Thomas Aquinas Commentary John 10

1. After our Lord showed that his teaching had power to enlighten, he here shows that he has power to give life.

   First, he shows this by his word.

   Second, he shows this by a miracle, with the words, now there was a certain man sick, named Lazarus (John 11:1).

   Concerning the first point, he does three things.

   First, he shows that he has life-giving power.

   Second, he shows his manner of giving life, with the words, I am the good shepherd (John 10:11).

   Third, he explains his power to give life, beginning with, a dissension arose again among the Jews on account of these words (John 10:19).

   The first part is divided into three sections.

   First, our Lord relates a parable.

   Second, the Evangelist mentions the necessity for explaining it, with the words, this proverb Jesus spoke to them (John 10:6).

   Third, our Lord explains the parable, beginning with, Jesus therefore said to them again (John 10:7).

   He relates the parable to them, saying, amen, amen, I say to you. It concerns two figures: a thief and the shepherd of the sheep. In it, he does three things.

   First, he mentions the mark of a thief and robber.

   Second, he gives a characteristic of the shepherd, with the words, he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep.

   Third, he describes the effect each of these has, with the words, and the sheep follow him, because they know his voice.

2. To understand this parable, we must consider who the sheep are: namely, they are the faithful of Christ and those in the grace of God. As it is written, we are the people of his pasture, and the sheep of his hand (Psalms 95:7); and, you, the people, are the sheep of my pasture (Ezekiel 34:31). And so the sheepfold is the multitude of the faithful: I will surely gather all of you, O Jacob, I will gather the remnant of Israel; I will set them together like sheep in a fold (Micah 2:12). The door of the sheepfold is explained in different ways by Chrysostom and by Augustine.

3. According to Chrysostom, Christ calls Sacred Scripture the door, according to the verse, pray for us also that God may open to us a door for the word (Colossians 4:3). Sacred Scripture is called a door, as Chrysostom says, first, because through it we have access to the knowledge of God: which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures, concerning his Son, who was made for him of the seed of David according to the flesh (Romans 1:2–3). Second, just as the door guards the sheep, so Sacred Scripture preserves the life of the faithful: search the Scriptures, for you think that in them you have eternal life (John 5:39). Third, because the door keeps the wolf from entering, so Sacred Scripture keeps heretics from harming the faithful: every Scripture inspired by God is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction in justice (2 Timothy 3:16). Therefore, the one who does not enter by the door is the one who does not use Sacred Scripture to teach the people. Our Lord says of such people: in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men (Matthew 15:9); and, you have made void the word of God (Matthew 15:6). This, then, is the mark of the thief: he does not enter by the door, but in some other way.

   He adds that the thief climbs, which is appropriate to this parable because thieves climb walls instead of entering by the door, and drop into the sheepfold. It also corresponds to the truth, because the reason some teach what conflicts with Sacred Scripture is pride: if any one teaches otherwise and does not agree with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the teaching which accords with godliness, he is puffed up with conceit and knows nothing (1 Timothy 6:3). Referring to this, he says that such a person climbs, that is, through pride. The one who climbs in another way is a thief, because he snatches what is not his, and a robber, because he kills what he snatches: if thieves came to you, if plunderers by night, how you would have been destroyed! (Obadiah 1:5).

   According to this explanation, the relation to what preceded is made in this way: since our Lord had said, if you were blind, you would not have sin (John 9:41), the Jews might have answered, “We do not believe you, but this is not due to our blindness. It is because of your own error that we have turned away from you.” And so our Lord rejects this and wishes to show that he is not in error, because he enters by the door—that is, by Sacred Scripture—and teaches what is contained in Sacred Scripture.

4. Against this interpretation is the fact that when our Lord explains this further on, he says, I am the door (John 10:9). So it seems that we should understand the door to be Christ.

   In answer to this, Chrysostom says that in this parable our Lord refers to himself as both the door and the shepherd. But this is from different points of view. Since he calls himself a shepherd, it is necessary that the door be something other than him, because a door and a shepherd are different. Now aside from Christ, nothing is more fittingly called a door than Sacred Scripture, for the reasons given above. Therefore, Sacred Scripture is fittingly called a door.

5. According to Augustine, the door is Christ, because one enters through him: after this I looked, and lo, in heaven an open door (Revelation 4:1). Therefore, anyone who enters the sheepfold should enter by the door, that is, by Christ, and not by another way. Note that both the sheep and their shepherd enter the sheepfold: the sheep in order to be secure there, and the shepherd in order to guard the sheep. And so, if you wish to enter as a sheep to be kept safe, or as a shepherd to keep the people safe, you must enter the sheepfold through Christ. You must not enter by any other way, as did the philosophers who taught the principal virtues, or the Pharisees who established ceremonial traditions. These are neither sheep nor shepherds because, as our Lord says, he who does not enter by the door into the sheepfold, but climbs in another way is a thief and a robber, because he destroys both himself and others. For Christ and no one else is the door into the sheepfold, that is, the multitude of the faithful: we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have access through faith into this grace in which we stand, and glory in the hope of the glory of the sons of God (Romans 5:1–2); there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved (Acts 4:12).

   According to this exposition, the connection with what went before is made in this way: because they claimed they could see without Christ, our Lord shows this is not true, recalling his words, now that you say, ‘We see,’ your sin remains (John 9:41). Thus he says, amen, amen, I say to you.

   It should be noted that just as one who does not enter by the door as a sheep cannot be kept safe, so one who enters as a shepherd cannot guard the sheep unless he enters by the door, namely, by Christ. This is the door through which the true shepherds have entered: and one does not take the honor upon himself, but he is called by God, just as Aaron was (Hebrews 5:4). Evil shepherds do not enter by the door, but by ambition, secular power, and simony; and these are thieves and robbers: they set up princes, but without my knowledge—that is, without my approval (Hosea 8:4). Further, he says such a person climbs in another way, because the door, namely, Christ, is small through humility—learn from me; for I am gentle and lowly in heart (Matthew 11:29)—and can be entered only by those who imitate the humility of Christ. Therefore, those who do not enter by the door but climb in by another way are the proud. They do not imitate him who, although he was God, became man; nor do they recognize his self-humbling.

6. Now he considers the shepherd.

   First, he mentions the mark of the shepherd.

   Second, he shows through signs that he is the shepherd, with the words, to him the gatekeeper opens.

7. The mark of the true shepherd is to enter by the door, that is, by the testimony of Sacred Scripture. Thus Christ said: everything written about me in the law of Moses and the prophets and the psalms must be fulfilled (Luke 24:44). He is called a shepherd: I am not troubled when I follow you as my shepherd (Jeremiah 17:16); he rebukes and trains and teaches them, and turns them back, as a shepherd his flock .

   But if the door is Christ, as Augustine explains it, then in entering by the door, he enters by himself. This is unique to Christ, for no one can enter the door to beatitude except by the truth, because beatitude is nothing other than joy in the truth. But Christ, as God, is the truth; therefore, as man, he enters by himself, that is, by the truth, which he is as God. We, however, are not the truth, but children of the light by participating in the true and uncreated light. Consequently, we have to enter by the truth which is Christ: sanctify them in truth (John 17:17); if any man enter by me, he will be saved (John 10:9).

   If one wishes to enter even as a shepherd, he must enter by the door, that is, Christ, according to his truth, will, and consent. Thus we read: and I will set up over them one shepherd, my servant David, and he will feed them (Ezekiel 34:23). This is like saying, “They must be given by me, and not by others or themselves.”

8. Now he mentions the signs of a good shepherd, and there are three.

   The first relates to the gatekeeper: the good shepherd is let in by him. As to this he says, to him the gatekeeper opens. This gatekeeper, according to Chrysostom, is the one who opens the way to a knowledge of Sacred Scripture. The first one to do this was Moses, who first received and established Sacred Scripture. And Moses opened to Christ, because as was said above: if you believed Moses, you would perhaps believe me also, for he wrote of me (John 5:46).

   Or, according to Augustine, the gatekeeper is Christ himself, because he brings us to himself. He says he opens himself, meaning he reveals himself, and we enter only by his grace: For by grace you have been saved (Ephesians 2:8).

   It does not matter if Christ, who is the door, is also the gatekeeper, for certain things are compatible in spiritual matters that cannot occur in physical reality. Now there seems to be a greater difference between a shepherd and a door than between a door and a gatekeeper. Therefore, since Christ can be called both a shepherd and a door, as was said, much more so can he be called a door and a gatekeeper. But if you seek a gatekeeper other than Moses or Christ, then consider the Holy Spirit the gatekeeper, as Augustine says. For it is the office of a gatekeeper to open the door, and it says of the Holy Spirit that he will teach you all truth (John 16:13). And Christ is the door insofar as he is the truth.

9. The second sign relates to the sheep: they obey the shepherd. He says, the sheep hear his voice. This is reasonable if the resemblance to a natural shepherd is considered, because just as sheep recognize the voice of their shepherd from familiar experience, so righteous believers hear the voice of Christ: O that today you would harken to his voice! (Psalms 95:7).

10. But what about the fact that many who were Christ’s sheep did not hear his voice, like Paul? Or that some who were not his sheep did hear it, like Judas?

    One might reply that Judas was Christ’s sheep at that time in regard to his present righteousness. And Paul, when he did not hear the voice of Christ, was not a sheep but a wolf; but when the voice of Christ came, it changed the wolf into a sheep.

    This reply could be accepted if it did not contradict the statement: the crippled you have not bound up, the strayed you have not brought back (Ezekiel 34:4). It seems from this that even when they were crippled and strayed, they were sheep. Therefore, one must say that here our Lord is speaking of his sheep not only according to their present righteousness but also according to their eternal predestination. For there is a certain voice of Christ that only the predestined can hear, that is, the call to endure to the end . Again, he says, the sheep hear his voice, because they might offer as an excuse for their unbelief the fact that not only they, but none of the leaders believed in him. So he says in answer to this, the sheep hear his voice, as if saying, “They do not believe because they are not my sheep.”

11. The third sign is taken from the actions of the shepherd. Here he mentions four actions of a good shepherd. The first is that he knows his sheep. He says, he calls his own sheep by name, which shows his knowledge of and familiarity with his sheep, for we call by name those whom we know familiarly: I know you by name (Exodus 33:17). This is part of the office of a shepherd, according to the verse: be diligent to know the countenance of your flock (Proverbs 27:23). This applies to Christ according to his present knowledge, but even more so considering eternal predestination, by which he knew them by name from eternity: he determined the number of the stars, he gives to all of them their names (Psalms 147:4); the Lord knows those who are his (2 Timothy 2:19).

    The second action of a good shepherd is that he leads them out, that is, he separates them from the company of the wicked: he brought them out of darkness and gloom (Psalms 107:14).

    The third is that after separating them from evil and bringing them into the sheepfold, he leads them out of the sheepfold. He does this, first, for the salvation of others: I will send survivors to the nations (Isaiah 66:19); behold, I send you as sheep in the midst of wolves (Matthew 10:16), so that they can make sheep out of the wolves. Second, they are to show the direction and way to eternal life: to guide our feet into the way of peace (Luke 1:79).

    Fourth, the good shepherd goes before his sheep by the example of a good life. So he says, he goes before them, although this is not what a literal shepherd does, for he often follows, as in I took him from following the ewes (Psalms 78:70). But the good shepherd goes before them by example: not as domineering over those in your charge but being examples to the flock (1 Peter 5:3). And Christ does go before them, for he was the first to die for the teaching of the truth: if any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me (Matthew 16:24). And he went before all into everlasting life: he who opens the breach will go up before them (Micah 2:13).

12. Now he considers the effect that both the thief and the shepherd have upon the sheep.

    First, he mentions the effect of the good shepherd.

    Second, he mentions the effect of the wolf and the thief, with the words, but a stranger they do not follow.

13. He says, first, that the sheep follow him who goes before them. This is easy to see, because subjects follow in the steps of their leaders, as is stated: Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps (1 Peter 2:21); my foot has held fast to his steps (Job 23:11). The sheep follow because they know his voice—that is, they know it and take delight in it: let me hear your voice in my ears, for your voice is sweet (Song of Solomon 2:14).

14. The effect that the thief has is that the sheep do not follow him for very long, but only for a time. So he says, but a stranger they do not follow; that is, they do not follow a false and heretical teacher: the children who are strangers have lied to me (Psalms 18:45). Thus Paul did not follow false teachers for long. But they fly from him, because bad company ruins good morals (1 Corinthians 15:33). They flee because they do not know—that is, do not approve of—the voice of strangers, meaning their teaching, which spreads stealthily like a cancer.

Here the Evangelist explains why it was necessary to clarify the preceding parable, a necessity caused by the listeners’ failure to understand. He does two things:

1. He mentions the reason for their failure to understand.
2. He explains that they failed to understand.

The cause of their failure to understand was that Christ was speaking in figures. The Evangelist says, this proverb Jesus spoke to them. A “figure,” properly speaking, is the use of one word in place of another, where one word is meant to be understood from its likeness to the other. This is also called a parable.

Our Lord spoke in figures for two reasons. First, for the sake of the wicked, to conceal from them the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven: to you it has been given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God; but for others they are in parables (Luke 8:10). Second, for the sake of the good, so that his figures might stir them to inquire further. Thus, after our Lord spoke his figures or parables to the crowds, his disciples questioned him in private, as mentioned elsewhere (Matthew 13:10; Mark 4:10). This is why Augustine says, “Our Lord feeds the believing crowds with clear words and stirs up his disciples with things that are obscure.”

The Evangelist reveals their failure to understand when he says, but they did not understand what he was saying to them. The ignorance that resulted from Christ’s figures was both useful and harmful. For the good and the just, it was useful for praising God; for although they did not understand, they believed and praised the Lord and His wisdom, which was so far beyond them: it is the glory of God to conceal the word (Proverbs 25:2). But for the wicked, it was a source of harm, because, failing to understand, they blasphemed: but these men revile whatever they do not understand (Jude 1:10). As Augustine observes, when both the good and the wicked hear the words of the Gospel, and neither of them understands, the good person says that what was said was true and good, but that he does not understand it. Such a person is knocking and deserves to have the door opened, provided he perseveres. But the wicked person says that what was said had no meaning or was evil.

Now our Lord explains the parable. If examined correctly, the parable contains two principal clauses. The first is, he who does not enter by the door into the sheepfold but climbs in another way is a thief and a robber (John 10:1). The second is, he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep (John 10:2). Accordingly, this section is divided into two parts.

1. First, He explains the first clause.
2. Then, He explains the second clause, beginning at I am the good shepherd.

Concerning the first part, He does two things:

1. He explains the clause.
2. He proves it, beginning at I am the door.

The first clause mentions a door, a thief, and a robber. He explains these in order:

1. First, the door.
2. Then, the thief and the robber, at all others, as many as have come, are thieves and robbers.

Concerning the first point, he says, Jesus therefore said to them again, to gain their attention and have them understand the parable: the man of understanding may acquire skill to understand a proverb and a figure (Proverbs 1:6). Jesus said, amen, amen, I say to you, I am the door. The purpose of a door is to lead one into the rooms of the house, and this is true of Christ, for one must enter into the secrets of God through him: this is the gate of the Lord, that is, Christ, the righteous will enter through it (Psalms 118:20).

He says, I am the door of the sheep, because through Christ not only the shepherds are brought into the present Church or enter into everlasting happiness, but the sheep also. Thus he says below: my sheep hear my voice... and they follow me; and I give them eternal life (John 10:27–28).

Then when he says, all others, as many as have come, are thieves and robbers, he explains what he had said about thieves and robbers. He shows who the thieves and robbers are, and then their sign.

In regard to the first point, we should avoid the error of the Manicheans, who rejected the Old Testament on the grounds that it says here, all others, as many as have come, are thieves. They maintained that the fathers of the Old Testament, who came before Christ, were evil and have been damned.

The falsity of this view is clear from three things. First, from what this parable says. The statement, all others, as many as have come, is intended as a description of the previous statement, which mentioned those who do not enter by the door. Therefore, all others, as many as have come, but not through me—that is, not entering by the door—are thieves and robbers. It is clear that all the patriarchs and prophets, whom the Christ who was to come had sent as forerunners, entered by the door, that is, Christ. For although he took flesh and became man in time, he was the Word of God from all eternity: Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever (Hebrews 13:8). Indeed, the prophets were sent by the Word and wisdom of God: in every generation she, the wisdom of God, passes into holy souls and makes them friends of God, and prophets . Accordingly, we expressly read in the prophets that the word of the Lord came to this or that prophet, who prophesied by participating in the Word of God.

Second, the falsity of the Manichean teaching is seen when our Lord says, have come, implying that they were thrusting themselves forward on their own authority and were not sent by God: I did not send the prophets, yet they ran (Jeremiah 23:21). Indeed, such prophets have not come from the Word of God: woe to the foolish prophets who follow their own spirit and have seen nothing (Ezekiel 13:3). But the fathers of the Old Testament were not of this type, as has been said.

Third, this falsity is seen from the effect their words had, for we read, but the sheep did not hear them. Therefore, those whom the sheep did heed were not thieves and robbers. Now the people of Israel did listen to the prophets, and those who did not heed them were rebuked in Sacred Scripture: Which of the prophets did your fathers not persecute? (Acts 7:52). O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, killing the prophets and stoning those who are sent to you! (Matthew 23:37).

Having excluded this error, it must be said that all others, as many as have come—that is, apart from me, without divine inspiration and authority, and with the intention not of seeking God’s glory but of acquiring their own—are thieves, in that they usurp what is not theirs, namely, the authority to teach: your princes are rebels and companions of thieves (Isaiah 1:23); and robbers, because they kill with their corrupt doctrine: you make it a den of robbers (Matthew 21:13); as robbers lie in wait for a man... they murder on the way (Hosea 6:9). But the sheep, that is, the predestined, did not hear them, the thieves and robbers; otherwise they would not have been Christ’s sheep, because, as was said before, a stranger they do not follow but fly from him (John 10:5). Furthermore, this is commanded: you will not listen to the words of that prophet or to that dreamer of dreams (Deuteronomy 13:3).

I am the door. Here he clarifies his explanation of the door, and then of the thief (at the thief only comes). Concerning the door, he first repeats what he intends to explain, and second, he gives the explanation.

He repeats what he had already said, namely, I am the door; if she is a door, we will enclose her with boards of cedar (Song of Solomon 8:9), that is, let us grant her an incorruptible power.

He explains this when he says, if any man enter by me, he will be saved. First, he shows that the purpose of a door, which is to keep the sheep safe, applies to himself. Second, he mentions the manner in which they are kept safe, at he will go in and out.

The door safeguards the sheep by keeping those within from going out and by protecting them from strangers so that they cannot come in. This applies to Christ, for he is our safeguard and protection. This is what he says: if any man, not insincerely, enter into the community of the Church and of the faithful, by me, the door, he will be saved, that is, if he perseveres: for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved (Acts 4:12); we will be saved by his life (Romans 5:10).

The way the sheep are safeguarded is explained when he says that he will go in and out, and he will find pasture. This statement can be explained in four ways.

1. First, according to Chrysostom, it simply affirms the security and freedom of those who cling to Christ. For one who enters some other way than by the door does not have free entry and exit; but one who does enter by the door has free exit, because he can leave freely. Therefore, when he says, he will go in and out, the meaning is that the Apostles adhering to Christ enter with security by living with the faithful, who are within the Church, and with unbelievers who are outside. They became masters of the whole world and no one wished to cast them out: Let the LORD, the God of the spirits of all flesh, appoint a man over the congregation, who will go out before them and come in before them... that the congregation of the LORD may not be as sheep which have no shepherd (Numbers 27:16). And find pasture, that is, find delight in converting others, and find joy even when persecuted by unbelievers for the name of Christ: then the Apostles left the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer dishonor for the name of Jesus (Acts 5:41).
2. Second, this can be explained as Augustine does in his Commentary on John. Two things are required of anyone who acts well: to be well-ordered regarding what is within him, and what is without. Within a person is the spirit, and without is the body: though our outer nature is wasting away, our inner nature is being renewed every day (2 Corinthians 4:16). Therefore, a person who clings to Christ will go in through contemplation to protect his conscience: when I enter my house, that is, my conscience, I will find rest with her, that is, with wisdom ; and out, namely, by good actions, to discipline the body: man goes forth to his work and to his labor until the evening (Psalms 104:23); and find pasture, in a clean and sincere conscience: I will appear before your sight: I will be satisfied when your glory appears (Psalms 16:15). Again, by his actions he will find pasture, that is, fruit: he will come home with shouts of joy, bringing his sheaves with him (Psalms 126:6).
3. The third explanation is also Augustine’s, as well as that given by Gregory in his Commentary on Ezekiel. The meaning, then, is this. Such a one will go in, into the Church, by believing: I will go over into the place of the wonderful tabernacle (Psalms 41:5), which is to enter the Church militant; and out, from the Church militant into the Church triumphant: go forth, O daughters of Zion, and behold King Solomon, with the crown with which his mother crowned him on the day of the wedding (Song of Solomon 3:11); and find pasture, that is, the pastures of doctrine and grace in the Church militant: he makes me lie down in green pastures (Psalms 22:2); and the pastures of glory in the Church triumphant: I will feed them with good pasture (Ezekiel 34:14).
4. Fourth, there is an explanation found in the work, On the Spirit and the Soul, which has been incorrectly attributed to Augustine. Here it is said that such a one will go in, that is, the saints will go in to contemplate the divinity of Christ, and out, to consider his humanity; and they will find pasture in both, because in both they will taste the joys of contemplation: your eyes will see the king in his beauty (Isaiah 33:17).

Now he considers the thief. First, he mentions the mark of the thief; second, he says that he himself has the opposite characteristic, at I have come that they may have life.

He says that those who do not enter by the door—that is, those who have come apart from me—are thieves and robbers; and they are evil. For in the first place, the thief comes only to steal, that is, to usurp what is not his; these are the agitators and heretics, who prey on those who belong to Christ: he lies in ambush to catch the ones who are poor (Psalms 9:4). Second, the thief comes to kill, and he kills by bringing in perverse teachings and evil practices: as robbers lie in wait for a man... they murder on the way (Hosea 6:9). Third, the thief comes to destroy, by casting into everlasting destruction: My people have been lost sheep (Jeremiah 50:6). But these traits are not in me.

I have come that they may have life. This is like saying: The people mentioned above have not come in by me; otherwise, they would do as I do. But they do the contrary, because they steal, kill, and destroy. I have come that they may have life, that is, the life of righteousness, by entering into the Church militant through faith: my righteous one will live by faith (Hebrews 10:38). We read of this life that we know that we have passed out of death into life, because we love the brethren (1 John 3:14). And have it abundantly, that is, have eternal life, when they leave the body. We read of this life below: this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God (John 17:3).

1. Here he explains the second clause of the parable: he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep (John 10:1).

   1. First, he gives the explanation.

   2. Second, he makes it clear, with the words, I am the good shepherd.

      1. He explains that he is the good shepherd.

      2. He states the office of a good shepherd, with the words, the good shepherd gives his life for his sheep.

      3. He shows that the opposite is found in an evil shepherd, with the words, but the hireling . . . leaves the sheep and flees.

2. In regard to the first point, he says, I am the good shepherd. That Christ is a shepherd is clear enough, for as a flock is led and fed by its shepherd, so the faithful are nourished by Christ with spiritual food—and even with his own body and blood. For you were straying like sheep, but now have returned to the shepherd and guardian of your souls (1 Peter 2:25); he will feed his flock like a shepherd (Isaiah 40:11).

   To distinguish himself from an evil shepherd and thief, he adds the word good. He is “good,” I say, because he fulfills the office of a shepherd, just as a soldier is called “good” who fulfills the office of a soldier. But since Christ had said above that the shepherd enters by the door, and here he says that he is the shepherd, and before he said he was the door—I am the door (John 10:7)—then he must enter through himself.

   And he does enter through himself, because he reveals himself and through himself knows the Father. We, however, enter through him, because it is by him that we are led to salvation.

   Note that only he is the door, because no one else is the true light, but only shares in the light: he, John the Baptist, was not the light, but came to bear witness to the light (John 1:8). But we read of Christ that he was the true light, which enlightens every man (John 1:9). Therefore, no one else refers to himself as a door; Christ reserved this for himself. But the role of a shepherd he did share with others and conferred on his members, for Peter was a shepherd, and the other apostles were shepherds, as were all good bishops: I will give you shepherds after my own heart (Jeremiah 3:15).

   Now, although the Church’s rulers, who are her children, are all shepherds, as Augustine says, yet he expressly says, I am the good shepherd, in order to emphasize the virtue of charity. For no one is a good shepherd unless he has become one with Christ by love and has become a member of the true shepherd.

3. The office of a good shepherd is charity; thus he says, the good shepherd gives his life for his sheep. It should be noted that there is a difference between a good and an evil shepherd: the good shepherd is focused on the welfare of the flock, but the evil one is focused on his own. This difference is mentioned in Ezekiel: Ho, shepherds of Israel who have been feeding yourselves! Should not shepherds feed the sheep? (Ezekiel 34:2). Therefore, one who uses the flock only to feed himself is not a good shepherd.

   From this it follows that an evil shepherd, even one over animals, is not willing to sustain any loss for the flock, since he does not seek the welfare of the flock, but his own. A good shepherd, however, even one over animals, endures many things for the flock whose welfare he has at heart. Thus Jacob said: By day the heat consumed me, and the cold by night (Genesis 31:40).

   However, when dealing with mere animals, it is not necessary that a good shepherd expose himself to death for the safety of the flock. But because the spiritual safety of the human flock outweighs the bodily life of the shepherd, the spiritual shepherd ought to suffer the loss of his bodily life for the safety of the flock when danger threatens. This is what our Lord says: the good shepherd gives his life—that is, his bodily life—for his sheep. These are the sheep who are his by authority and by charity. Both are required, for they must belong to him and he must love them; the first without the second is not enough.

   Furthermore, Christ has given us an example of this teaching: he laid down his life for us; and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren (1 John 3:16).

4. Now he considers the evil shepherd, showing that he possesses characteristics contrary to those of the good shepherd.

   1. First, he mentions the marks of an evil shepherd.

   2. Second, he shows how these marks follow one another, with the words, but the hireling . . . flees.

   Concerning the first point, he does two things:

   1. First, he gives the marks of an evil shepherd.

   2. Second, he mentions the danger that threatens the flock because of an evil shepherd: the wolf catches and scatters the sheep.

5. Note that from what has been said about the good and evil shepherd, there are three differences in their traits: first, in their intentions; second, in their solicitude; and third, in their affections.

6. First, they differ in their intentions, and this is implied by their very names. The first is called a good shepherd, which implies that he intends to feed the flock: should not shepherds feed the sheep? (Ezekiel 34:2). But the other, the evil shepherd, is called a hireling, as though he were focused on his wages. Thus they differ in this: the good shepherd looks to the benefit of the flock, while the hireling seeks mainly his own advantage. This is also the difference between a king and a tyrant, as the Philosopher says, because a king rules intending to benefit his subjects, while a tyrant seeks his own interest. So a tyrant is like a hireling: if it seems right to you, give me my wages (Zechariah 11:12).

7. But may not even good shepherds seek a wage? It seems so, for the Scriptures say: reward those who wait for you ; the Lord God comes . . . his reward is with him (Isaiah 40:10); and, how many of my father’s hired servants have bread enough and to spare (Luke 15:17).

   I answer that “wage” can be understood in a general sense and in a proper sense. In a general sense, a wage is anything conferred on the basis of merit. Because everlasting life—which is God, for this is the true God and eternal life (1 John 5:20)—is conferred on the basis of merit, everlasting life is said to be a wage. This is a wage that every good shepherd can and should seek. In the strict sense, however, a wage is different from an inheritance, and a wage is not sought by a true child, who is entitled to the inheritance. A wage is sought by servants and hirelings. Thus, since everlasting life is our inheritance, anyone who works with an eye toward it is working as a child. But anyone who aims at something different (for example, one who longs for worldly gain or takes delight in the honor of being a prelate) is a hireling.

8. Second, they differ in their solicitude. We read of the good shepherd that the sheep are his own, not only as a trust but also by love and concern: I hold you in my heart (Philippians 1:7). On the other hand, it is said of the hireling, whose own the sheep are not; that is, the hireling has no care for them: my shepherds have not searched for my sheep, but the shepherds have fed themselves (Ezekiel 34:8).

9. Third, they differ in their affections. The good shepherd, who loves his flock, gives his life for it; that is, he exposes himself to dangers that affect his bodily life. But the evil shepherd, because he has no love for the flock, flees when he sees the wolf. Thus the Lord says, he . . . sees the wolf coming, leaves the sheep and flees.

   Here, the “wolf” is understood in three ways:

   1. First, it represents the devil as tempter: What fellowship has a wolf with a lamb? No more has a sinner with a godly man .

   2. Second, it stands for the heretic who destroys: Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves (Matthew 7:15); I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock (Acts 20:29).

   3. Third, it stands for the raging tyrant: Her princes in her midst are like wolves (Ezekiel 22:27).

   Therefore, the good shepherd must guard the flock against these three wolves, so that when he sees the wolf—that is, the tempting devil, the deceiving heretic, and the raging tyrant—he can oppose him. Against those who do not, we read, You have not gone up into the breaches, or built up a wall for the house of Israel (Ezekiel 13:5). Accordingly, we read of the evil shepherd that he leaves the sheep and flees: Woe to my worthless shepherd, who deserts the flock! (Zechariah 11:17). It is as if to say, “You are not a shepherd, but only appear to be one”: Even her hired soldiers in her midst are like fatted calves; yes, they have turned and fled together, they do not stand (Jeremiah 46:21).

10. But we find the contrary command: when they persecute you in one town, flee to the next (Matthew 10:23). Therefore, it seems to be lawful for a shepherd to flee.

    I reply that there are two answers to this. One is given by Augustine in his Commentary on John. There are two kinds of flight: that of the soul and that of the body. When we read here, he leaves the sheep and flees, we can understand it to mean the flight of the soul. For when an evil shepherd fears personal danger from a wolf, he does not dare to resist its injustices but flees—not by running away, but by withdrawing his encouragement and refusing to care for his flock.

    This should be the explanation when considering the first kind of wolf (the devil), because it is not necessary to physically flee from the devil. But since a shepherd does sometimes flee physically from certain wolves, such as powerful heretics and tyrants, another answer must be given, as found in Augustine’s Letter to Honoratus. As he says, it seems lawful to flee, even physically, from wolves, not only because of the authority of our Lord, as cited above, but also because of the example of certain saints, like Athanasius and others, who fled from their persecutors.

    For what is censured is not the flight itself, but the neglect of the flock. So, if the shepherd could flee without abandoning his flock, it would not be blameworthy. Sometimes it is the prelate himself who is sought, and at other times, it is the entire flock. It is obvious that if the prelate alone is sought, others can be assigned to guard, console, and govern the flock in his place. If he flees under these circumstances, he is not said to leave the sheep. In this way, it is lawful to flee in certain cases. But if the whole flock is sought, then either all the shepherds should be with the people, or some should remain while the others leave. If all desert the flock, then these words apply: he . . . sees the wolf coming, leaves the sheep and flees.

11. Here he mentions the twofold danger that threatens. One is the ravaging of the sheep; so he says, and the wolf catches them. This means the wolf takes for himself what belongs to another, for the faithful are Christ’s sheep. Therefore, leaders of sects and wolves snatch the sheep when they entice Christ’s faithful to their own teachings: my sheep have become food for all the wild beasts (Ezekiel 34:8).

    The other danger is that the sheep are scattered; so he says, and scatters the sheep. This happens insofar as some are led astray while others persevere: my sheep were scattered over all the face of the earth, with none to search or seek for them (Ezekiel 34:6).

12. Now he shows how the above-mentioned marks are related, for the third follows from the first two. Since the evil shepherd seeks his own advantage and has no love or solicitude for the flock, it follows that he is not willing to endure any inconvenience for them. Thus he says the hireling flees for this very reason: because he is a hireling—that is, he seeks his own advantage (the first mark)—and he has no care for the sheep—that is, he does not love them and is not solicitous for them (the second mark). So we read about the evil shepherd: she deals cruelly with her young, as if they were not hers (Job 39:16).

    The opposite is true of the good shepherd, for he seeks the welfare of his flock and not his own: not that I seek the gift, but I seek the fruit that increases to your credit (Philippians 4:17). Furthermore, he is concerned for his sheep—that is, he loves them and is solicitous for them: I hold you in my heart (Philippians 1:7).

1. Here our Lord proves his explanation.

   • First, he restates what he intends to prove.
   • Second, he gives the proof, with the words I know mine.
   • Third, he amplifies on it, with the words for this reason the Father loves me.

2. He says, I am the good shepherd, which has been explained above: as a shepherd seeks out his flock . . . so will I seek out my sheep (Ezekiel 34:11–12).

3. Then, with the words, I know mine, he proves what he says. He says two things about himself: that he is a shepherd, and that he is good.

   • First, he proves that he is a shepherd.
   • Second, that he is a good shepherd.

4. He proves he is a shepherd by the two signs of a shepherd already mentioned. The first of these is that he calls his own sheep by name. Concerning this he says, I know mine: the Lord knows those who are his (2 Timothy 2:19). I know, I say, not with mere knowledge only, but with a knowledge joined with approval and love: to him who loves us and has freed us from our sins (Revelation 1:5).

   The second sign is that the sheep hear his voice and know him. Concerning this he says, and mine know me. Mine, I say, by predestination, by vocation, and by grace. This is like saying: they love me and obey me. Thus, we must understand that they have a loving knowledge about which we read: they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest (Jeremiah 31:34).

5. He shows that he is a good shepherd by mentioning that he has the office of a good shepherd, which is to lay down his life for his sheep.

   • First, he shows the reason for this.
   • Second, he gives a sign of it.
   • Third, he shows the fruit of his sign.

6. The reason for this sign—that is, of his laying down his life for his sheep—is the knowledge he has of the Father. Concerning this he says, as the Father knows me, and I know the Father, and I lay down my life for the sheep. This statement can be explained in two ways.

   In one way, “as” indicates just a similarity in knowledge. Taken this way, such knowledge can be given to a creature: I will know even as I am known (1 Corinthians 13:12), that is, as I am known without obscurity, so I will know without obscurity.

   In another way, “as” implies an equality. To know the Father as he is known by him is proper to the Son alone, because only the Son knows the Father comprehensively, just as the Father knows the Son comprehensively: no one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son (Matthew 11:27), that is, with a comprehensive knowledge.

   Our Lord says this because in knowing the Father, he knows the will of the Father that the Son should die for the salvation of the human race. He is also saying here that he is the mediator between God and man. For as he is related to the sheep as known by them and as knowing them, so also he is related to the Father, because as the Father knows him, so he knows the Father.

7. Then when he says, and I lay down my life for the sheep, he gives the sign: by this we know love, that he laid down his life for us (1 John 3:16).

   But since there are three substances in Christ—namely the substance of the Word, of the soul, and of the body—one might ask who is speaking when he says, I lay down my life. If you say that the Word is speaking here, it is not true, because the Word never laid down his soul, since he was never separated from his soul. If you say that the soul is speaking, this too seems impossible, because nothing is separated from itself. And if you say that Christ says this referring to his body, it does not seem to be so, because his body does not have the power to take up its soul.

   Therefore, one must say that when Christ died, his soul was separated from his flesh; otherwise Christ would not have been truly dead. But in Christ, his divinity was never separated from his soul or his flesh; it was united to his soul as it descended to the lower world, and to his body as it lay in the tomb. Therefore, his body, by the power of his divinity, laid down his soul by the power of his divinity, and took it up again.

8. Then when he says, and other sheep I have, he sets down the fruit of Christ’s death, which is the salvation not only of the Jews but of the Gentiles as well. For since he had said, I lay down my life for my sheep, the Jews, who regarded themselves as God’s sheep—we your people, the flock of your pasture (Psalms 79:13)—could have said that he laid down his life for them alone.

   But our Lord adds that it is not only for them, but for others too: and this he did not speak from himself, but being the high priest of that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for the nation. And not only for the nation, but for the sons of God, who were dispersed, that they be gathered together into one (John 11:51–52).

9. In regard to this fruit, our Lord does three things. First, he mentions the predestination of the Gentiles; second, their vocation through grace; and third, their justification.

   As to the first, he says, and other sheep I have, that is, the Gentiles, that are not of this fold, i.e., of the family of the flesh of Israel, which was in a way a flock: I will surely gather all of you, O Jacob (Micah 2:12). For as sheep are enclosed in a fold, so the Jews were kept enclosed within the precepts of the law (compare to Galatians 3). These other sheep, I say, that is, the Gentiles, I have from my Father through an eternal predestination: ask of me, and I will make the nations your heritage (Psalms 2:8); it is a small thing that you should be my servant, to raise up the tribes of Jacob and to convert the dregs of Israel. Behold, I will give you as a light to the nations, that my salvation may reach to the end of the earth (Isaiah 49:6).

10. As to the second, he says, those also I must bring, i.e., according to the plans of divine predestination it is time to call them to grace.

    This seems to conflict with what our Lord says: I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matthew 15:24).

    I answer that Jesus was sent only to the sheep of the house of Israel in the sense of preaching to them personally, as we read: Christ became a servant to the circumcised to show God’s truthfulness, in order to confirm the promises given to the patriarchs (Romans 15:8). It was through the apostles that he brought in the Gentiles: from them I will send survivors to the nations (Isaiah 66:19).

11. In regard to the third, he says, and they will hear my voice. Here he mentions three things necessary for righteousness in the Christian religion.

    1. The first is obedience to the commandments of God. Concerning this he says, and they will hear my voice, i.e., they will observe my commandments: teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you (Matthew 28:20); people whom I had not known, i.e., whom I did not approve, served me. As soon as they heard of me they obeyed me (Psalms 18:43).
    2. The second is the unity of charity, and concerning this he says, and there will be one fold, i.e., one Church of the faithful from the two peoples, the Jews and the Gentiles: one faith (Ephesians 4:5); for he is our peace, who has made us both one (Ephesians 2:14).
    3. The third is the unity of faith, and in regard to this he says, and one shepherd: they will all have one shepherd, that is, the Jews and the Gentiles (Ezekiel 37:24).

12. Now our Lord explains his proof:

    • First, he amplifies on the reason for the sign.
    • Second, he explains the sign, or the effect, at no man takes it away from me.
    • Third, he shows that the reason is appropriate, at this commandment I have received from my Father.

13. Our Lord says that the reason for his death is the knowledge he has of the Father, saying, as the Father knows me, and I know the Father, and I lay down my life for my sheep. In explaining this he says, for this reason the Father loves me. From this it is clear that the Father knows him with a knowledge joined with approval, for this reason, I say, because I lay down my life, that I may take it again.

14. But is it true that his death is the cause of the Father’s love? It seems not, because something temporal is not the cause of something eternal. Christ’s death is in the temporal order, while the love of God for Christ is eternal.

    I answer that Christ is speaking here of the Father’s love for him as having a human nature. Accordingly, this passage can be understood in three ways. In one way, because indicates a cause, while in the other ways it indicates the end or sign of love.

    If it is taken causally, then the meaning is: because I lay down my life, i.e., endure death, for this reason the Father loves me, that is, he grants me the effect of his love, which is the glory and exaltation of my body: he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross. Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him a name which is above every name (Philippians 2:8).

    But one might object to this that good works cannot merit the divine love. For since our works are meritorious to the extent that they are given life by charity—if I give away all I have to feed the poor . . . but have not love, I gain nothing (1 Corinthians 13:3)—and since God precedes us in loving—in this is love, not that we love God but that he first loved us (1 John 4:10)—it is clear that his love precedes all our merit.

    This can be answered by saying that no one can merit God’s love; nevertheless, we can merit by our good works the effect of God’s love, that is, an increase of grace and the reception of the good of glory, both of which God bestows on us because of his love. Thus we can say that for this reason God loves this or that person—that is, bestows on him the effect of his love—because he obeys his commandments. And so we can say about Christ as man, that for this reason the Father loves him—that is, has exalted him and given him the brightness of glory—because he laid down his life in death.

    If because is taken to mean the end of love, this is the sense: for this reason the Father loves me, that is, the Father loves me because I lay down my life. This is the same as saying: Father, on account of your love which you have for me, ordain that through my passion I may redeem humanity. As it is written: he that spared not even his own Son, but delivered him up for us all (Romans 8:32).

    But if the because indicates a sign of love, then the meaning is this: for this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life, as if to say: this is a sign that the Father loves me, because I lay down my life, that I may take it again, that is, I fulfill his commands and will and endure death. For an obvious sign of love is that a person, out of charity, fulfills the commands of God.

15. Now he explains the effect of the sign. Since the sign was I lay down my life for my sheep, he explains how he lays it down.

    • First, he excludes violence.
    • Second, he speaks of his power.

16. The violence he excludes is that which could be employed in taking a life; such violence was not accomplished in Christ. Concerning this he says, no man takes it away from me, that is, my life, by violence, but I lay it down, by my own power, that is, of myself; can the prey be taken from the mighty? (Isaiah 49:24).

    But did not the Jews use violence against Christ? They did, insofar as it was in them; but this violence was not effective in Christ because he laid down his life voluntarily, when he willed. Thus we read that the Jews wanted to arrest him but were unable because his hour had not yet come (John 7:30). It was voluntary not as though he was forced to die, but he condescended to be killed, as Augustine says.

17. He adds something about his power when he says, I have power to lay it down.

    Apropos of this, it should be noted that since the union of the soul and body is natural, their separation is unnatural. And although the cause of this separation and death can be voluntary, among human beings death is always natural. Now nature is not subject to the will of any mere human, since nature, as well as the will, are from God. Therefore, the death of any mere human person must be natural.

    But in Christ, his own nature and every other nature are subject to his will, just as artifacts are subject to the will of the artisan. Thus, according to the pleasure of his will, he could lay down his life when he willed, and he could take it up again. No mere human being can do this, although he could voluntarily use some instrument to kill himself.

    This explains why the centurion, seeing that Christ did not die by a natural necessity but by his own will, since Jesus cried again with a loud voice and yielded up his spirit (Matthew 27:50), recognized a divine power in him and said: truly, this was the Son of God (Matthew 27:54). Again, the Apostle says: for the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God (1 Corinthians 1:18), that is, his great power was revealed in the very death of Christ.

18. Here he shows that the above-mentioned reason is appropriate, for to fulfill a command shows love for the one commanding. Thus he says, this commandment I have received from my Father, that is, to lay down my life and take it up again: if any one love me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him (John 14:23).

1. After showing that he has the power to give life and demonstrating his manner of doing so, our Lord here shows how this power to give life belongs to him.

   First, the Evangelist mentions the dispute that arose among the crowd on this point.

   Second, he gives the discussion between the Jewish leaders and Christ, when it was the feast of the dedication at Jerusalem.

   Concerning the first point, he does three things.

   First, he mentions the dispute within the crowd.

   Second, he gives the opinion of one side.

   Third, he states the reasonable position of the other side.

2. The dispute arose within the crowd listening to Christ because of what he said. The Evangelist says, a division arose again among the Jews because of these words. Since some of them understood his words correctly and others did not, they argued among themselves. As Jesus said, I have not come to bring peace, but a sword (Matthew 10:34)—that is, the sword of Gospel teaching, which some believed and others denied. He pours contempt upon princes (Psalms 107:40).

3. The opinion of one party in the argument was false. About this he says, many of them said. He says many, because as we read, the number of fools is infinite (Ecclesiastes 1:15). They said, He has a demon and is mad. It is the habit of the foolish to always interpret doubtful matters in an evil way, when the opposite should be done. Thus they insult whatever they do not know, as we read in the letter of Jude. And so, because they were incapable of understanding our Lord’s words—for the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not overcome it (John 1:5)—they blasphemed, saying, He has a demon and is mad. They then tried to turn others away from him, saying, Why do you listen to him?

   These blasphemers accuse Christ of two things. First, that he has a demon, as if to say, “He is not speaking by the Holy Spirit, but from a wicked spirit.” Something similar is said about Paul: He seems to be a preacher of foreign divinities (Acts 17:18). Now, a person who has a familiar demon is always spiritually mad, but not always physically mad. But some can be possessed by a demon, and these are always mad, even in a physical way. Thus it was said of Christ, He has gone out of his mind (Mark 3:21). Second, to show that Christ has a demon in this way, they say, and is mad. As Festus said to Paul, Your great learning is driving you mad (Acts 26:24). Yet their blasphemy is not surprising, because they are sensual, and as we read, the sensual person does not perceive those things that pertain to the Spirit of God (1 Corinthians 2:14).

4. This opinion is refuted by the statements of the other side, and this occurs in two ways. First, by the depth of Christ’s words. Thus he says, others—that is, those who rightly understood—said: These are not the words of one who has a demon. This was like saying, “It is clear from what he is saying that he is not mad, because his words are orderly and profound.” As Peter said, Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life (John 6:68). And Paul says, I am not mad, most excellent Festus, but I am speaking the sober truth (Acts 26:25).

   Second, this opinion is refuted by the greatness of the miracle. Thus they say, Can a demon open the eyes of the blind? This means, “Was this not one of the greatest of miracles?” They were correct in believing that it could be performed only by the power of God: If this man were not from God, he could do nothing (John 9:33).

5. It should be noted that there are certain miracles that can be performed by the power of demons and angels, and there are others that can in no way be accomplished by their power. Those things that are above the order of nature no creature can perform by its own power, since the creature itself is subject to the laws of nature. God alone, who is above nature, can act above the order of nature. Therefore, whenever another creature acts, it is apparent that it remains under the order of nature.

   Therefore, whatever can be performed within the order of nature, an angel—either good or wicked—is able to do, when permitted. Thus, by using the seeds that in natural things are ordered toward the generation of certain animals, they are able to effect the generation of these animals, as Pharaoh’s magicians did (Exodus 7:11). Again, they can produce changes affecting the nature of a thing; thus, they can heal the sick who could be helped by the power of nature.

   But things that absolutely transcend the order of nature can be performed by God alone, or by good angels and saintly men through God’s power, which they obtain through prayer. Such would be the giving of sight to the blind and the raising of the dead, for the power of nature does not extend to restoring sight or to raising the dead. Consequently, a demon cannot open the eyes of a blind man or raise the dead, because this is done by God alone, and by the saints through the power of God.

6. Here we see the dispute that the Jewish leaders initiated with Christ.

   First, the Evangelist gives the question asked by the Jews.

   Second, Christ’s answer, beginning with, Jesus answered them, “I told you...”

   And third, the effect of this answer, at the Jews then took up stones to stone him (John 10:31).

   Concerning the first point, he does two things:

   First, he describes the circumstances of the questioning.

   Second, he gives the question itself, at and said to him, “How long will you keep us in suspense?”

   The circumstances of the questioning are described with respect to three things: the time, the place, and the persons who ask the question.

7. He mentions the specific time first, saying, It was the feast of the dedication at Jerusalem, and it was winter.

   To understand this, we have to know, as Augustine says, that an “encaenia” was the feast of the dedication of a church. The Greek word, kainos, is the same as the Latin word for new. Thus an encaenia is the same as a renewal. Even in everyday speech, when something new is dedicated to a specific use, it is said to be “encaeniated,” which is the same as being renewed. It was the feast of the dedication at Jerusalem refers to the feast and commemoration of the dedication of the temple. For when we newly dedicate a church to divine worship, we celebrate its being set aside for a sacred purpose, and in memory of this, we celebrate it every year on the same day. Thus every year the Jews celebrated the encaenia, the remembrance of the dedication of the temple.

8. To understand why there is a feast for the consecration of a church, we should note that all the feasts in the Church are celebrated in remembrance of God’s blessings: I will recount the steadfast love of the Lord (Isaiah 63:7). Again, after David called to mind God’s many blessings, saying, Give praise to the Lord, for he is good (Psalms 118:1), he adds, Bind the festal procession with branches, up to the horns of the altar! (Psalms 118:27).

   We recall God’s benefits to us as being of three kinds. Sometimes, we recall them as they are found in our Head, the Lord Jesus Christ. Thus we celebrate the feast of his birth, his resurrection, and so on. Sometimes we recall them as found in our fellow members, that is, in the saints, who are members of the Church. This is fitting, for as the Apostle says, If one member is honored, all rejoice together (1 Corinthians 12:26). Thus we celebrate the feasts of Saints Peter and Paul, and the other saints.

   At other times we recall God’s benefits as found in the entire Church, for example, the benefits of the sacraments and other things granted to the Church in general. Now, a material church building is a sign of the gathering of the faithful of the Church, and in this building all the sacraments of grace are dispensed. So it is in memory of these benefits that we celebrate the feast of the dedication of a church. Indeed, such a feast is greater than the feast of any saint, just as the benefits conferred upon the whole Church, which we celebrate, exceed the benefits conferred on a single saint and recalled during his feast.

9. Recall that the temple at Jerusalem had been consecrated three times: first by Solomon (1 Kings 8); second, during the time of Ezra by Zerubbabel and Joshua, the high priest (Ezra 6); and third, by the Maccabees, for it says that they went up to Jerusalem to cleanse the holy places (1 Maccabees 4). Now this feast was not celebrated in memory of the dedication by Solomon, because that took place in the fall, that is, in the seventh month. Nor was it in memory of the dedication made at the time of Ezra, for this took place during the spring, that is, the ninth day of March. It was in memory of the dedication made by the Maccabees, which took place during the winter.

   And so to show this, he mentions the specific time, saying, it was winter. There is also a mystical reason for mentioning the time. As Gregory says in his Morals on the Book of Job, the Evangelist took care to mention the season as winter in order to indicate the chill of evil in the hearts of those listening, that is, the Jews: As a well keeps its water cold, so she keeps cold her wickedness (Jeremiah 6:7). We also read of this winter: The winter is past, the rain is over and gone (Song of Solomon 2:11).

10. Then he describes the place: and Jesus was walking in the temple, in the colonnade of Solomon. He describes it first in a general way, in the temple—The Lord is in his holy temple (Psalms 11:4)—and second, in more detail, saying, in the colonnade of Solomon.

    We have to know that the temple included not just its main building, but the surrounding colonnades as well. It was in these colonnades that the people stood and prayed, for only the priests prayed in the temple proper. It was called the colonnade of Solomon because it was the place where Solomon stood and prayed when the temple was being dedicated: Then Solomon stood before the altar of the Lord in the presence of all the assembly of Israel (1 Kings 8:22).

11. One might object that the temple which Solomon built was destroyed, and so was his colonnade.

    I answer that the temple was rebuilt according to the specifications of the previous one. Therefore, just as that colonnade was called the colonnade of Solomon in the first instance, it was called the same later out of respect for him.

12. The persons who question Christ are described as to their malice; thus he says, So the Jews gathered around him, not warmed by loving charity, but burning with the desire to harm him. They came to attack him, surrounding and pressing him in on all sides: Many bulls surround me; strong bulls of Bashan encompass me (Psalms 22:12); Ephraim has surrounded me with lies (Hosea 11:12).

13. Then when he says, and said to him, “How long will you keep us in suspense?” we see the Jews questioning him.

    First, he mentions the supposed reason for their questions when he says, How long will you keep us in suspense? Their manner is flattering because they want it to appear that they desire to know the truth about him. It is as if they were saying, “We are hanging in anticipation. How long will you keep us unsatisfied? Hope deferred makes the heart sick” (Proverbs 13:12).

    Second, they state their question: If you are the Christ, tell us plainly. Note their perversity. Since they resented Christ’s calling himself the Son of God (John 5:18), they do not ask him if he is the Son of God, but if you are the Christ, tell us plainly. They hoped by this to obtain grounds for accusing him before Pilate of inciting sedition and making himself king, which was in opposition to Caesar and offensive to the Romans. For when the Jews accused Christ of making himself the Son of God, Pilate was not very impressed; but when they said, Everyone who makes himself a king opposes Caesar (John 19:12), he was swayed against Christ. This is why they say, If you are the Christ—or a king, or anointed—tell us plainly.

    Notice also their wickedness, because they say, plainly. It was like saying, “Until now you have not taught in public, but more or less in secret.” But in reality, Christ said everything openly, was present for the festival days, and said nothing in secret: I have spoken openly to the world... and in secret I have said nothing (John 18:20).

14. Now we have the answer of Christ, where he exposes their unbelief, proving they were deceitful in claiming they wished to know the truth when they said, How long will you keep us in suspense? He shows this in two ways. First, because they did not believe his words. About this he says, I told you, and you do not believe. It is as if to say, “You say to me, If you are the Christ, the king, tell us. But I told you—that is, I told you the truth—and you do not believe.” As it is written: If I tell you, you will not believe (Luke 22:67).

    He shows this in a second way: because they do not believe his works. About this he says, The works that I do in my Father’s name bear witness about me.

    He first shows their unbelief in his works, and second, the reason for their unbelief, at but you do not believe because you are not among my sheep.

15. As to the first point, he says, the works that I do, as if to say, “You cannot be persuaded by my words, nor even by the great works that I do in my Father’s name,” that is, for his glory. They bear witness about me, because they can be performed by God alone. Thus they clearly show that I have come from God. The tree is known by its fruit (Matthew 12:33); The works that I do bear witness about me that the Father has sent me. But you do not believe (John 5:36). Though he had done so many signs before them, they still did not believe in him (John 12:37). For this reason they are inexcusable: If I had not done among them the works that no one else did, they would not be guilty of sin, but now they have seen and hated both me and my Father (John 15:24).

16. The reason for their unbelief is that they are separated from Christ’s sheep. So he says, but you do not believe because you are not among my sheep.

    He does three things concerning this.

    First, he says that they are excluded from membership with the sheep of Christ.

    Second, he shows the dignity of his sheep, at My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me.

    Third, he proves that no one will snatch his sheep out of his hands, at What my Father has given to me is greater than all.

17. He mentions that they are not among his sheep when he says, because you are not among my sheep—that is, you are not predestined to believe, but are foreknown to eternal destruction. For the very fact that we believe is due to God: For it has been granted to you that for the sake of Christ you should not only believe in him but also suffer for his sake (Philippians 1:29); For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God (Ephesians 2:8). And this is given only to those for whom it was prepared from eternity. Thus, only those believe in him who have been ordained to this by God through an eternal predestination: As many as were appointed to eternal life believed (Acts 13:48); We believe that we will be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus (Acts 15:11).

18. But should anyone be told that he is not predestined? It seems that he should not be, for since no one can be saved unless he is predestined, if one is told that he is not predestined, he would be driven to despair. And so our Lord was driving the Jews to despair when he said to them, You do not believe, because you are not among my sheep.

    My answer to this is that in this group there was something common to all: they were not preordained by God to believe at that time. There was also something unique to individuals: some of them were preordained to believe later. Thus, some of them did believe later, for we read that three thousand of them believed in one day (Acts 2:41). But some were not preordained to do this. Therefore, it did not work against hope to say to a group—some of whom were preordained to believe later—that they did not belong to his sheep, because no one among them could apply this definitively to himself. But it would have worked against hope if Christ had said this to a specific person.

19. Now he reveals the dignity of his sheep when he says, My sheep hear my voice. He here mentions four things: two of them are what we do in reference to Christ; the other two, which correspond to the first two, are what Christ does in us.

20. The first thing we do is to obey Christ. Concerning this he says, My sheep—through predestination—hear my voice, by believing and obeying my precepts: Oh, that today you would hear his voice! Do not harden your hearts (Psalms 95:7–8).

21. The second thing, corresponding to this, is what Christ does, which is to give his love and approval. Concerning this he says, and I know them, that is, I love and approve of them: The Lord knows those who are his (2 Timothy 2:19). This is like saying, “The very fact that they hear me is due to the fact that I know them by an eternal election.”

    But if a person cannot believe unless God gives this to him, it seems that unbelief should not be held against anyone. I answer that it is held against them because they themselves are the cause of it not being given to them. For example, I cannot see the light unless I am enlightened by the sun. Yet if I were to close my eyes, I would not see the light; this is not due to the sun but to me, because by closing my eyes I am the cause of my not being enlightened. Now sin—for example, original sin, and in some persons actual sin—is the cause why we are not enlightened by God through faith. This cause is in everyone. Thus, all who are left by God are left by reason of God’s just judgment, and those who are chosen are lifted up by God’s mercy.

22. The third thing, which is what we do, concerns our imitation of Christ. So he says, and they follow me. My foot has held fast to his steps (Job 23:11); Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, so that you might follow in his steps (1 Peter 2:21).

23. The corresponding fourth part, which is what Christ does, is the giving of a reward. Concerning this he says, and I give them eternal life. This is like saying, “They follow me by walking the path of gentleness and innocence in this life, and I will see that afterwards they will follow me by entering into the joys of eternal life.”

    Our Lord shows in three ways that this reward will never end. Something can end in three ways. First, by its very nature, for example, if it is corruptible. But this reward is incorruptible by its very nature. Thus he says, I give them eternal life, which is the incorruptible and ever-living enjoyment of God: And this is eternal life, that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent (John 17:3). As Augustine says, this is the pasture he spoke of before. Indeed, eternal life is called a good pasture because it is entirely verdant and nothing withers away.

    Second, a thing can end because the one receiving it ends or does not guard it well. But this will not happen to that reward, so he says, and they will never perish, that is, the sheep will never perish. This conflicts with Origen, who said that the saints in glory are able to sin. Yet our Lord says, they will never perish, because they will be preserved forever: The one who conquers, I will make him a pillar in the temple of my God. Never shall he go out of it (Revelation 3:12).

    Third, a thing can end by being snatched by force. Perhaps Adam would not have been cast out if the deceiver had not been present. But this will not happen in eternal life, and so he says, and no one will snatch them—that is, the sheep—out of my hand, that is, from my protection and power. The souls of the righteous are in the hand of God . As Augustine says, “There the wolf does not snatch, nor the thief steal, nor the robber kill.”

24. He now proves what he had said above about the dignity of his sheep, namely, that no one can snatch them from his hand. His reason is this: no one can snatch what is in the hand of my Father, but the Father’s hand and mine are the same; therefore, no one can snatch what is in my hand.

    Concerning this he does three things. First, he gives the minor premise by showing that the Father had communicated divinity to him, saying, What my Father has given to me—through an eternal generation—is greater than all. For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself (John 5:26). It is greater than any power: And he has given him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of Man (John 5:27). It is greater than any reverence and honor: God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow (Philippians 2:9–10). Therefore, what my Father has given to me—that is, that I am his Word, his only begotten, and the splendor of his light—is greater than all.

    Second, he mentions the greatness of the Father’s power, which concerns the major premise, when he says, and no one is able to snatch them—to take by violence or secretly steal—out of the hand, from the power, of my Father, or from me, who am the might of the Father. Although as Augustine says, it is better to say from the power of the Father than from me. Now, no one is able to snatch them out of my Father’s hand, because he is the almighty one who is not subject to violence, and he is all-wise from whom nothing is hidden: He is wise in heart and mighty in strength (Job 9:4).

    Third, he affirms his unity with the Father, and from this the conclusion follows. Thus he says, I and the Father are one. As if to say, “No one will snatch them out of my hand, because I and the Father are one”—by a unity of essence, for the Father and the Son are the same in nature.

25. This statement rejects two errors: that of Arius, who distinguished the essence, and that of Sabellius, who did not distinguish the persons. We escape both Charybdis and Scylla, for by the fact that Christ says one, he saves us from Arius, because if they are one, then they are not different. And by the fact that he says we are, he saves us from Sabellius, for if we are, then the Father and the Son are distinct.

    Yet the Arians, deceived by their wickedness, try to deny this and say that a creature can in some sense be one with God, and in this sense the Son can be one with the Father.

    The falsity of this can be shown in three ways. First, from our very manner of speaking. It is clear that “one” is asserted as “being.” Thus, just as something is not said to be a being absolutely except according to its substance, so it is not said to be one except according to its substance or nature. Now, something is asserted absolutely when no qualification is added. Therefore, because I and the Father are one is asserted absolutely, without any qualifications added, it is plain that they are one according to substance and nature. But we never find that God and a creature are one without some added qualification: He who is united to the Lord becomes one spirit with him (1 Corinthians 6:17). Therefore, it is clear that the Son of God is not one with the Father as a creature can be.

    Second, we can see this from his previous statement, What my Father has given me is greater than all. He draws the conclusion from this: I and the Father are one. This is like saying, “We are one to the extent that the Father has given me that which is greater than all.”

    Third, it is clear from his intention. Our Lord proves that no one will snatch the sheep from his hand precisely because no one can snatch them from the hand of his Father. But this would not follow if his power were less than the power of the Father. Therefore, the Father and Son are one in nature, honor, and power.