Thomas Aquinas Commentary John 7

1. After our Lord considered the spiritual life and its food, He now discusses His instruction or teaching, which, as mentioned above, is necessary for those who are spiritually reborn.

   First, He shows the origin of His teaching; second, its usefulness (John 8).

   Regarding the origin, He does three things. First, He mentions the place where He revealed the origin of His teaching. Second, He notes the occasion for revealing this, with the words, the Jews therefore looked for Him. Third, His actual statement is given, beginning with, Jesus answered them and said, “My doctrine is not Mine” (John 7:16).

   Concerning the place, three things are considered. First, we see Christ invited to go there. Second, we see our Lord refuse, with the words, Then Jesus said to them, “My time has not yet come.” Third, we see how Jesus finally did go, after the words, When He had said these things, He Himself stayed in Galilee (John 7:9).

   Regarding the invitation, two things are noted. First, the reasons why they encouraged Christ to go to Judea. Second, their exhortation itself, with the words, and His brethren said to Him.

   They were influenced by three things to encourage Christ to go to Judea:

   • His delay.
   • His intention.
   • The appropriateness of the time.

2. They were influenced by Christ’s delaying in Galilee, which showed that He wanted to stay there. Thus it says, After these things, that is, after teaching in Capernaum, Jesus walked in Galilee, meaning He set out from Capernaum, a city of Galilee, with the intention to journey throughout that region.

   Our Lord lingered so often in Galilee to show us that we should pass from vices to virtues: So you, son of man, prepare your belongings for exile, and go during the day in their sight (Ezekiel 12:3).

3. They were also influenced by Christ’s intention, which He perhaps told them; hence it says, for He did not want to walk in Judea, the reason being, because the Jews sought to kill Him. As it says above: Therefore the Jews sought all the more to kill Him, because He not only broke the Sabbath, but also said that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God (John 5:18).

   But could not Christ still have gone among the Jews without being killed by them, as He did later? For example, but Jesus hid Himself, and went out of the temple (John 8:59).

   Three answers are given to this question.

   1. The first is given by Augustine, who says that Christ did this because the time would come when some Christians would hide from their persecutors. So that they would not be criticized for this, our Lord wanted to console us by setting a precedent Himself in this matter. He also taught this in word, saying, If they persecute you in one town, flee to another (Matthew 10:23).

   2. Another answer is that Christ was both God and man. By reason of His divinity, He could prevent Himself from being injured by His persecutors. Yet, He did not want to do this all the time, for while this would have shown His divinity, it might have cast doubt on His humanity. Therefore, He showed His humanity by sometimes fleeing as a man from His persecutors, to silence all those who would say that He was not a true man. And He showed His divinity by sometimes walking among them unharmed, thus refuting all those who say He was only a man. Thus, Chrysostom has another text, which reads, He could not, even if He wanted to, walk about Judea. This is expressed in a human way and is the same as saying that due to the danger of treachery, a person cannot go anywhere he might wish.

   3. The third answer is that it was not yet the time for Christ’s passion. The time would come when Christ would suffer, at the feast of the Passover when the lamb was sacrificed, so that one victim would succeed another: Jesus knowing that His hour had come, that He should pass out of this world to the Father (John 13:1).

4. They were also influenced by the appropriateness of the time, for it was a time for going to Jerusalem. Now the Jewish feast of Tabernacles was at hand. The word Tabernacles is a Greek word, composed of ‘scenos,’ which means shade or tent, and ‘phagim,’ which means to eat. It is as if to say it was the time in which they used to eat in their tents. For our Lord had ordered the children of Israel to stay in their tents for seven days during the seventh month, as a reminder of the forty years they had lived in tents in the desert (Leviticus 23:41). This was the feast the Jews were then celebrating.

   The Evangelist mentions this to show that some time had already passed since the previous teaching about spiritual food. For it was near the Passover when our Lord performed the miracle of the loaves, and this feast of Tabernacles is much later. The Evangelist does not tell us what our Lord did in the intervening five months. From this, we can see that although Jesus was always performing miracles, as the last chapter says, the Evangelist was mainly concerned with recording those matters over which the Jews argued and with which they disagreed.

5. Then, with the words, And His brethren said to Him, our Lord is urged on by His brethren.

   First, we are given their advice; second, the reason for it, with the words, so that Your disciples also may see Your works; and third, the Evangelist mentions the cause of this reason, with the words, for neither did His brethren believe in Him.

6. Regarding the first point, the ones who urge Christ are mentioned; hence it says, And His brethren said to Him. These were not brothers of the flesh or of the womb, as the blasphemous opinion of Helvidius would have it. It is, indeed, offensive to the Catholic faith that the most holy virginal womb, which bore Him who was God and man, should later bear another mortal man. Thus, they were His brothers or brethren in the sense of relatives, because they were related by blood to the Blessed Virgin Mary. For it is the custom in Scripture to call relatives brothers: Let us not quarrel, for we are brothers (Genesis 13:8), although Lot was the nephew of Abraham.

   As Augustine says, just as in the tomb in which our Lord’s body had been placed no other body was placed either before or after, so the womb of Mary conceived no other mortal person either before or after Christ. Although some of the relatives of the Blessed Virgin were apostles, such as the sons of Zebedee, and James the son of Alpheus, and some others, we should not think that these were among those who were urging Christ; this was done by other relatives who did not love Him.

   Second, we see their advice when they say, Pass from here, that is, from Galilee, and go into Judea, where you will find Jerusalem, a sacred place well-suited for teachers. Seer, go, flee to the land of Judah. There eat your bread and there prophesy (Amos 7:12).

7. They give their reason when they say, so that Your disciples also may see Your works. Here they show, first, that they are hungry for empty glory; second, that they are suspicious; and third, that they do not believe.

   They show that they are hungry for empty glory when they say, so that Your disciples also may see Your works. For they allowed something human to Christ and wanted to share the glory of the human honor that the people would show Him. And so, they urged Him to perform His works in public, for it is a characteristic of one who is seeking human glory to want publicly known whatever of one's own or of one's associates can bring glory. They love to pray at street corners, so people can see them (Matthew 6:5). We read of such people: for they loved the glory of men more than the glory of God (John 12:43).

   They reveal that they themselves are suspicious, and first of all remark on Christ’s fear, saying, for there is no man who does anything in secret. As if to say: You say that You are performing miracles, but You are doing them secretly because of fear. Otherwise, You would go to Jerusalem and do them before the people. Nevertheless, our Lord says below, I have spoken nothing in secret (John 18:20).

   Second, they refer to His love of glory, saying, and He Himself seeks to be known openly. As if to say: You want glory for what You are doing, yet You are hiding because You are afraid. Now this attitude is characteristic of those who are evil: to think that other people are experiencing the same emotions as they are. Notice the disrespect with which the prudence of the flesh reproached the Word made flesh. Job says against them, You reproach Him who is not like you, and say what you should not (Job 4:3).

   They show they do not believe when they say, If You do these things, manifest Yourself to the world, doubting whether He did perform miracles. He who does not believe is unfaithful (Isaiah 21:2).

8. The Evangelist tells why they said this when he says, for neither did His brethren believe in Him. For sometimes blood relatives are very hostile to one of their own and are jealous of his spiritual goods. They may even despise him. Thus Augustine says, They could have Christ as a relative, but in that very closeness they refused to believe in Him. A man’s enemies are in his own house (Micah 7:6); He has put my brethren far from me, and my acquaintances, like strangers, have gone from me. My relatives have left me, and those who knew me have forgotten me (Job 19:13–14).

9. Then, with the words, Then Jesus said to them, “My time has not yet come, but your time is always here,” Christ’s answer is given.

   First, He mentions that the time was not appropriate for going to Jerusalem; second, the reason for this, with the words, The world cannot hate you; and third, we see Christ deciding not to go, with the words, Go up to this festival day, but I will not go up to this festival day.

10. We should note that all of the following text is explained differently by Augustine and by Chrysostom.

    Augustine says that the brethren of our Lord were urging Him to a human glory. Now there is a time, in the future, when the saints acquire glory, a glory they obtain by their sufferings and troubles. He has tested them like gold in a furnace, and He accepted them as the victim of a holocaust. At the time of their visitation they will shine . And there is a time, the present, when the worldly acquire their glory. Let not the flowers of the time pass us by; let us crown ourselves with roses before they wither . Our Lord, therefore, wanted to show that He was not looking for the glory of this present time, but that He wanted to attain the height of heavenly glory through His passion and humiliation. It was necessary for Christ to suffer, and so enter into His glory (Luke 24:26).

    So Jesus says to them (that is, His brethren), My time—the time of My glory—has not yet come, because My sorrow must be turned into joy: The sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory to come, which will be revealed in us (Romans 8:18). But your time—the time of the glory of this world—is always here.

11. He gives the reason why these times are different when He says, The world cannot hate you, but it hates Me. The reason the time for the glory of the worldly is here is that they love the same things the world loves, and they agree with the world. But the time for the glory of the saints, who are looking for a spiritual glory, is not here, because they want what is displeasing to the world: poverty, afflictions, fasting, and things like that. They even disparage what the world loves; in fact, they despise the world: The world has been crucified to me, and I to the world (Galatians 6:14).

    And so He says, The world cannot hate you. As if to say: Thus, the time of your glory is here because the world does not hate you, who are in agreement with it; and every animal loves its like. But it hates Me, and so My time is not always here. And the reason it hates Me is because I give testimony against it—that is, the world—that its works are evil. This means I do not hesitate to reprimand those who are worldly, even though I know that they will hate Me for it and threaten Me with death. They—that is, those who love evil—hate the one who rebukes at the city gate (Amos 5:10); do not rebuke one who mocks, lest he hate you (Proverbs 9:8).

12. But cannot a person of the world be hated by the world—that is, by another person of the world?

    I answer that, in a particular case, one worldly person can hate another insofar as the latter has what the first wants, or prevents him from obtaining what relates to the glory of this world. But precisely insofar as a person is of the world, the world does not hate him. The saints, however, are universally hated by the world because they are opposed to it. And if anyone of the world does love them, it is not because he is of the world, but because of something spiritual in him.

13. Our Lord refuses to go when He says, Go up to this festival day, but I will not go up to this festival day. For just as there are two kinds of glory, so there are two different feasts. Worldly people have temporal feasts: their own enjoyments, banquets, and other external pleasures. The Lord called for weeping and mourning... and look at the rejoicing and gladness (Isaiah 22:12); I hate your feasts (Isaiah 1:14). But the saints have their own spiritual feasts, which consist in the joys of the spirit: Look upon Zion, the city of your feasts (Isaiah 33:20).

    So He says, You yourselves, who are looking for the glory of this world, go up to this festival day—that is, to the feasts of temporal pleasure. But I will not go up to this festival day, for I will go to the feast of an eternal celebration. I am not going up now because My time—that is, the time of My true glory, which will be a joy that lasts forever, an eternity without fatigue, and a brightness without shadow—is not yet completed.

14. Chrysostom keeps the same division of the text but explains it this way. He says that these brethren of our Lord joined with the Jews in plotting the death of Christ. And so they urged Christ to go to the feast, intending to betray Him and hand Him over to the Jews. That is why He says, My time—that is, the time for My cross and death—is not yet completed, to go to Judea and be killed. But your time is always here, because you can associate with them without danger. And this is because they cannot hate you, since you love and envy the same things they do.

    But it hates Me, because I give testimony against it, that its works are evil. This shows that the Jews hate Me, not because I broke the Sabbath, but because I denounced them in public. Go up to this festival day—that is, for its beginning (for it lasted seven days, as was said)—but I will not go up to this festival day—that is, not with you, and not when it first begins—because My time is not yet completed, when I am to suffer, for He was to be crucified at a future Passover. Accordingly, He did not go with them then in order to remain out of sight.

1. After the Evangelist mentioned how our Lord’s relatives urged him to go to Judea, he also tells us what Christ replied to them. He then tells us of his journey, covering three points:

   • First, his delay in going into Judea.
   • Second, the order of the events.
   • Third, the way Christ went up.

2. He mentions our Lord’s delay in going when he says, when he had said these things, in answer to his relatives, he himself stayed in Galilee. He did this to keep his word: I will not go up to this festival day (John 7:8). As we read, God is not like man, a liar, nor as the son of man, that he should be changed (Numbers 23:19).

3. He gives the order of events when he says, but after his brethren had gone up—that is, his relatives—he also went up to the feast.

   This seems to conflict with what he had said before: I will not go up (John 7:8), for the Apostle says, Jesus Christ, whom we preached among you . . . was not ‘yes’ and ‘no,’ but only ‘yes’ (2 Corinthians 1:19).

   I answer, first, that the festival of Tabernacles lasted for seven days, as was mentioned. Our Lord first stated, I will not go up to this festival day (John 7:8), meaning for its beginning. When it says here that he himself went up to the feast, we should understand this to refer to the middle of the feast. This is why we read a little further on, now on the middle feast day. So it is clear that Christ was not breaking his word.

   Second, as Augustine says, his relatives wanted him to go to Jerusalem to seek temporal glory. So he said to them, I will not go up to this festival day (John 7:8), for the purpose you want me to. But he did go to the festival to teach the people and to tell them about an eternal glory.

   Third, as Chrysostom says, our Lord said, I will not go up to this festival day (John 7:8), to suffer and die, as they wished. But he did go, not in order to suffer, but to teach others.

4. The way he went was not openly, but, as it were, in secret.

   There are three reasons for this. The first, given by Chrysostom, is so that he would not call more attention to his divinity and thus perhaps make his incarnation less certain, as was said above. It was also so that the virtuous would not be ashamed to hide from their persecutors when they cannot openly restrain them. Thus he says, in secret, to show that this was done according to a plan: truly, you are a hidden God (Isaiah 45:15).

   Augustine gives us another reason: to teach us that Christ was hidden in the figures of the Old Testament. I will wait for the Lord, who has hidden his face from the house of Jacob (Isaiah 8:17); so, even to this day . . . a veil is over their hearts (2 Corinthians 3:15). Thus everything that was said to this ancient people was a shadow of the good things to come (Hebrews 10:1). Our Lord went up in secret to show that even this feast was a figure. Scenopegia, as we saw, was the feast of Tabernacles, and the one who celebrates this feast is the one who understands that he is a pilgrim in this world.

   Another reason our Lord went up in secret was to teach us that we should conceal the good things we do, not looking for human approval or desiring the applause of the crowd: take care not to perform your good actions in the sight of men, in order to be seen by them (Matthew 6:1).

5. Then, at the Jews therefore looked for him on the festival day, he mentions the opportunity Christ had to show the origin of his spiritual teaching. He mentions two such opportunities:

   • One was due to the disagreement among the people.
   • The other was due to their amazement, at now on the middle feast day, Jesus went up into the temple and taught.

   The people disagreed in what they thought of Christ. He does three things concerning this:

   • First, he shows what they had in common.
   • Second, how they differed, at and there was much murmuring.
   • Third, whose opinion prevailed, at yet no man spoke openly about him for fear of the Jews.

6. What they had in common was that they looked for him on the festival day and said: where is he? It is obvious that they did not even want to mention his name because of their hatred and hostility: they hated him and could not speak civilly to him (Genesis 37:4).

7. They differed, however, because some looked for him because they wished to learn—seek him, and your soul will live (Psalms 68:33)—while others were looking for him in order to harm him: they seek my soul to carry it away (Psalms 39:15). And so there was much murmuring among the multitude concerning him, because of their disagreements. And although murmuring is neuter in gender, Jerome makes it masculine because he was following the custom of the older grammarians, or else to show that divine Scripture is not subject to the rules of Priscian.

   There was disagreement: for some of the people, that is, those who were right in heart, said of Christ that he is a good man. How good God is to Israel, to those whose heart is right (Psalms 72:1); the Lord is good to those who hope in him, to the one who seeks him (Lamentations 3:25). But others, that is, those who were badly disposed, said: no, meaning, he is not a good man. We can see from this that it was the people who thought he was a good person, while he was considered evil by the chief priests. So they say, he seduces the people: we found this man leading our people astray (Luke 23:2); we have remembered that that seducer said . . . (Matthew 27:63).

8. Here we should note that to seduce is to lead away. A person can be led away either from what is true or from what is false. In either way, a person can be called a seducer: either because he leads one away from the truth, and in this sense it does not apply to Christ, because he is the truth (John 14:6); or because he leads one away from what is false, and in this sense Christ is called a seducer: you seduced me, O Lord, and I was seduced. You were stronger than I, and you have won (Jeremiah 20:7). Would that all of us were called and were seducers in this sense, as Augustine says.

   But we call a person a seducer primarily because he leads others away from the truth and deceives them, because a person is said to be led away if he is drawn from the common way. The common way is the way of truth; heresies, on the other hand, and the way of the wicked, are detours.

9. It was the opinion of the evil, that is, of the chief priests, that finally won out. Thus he continues, yet no man spoke openly about him for fear of the Jews. This was because the people were held back by their fear of the chief priests: if any man should confess him to be Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue (John 9:22).

   This reveals the wickedness with which the leaders plotted against Christ, and it shows that those who were subject to them—the people—were not free to say what they thought.

10. Next, at now on the middle feast day, Jesus went up into the temple, we see the second opportunity Christ had to present his teaching: the amazement of the people. First, we see the object of their amazement; second, their amazement itself; and third, the reason why they were amazed.

11. The object of their amazement is the doctrine or teaching of Christ. Both the time and the place of this teaching are given.

    The time is mentioned when he says, now on the middle feast day, that is, when as many days of the feast had passed as were still remaining. Thus, since the feast lasted seven days, this took place on the fourth day. As we said, when Christ hid himself, it was a sign of his humanity and an example of virtue for us. But when he did come before them, and they could not suppress him, this showed his divinity.

    Furthermore, our Lord went when the feast was half over because at the beginning everyone would be occupied with matters relating to the feast: the good, with the worship of God, and others with trivialities and financial profit. But when it was half over, and such matters had been settled, the people would be better prepared to receive his teaching. Thus our Lord did not go to the first several days of the feast so that he would find them more attentive and better prepared for his teaching. Similarly, Christ’s going to the feast at this time paralleled the arrangement of his teaching, for Christ came to teach us about the kingdom of God not at the beginning of the world, nor at its ending, but during the intervening time. You will make it known in the intervening years (Habakkuk 3:2).

    The place where our Lord taught is mentioned when he says, into the temple. He taught there for two reasons. First, to show that he was teaching the truth, which they could not belittle, and which was necessary for all: I have spoken nothing in secret (John 18:20). Second, because the temple, since it was a sacred place, was appropriate for the very holy teaching of Christ: come! Let us go up the mountain of the Lord, and to the house of the God of Jacob. And he will teach us his ways, and we will walk in his steps (Isaiah 2:3).

    The Evangelist does not mention what Christ taught, for, as was said, the evangelists do not report everything our Lord did and said, but only those things which excited the people or produced some controversy. And so here he mentions the excitement his teaching produced in the people: that is, that those who had said before, he seduces the people, were now amazed at his teaching.

12. He mentions this amazement when he says, and the Jews wondered. And this is not surprising, for your testimony is wonderful (Psalms 119:129). For the words of Christ are the words of divine wisdom.

    He adds the reason why they were amazed when he says, how does this man know letters, when he has never learned? For they knew that Jesus was the son of a poor woman and was considered the son of a carpenter. As such, he would be working for a living and devoting his time not to study, but to physical work, according to I am poor, and have labored since my youth (Psalms 88:15). And so when they hear him teach and debate, they are amazed, and say, how does this man know letters when he has never learned? Much the same is said: where did he acquire this wisdom, and these great works? Isn’t he the son of the carpenter? (Matthew 13:54).

13. Having been told of the place and opportunity which Christ had to reveal the origin of his spiritual teaching, he now shows the origin of this teaching.

    First, he shows them that God is the source of this spiritual teaching. Second, he invites them to accept it, at and on the last and great day of the festivity, Jesus stood and cried (John 7:37).

    As to the first, he does two things:

    • First, he shows the origin of this teaching.
    • Second, the origin of the one teaching it, at therefore, some of Jerusalem said: is this not he whom they seek to kill?

    He does two things about the first point:

    • First, he shows the origin of this teaching.
    • Second, he answers an objection, at did not Moses give you the law?

    In regard to the first of these, he does two things:

    • First, he shows the origin of this teaching.
    • Second, he proves that it comes from God, at if any man wants to do his will, he will know of the doctrine.

14. He says, Jesus answered them and said. As if to say: you are wondering where I gained my knowledge, but I say, my doctrine is not mine.

    If he had said, “The doctrine that I am presenting to you is not mine,” there would be no problem. But he says, my doctrine is not mine, and this seems to be a contradiction.

    However, this can be explained, for this statement can be understood in several ways. Our Lord’s doctrine can in some sense be called his own, and in some sense not his own. First, we can understand Christ as the Son of God. Then, since the doctrine of anyone is nothing other than his word, and the Son of God is the Word of God, it follows that the doctrine of the Father is the Son himself. But this same Word belongs to himself through an identity of substance. What does belong to you, if not you yourself? However, as Augustine says, he does not belong to himself through his origin. If you do not belong to yourself, because you are from another, what does? This seems to be the meaning, expressed in summary fashion, of my doctrine is not mine. As if to say: I am not of myself.

    This refutes the Sabellian heresy, which dared to say that the Son is the Father.

    Or, we could understand it as meaning that my doctrine, which I proclaim with created words, is not mine but his who sent me, that is, it is the Father’s. My doctrine is not mine as from myself, but it is from the Father, because the Son has even his knowledge from the Father through an eternal generation. All things have been given to me by my Father (Matthew 11:27).

    Second, we can understand Christ as the Son of man. Then he is saying: my doctrine, which I have in my created soul, and which my lips proclaim, is not mine, that is, it is not mine as from myself, but from God, because every truth, by whomever spoken, is from the Holy Spirit.

    Thus, as Augustine says in On the Trinity (Book 1), our Lord called this doctrine his own from one point of view, and not his own from another. According to his form of God, it was his own; but according to his form of a servant, it was not his own. This is an example for us, that we should realize that all our knowledge is from God and thank him for it: what do you have which you have not been given? And if you have been given it, why do you glory as if you have not been given it? (1 Corinthians 4:7).

15. Then, at if any man wants to do his will, he will know of the doctrine, whether it is from God or whether I speak from myself, he proves that his doctrine is from God. He does this in two ways:

    • First, from the judgment of those who correctly understand such matters.
    • Second, from his own intention, at he who speaks of himself seeks his own glory.

16. With respect to the first, we should note that when there is a question whether someone is performing well in some art, this is decided by one who has experience in that art; just as the question whether someone is speaking French well should be decided by one who is well versed in the French language. With this in mind, our Lord is saying: the question of whether my doctrine is from God must be decided by one who has experience in divine matters, for such a person can judge correctly about these things. The sensual man does not perceive those things that pertain to the Spirit of God. The spiritual man judges all things (1 Corinthians 2:14). Accordingly, he is saying: because you are alienated from God, you do not know whether a doctrine is from God. If anyone wants to do his will, that is, the will of God, he can know whether this doctrine is from God, or whether I speak from myself. Indeed, one who is speaking what is false is speaking on his own, because when he speaks a lie, he speaks of his own (John 8:44).

    Chrysostom explains this text in another way. The will of God is our peace, our love, and our humility: happy are the peacemakers, because they will be called sons of God (Matthew 5:9). But the love of controversy often distorts a person’s mind to such an extent that he thinks that what is really true is false. Thus, when we abandon the spirit of controversy, we possess more surely the certitude of truth. Answer, I entreat you, without contention, and judge, speaking what is just (Job 6:29). So our Lord is saying: if anyone wishes to judge my doctrine correctly, let him do the will of God, that is, abandon the anger, the envy, and the hatred which he has for me without reason. Then, nothing will prevent him from knowing whether this doctrine is from God, or whether I speak from myself, that is, whether I am speaking the words of God.

    Augustine explains it this way. It is the will of God that we know his works, just as it is the will of a head of a household that his servants do his works. The work of God is that we believe in him whom he has sent: this is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent (John 6:29). Thus he says: if any man wants to do his will, that is, God’s will, which is to believe in me, he will know of the doctrine, whether it is from God. As the other version says, if you do not believe, you will not understand (Isaiah 7:9).

17. Then when he says, he who speaks of himself seeks his own glory, he proves the same thing from his intention. He presents two intentions through which we can recognize the two sources of a doctrine.

    Some are said to speak on their own, and others not on their own. Now whoever strives to speak the truth does not speak on his own. All our knowledge of the truth is from another: either from instruction, as from a teacher; from revelation, as from God; or by a process of discovery, as from things themselves, for the invisible things of God are clearly known by the things that have been made (Romans 1:20). Consequently, in whatever way a person acquires his knowledge, he does not acquire it on his own.

    That person speaks on his own who takes what he says neither from things themselves, nor from any human teaching, but from his own heart: they proclaim a vision taken out of their own hearts (Jeremiah 23:16); woe to those foolish prophets who prophesy out of their own hearts (Ezekiel 13:3). Accordingly, when a person devises a doctrine on his own he does it for the sake of human glory, for, as we see from Chrysostom, a person who wishes to present his own private doctrine does so for no other purpose than to acquire glory. And this is what our Lord says, proving that his doctrine is from God: he who speaks of himself, about a certain knowledge of the truth which is really from another, seeks his own glory. It is for this reason, and because of pride, that various heresies and false opinions have arisen. This is a characteristic of the antichrist, who opposes and is exalted above all that is called God, or is worshipped (2 Thessalonians 2:4).

    But the one who seeks the glory of him who sent him, as I do—I do not seek my own glory (John 8:50)—is true, and there is no injustice in him. I am truthful because my doctrine contains the truth; there is no injustice in me because I do not appropriate the glory of another. As Augustine says: He gave us a magnificent example of humility when, in the form of a man, he sought the glory of the Father, and not his own. O man, you should do the same! When you do something good, you seek your glory; when you do something evil, you insult God. It is obvious that he was not looking for his own glory, because if he had not been an enemy of the chief priests, he would not have been persecuted by them.

    So Christ, and everyone who is looking for the glory of God, has knowledge in his intellect—master, we know that you are truthful (Matthew 22:16)—thus he says, he is true. And he has the correct intention in his will; thus he says, and there is no injustice in him. For a person is unjust when he takes for himself what belongs to another, but glory is proper to God alone; therefore, he who seeks glory for himself is unjust.

18. Then, at did not Moses give you the law? he answers an objection.

    For someone could tell Christ that his doctrine was not from God because he broke the sabbath, according to, this man is not of God, who does not keep the Sabbath (John 9:16). This is what he intends to answer, and he does three things:

    • First, he clears himself, by arguing from the actions of those who are accusing him.
    • Second, we see their vicious reply at the multitude answered.
    • Third, he vindicates himself with a reasonable explanation, at Jesus answered and said to them: I have done one work, and you all wonder.

19. He says: even granting, as you say, that my doctrine is not from God because I do not keep the law by breaking the sabbath, you still have no reason to accuse me since you do the same thing. Thus he says: did not Moses give you the law? That is, did he not give it to your people? And yet none of you keep the law. You received the law through the angels, and have not kept it (Acts 7:53). This is why Peter says, a yoke, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear (Acts 15:10). Therefore, if you do not keep the law, why do you want to kill me for not keeping it? You are not doing this because of the law, but out of hatred. If you were acting out of devotion for the law, you would keep it yourselves. Let us lie in wait for the just man, because he is unfavorable to us, and against our works, and he reproaches us for breaking the law ; and a little further on we read: let us condemn him to a most shameful death .

    Or, it could be explained this way: you do not keep the law that Moses gave you, and this is obvious from the fact that you want to kill me, which is against the law: you shall not kill (Exodus 20:13). Another explanation, following Augustine, is: you do not keep the law because I myself am included in the law. If you believed Moses, you would perhaps believe me also, for he wrote of me (John 5:46). But you want to kill me.

20. Then we see the vicious reply of the crowd, when he says, the multitude answered and said: you have a devil! As Augustine says, their reply indicates disorder and confusion, rather than any order, for they are saying that the one who casts out devils has one himself (Matthew 12:24).

21. Then when he says, I have done one work, and you all wonder, our Lord, at peace in his own truth, answers them and justifies himself with a reasonable explanation.

    First, he recalls the incident that is troubling them. Second, he shows that this should not bother them, at therefore, Moses gave you circumcision. And third, he shows the way to a just judgment, at do not judge according to the appearance, but judge according to just judgment.

22. Jesus answered and said to them: I have done one work, and you all wonder. He does not trade one insult for another, nor does he rebuff it, because when he was derided, he did not deride in return (1 Peter 2:23). He instead recalls for them his cure of the paralytic, which was the cause of their amazement. But their amazement was not one of devotion, as in your heart will be amazed and expanded (Isaiah 60:5), but a kind of agitation and disturbance, as in those who see it will be afflicted with terrible fear, and will be amazed .

    So, if you are amazed over one of my works—that is, if you are disturbed and troubled—what would you do if you saw all of my works? For, as Augustine says, his works were those which they saw in the world: even all the sick are healed by him. He sent his word, and healed them (Psalms 107:20); it was neither a herb nor a poultice that healed them, but your word, O Lord, which heals all . Thus, the reason you are disturbed is that you have seen only one of my works, and not all of them.

23. Then, at therefore, Moses gave you circumcision, he shows that there is no reason why they should be disturbed.

    First, he recalls the command given to them by Moses. Second, he states their customary behavior. And third, he presents an argument based on the first two.

24. The command of Moses was about circumcision, so he says: therefore, that is, to signify my works, Moses gave you circumcision. For circumcision was given as a sign, as we read, it will be a sign of the covenant between me and you (Genesis 17:11). For it signified Christ. This is the reason why it was always done on the genital organ: because Christ was to descend, in his human nature, from Abraham, and Christ is the one who spiritually circumcises us, both in mind and body. Or, it was done to the genital organ because it was given in opposition to original sin.

    We do not find it explicitly stated that Moses gave circumcision, except at every slave who is bought shall be circumcised (Exodus 12:44). And although Moses did tell them to circumcise, he was not the one who established this practice, because he was not the first one to receive the command to circumcise; this was Abraham (Genesis 17:10).

25. Now it was the custom among the Jews to circumcise on the sabbath. This is what he says: you circumcise a man on the Sabbath day. They did this because Abraham was told that a boy should be circumcised on the eighth day: he circumcised him on the eighth day, as God had commanded him (Genesis 21:4). On the other hand, they were told by Moses not to do any work on the sabbath. But it sometimes happened that the eighth day was a sabbath. And so, in circumcising a boy on that day, they were breaking a command of Moses for a command of the patriarchs.

26. Our Lord is arguing from those facts when he says: if a man receives circumcision on the Sabbath, that the law of Moses may not be broken, why are you angry at me because I have healed a whole man on the Sabbath?

    We should note here that three things make this argument effective; two of these are explicit, and the other is implied. First, although the command given to Abraham was the first to be given, it was not canceled by the command given to Moses concerning observing the sabbath. I say that the covenant, confirmed by God, is not canceled by the law, which came four hundred and thirty years later (Galatians 3:17). And so Christ is arguing from this: although when dealing with human laws, the later ones cancel the earlier laws, in the case of divine laws, the earlier ones have greater authority. Thus the command given to Moses about observing the sabbath does not cancel the command which was given to Abraham concerning circumcision. Therefore, much less does it interfere with me, who am only doing what was decided by God before the creation of the world for the salvation of mankind; and this salvation was symbolized by the sabbath.

    Another point is that the Jews were commanded not to work on the sabbath, yet they did do things that were related to the salvation of the individual. So Christ is saying: if you people, who were commanded not to work on the sabbath, circumcise on that day (and this concerns the salvation of the individual, and thus it was done to an individual organ) and you do this so that the law of Moses may not be broken (from which it is clear that those things that pertain to salvation should not be omitted on the sabbath), it follows with greater reason that a man should do on that day those things that pertain to the salvation of everyone. Therefore, you should not be indignant with me because I have healed a whole man on the Sabbath.

    The third point is that each command was a symbol, for all these things happened to them in symbol (1 Corinthians 10:11). Thus, if one symbol (the command to observe the sabbath) does not cancel the other symbol (the command to circumcise), much less does it cancel the truth. For circumcision symbolized our Lord, as Augustine says. Finally, he says, a whole man, because, since God’s works are perfect, the man was cured so as to be healthy in body, and he believed so as to be healthy in soul.

27. Then when he says, do not judge according to the appearance, but judge according to just judgment, he guides them to a fair consideration of himself, so that they do not judge him according to appearances, but give a judgment which is just. There are two ways in which one is said to judge according to appearances. First, a judge may reach his decision relying on the allegations: men see the things that are evident (1 Samuel 16:7). But this way can lead to error; thus he says, do not judge according to the appearance, that is, by what is immediately evident, but examine the matter diligently: I diligently investigated the stranger’s cause (Job 29:16); he will not judge by appearances (Isaiah 11:3).

    In the second way, do not judge according to the appearance means do not show partiality or favoritism in your judgment, for all judges are forbidden to do this. You will not show favoritism when judging a person who is poor (Exodus 23:3); you have shown partiality in your judgment (Malachi 2:9). To show partiality in a judgment is to not give a just judgment because of love, deference, fear, or the status of a person—things which have nothing to do with the case. So he says: do not judge according to the appearance, but with a just judgment, as if to say: just because Moses is more honored among you than I am, you should not base your decision on our reputations, but on the nature of the facts, because the things I am doing are greater than what Moses did.

    But it should be noted, according to Augustine, that one who loves all equally does not judge with partiality. For when we honor people differently according to their rank, we must beware of showing partiality.

Having considered the origin of His doctrine, the Evangelist now tells us about the origin of its Teacher.

1. Christ shows His source, from which He comes.
2. He shows His end, to which He goes, at yet a little while I am with you (John 7:33).

Concerning the first point, he does three things:

1. We see the doubt of the people about His origin.
2. We have Christ’s teaching concerning His origin, at Jesus, therefore, teaching in the temple, cried out.
3. We see the effect this teaching had, at they sought therefore to apprehend him.

Regarding the first of these, he does three things:

1. We see the amazement of the people.
2. Their conjecture is presented, at have the rulers truly known that this is the Christ?
3. Their objection against those who are suspicious is brought forward, at but we know where this man comes from.

The people were amazed over two things:

1. The unjust statements of their leaders.
2. The public teaching of Christ, at behold, he speaks openly.

As we said before, Christ went up to this feast in secret to show the weakness of His human nature. However, He publicly taught in the temple, with His enemies being unable to restrain Him, to show His divinity. And so, as Augustine remarks, what was thought to be a lack of courage turned out to be strength.

Accordingly, some of Jerusalem said, in amazement, for they knew how fiercely their leaders were looking for Him, as they lived with them in Jerusalem. Thus Chrysostom says: The most pitiable of all were they who saw a very clear sign of His divinity and, leaving everything to the judgment of their corrupt leaders, failed to show Christ reverence. As it is written, As the ruler of a city is, so are its inhabitants .

Yet they were amazed at the power He had which kept Him from being apprehended. So they said, is this not he whom they seek?—"they" meaning the leaders of the Jews. This is according to what was said before: therefore the Jews—that is, the leaders—persecuted Jesus, because he did these things on the Sabbath (John 5:16). As it is written, evil has come out of the elders of the people, who ruled them (Daniel 13:5).

This also shows that Christ spoke the truth, while what their leaders said was false. For earlier, when our Lord asked them, why do you seek to kill me? they denied it, saying, you have a devil: who seeks to kill you? (John 7:20). But here, what their leaders had denied, these others admit when they say, is this not he whom they seek to kill? Accordingly, they are amazed, considering the evil intentions of their leaders.

Again, they were amazed that Christ was teaching openly, so they said, and behold, he speaks openly. Christ was teaching publicly, which is an indication of the secure possession of the truth—I have spoken publicly (John 18:20)—and they say nothing to him, because they were held back by divine power.

For it is a characteristic of God’s power that He prevents the hearts of evil men from carrying out their evil plans. As it is written, When the LORD is pleased with the way a man is living he will make his enemies be at peace with him (Proverbs 16:7), and again, the heart of the king is in the hand of the LORD; he turns it wherever he wills (Proverbs 21:1).

We see their conjecture when they say, have the rulers truly known that this is the Christ? It is as if they were saying: Before, they sought to kill Him, but now that they have found Him, they do not say anything to Him.

Still, the leaders had not changed their opinion about Christ, for if they had known, they would never have crucified the Lord of glory (1 Corinthians 2:8); rather, they were restrained by divine power.

Their objection to this conjecture is then added: but we know where this man comes from. They seem to be arguing: The Christ should have a hidden origin, but the origin of this man is known; therefore, he is not the Christ.

This shows their folly. For even if some of their leaders had believed in Christ, these people did not follow that opinion but instead offered another, which was false. This is Jerusalem; I have set her in the midst of the nations (Ezekiel 5:5). They knew that Christ took His origin from Mary, but they did not know how this came about, asking, isn’t Joseph his father, and Mary his mother? (Matthew 13:55).

Why did they say, but when the Christ comes, no man knows where he comes from, since it is written, out of you will come a leader, who will rule my people Israel (Micah 5:2)?

I answer that they took this opinion from Isaiah, who said, who will make known his origin? (Isaiah 53:8). Thus, they knew from the prophets where He was from according to His human origin, and they also knew from them that they did not know His origin according to His divine nature.

Then, at Jesus, therefore, teaching in the temple, cried out, He shows His origin.

1. He shows in what sense His origin is known and in what sense it is not known.
2. He shows how we can acquire a knowledge of His origin, at I know him, and if I said, I do not know him, then I would be like you, a liar.

Regarding the first point, He does two things:

1. He shows what they knew about His origin.
2. He shows what they did not know about it, at I have not come from myself.

They did know the origin of Jesus, and so He is said to have cried out. Now, a cry comes from some great emotion. Sometimes it indicates the upheaval of a soul in interior distress, and in this sense, it does not apply to Christ: he will not cry out (Isaiah 42:2); the words of the wise are heard in silence (Ecclesiastes 9:17).

Sometimes it implies great devotion, as in, in my trouble I cried to the LORD (Psalms 119:1). And sometimes, along with this, it signifies that what is to be said is important, as in, the seraphim cried to each other and said: holy, holy, holy, is the LORD God of hosts (Isaiah 6:3), and, does not wisdom cry out? (Proverbs 8:1).

This is the way preachers are encouraged to cry out: cry out, do not stop! Raise your voice like a trumpet (Isaiah 58:1). This is the way Christ cried out here, teaching in the temple, saying. And He said, you know me—according to appearances—and you know from where I come, that is, as to my bodily existence: after this he was seen on earth .

For they knew that He was born from Mary in Bethlehem and brought up in Nazareth, but they did not know about the virgin birth or that He had been conceived through the Holy Spirit, as Augustine says. With the exception of the virgin birth, they knew everything about Jesus that pertained to His humanity.

They did not know His hidden origin, and so He says, and I have not come from myself. Here, He first gives His origin and second, shows that it is hidden from them.

His origin is from the Father, from eternity. And so He says, I have not come from myself, as if to say: Before I came into the world through My humanity, I existed according to My divinity; before Abraham was made, I am (John 8:58). For He could not have come unless He already was.

And although I have come, I have not come from myself, because the Son is not of Himself, but from the Father. I came forth from the Father, and have come into the world (John 16:28).

Indeed, His origin was foretold by the Father, who promised to send Him: I beg you, O Lord, send him whom you are going to send (Exodus 4:13); I will send them a savior and a defender, to free them (Isaiah 19:20). And so He says, the one who sent me is truthful, as if to say: I have not come from another but from Him who promised and kept His promise, as He is truthful: God is truthful (Romans 3:4). Consequently, He teaches me to speak the truth, because I have been sent by one who is truthful.

But they do not know this, because they do not know Him who sent Me; and so He says, whom you do not know.

But since every person, although born in a bodily condition, is from God, it seems that Christ could say that He is from God, and consequently, that they do know where He comes from.

I answer, according to Hilary, that the Son is from God in a different way than others. For He is from God in such a way that He is also God; and so God is His consubstantial principle. But others are from God in such a way that they are not out of Him. Thus, it is not known where the Son is from because the nature out of which He is, is not known. But where humans are from is not unknown, for if something exists out of nothing, where it is from cannot be unknown.

Then when He says, I know him, He teaches us how to know Him from whom He comes. For if a thing is to be learned, it must be learned from one who knows it. But only the Son knows the Father. And so He says: If you wish to know Him who sent Me, you must acquire this knowledge from Me, because I alone know him.

1. He shows that He knows Him.
2. He shows the perfection of His knowledge.
3. He shows the nature of His knowledge.

He shows that He knows Him when He says, I know him. Now it is true that all men see him (Job 36:25), but they do not see Him in the same way. In this life, we see Him through the intermediary of creatures: the invisible things of God are clearly known through the things that have been made (Romans 1:20). Thus we read, now we see in a mirror, in an obscure manner (1 Corinthians 13:12).

But the angels and the blessed in heaven see Him through His essence: their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father who is in heaven (Matthew 18:10); we shall see him as he is (1 John 3:2).

The Son of God, on the other hand, sees Him in a more excellent way than all others, that is, with a comprehensive or all-inclusive vision. No one has ever seen God—that is, in a comprehensive way—the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, has made him known (John 1:18); no one knows the Father but the Son (Matthew 11:27). It is of this vision that He is speaking here when He says, I know him, with a comprehensive knowledge.

He shows the perfection of His knowledge when He says, and if I said, I do not know him, then I would be like you, a liar. This is mentioned for two reasons. First, intellectual creatures know God, though from a distance and imperfectly, for all men see him, from a distance (Job 36:25). Because divine truth transcends all our knowledge—God is greater than our hearts (1 John 3:20)—whoever knows God can say without lying, I do not know him, because he does not know Him to the full extent that He is knowable.

But the Son knows God the Father most perfectly, just as He knows Himself most perfectly. Thus, He cannot say, I do not know him.

Second, because our knowledge of God, especially that which comes through grace, can be lost—they forgot God, who saved them (Psalms 105:21)—people can say, I do not know him, as long as they are in this present life, because no one knows whether he deserves love or hatred. The Son, on the other hand, has a knowledge of the Father that cannot be lost, so He cannot say, I do not know him.

We should understand I would be like you as a reverse likeness. They would not be lying if they said they did not know God, but they would be lying if they said that they did know Him, since they did not. But if Christ said that He did not know Him, He would be lying, since He did know Him. So the meaning of this statement is this: If I said, I do not know him—since I really do know Him—I would be like you, a liar, who say that you know Him, although you do not.

Could Christ not have said, I do not know him? It seems He could, since He could have moved His lips and said the words. And so, could He have lied?

I reply that if Christ were to say this, He still would not be lying. We should explain it this way: if He were to say, I do not know him, declaratively, it would mean, "I believe in my heart what I profess with my lips." Now, to state as truth what is false comes from two defects: from a defect of knowledge in the intellect, which Christ could not have since He is the wisdom of God (1 Corinthians 1:30); or from a defect of right will in the affections, which also could not be in Christ since He is the power of God, according to the same text.

Thus, He could not say the words I do not know him declaratively. Yet this entire conditional statement—"if I said I do not know him, I would be a liar"—is not false, even though both its parts are impossible.

The reason for this singular and perfect knowledge of Christ is given when He says, I do know him, because I am from him, and he has sent me. All knowledge comes about through some likeness, since nothing is known except insofar as there is a likeness of the known in the knower. But whatever proceeds from something has a likeness to that from which it proceeds. And so, all who truly know God have a varied knowledge of Him according to the different degrees of their procession from Him.

The rational soul has a knowledge of God insofar as it participates in a likeness to Him in a more imperfect way than other intellectual creatures. An angel, because it has a more explicit likeness to God—being a stamp of resemblance—knows God more clearly. But the Son has the most perfect likeness to the Father, since He has the same essence and power as the Father does. Therefore, He knows Him most perfectly, as was said.

And so He says, but I know him—that is, to the extent that He is knowable. The reason for this is, because I am from him, having the same essence with Him through consubstantiality. Thus, just as the Father knows Himself perfectly through His essence, so I know him perfectly through the same essence.

So that we do not understand these words as referring only to His being sent into this world, He at once adds, because he has sent me. Consequently, the statement, I am from him, refers to His eternal generation, through which He is consubstantial with the Father.

Then, when He says, because he has sent me, He is saying that the Father is the author of the incarnation: God sent his Son, made from a woman, made under the law (Galatians 4:4). Now, just as the Son has a perfect knowledge of the Father because He is from the Father, so too the soul of Christ, because it is united to the Word in a unique way, has a unique and more excellent knowledge of God than other creatures, although it does not comprehend Him. And so Christ can say, according to His human nature: I know Him in a more excellent way than other creatures do, but without comprehending Him.

Then, at they sought therefore to apprehend him, the Evangelist considers the effect of His teaching.

1. First, on the people.
2. Then, on the Pharisees, at the Pharisees heard the people murmuring.

Regarding the first point, he does two things:

1. He shows the effect of this teaching on those among the people who were ill-willed.
2. He shows the effect on those who were favorable, at but of the people many believed in him.

Concerning the ill-willed, he does three things:

1. He mentions the evil intention of the people.
2. He shows that they were hindered in carrying out their plan.
3. He mentions the reason why they were hindered.

He presents their evil intention when he says, they sought therefore to apprehend him. Because our Lord said to them, whom you do not know, they became angry, feigning that they did know Him. And so they formed the evil plan of seizing Him, so that they could crucify and kill Him: go after him, and seize him (Psalms 70:11).

Yet there are some who have Christ within themselves and still seek to seize Him in a reverent manner: I will go up into the palm tree and seize its fruit (Song of Solomon 7:8). And so the Apostle says, I will go after it to seize it, wherein I am also apprehended by Christ Jesus (Philippians 3:12).

He mentions that they were hindered in their plans when he says, but no man laid hands on him, for their rage was invisibly checked and restrained. This shows that a person has the will to inflict injury from himself, while the power to inflict injury is from God. This is clear from the first chapters of Job, where Satan was unable to torment Job except to the extent that he was permitted to do so by God.

The reason they were hindered was because his hour had not yet come.

Here we should note that there is a time and fitness for everything (Ecclesiastes 8:6). However, the time for anything is determined by its cause. Therefore, because the heavenly bodies are the cause of physical effects, the time for things that act in a physical way is determined by the heavenly bodies.

The soul, on the other hand, is not subject to any heavenly body in its intellect and reason. In this respect, it transcends temporal causes and does not have its times determined by the heavenly bodies. Rather, its times are determined by its cause, that is, God, who decrees what is to be done and at what time: why is one day better than another? ... they are differentiated by the knowledge of the Lord . Much less, therefore, is Christ’s time determined by these bodies.

Accordingly, His hour must be regarded as fixed not by fatal necessity, but by the entire Trinity. For as Augustine says: You should not believe this about yourself; and how much less should you believe it about Him who made you? If your hour is His will—that is, God’s—what is His hour but His own will? Therefore, He was not speaking here of the hour in which He would be forced to die, but rather of the hour in which He thought it fitting to be killed.

This is seen in His words, My hour has not yet come (John 2:4), and later, Jesus knowing that his hour was come, that he should pass out of this world to the Father (John 13:1).

Then, at but of the people many believed in him, he mentions the effect His teaching had on those who were favorable.

First, he shows their faith: but of the people many believed in him. He does not say, "of the leaders," because the higher their rank, the further away they were from Him. So there was no room in them for wisdom: where there is humility, there is wisdom (Proverbs 11:2).

But the people, because they were quick to see their own sickness, immediately recognized our Lord’s medicine: you have hidden these things from the wise and the prudent, and have revealed them to little ones (Matthew 11:25). This is why in the beginning, it was the poor and the humble who were converted to Christ: God chose what is lowly and despised in the world, and things that are not, to destroy those things that are (1 Corinthians 1:28).

Second, he gives the motive for their faith when they ask, when the Christ comes, will he do more miracles than what this man does? It had been prophesied that when the Christ came, He would work many miracles: God himself will come, and save us. Then the eyes of the blind will be opened, and the ears of the deaf will hear (Isaiah 35:4). And so when they saw the miracles Christ was accomplishing, they were led to believe.

Yet their faith was weak, because they were led to believe in Him not by His teaching, but by His miracles. Since they were already believers and instructed by the Law, they should have been influenced more by His teaching: signs were given to unbelievers; while prophecies were given to believers, not to unbelievers (1 Corinthians 14:22).

Their faith was also weak because they seemed to be expecting another Christ. Thus they say, when the Christ comes, will he do more miracles than what this man does? From this it is obvious that they did not believe in Christ as God, but as some just man or prophet.

Or, according to Augustine, they were reasoning this way: When the Christ comes, will he do more miracles than what this man does? As if to say: We were promised that the Christ would come. But he will not work more signs than this man is doing. Therefore, either this man is the Christ, or there will be several Christs.

Then when he says, the Pharisees heard the people saying these things concerning him, we see the effect this had on the Pharisees. As Chrysostom says, Christ said many things, and yet the Pharisees were not aroused against Him. But when they saw that the people were accepting Him, they were immediately inflamed against Him, and in their madness they wanted to kill Him.

This shows that the real reason they hated Him was not that He broke the Sabbath; what provoked them the most was the fact that the people were honoring Christ. This is clear from a later passage: Do you see that we accomplish nothing? Behold, the whole world is gone after him (John 12:19). Because they were afraid of the danger, they did not dare to seize Christ themselves, but sent their officers, who were used to such things.

After our Lord spoke of the principle of His origin, He then mentions His end, that is, where He would go by dying.

First, the end of Christ’s life is given; second, we see that the people are puzzled by what He says:

1. The end of Christ’s life is given.
2. We see that the people are puzzled by what He says: the Jews therefore said among themselves, “Where will he go that we will not find him?”

Regarding the first point, He does three things.

1. The end of His life is mentioned.
2. He predicts what they will desire in the future: you will seek me and will not find me.
3. He mentions one of their deficiencies: and where I am, you are not able to come.

Regarding the first of these points, He does two things.

1. He predicts the delay of His death until a later time.
2. He states where He will go by dying: I go to the Father, and you shall see me no more (John 16:5).

And so, in the first, He shows His power; and in the second, His will to suffer.

Our Lord shows His power by delaying His death until a later time. Although the Jews wanted to seize Him, they could not do this until Christ willed it. No man takes it away from me, but I lay it down of myself (John 10:18).

And so Jesus said, yet a little while I am with you. It is as if He were saying: You want to kill Me, but this does not depend on your will, but on Mine. I have decided that yet a little while I am with you, so wait a while. You will do what you want to do, for yet a little while I am with you.

As Chrysostom says, these words of our Lord first of all satisfied those people who honored Him, making them more eager to listen because only a short time remained to receive His teaching. While you have the light, believe in the light (John 12:36). Second, He satisfied those who were persecuting Him. It is as if He were saying: Your desire for My death will not be delayed long, so be patient, because it is a little while. For I must accomplish My mission: to preach, to perform miracles, and then to come to My passion. Go and tell that fox that I will work today and tomorrow, and on the third day I will finish my course (Luke 13:32).

There are three reasons why Christ wished to preach for only a short time.

1. To show His power by transforming the entire world in such a brief time: one day in your courts is better than a thousand elsewhere (Psalms 83:11).
2. To arouse the desire of His disciples—that is, for them to desire Him more, whose physical presence they would have for only a short time: the days will come when you will desire to see one day of the Son of man (Luke 17:22).
3. To accelerate the spiritual progress of His disciples. Since the humanity of Christ is our way to God, as it says, I am the way, and the truth, and the life (John 14:6), we should not rest in it as a goal, but through it strive toward God. So that the hearts of His disciples, which were moved by the physical presence of Christ, would not rest in Him as a man, He quickly took His physical presence from them. Thus He said, it is expedient to you that I go (John 16:7); if we knew Christ according to the flesh—that is, when He was physically present to us—now we no longer know him in this way (2 Corinthians 5:16).

He shows His desire for His passion when He says, then I am going to him who sent me (John 16:5), that is, willingly, through His passion: he was offered because it was his own will (Isaiah 53:7); he gave himself for us, an offering to God (Ephesians 5:2).

Now I go, He says, to the Father, to him who sent me (John 16:5). This is appropriate, for everything naturally returns to its principle: rivers return to the place from which they come (Ecclesiastes 1:7); knowing... that he came from God, and was going to God (John 13:3). And again: I am going to him who sent me (John 16:5).

When He says, you will seek me and will not find me, He is predicting what the Jews will desire in the times to come. It is as if He were saying: You can enjoy My teaching for a short time, but this brief time, which you are now rejecting, you will look for later and not find it. Search for the Lord while he can be found (Isaiah 55:6); and seek the Lord at the present time, and your soul will live (Psalms 68:33).

This statement, you will seek me and will not find me, can be understood as either a physical or a spiritual search for Christ.

If we understand it as a physical search, then, according to Chrysostom, this is how He was sought by the daughters of Jerusalem, that is, the women who cried for Him (Luke 23:27). No doubt many others were affected at the same time. It is not unreasonable to think that when trouble was near, especially during the capture of their city, the Jews remembered Christ and His miracles and wished that He were there to free them. In this way, they would seek me—that is, for Me to be physically present—and will not find me.

If we understand this as a spiritual search for Christ, then we should say, as Augustine does, that although they refused to recognize Christ while He was among them, they later looked for Him. This happened after they had seen the people believe and had themselves been stung by the crime of His death, saying to Peter, Brothers, what shall we do? (Acts 2:37). In this way, they were looking for the Christ whom they saw die as a result of their crime when they believed in Him who forgave them.

Then, when He says, and where I am, you are not able to come, He points out one of their deficiencies. He does not say, “and where I am going,” which would be more in keeping with the earlier thought, I am going... to him who sent me (John 16:5). Rather, He says, where I am, to show that He is both God and man.

He is man insofar as He is going: I am going to him who sent me (John 16:5). But insofar as Christ had always been where He was about to return, He shows that He is God: and no man has ascended into heaven, except he who descended from heaven (John 3:13). And so, as Augustine says, just as Christ returned in such a way as not to leave us, so he came down to us, when he assumed visible flesh, but in such a way as still to be in heaven according to his invisible greatness.

He does not say, “you will not find,” because some were about to go; but He does say, you are not able to come, that is, as long as you keep your present attitude. For no one can obtain the eternal inheritance unless he is God’s heir, and one becomes an heir of God by faith in Christ: he gave them power to be made the sons of God, to those who believe in his name (John 1:12).

But the Jews did not yet believe in Him, and so He says, “you will not be able to come.” In the Psalm it is asked, who will ascend the mountain of the Lord? And the answer given is, those whose hands are innocent and whose hearts are clean (Psalms 23:3). But the hearts of the Jews were not clean, nor were their hands innocent, because they wanted to kill Christ. And so He says, you are not able to ascend the mountain of the Lord.

Then, with the words, the Jews therefore said among themselves, we see that this was bewildering to the Jews, who, although they thought of Christ in a worldly way, still believed to a certain extent.

Three things happen here.

1. They are astonished.
2. They form an opinion.
3. They argue against their own opinion.

They are perplexed when they say to each other, Where will he go that we will not find him? For, as was said, they understood this in a physical way: the sensual man does not perceive those things that pertain to the Spirit of God (1 Corinthians 2:14).

And so they came to the opinion that Christ was going to go away physically, not by dying, to some place where they would not be permitted to go. Thus they ask, Will he go to the dispersed among the gentiles and teach the gentiles? For the Gentiles were separated from the way of life of the Jews: separated from Israel’s way of life, strangers to the covenants, without hope in the promise, and without God in this world (Ephesians 2:12).

They spoke of “the dispersed among the gentiles” in a reproaching way, referring to those who had settled in many different places: these are the families of Noah... and they settled among the nations on the earth after the flood (Genesis 10:32). The Jewish people, by contrast, were united by place, by their worship of the one God, and by their observance of the law: the Lord builds up Jerusalem, and he will gather the dispersed of Israel (Psalms 146:2).

They did not say that He would go to the Gentiles to become a Gentile Himself, but to bring them back; and so they said, and teach the gentiles. They probably took this from Isaiah: I have given you to be a light to the gentiles, to be my salvation to the ends of the earth (Isaiah 49:6).

However, as Augustine says, even though they did not understand what they were saying—just as Caiaphas did not understand his own words, it is expedient for you that one man should die for the people and that the whole nation should not perish (John 11:50)—what they said was true. They were predicting the salvation of the Gentiles, for Christ would go to the Gentiles, not in His own body, but by His feet, that is, His apostles.

For He sent His own members to us to make us His members. And other sheep I have that are not of this fold: those also I must bring, and they will hear my voice, and there will be one fold and one shepherd (John 10:16). And so Isaiah says, speaking for the Gentiles, he will teach us his ways (Isaiah 2:3).

Finally, they saw an objection to their own opinion when they asked, What is this saying that he has said: “You will seek me”? It is as if they were reasoning: If He had said only, “You will look for me, and you will not find me,” we could think that He was going to the Gentiles. But He seems to exclude this when He adds, where I am, you are not able to come, for we can go to the Gentiles.

1. After our Lord told them about the origin and teacher of His doctrine, as well as its purpose, He now invites them to accept His teaching itself.

   First, we see Christ’s invitation.

   Second, the dissension among the people, at the phrase, when they had heard his words.

   Regarding the first part, He does three things.

   • First, He tells us the manner of this invitation.
   • Second, we see the invitation itself, at if any man thirst, let him come to me.
   • Third, He explains what it means, at now this he said concerning the Spirit.

   The manner of the invitation is described in three ways:

   • by its time;
   • by the posture of the one inviting;
   • and by his efforts.

2. As to the time, we see that it was on the last and great day of the festival. As we saw before, this feast was celebrated for seven days, and the first and the last days were the most solemn, just as with us, the first day of a feast and its octave are the most solemn. Therefore, what our Lord did here He did not do on the first day, as He had not yet gone to Jerusalem, nor on the intervening days, but on the last day.

   He acted then because few people celebrate feasts in a spiritual way. Consequently, He did not invite them to His teaching at the beginning of the festival, so that the trivial matters of the following days would not drive it from their hearts; for we read that the word of the Lord is choked by thorns (Luke 8:7). Instead, He invited them on the last day so that His teaching would be more deeply impressed on their hearts.

3. As to His posture, Jesus stood.

   Here we should note that Christ taught both while sitting and standing. He taught His disciples while sitting (Matthew 5:1), while He stood when He taught the people, as He is doing here. From this, we get the custom in the Church of standing when preaching to the people, but sitting while preaching to monastics and clergy. The reason for this is that since the aim in preaching to the people is to convert them, it takes the form of an exhortation. But when preaching is directed to clergy, who are already living in the house of God, it takes the form of a reminder.

4. As to His effort, we read that He cried out, in order to show His own assurance: raise up your voice with strength... raise it up, and do not be afraid (Isaiah 40:9). He also cried out so that all would be able to hear Him: cry out, and do not stop; raise your voice like a trumpet (Isaiah 58:1). And He did so to stress the importance of what He was about to say: listen to me, for I will tell you about great things (Proverbs 8:6).

5. Next, at if any man thirst, let him come to me, we see Christ’s invitation. We see:

   • First, those who are invited;
   • Second, the fruit of this invitation.

6. It is the thirsty who are invited. Thus He says: if any man thirsts, let him come to me and drink; come to the waters, all you who thirst (Isaiah 55:1). He calls the thirsty because such people want to serve God, for God does not accept a forced service: God loves a cheerful giver (2 Corinthians 9:7). So we read: I will sacrifice freely (Psalms 54:6). Such people are described in Matthew this way: blessed are they who hunger and thirst for what is right (Matthew 5:6).

   Now our Lord calls all of these people, not just some, and so He says, if any man thirsts, as if to say: whoever it is. Come to me, all you who desire me, and be filled with my fruits ; he desires the salvation of all (1 Timothy 2:4).

   Jesus invites them to drink; and so He says, and drink. This drink is spiritual refreshment in the knowledge of divine wisdom and truth, and in the fulfillment of their desires: my servants will drink, and you will be thirsty (Isaiah 65:13); come and eat my bread, and drink the wine I have mixed for you (Proverbs 9:5); she will give him the water of saving wisdom to drink .

7. The fruit of this invitation is that good things overflow to others. Thus He says: he who believes in me, as the Scripture says, out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water. According to Chrysostom, we should read this as follows: he who believes in me, as the Scripture said. Then a new sentence begins: out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water. For if we say, "whoever believes in me," and follow this with, "as the Scriptures say, out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water," it does not seem to be correct, for the statement, "out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water," is not found in any book of the Old Testament.

   So we should say: whoever believes in me, as the Scriptures say, that is, according to the teaching of the Scriptures. Search the Scriptures... they give testimony about me (John 5:39). And then follows: out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water. He says here, he who believes in me, while before He said, he who comes to me (John 6:35), because to believe and to come are the same thing: come to him and be enlightened (Psalms 34:5).

   But Jerome punctuates this differently. He says that after he who believes in me, there follows, "as the Scriptures say, out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water." And he says that this phrase was taken from Proverbs: drink the water from your own cistern, and from the streams of your own well. Let your fountains flow far and wide (Proverbs 5:15–16).

8. We should note, with Augustine, that rivers come from fountains as their source. Now one who drinks natural water does not have either a fountain or a river within himself, because he takes only a small portion of water. But one who drinks by believing in Christ receives a fountain of water. When he receives it, his conscience, which is the heart of the inner man, begins to live and it itself becomes a fountain. So we read above: but the water that I will give to him will become in him a fountain of water, springing up into eternal life (John 4:14). This fountain which is received is the Holy Spirit, of whom we read: with you is the fountain of life (Psalms 36:9).

   Therefore, whoever drinks the gifts of grace, which are signified by the rivers, in such a way that he alone benefits, will not have living water flowing from his heart. But whoever acts quickly to help others, and to share with them the various gifts of grace he has received from God, will have living water flowing from his heart. This is why Peter says: according to the grace each has received, let them use it to benefit one another (1 Peter 4:10).

   He says, rivers, to indicate the abundance of the spiritual gifts which were promised to those who believe: the river of God is full of water (Psalms 65:9). He also says it to indicate their force or rush: when they rush to Jacob, Israel will blossom and bud, and they will fill the surface of the earth with fruit (Isaiah 27:6); and again, the rush of the rivers gives joy to the city of God (Psalms 46:4). Thus, because the Apostle was governed by the impulsive force and fervor of the Holy Spirit, he said: the love of Christ spurs us on (2 Corinthians 5:14); and those who are led by the Spirit of God are the sons of God (Romans 8:14). The separate distribution of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is also indicated, for we read, to one the gift of healing... to another the gift of tongues (1 Corinthians 12:9–10). These gifts are rivers of living water because they flow directly from their source, which is the indwelling Holy Spirit.

9. Then, at now this he said concerning the Spirit, he explains what he said.

   • First we see the explanation.
   • Second, the reason behind this explanation, at for the Spirit was not yet given.

10. Christ had said: out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water. The Evangelist tells us that we should understand this concerning the Spirit, whom those who believed in him would receive, because the Spirit is the fountain and river of life. He is the fountain of which we read: with you is the fountain of life; and in your light we will see light (Psalms 36:9). And the Spirit is a river because He proceeds from the Father and the Son: the angel then showed me the river of the water of life, clear as crystal, coming from the throne of God and of the Lamb (Revelation 22:1). He gave the Spirit, that is, to those who obey Him (Acts 5:32).

11. He gives the reason for this explanation, saying, for the Spirit was not yet given. He says two things: that the Spirit was not yet given, and that Jesus was not yet glorified.

    There are two opinions about the first of these. Chrysostom says that before the resurrection of Christ, the Holy Spirit was not given to the apostles with respect to the gifts of prophecy and miracles. This grace, which was given to the prophets, was not to be found on earth until Christ came, and after that, it was not given to anyone until the time mentioned. If anyone objects that the apostles cast out demons before the resurrection, it should be understood that they were cast out by the power that was from Christ, not by the Spirit. For when He sent them out, we do not read that He gave them the Holy Spirit, but rather that he gave them power over unclean spirits (Matthew 10:1).

    However, this seems to conflict with what our Lord says in the Gospel of Luke: if I cast out devils by Beelzebub, by whom do your children cast them out? (Luke 11:19). But it is certain that our Lord cast out demons by the Holy Spirit, as the children, that is, the apostles, also did. Therefore, it is clear that they had received the Holy Spirit.

    And so we must say, with Augustine, that the apostles had the Holy Spirit before the resurrection, even with respect to the gifts of prophecy and miracles. When we read here that for the Spirit was not yet given, we should understand this to refer to a more abundant giving, and one with visible signs, as the Spirit was given to them in tongues of fire after the resurrection and ascension.

12. But since the Holy Spirit sanctifies the Church and is even now received by those who believe, why does no one speak in the languages of all nations as they did then?

    My answer is that it is not necessary, as Augustine says. For now the universal Church speaks the languages of all the nations, because the love of charity is given by the Holy Spirit: the love of God is poured out into our hearts by the Holy Spirit (Romans 5:5). This love, making all things common, makes everyone speak to everyone else. As Augustine says: "If you love unity, then you have everything that anyone else has in it (that is, in the Church). Give up your envy, and what I have is also yours. Ill will divides; the love of charity unites. If you have this love, you will have everything." But at the beginning, before the Church was spread throughout the world, its members were few, so they had to speak the languages of all in order to establish the Church among all nations.

13. Regarding the second point, we should note that Augustine thinks the statement, Jesus was not yet glorified, should be understood as the glory of the resurrection. It is as if to say: Jesus had not yet risen from the dead or ascended into heaven. We read about this below: glorify me, O Father (John 17:5). The reason Christ willed to be glorified before He gave the Holy Spirit is that the Holy Spirit is given to us so that we might raise our hearts from the love of this world in a spiritual resurrection and turn completely to God. To those who are on fire with the love of the Holy Spirit, Christ promised eternal life, where we will not die and where we will have no fear. For this reason, He did not wish to give the Holy Spirit until He was glorified, so that He might show in His body the life for which we hope in the resurrection.

14. For Chrysostom, however, this statement does not refer to the glory of the resurrection, but to the glorification of the passion. When His passion was near, our Lord said: now the Son of man is glorified (John 13:31). So, according to this view, the Holy Spirit was first given after the passion, when our Lord said to His apostles: receive the Holy Spirit (John 20:22). The Holy Spirit was not given before the passion because, since it is a gift, it should not be given to enemies, but to friends. But we were enemies. Thus it was necessary that first the victim be offered on the altar of the cross, and enmity be destroyed in His flesh, so that by this we might be reconciled to God by the death of His Son. Then, having been made friends, we could receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

15. The Evangelist, having shown us Christ’s invitation to a spiritual drink, now presents the disagreement of the people.

    • First, the disagreement among the people themselves.
    • Second, that of their leaders, at the ministers therefore came.

    He does two things about the first.

    • First, he states what those who disagreed said.
    • Second, he states the fact that there was a disagreement, at so there arose dissension among the people.

    What the people said varied according to their different opinions about Christ. He gives three of their opinions: two of these were from those who were coming for the spiritual drink, and the third was held by those who shrank from it.

16. The first opinion was that Christ was the prophet. So he says, of that multitude, therefore, when they had heard his words—that is, from the time Christ had spoken on the great day of the feast—some said, meaning those who had now begun to drink that water spiritually, truly, this is the prophet. They did not just call Him a prophet, but the prophet, thinking that He was the one about whom Moses foretold: the Lord your God will raise up a prophet for you from your brothers... you will listen to him (Deuteronomy 18:15).

17. Another opinion was from those who said, this is the Christ. These people had drawn closer to that drink and had quenched the thirst of unbelief to a greater extent. This is what Peter himself professed: you are the Christ, the Son of the living God (Matthew 16:16).

18. The third opinion conflicts with the other two. First, those who hold this disagree with those who say that Jesus is the Christ; second, they support their opinion with an authority.

    So he says: but others said, those remaining in the dryness of unbelief, is it possible that the Christ comes out of Galilee? They knew that it was not predicted by the prophets that the Christ would come from Galilee. They said what they did because they thought that Jesus had been born in Nazareth, not knowing that it was really in Bethlehem. For it was well known that He had been raised in Nazareth, but only a few knew where He was born. Nevertheless, although the Scripture does not say that the Christ would be born in Galilee, it did foretell that He would first start out from there: the people who walked in darkness saw a great light, and on those who lived in the region of the shadow of death, a light has risen (Isaiah 9:2). It even foretold that the Christ would come from Nazareth: a flower will rise up from his roots (Isaiah 11:1), where the Hebrew version reads: "a Nazarene will rise up from his roots."

19. They support their objection with the authority of Scripture when they say, does not the Scripture say that the Christ comes from the seed of David and from Bethlehem, the town where David was? We read that Jesus would come from the seed of David: I will raise up a just branch for David (Jeremiah 23:5). And we see that David was the anointed of God (2 Samuel 23:1). We also read that Jesus would come from Bethlehem: and you, Bethlehem, land of Judah... from you there will come forth, for me, a ruler of Israel (Micah 5:2).

20. Then, at so there arose dissension among the people because of him, three things are mentioned:

    • the disagreement among the people;
    • the attempt of some of them to seize Christ;
    • and the failure of their attempt.

21. And so there was dissension among the people because of him, that is, Christ. For it often happens that when the truth is made known, it causes dissensions and uneasiness in the hearts of the wicked. So Jeremiah says, representing Christ: woe is me, my mother! Why did you give birth to me as a man of strife and dissension for all the earth (Jeremiah 15:10). And our Lord said: I have not come to send peace, but the sword (Matthew 10:34).

22. Some of them attempted to seize Christ. So he says, some of them, that is, those who had said, is it possible that the Christ comes from Galilee? wanted to apprehend him, to kill Him out of hatred: pursue and seize him (Psalms 71:11); the enemy said: I will pursue and seize (Exodus 15:9). On the other hand, those who are good and those who believe want to seize Christ to enjoy Him: I will go up into the palm tree and seize its fruit (Song of Solomon 7:8).

23. But they were frustrated by the power of Christ. So he says: no man laid hands on him, because Jesus was not willing that they do so, for this depended on His power: no man takes it away from me, but I lay it down of myself (John 10:18). Accordingly, when Christ did will to suffer, He did not wait for them, but offered Himself to them: Jesus stepped forward and said to them: ‘whom are you looking for?’ (John 18:4).

24. Then, at the ministers therefore came to the chief priests and the Pharisees, we see the dissension of the leaders of the people:

    • First, their disagreement with their officers.
    • Second, the disagreement among themselves, at Nicodemus said.

    He does three things about the first:

    • First, he shows the leaders rebuking their officers.
    • Second, the testimony the officers gave about Christ.
    • Third, we see the leaders reprimanding their own officers.

25. As to the first, let us note the evil of the leaders, that is, the chief priests and Pharisees, when they say to their officers: why have you not brought him? Their evil was so great that their own officers could not please them unless they injured Christ: they cannot sleep unless they have done something evil (Proverbs 4:16).

    There is a problem here about the literal meaning of the text. Since it was said before that the officers were sent to seize Jesus when the festival was half over, that is, on the fourth day, and here we read that they returned on the seventh day, at and on the last and great day of the festivity, it seems that the Evangelist overlooked the days in between.

    There are two answers to this: either the Evangelist mentioned the disagreement among the people earlier than it occurred, or the officers had returned before, but it is just mentioned now to show the reason why there was dissension among the leaders.

26. As to the second point, let us realize how good these officers were in giving this praiseworthy testimony about Christ, saying: never has a man spoken like this man. They deserve our praise for three reasons. First, because of their admiration, for they admired Christ because of His teachings, not His miracles. This brought them nearer to the truth and further from the custom of the Jews, who looked for signs (1 Corinthians 1:22). Second, we should praise them because of the ease with which they were won over, because with just a few words, Christ had captivated them and had drawn their love. Third, because of their confidence, for it was to the Pharisees, who were the enemies of Christ, that they said: never has a man spoken like this man.

    These things are to be expected, for Jesus was not just a man, but the Word of God, and so His words had power to affect people. Are not my words like fire, says the Lord, and like a hammer breaking a rock? (Jeremiah 23:29). And so Matthew says: he was teaching them as one who had authority (Matthew 7:29). His words were sweet to contemplate: let your voice sound in my ears, for your voice is sweet (Song of Solomon 2:14); how sweet are your words to my tongue! (Psalms 119:103). And His words were useful to keep in mind, because they promised eternal life: Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life (John 6:68); I am the Lord, who teaches you things that are useful (Isaiah 48:17).

27. As to the third point, see the treachery of the Jews in trying to alienate the officers from Christ. The Pharisees therefore answered them, the officers, have you also been seduced? Here they do three things.

    • First, they attack what they consider a mistake of their officers.
    • Second, they hold up their leaders as an example.
    • Third, they reject the example of the people.

28. They attack the officers when they say, have you also been seduced? As if to say: we see that what He said was pleasing to you. As a matter of fact, they had been seduced, but in an admirable way, because they left the evil of unbelief and were brought to the truth of the faith. We read about this: you seduced me, O Lord, and I was seduced (Jeremiah 20:7).

29. Then they appeal to their rulers as an example to turn the officers further from Christ, saying: has any one of the rulers or the Pharisees believed in him? There are two reasons why a person should be believed: either because of some authority or because of a religious disposition. They say that neither of these are found with Christ. It is as if they were saying: if Christ were worthy to be received, then our rulers, who have authority, would have accepted Him, and so would the Pharisees, who have a religious disposition. But none of these believe in Him, and so neither should you believe in Him. This fulfills the Psalm: the stone that the builders, that is, the rulers and the Pharisees, rejected has become the cornerstone, that is, in the hearts of the people. The Lord has done this, because His goodness is greater than human evil (Psalms 118:22–23).

30. They reject the statements of the people because they are a rebuke to their own evil. So they say: but these people, who do not know the law, are accursed; therefore, you should not agree with them. This thought was found in Deuteronomy: accursed are they who do not live within the law and do not act according to it (Deuteronomy 27:26). But they did not understand this correctly, because even those who do not have a knowledge of the law but act in harmony with it, live more within the law than those who do have a knowledge of the law yet do not keep it. It is said about such people: this people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me (Matthew 15:8); be a doer of the word, and not just a hearer (James 1:22).

31. Next, at Nicodemus said to them, we see the dissension among the rulers.

    • First, the advice of Nicodemus is given.
    • Second, the opposition of the rulers, at they answered and said.
    • Third, the outcome of the whole affair.

    The Evangelist does two things about the first:

    • First, he tells us something about Nicodemus.
    • Second, he gives his advice.

32. He tells us three things about Nicodemus: the first two show us the attitude of Nicodemus himself, and the third reveals the malice of the rulers.

    The first concerns the faith of Nicodemus, and he says: Nicodemus, he who came to him, that is, who believed, for to come to Christ is the same as to believe in Him.

    The second shows the imperfection of his faith, because he who came to him by night. For if he had believed perfectly, he would not have been fearful, for many of the chief men also believed in him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, that they might not be cast out of the synagogue (John 12:42). And one of these was Nicodemus.

    The third thing the Evangelist tells us shows us that the rulers did not speak the truth, for they said that none of the rulers, or of the Pharisees, believed in Christ. And so the Evangelist says about Nicodemus that he was one of them. It is as if to say: if Nicodemus, who was one of the rulers, believed in Christ, then the rulers and Pharisees are speaking falsely when they say that none of the rulers believed in Him. Truly, a lie was spoken (Jeremiah 16:19).

33. The advice of Nicodemus is given when he says: does our law judge any man, unless it first hear him and know what he does? According to the civil laws, a judgment was only to be given after a complete investigation. This is why we read: it is not the custom of the Romans to condemn any man before he has his accusers face him, and can defend himself from the charges (Acts 25:16). I diligently investigated the stranger’s cause (Job 29:16). And so the law of Moses says: do not condemn one who is innocent and just, because I hate the wicked (Exodus 23:7).

    Nicodemus said what he did because he believed in Christ and wanted to convert them to Christ; yet because he was afraid, he did not act very openly. He thought that if they would only listen to Christ, the words of Christ would be so effective that perhaps they would be changed like those whom they sent to Jesus, and who, when they heard Christ, were turned aside from the very act for which they had been sent.

34. We see the opposition of the rulers to Nicodemus when they said, they answered and said to him: are you also a Galilean? First, they think that he has been led astray; and second, that he does not know the law.

    As to the first, they say: are you also a Galilean?—that is, one who has been led astray by this Galilean. For they considered Christ a Galilean because He lived in Galilee. And so anyone who followed Christ they mockingly called a Galilean. The girl servant said to Peter: you are a Galilean, are you not? (Matthew 26:69). Will you also become his disciples? (John 9:27).

    About his ignorance of the law, they say: search the Scriptures and see that, out of Galilee, a prophet does not rise. But since Nicodemus was a teacher of the law, he did not have to look again. It is as if they were saying: although you are a teacher, you do not know this. Something like this was said before: you are a teacher in Israel, and you do not know these things? (John 3:10). Now even though the Old Testament does not explicitly say that a prophet will come from Galilee, it does say that the Lord of the prophets would come from there, according to: a flower (that is, a Nazarene) will arise from his root... and the Spirit of the Lord will rest upon him (Isaiah 11:1–2).

35. The outcome of this dissension is seen to be useless. So he says: and every man returned, leaving the matter unfinished, to his own house, that is, to what belonged to him, empty of faith and frustrated in his evil desires. He frustrates the plans of the wicked (Job 5:12); God destroys the plans of rulers, and frustrates the schemes of the people (Psalms 33:10). Or, each returned to his own house, that is, to the evil of his unbelief and irreverence. I know where you live: where the throne of satan is. You hold to my name, and you have not denied my faith (Revelation 2:13).