other. He wishes for both to be believed: both the economy of His humiliation and the dignity of His Godhead. Therefore, He shows His equality to the Father, both by emphatically calling God His own Father ("My Father") and by declaring that He does the same things the Father does ("And I work"). It follows, therefore, that the Jews sought all the more to kill Him, because He not only had broken the Sabbath but also said that God was His Father.

St. Augustine of Hippo: That is, He did not mean "Father" in the secondary sense in which it is true for all of us, but in a way that implies equality. For we all say to God, Our Father, who art in heaven. And the Jews say, You are our Father. They were not angry, then, because He called God His Father, but because He called Him so in a sense different from how other people do.

The words, My Father works until now, and I work, imply that He is equal to the Father. Once this is understood, it follows from the Father's working that the Son also works, since the Father does nothing without the Son.

St. John Chrysostom: If He were not the Son by nature and of the same substance, this defense would be worse than the original accusation. For no governor could clear himself of transgressing the king's law by arguing that the king also broke it. But if we assume the Son's equality with the Father, the defense is valid. It then follows that just as the Father worked on the Sabbath without doing wrong, the Son could do so likewise.

St. Augustine of Hippo: So, the Jews understood what the Arians do not. For the Arians say that the Son is not equal to the Father, and from this sprang the heresy that afflicts the Church.

St. John Chrysostom: However, those who are not well-disposed toward this doctrine do not admit that Christ made Himself equal to the Father, but claim that the Jews only thought He did. But let us consider what has come before. It is unquestionably true that the Jews persecuted Christ, that He broke the Sabbath, and that He said God was His Father. Therefore, that which immediately follows from these premises—namely, His making Himself equal with God—is also true.

St. Hilary of Poitiers: The Evangelist here explains why the Jews wished to kill Him.

St. John Chrysostom: Again, if our Lord Himself had not meant this, but the Jews had simply misunderstood Him, He would not have overlooked their mistake. Nor would the Evangelist have failed to comment on it, as he does regarding our Lord's statement, Destroy this temple.

St. Augustine of Hippo: The Jews, however, did not understand from our Lord that He was the Son of God, but only that He was equal with God, even though Christ presented this equality as the result of His being the Son of God. Because they failed to see this, while at the same time seeing that equality was being asserted, they charged Him with making Himself equal with God. The truth, however, is that He did not make Himself equal; rather, the Father had begotten Him as equal.

St. Hilary of Poitiers: He refers to the charge of violating the Sabbath, which was brought against Him. My Father works until now, and I work, meaning that He had a precedent for claiming the right He did. What He did was, in reality, His Father’s doing, who acted in the Son. To quiet the jealousy that had been raised because He had made Himself equal with God by using His Father’s name, and to assert the excellence of His birth and nature, He says, Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He sees the Father do.

St. Augustine of Hippo: Some who claim to be Christians, namely the Arian heretics who say that the Son of God who took our flesh upon Him was inferior to the Father, use these words to discredit our doctrine. They say, "You see that when our Lord perceived the Jews were indignant because He seemed to make Himself equal with God, He gave an answer that showed He was not equal." For they say that he who can do nothing but what he sees the Father do is not equal but inferior to the Father. But if there is a greater God and a lesser God (the Word being God), we worship two Gods, and not one.

St. Hilary of Poitiers: So that His assertion of equality—which must belong to Him as the Son by name and nature—would not cast doubt on His divine birth, He says that the Son can do nothing of Himself.

St. Augustine of Hippo: It is as if He said: Why are you offended that I called God My Father and that I make Myself equal with God? I am equal, but equal in a sense that is consistent with His having begotten Me—with My being from Him, not Him from Me. With the Son, being and power are one and the same thing. The substance of the Son, then, being from the Father, the power of the Son is also from the Father. And as the Son is not of Himself, so He cannot act of Himself. The Son can do nothing of Himself but what He sees the Father do. His seeing and His being born of the Father are one and the same. His vision is not distinct from His substance; rather, the whole of what He is comes from the Father.

St. Hilary of Poitiers: So that the wholesome order of our confession—that is, that we believe in the Father and the Son—might remain, He shows the nature of His birth: namely, that He derived the power to act not from a new supply of strength given for each work, but from His own knowledge in the first place. This knowledge did not come from observing specific, visible examples, as if the Son could only later do what the Father had already done. Rather, the Son, being born of the Father and consequently conscious of the Father’s power and nature within Him, could do nothing but what He saw the Father do, as He here testifies. God does not see with physical organs, but by the power of His nature.

St. Augustine of Hippo: If we understand this subordination of the Son to arise from His human nature, it would follow that the Father first walked on the water and did all the other things that the Son did in the flesh, in order for the Son to do them. Who can be so insane as to think this?

Yet that walking of the flesh upon the sea was done by the Father through the Son. For when the flesh walked and the Divinity of the Son guided, the Father was not absent, as the Son Himself said, The Father that dwells in Me, He does the works. He guards, however, against a carnal interpretation of the words, "The Son can do nothing of Himself." This is not like the case of two craftsmen, a master and a disciple, where one makes a chest and the other makes another like it. He prevents this misunderstanding by adding, For whatever things He does, these also the Son does likewise.

He does not say, "Whatever the Father does, the Son does other things like them," but the very same things. The Father made the world, the Son made the world, and the Holy Spirit made the world. If the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one, it follows that one and the same world was made by the Father, through the Son, in the Holy Spirit. Thus, it is the very same thing that the Son does.

He adds "likewise" to prevent another error. The body may seem to do the same things as the mind, but it does not do them in a like way, since the body is subject while the soul governs; the body is visible, the soul invisible. When a slave does something at his master's command, the same thing is done by both, but is it done in a like way? In the Father and the Son, however, there is no such difference; they do the same things, and in a like way. The Father and Son act with the same power, so that the Son is equal to the Father.

St. Hilary of Poitiers: Or, to put it another way: He says "all things" and "the same" to show the power of His nature—that it is the same as God's. That nature is the same which can do all the same things. And as the Son does all the same things in a like way, the likeness of the works excludes the notion of the worker existing alone. Thus we arrive at a true understanding of His divine birth, as our faith receives it: the likeness of the works testifies to His birth, while their sameness testifies to His nature.

St. John Chrysostom: Or, to put it another way: that the Son can do nothing of Himself must be understood to mean that He can do nothing contrary to the Father or that displeases Him. Therefore, He does not say that He does nothing contrary, but that He can do nothing contrary, in order to show His perfect likeness and absolute equality to the Father. Nor is this a sign of weakness in the Son, but rather of goodness. For when we say that it is impossible for God to sin, we do not charge Him with weakness but bear witness to a certain ineffable goodness. So when the Son says, I can do nothing of Myself, it only means that He can do nothing contrary to the Father.

St. Augustine of Hippo: This is not a sign of failure in Him, but of His abiding in His birth from the Father. And it is as high an attribute of the Almighty that He does not change as it is that He does not die. The Son could do what He had not seen the Father doing if He could do what the Father does not do through Him—that is, if He could sin, a supposition inconsistent with the immutably good nature that was begotten from the Father. Therefore, this "cannot" should be understood not as a deficiency in Him, but as a testament to His power.

St. John Chrysostom: And this is confirmed by what follows: For whatever He does, these also the Son does likewise. For if the Father does all things by Himself, so does the Son also, if this "likewise" is to hold true. You see how high a meaning these humble words bear. He purposely clothes His thoughts in humble language, for whenever He expressed Himself loftily, He was persecuted as an enemy of God.

St. Augustine of Hippo: Having said that He did the same things that the Father did, and in a like way, He adds, For the Father loves the Son, and shows Him all things that Himself does. This phrase, "and shows Him all things that Himself does," refers back to the words above, but what He sees the Father do.

But again, our human ideas are perplexed. One might say, "So then, the Father first does something so that the Son may see what He does," just as a craftsman teaches his son his art, showing him what he makes so that he can make the same thing after him. On this assumption, when the Father does something, the Son is not doing it, because the Son is only watching what His Father does.

But we hold it as a fixed and incontrovertible truth that the Father makes all things through the Son. Therefore, He must show them to the Son before He makes them. And where does the Father show the Son what He makes, except in the Son Himself, by whom He makes them? For if the Father makes something as a pattern, and the Son attends to the workmanship as it goes on, where is the indivisibility of the Trinity? The Father, therefore, does not show the Son what He does by doing it; rather, by showing it, He does it through the Son. The Son sees and the Father shows before a thing is made, and from the showing of the Father and the seeing of the Son, that which is made is made—made by the Father, through the Son.

But you will say, "I show my son what I wish him to make, and he makes it, and I make it through him." True, but before you do anything, you show it to your son so he may follow your example, and you work through him. But you speak to your son with words that are not yourself, whereas the Son Himself is the Word of the Father. Could the Father speak by the Word to the Word? Or, because the Son was the great Word, did lesser words—some temporary, audible creation—have to pass from the Father's mouth to strike the Son's ear?

Put away these physical notions. If you cannot comprehend what God is, at least comprehend what He is not. You will have advanced a long way if you think nothing that is untrue of God. Consider this example from your own mind: you have memory and thought. Your memory shows Carthage to your thought. Before you perceive what is in your memory, it shows it to your thought, which is turned toward it. The memory has shown, the thought has perceived, and no words have passed between them; no outward sign has been used.

However, whatever is in your memory, you receive from the outside. That which the Father shows to the Son, He does not receive from the outside. The whole process goes on within, since no creature exists outside of God except what the Father has made by the Son. And the Father makes by showing, in that He makes by the Son who sees. The Father’s showing begets the Son’s seeing, just as the Father begets the Son. Showing begets seeing, not the other way around. But it would be more correct, and more spiritual, not to view the Father as distinct from His showing, or the Son from His seeing.

St. Hilary of Poitiers: It must not be supposed that the Only-Begotten God needed this showing because of ignorance. For the "showing" here is simply the doctrine of His divine birth: the self-existing Son from the self-existing Father.

St. Augustine of Hippo: For to see the Father is to see His Son. The Father so shows all His works to the Son that the Son sees them from the Father. For the birth of the Son is in His seeing: He sees from the same source from which He exists, is born, and remains.

St. Hilary of Poitiers: Nor did this heavenly discourse lack the caution needed to prevent us from inferring any difference in nature between the Son and the Father from these words. He says that the works of the Father were shown to Him, not that strength was supplied to Him for doing them. This is to teach that the "showing" is substantially nothing other than His birth, because the Son's knowledge of the works the Father will do through Him is born simultaneously with the Son Himself.

St. Augustine of Hippo: But now, from Him whom we called co-eternal with the Father—who saw the Father and existed in that He saw—we return to matters of time. He says, And He will show him greater works than these. But if He will show Him, meaning He is about to show Him, then He has not yet shown Him. And when He does show Him, others also will see, for it follows, that you may believe.

It is difficult to see what the eternal Father can show in time to the co-eternal Son, who knows all that exists within the Father’s mind. For as the Father raises up the dead and gives them life, even so the Son gives life to whom He will. To raise the dead was a greater work than to heal the sick. But this is explained by considering that He who a little before spoke as God, now begins to speak as man.

As man, and therefore living in time, He will be shown greater works in time. Bodies will rise again by the human dispensation through which the Son of God assumed manhood in time, but souls are raised by virtue of the eternity of the Divine Substance. This is why it was said before that the Father loved the Son and showed Him whatever He did, for the Father shows the Son that souls are raised up, since they are raised by the Father and the Son and cannot live unless God gives them life.

Alternatively, the Father is about to show this to us, not to Him, according to what follows: that you may believe. This would be the reason why the Father would show "Him" greater things than these. But why did He not say, "shall show you," instead of "the Son"? Because we are members of the Son, and He, as it were, learns in His members, just as He suffers in us. For as He says, Inasmuch as you have done it to one of the least of these My brethren, you have done it to Me, so if we ask Him how He, the Teacher of all things, learns, He replies, "When one of the least of My brethren learns, I learn."

St. Augustine of Hippo: After saying the Father would show the Son greater works than these, He proceeds to describe these greater works: For as the Father raises up the dead and quickens them, even so the Son quickens whom He will. These are clearly greater works, for it is a greater miracle for a dead man to rise again than for a sick man to recover. We must not understand from these words that some are raised by the Father and others by the Son, but that the Son gives life to the same ones whom the Father raises. And to prevent anyone from saying that the Father raises the dead by the Son—the Father by His own power, and the Son, like an instrument, by another's power—He clearly asserts the Son's power: The Son quickens whom He will. Observe here not only the Son's power, but also His will. The Father and Son have the same power and will. The Father wills nothing distinct from the Son; rather, both have the same will, just as they have the same substance.

St. Hilary of Poitiers: For to will is the free power of a nature, which, by the act of choice, rests in the blessedness of perfect excellence.

St. Augustine of Hippo: But who are these dead whom the Father and Son raise to life? He is alluding to the general resurrection that is to come, not to the resurrection of the few who were raised to life so that others might believe, such as Lazarus, who rose again only to die later. Having said, For as the Father raises up the dead and quickens them, to prevent us from taking the words to refer to the dead whom He raised for the sake of a miracle and not to the resurrection to eternal life, He adds, For the Father judges no one. This shows that He was speaking of the resurrection of the dead that will take place at the judgment.

Alternatively, the words, As the Father raises up the dead... refer to the resurrection of the soul, while the words, For the Father judges no one, but has committed all judgment to the Son, refer to the resurrection of the body. The resurrection of the soul takes place by the shared substance of the Father and the Son, and is therefore the work of both together. The resurrection of the body, however, takes place through the dispensation of the Son’s humanity, which is a temporal reality and not co-eternal with the Father.

But see how the Word of Christ leads the mind in different directions, not allowing it any worldly resting place. By a variety of movements, it exercises the mind; by exercise, it purifies it; by purifying, it enlarges its capacity; and after enlarging, it fills it. He said just before that the Father showed the Son whatever He did. So I saw, as it were, the Father working and the Son waiting; now again, I see the Son working and the Father resting.

For this—namely, that the Father has given all judgment to the Son—does not mean that He begot the Son with this attribute, as is meant in the words, So He has granted the Son to have life in Himself. If that were so, it would not be said, The Father judges no one, because, in begetting the Son as His equal, the Father judges with the Son.

What is meant is that in the judgment, it is not the form of God but the form of the Son of Man that will appear. This is not because the Father—who has given all judgment to the Son—will not judge. Indeed, the Son says of Him later, There is one who seeks and judges. Rather, it means that no one will see the Father in the judgment. Instead, all will see the Son, because He is the Son of Man—even the ungodly, who will look on Him whom they pierced.

St. Hilary of Poitiers: Having said that the Son quickens whom He wills, so that we might not lose sight of His divine origin (His nativity) and think that He was acting on the basis of His own unbegotten power, He immediately adds, For the Father judges no one, but has committed all judgment to the Son. In that all judgment is given to Him, both His nature and His divine origin are shown, because only a self-existent nature can possess all things, and a begotten nature cannot have anything except what is given to it.

St. John Chrysostom: Just as the Father gave Him life—that is, begot Him as living—so He gave Him judgment—that is, begot Him as a judge. The word "gave" is used so that you do not think the Son is unbegotten and thus imagine two Fathers. It says "all judgment" because He has the authority to award both punishment and reward.

St. Hilary of Poitiers: All judgment is given to Him because He quickens whom He wills. Nor can this judgment be seen as taken away from the Father, since the reason He does not judge is that the judgment of the Son is His own. For all judgment is given from the Father. The reason He gives it appears immediately after: That all may honor the Son, just as they honor the Father.

St. John Chrysostom: So that you do not infer from hearing that the Father is the Author of His power any difference in substance or inequality of honor, He connects the honor of the Son with the honor of the Father, showing that both are the same. But should people then call Him the Father? God forbid. Whoever calls Him the Father does not honor the Son equally with the Father, but confuses the two.

St. Augustine of Hippo: At first, the Son appeared as a servant, and the Father was honored as God. But the Son will be seen to be equal to the Father, so that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. But what if people are found who honor the Father but do not honor the Son? That cannot be. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him.

It is one thing to acknowledge God as God, and another to acknowledge Him as the Father. When you acknowledge God the Creator, you acknowledge an almighty, supreme, eternal, invisible, and immutable Spirit. When you acknowledge the Father, you in reality acknowledge the Son, for He could not be the Father if He did not have the Son. But if you honor the Father as greater and the Son as less, then to the extent that you give less honor to the Son, you take away from the honor of the Father. For you in reality think that the Father either could not or would not beget a Son equal to Himself. If He was unwilling, He was envious; if He was unable, He was weak.

Alternatively, the phrase that all should honor the Son just as they honor the Father refers to the resurrection of souls, which is the work of the Son as well as of the Father. But the resurrection of the body is meant in what comes after: Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him. Here, the word as is not used; the man Christ is honored, but not as the Father who sent Him, since with respect to His humanity He Himself says, My Father is greater than I.

But someone will say, "If the Son is sent by the Father, He is inferior to the Father." Leave your worldly ways of thinking and understand a "sending," not a separation. Human examples can be misleading, but divine realities bring clarity. Even so, a human example testifies against you: if a man wishes to marry a woman but cannot win her over himself, he sends a friend—perhaps one greater than himself—to plead his case for him. But see the difference in divine matters. A man does not go with the one he sends, but the Father who sent the Son never ceased to be with the Son, as we read, I am not alone, but the Father is with Me.

However, the Son is not said to be "sent" because He is born of the Father, but because of His appearing in this world as the Word made flesh, as He says, I came from the Father and have come into the world. Or, it refers to His being received into our individual minds, as we read in Scripture, Send her, that she may be with me and may labor with me.

St. Hilary of Poitiers: The conclusion, then, stands firm against all the fury of heretical minds. He is the Son because He does nothing of Himself. He is God because whatever the Father does, He does likewise. They are one because They are equal in honor. He is not the Father because He is sent.

Glossa Ordinaria: Having said that the Son gives life to whom He will, He next shows that we attain life through the Son: Verily, verily, I say to you, He that hears My word, and believes in Him that sent Me, has everlasting life.

St. Augustine of Hippo: If eternal life is in hearing and believing, how much more is it in understanding? But faith is the first step of our piety; the fruit of faith is understanding. He does not say, "Believe in Me," but "in Him that sent Me." Why is one to hear His word, and yet believe in another? Is it not because He means to say, "His word is in Me"? And what does "Hears My word" mean, if not "hears Me"? And when He says, "Believe in Him that sent Me," it is as if to say, "He who believes in the Father believes in His Word"—that is, in Me, because I am the Word of the Father.

St. John Chrysostom: Alternatively, He did not say, "He who hears My words and believes in Me," because they would have considered this to be empty boasting and arrogance. Saying, "Believe in Him that sent Me," was a better way to make His discourse acceptable. To this end, He says two things: first, that he who hears Him believes in the Father; and second, that he who hears and believes will not come into condemnation.

St. Augustine of Hippo: But who is this favored person? Will there be anyone better than the Apostle Paul, who says, We must all appear before the judgment-seat of Christ? Now, "judgment" sometimes means punishment and sometimes trial. In the sense of a trial, we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ. But in the sense of condemnation, we read that some "shall not come into judgment"—that is, they will not be condemned.

It follows, but has passed from death into life. This does not mean "is now passing," but "has already passed"—from the death of unbelief into the life of faith, from the death of sin to the life of righteousness. Perhaps this is said to prevent us from supposing that faith will save us from bodily death, which is the penalty we must pay for Adam’s transgression. Adam, in whom we all then existed, heard the divine sentence, You shall surely die (Genesis 2:17), and we cannot evade it.

But when we have suffered the death of the old man, we will receive the life of the new, and through death, we will make a passage to life. But to what life? To everlasting life. The dead will rise again at the end of the world and enter into everlasting life, for this present life does not deserve the name of life; only that life which is eternal is true life.

We see that those who love this present, transitory life are so intent on its well-being that when they are in danger of death, they will use any means to delay its approach, even though they cannot hope to prevent it altogether. If, then, so much care and labor is spent on gaining a little more time in this life, how much more should we strive for eternal life? And if those are considered wise who try in every way to postpone death, even though they can only live a few more days, how foolish are those who live in such a way that they lose the eternal day?