Thomas Aquinas Commentary Matthew 10

Above, He had presented His doctrine; here, He appoints His ministers. They are described by their number, their power, and the listing of their names. They are described by their number; for this reason, the Evangelist says, And having called the twelve. And why does He appoint twelve? It is so that the conformity of the Old and New Testaments might be shown, because in the Old Testament there were twelve patriarchs. The second reason is so that their power, and what will be accomplished through them, might be shown: for this number is composed of its multiplied parts three and four, that is to say, four times three or three times four. By the number three, the Trinity is designated; by the number four, the world is designated.

Therefore, it is signified that their preaching ought to be extended to the whole world; for this reason, the Lord says, Go you into the whole world and preach the gospel to every creature, etc. (Mark 16:15). Likewise, the number twelve is used to signify perfection, because the number twelve is formed from the doubling of the number six. For six is a perfect number, because it is derived from all its aliquot parts; for it is the product of the numbers one, two, and three, and these numbers added together equal six. Therefore, He called such a number of men to signify perfection: Be you therefore perfect, as also your heavenly Father is perfect (Matthew 5:48).

He continues concerning their power: therefore, he gave them power, etc., namely, that they might themselves do, or be able to do, what He Himself did; and not only what He did, but even greater things (John 14:12). For it is not written that sick men were cured by the shadow of Christ, as indeed, it is written that many were cured by the shadow of Peter (Acts 5:15).

Over unclean spirits, to cast them out. Therefore, He did not wish that they should cast out unclean spirits by their own power, as He Himself did; on the contrary, He cast them out by His own word, but they were to cast them out in Christ’s name. For this reason, it is said, In my name they shall cast out devils, etc. (Mark 16:17). And not only did He give them the power to cast out devils, but also to heal all manner of diseases, etc., as it is stated: They shall lay their hand upon the sick, and they shall recover (Mark 16:18).

But if you were to ask why this power is not now given to preachers, Augustine responds that a very great miracle is now before everyone’s eyes: namely, that the whole world has been converted. Therefore, either many miracles have been performed, and thus I have proved what I proposed to prove; or, if not, this is the greatest miracle: that the whole world was converted by twelve most abject fishermen.

The listing of their names follows. And why? It is lest some false prophet should come, who might say that he was an Apostle and be believed. For this reason, the Epistola Fundamenti, namely, of the Manichaeans, is reproved.

It should be observed that this Evangelist always joins the Apostles' names in pairs. And why is this? It is because the number two is the number of charity. Likewise, wherever he lists someone who is called by two names, he includes something by which that person may be differentiated from another bearing the same name. It should also be known that he does not keep the order of dignity; nevertheless, Peter is always placed first, who is also called Simon, that is, ‘obedient.’ Therefore, it is said, An obedient man shall speak of victory (Proverbs 21:28).

Peter is named from petra on account of his firmness; and ‘Cephas’ is his Syriac, and not his Hebrew, name. Andrew is interpreted as ‘manly’; therefore, it is said, Do manfully, and let your heart take courage (Psalms 26:14). Likewise, Philip is interpreted as ‘The mouth of a lamp’; such a person ought to be a preacher: Your word is exceedingly on fire (Psalms 118:140). Bartholomew is interpreted as ‘The son of him who raises waters’; and Christ is called this, about whom it is written, He binds up the waters in his clouds (Job 26:8). Again, James the son of Zebedee is listed, who was killed by Herod, and who is named ‘The supplanter.’ And John, who is named ‘grace’; By the grace of God, I am what I am (1 Corinthians 15:10). This Evangelist does not follow the order of dignity, as Mark does.

Likewise, Thomas and Matthew are listed. The other Evangelists do not add ‘the Publican’; but Matthew himself adds ‘the publican’ for the sake of humility. Similarly, the others put Matthew before Thomas, but he, on the contrary, puts Thomas first in the pair of names. Thomas is named ‘an abyss,’ on account of his profundity of faith. Matthew is named ‘given’ (donatus), as it is stated in Ephesians 4:32: Forgiving (donates) one another, even as Christ has forgiven you. James the son of Alpheus is called this to differentiate him from the other James, that is, the son of Zebedee. He is called the Lord’s brother because he is His cousin. And Matthew lists Thaddeus, the brother of James. He is also called Judas, the one who wrote the epistle, and his surname, Thaddeus, is interpreted as ‘heart’: With all watchfulness keep your heart (Proverbs 4:23). Again, Simon the Cananean is surnamed from the village of Cana. And Judas Iscariot is named this to differentiate him from the other Judas; and he is called Iscariot either from his village or from the tribe of Issachar, and he is named ‘death.’

Who also betrayed him. And why did Matthew add this? It was to give a lesson that dignity of state does not sanctify a man. Likewise, there is another reason: to note that it scarcely ever happens that there is not some evil person in a large group of men. For that reason, it is added to show that good men are sometimes not without evil men: As the lily among thorns, so is my love among the daughters (Song of Solomon 2:2). And Augustine says, “My house is not better than the Lord’s house.” God chose these twelve, and He made them spreaders of sacred Scripture among the people.

Commanding them, saying, etc. Here Matthew relates their instruction. He instructs them in two ways:

1. By word.
2. By example, where it is said, And it came to pass, when Jesus had made an end of commanding his twelve disciples, etc. (Matthew 11:1).

He instructs them by word in three ways:

1. He instructs them about their office.
2. He instructs them about things received from the faithful, where it is said, Do not possess gold, nor silver.
3. He instructs them about their dangers, where it is said, Behold I send you as sheep in the midst of wolves.

Concerning their office, He commands four things:

1. He commands where they should go.
2. He commands what they should say, where it is said, And going, preach, etc.
3. He commands what they should do, where it is said, Heal the sick, etc.
4. He commands for what purpose they are to fulfill their office, where it is said, Freely have you received, freely give.

Regarding the first of these commands (where they should go): first, He says where they should not go; second, He says where they should go, where it is said, But go you rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Concerning the first point (where they should not go), He states the two prohibitions in this way: Go you not into the way of the Gentiles, and into the city of the Samaritans enter you not. The latter (the Samaritans) held a middle position between the Jews and the Gentiles (about whom it is written in 4 Kings 27). They partly retained the ceremonies of the Jews and partly the ceremonies of the Gentiles, and they were very opposed to the Jews. Therefore, He forbids them to go to the pure Gentiles or to these people in between.

But it seems that He has said the contrary: Go, teach you all nations (Matthew 28:19); and, All flesh together shall see that the mouth of the Lord has spoken (Isaiah 40:5). Therefore, why does He say, Go you not into the way of the Gentiles?

It should be replied that they were sent to both, but an order needed to be observed. The order was that they go first to the Jews. One reason is that what justice demands should happen first, rather than what proceeds from mercy. It was just that they preach first to the Jews because they possessed that prerogative by promise, as it is stated: I say that Christ Jesus was minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers (Romans 15:8). To the Gentiles, He was bound by mercy. For as it is stated in Romans 11:17, the Gentiles are the wild olives received by the olive tree—namely, by the faith of the Patriarchs of old. Therefore, it is said in that place, And you, being a wild olive, are ingrafted in them and are made partaker of the root and of the fatness of the olive tree. First, therefore, the olive tree had to be nourished, so that He might receive something from it; afterwards, the wild olive needed to be ingrafted (Romans 11). Likewise, wishing to lead the faithful into the faith of the Patriarchs, He willed that the faith be preached first to the Jews.

The second reason was that the Lord infuses into all men that to which they are disposed, and many of the Jews were already disposed through faith. Just as fire acts first upon those things which are near, so the Lord willed, out of charity, that the faith be preached to those who were near. Therefore, it is said, They will come to announce peace to those who are near, and peace to those who are far off (Isaiah 57:19). Moreover, if He had first gone to the Gentiles, the Jews, who greatly hated the Gentiles, would have reproved Him out of indignation. For that reason, it is written in Acts 13:46, To you it behooved us first to speak the word of God.

Therefore, He says, Go you not into the way of the Gentiles, that is, you should not approach the way that leads to the Gentiles, so that they may not speak against you. But He does not say, ‘You may go into the way of the Samaritans.’ And, mystically, those who are the Lord’s disciples ought not to go into the way of the Gentiles, nor of heretics; therefore, it is written, What have you to do in the way of Egypt, to drink the troubled water? (Jeremiah 2:18).

But go you rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And why are they to go to the sheep? It is because they perished more from the errors of the Pharisees than from their own fault. Therefore, it is written, We are his people and the sheep of his pasture (Psalms 99:3); and, You were as sheep going astray; but you are now converted to the shepherd and bishop, etc. (1 Peter 2:25). But what will they do, going here and there? And going, preach. I have appointed you, that you should go and should bring forth fruit, and your fruit should remain (John 15:16). And He sent them just as He Himself was sent: namely, to preach.

Therefore, preach, saying, etc. He had begun His preaching by saying, Do penance, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand (Matthew 4:17). Salvation is far from sinners (Psalms 118:155); but now it is near through Christ’s Passion: By his own blood, entered once into the Holies, having obtained eternal redemption (Hebrews 9:12). Therefore, He says, The kingdom of heaven is at hand, namely, through My Passion. Thus, it is established in them through the participation of grace: For the whole kingdom of God is within you (Luke 17:21).

But they could ask, “How will we confirm the things that we will say?” They will do so, undoubtedly, by miracles, just as He did. Therefore, He says, Heal the sick, etc.

But if someone were to ask, ‘Why does the Church not perform miracles now?’ one should reply that miracles were performed to prove the faith; but now the faith has been proved. For that reason, just as one who makes a demonstration to prove some conclusion would not need to make another proof, so it is here. Therefore, a very great miracle is the conversion of the whole world; for that reason, it is not necessary that other miracles take place.

And just as other corporeal miracles were performed, so spiritual miracles happen daily, because the spiritually sick are cured. For the sick are those troubled by sin and who are inclined to sin; Now him that is weak in faith, take unto you (Romans 14:1). These people are cured by the Lord. Those, however, who consent to sin are dead because they are separated from God, and these are raised back to life by the Lord: Rise, you who sleep, and arise from the dead (Ephesians 5:14). Likewise, lepers are cleansed—for those who are infectious to others are called lepers, because leprosy is a contagious disease—and these people are sometimes cured. In 4 Kings 5, it is said that the leprosy of Naaman adhered to Giezi. Similarly, demons are cast out: for they are demons whose sin has already been carried into effect, about whom it is said, They are glad when they have done evil, and rejoice in the most wicked things (Proverbs 2:14). And, as it is related concerning Judas (John 13:27), that Satan entered into him, etc. And these too are sometimes cured.

And because the Apostles might say, ‘Now we will be rich; if we perform miracles, we will possess many things,’ and from this motive Simon the Magician wanted to perform miracles, the Lord excludes this motive, saying, Freely have you received, freely give. It is a great thing to perform miracles, but to live virtuously is greater. Therefore, He rids them of pride, because pride can come about in two ways: either from one’s cupidity or from one’s merits. It is a very great pride when someone attributes to himself the good which he possesses. For that reason, He excludes such pride in that He says, you have received; What have you that you have not received? (1 Corinthians 4:7). Likewise, you ought not to be proud, because you have received, not on account of your merits, but freely. For he who receives on account of his merits does not receive freely. Similarly, He excludes cupidity, saying, freely give, that is, not for the sake of some temporal good. For the price of a thing is either greater or equal to the thing traded. For that which you trade for a price is not so highly valued in your heart as the price which you receive. Nothing, however, is greater than or equal to God’s gift: I did not compare unto her any precious stone: for all gold, in comparison of her, is as a little sand; and silver, in respect to her, shall be counted as clay .

Do not possess gold, etc. Because they could say, ‘From what means of support, therefore, shall we live?’ For that reason, He instructs them concerning things received. First, He forbids them to carry provisions; and second, He teaches from whom they may accept their necessities, where it is said, And into whatsoever city or town you shall enter, etc. He says, therefore, Do not possess gold.

And the words which follow ought to be noted, because He says, Nor shoes; yet Mark says, Be shod with sandals (Mark 6:9). Likewise, He says, Nor a staff; but Mark says, He commanded them that they should take a staff. For that reason, these words give rise to some doubt and difficulty. For what He says, Do not, etc., is either a precept or it is a counsel. But it is sure that this is a precept, because it is said thus: Jesus commanding them, etc. But the Apostles both were Apostles and were faithful. Therefore, either it was a precept for them, insofar as they were faithful, or insofar as they were Apostles. If it was insofar as they were faithful, then all the faithful are bound to this precept; and this was a certain heresy, as Augustine says, which maintained that no one could be saved unless they possessed nothing; and this was the heresy of the Apostolici. Likewise, another heresy was that no one can be saved unless they go about barefoot: and these were heresies, not because they prescribed something evil, but because they precluded those who did not observe their prescriptions from the way of salvation.

If, however, it was commanded to them insofar as they were Apostles, then all prelates, who are the successors of the Apostles, are bound to these things. But assuming that these men did not act badly, did not Paul, who was carrying such things and was accepting such things from some men to give them to others, act badly? For that reason, these words present a difficulty.

And so it ought to be said that, according to Jerome, there was a correct way of understanding this command by expounding it literally: that He commanded something on account of their office of the apostleship and not because it was simply necessary, but it was necessary for that time.

Hence, before the Passion He commanded them to carry nothing. At the Passion, however, He says, When I sent you without purse and scrip and shoes, did you want anything? (Luke 22:35). And He continues, But now he that has a purse, let him likewise buy a scrip. And he that has not, let him sell his coat and buy a sword. Hence, before the Passion they were sent to the Jews; now, among the Jews, there was a custom that they ought to provide for their teachers. For that reason, He commanded them to carry nothing when He sent them to the Jews. But this was not the custom among the Gentiles; for which reason, when they were sent to the Gentiles, permission was given to them of carrying provisions. Therefore, they carried these things when they preached to men other than the Jews. And it ought to be observed that some things are of necessity, and other things are the means by which necessaries are bought: and this is what is said, that certain things are artificial riches, such as clothes and shoes; and for that reason, He forbids both. He says, therefore, Do not, etc. Because all money either is made of gold, or of silver, or of copper; for that reason, He forbids them to possess gold or silver; hence, Peter was saying, Silver and gold I have none; but what I have, I give thee (Acts 3:6).

And why did God command this? One reason is that the Lord was sending poor men to preach; therefore, someone might believe that they preached merely for the sake of gain. Therefore, in order that this suspicion might be eliminated, He commanded them to carry nothing. Likewise, He commanded this to remove solicitude: for if they had been excessively solicitous about this, God’s word would be impeded. Likewise, He forbids riches, which render aid in necessity. And because they could say, ‘We do not carry gold or silver, but instead we carry eggs and bread, which are necessaries for living’; He forbids this also, saying, Nor scrip for your journey. And why does He forbid this? Chrysostom says that it was to show them His power: because He could send them without these things; hence, He says in Luke 22:35, When I sent you without purse and scrip and shoes, did you want anything? Therefore, He did this to show His power.

Likewise, so far as concerns clothing, He says, Nor two coats: it was not that they could only wear one coat, but that they could not own two sets of clothing, such that they would put away one set and wear the other. Hence, by the name of one coat, He understands one suit of clothes: He that has two coats, let him give to him that has none (Luke 3:11). Nor shoes. And why does he prohibit them? The reason is twofold, namely, for the same reasons He forbade gold and silver. The Lord was sending them barefooted, so that amidst all men they would be deemed poor. Hence, the Apostle says, Not many mighty has God chosen (1 Corinthians 1:26). For that reason, He willed that they be lowly: for the poor in the Eastern parts of the world go forth barefooted; nevertheless, they use those shoes which are called sandals, and they make them out of straw. Another reason was because, just as Plato taught that men ought not to cover their feet or their head frequently, so, likewise, to strengthen them so that they might be strong in enduring, He commanded them to go barefooted.

But why does He say, nor a staff? For some men use horses, but others are supported by a staff: for that reason, He also forbids that very small thing, so that they might completely trust in Him, according to the passage in Psalm 22:4: Your rod and your staff, they have comforted me. Hence, because He says elsewhere that they may carry a staff, it was not a precept to be observed, except in certain places and at certain times. Augustine takes a different line of thought, saying that these are neither precepts nor counsels, but are permissions, so that it is rather a counsel to abstain than to fulfill them. Hence, the sense is, Do not, etc., that is, it is not a matter of great importance that you do not possess other shoes besides these which you are wearing. Nor a staff, that is, nothing, as it is said, ‘Not a speck.’ And why? For the workman is worthy of his meat, etc. Because you have the right of receiving from others yourselves; and, for that reason, you do not need to carry these things. Hence, when something is permitted, if it does not happen, it is not a sin; however, whatever happens over and above is supererogatory. Hence, Paul also, although he could have received from others, accepted nothing, and this was a supererogation, according to Augustine, because not to use permitted things is supererogatory. Hence, Paul says: It is good for me to die rather than make my glory void (1 Corinthians 9:15). And why? Because he was not using that which was permitted: For the workman is worthy of his meat.

But what is it that He says elsewhere, that they may carry a staff? Augustine says that it is not unseemly that sometimes certain things be said mystically, and at other times literally. Hence, what Matthew says here, he says literally, that they ought not to carry a staff: but what Mark says is understood mystically, namely, that they may not carry temporal things, but they have the right of receiving from others. Hence, For the workman is worthy of his meat. This word ‘for’ is not there by accident. These workmen are they about whom it was said above: Pray you the Lord of the harvest, that he send forth laborers into his harvest (Matthew 9:38). A third exposition is, Do not possess gold, that is, worldly wisdom; nor silver, that is, worldly eloquence; nor purse, that is, excessive solicitude; nor two coats, that is, duplicity; nor shoes, that is, earthly affections; for shoes are made from the skins of dead animals.

Into whatsoever city or town you shall enter, etc. Above, the Lord ordained that the Apostles should not carry the things they need with them, and gave a reason, namely, that the workman is worthy of his meat. Now He prescribes the manner in which they ought to accept what they need. First, He gives the manner, that they ought to accept what they need from those willing to give; and second, what happens to those who are willing to give. About the first, He does three things: first, He teaches them to select their host; second, He forbids them to change their lodging; and third, He commands that their host be greeted.

He says, therefore: It has been said that the workman is worthy of his meat. In order that you may know from whom you ought to accept what you need, lest you think that you are permitted to stay at anyone’s house, for that reason He says, into whatsoever city or town you shall enter, inquire who in it is worthy. And He says this lest on account of the host’s bad reputation your preaching be despised, as it is stated in 1 Timothy 3:7: He must have a good testimony of them who are without. The second reason is that if someone should be a good man, he will more easily supply your necessities.

And in saying this He provides for them. The third reason is so that the suspicion of profit-seeking may be excluded: because when men see such poor men accepting only from good men, it was a sign to them that they were not preaching for the sake of profit.

Chrysostom puts forth the last two expositions; Jerome puts forth the first. And the Apostle says the same, For neither have we used at any time the speech of flattery, nor taken an occasion of covetousness (1 Thessalonians 2:5). Likewise, He says, Who in it is worthy, and this because it is reputed a great thing to him who receives such guests. Hence, to Abraham it was reputed a great thing that he received guests, as is stated in Hebrews 13:2: Hospitality do not forget: for by this some, being not aware of it, have entertained angels. And there abide. Here He speaks about stability in their lodging. There abide, that is, do not pass from lodging to lodging. And why? The reason is, lest your host be made sad; and if he is worthy, he will receive you willingly, and so he will send you away with sadness: Shall evil be rendered for good? The second reason is, lest they incur a reputation of levity, which is not befitting to a preacher. I will praise you in a serious minded people (Psalms 34:18). Likewise, it was so that they might avoid the reputation of gluttony, because if they would leave a bad host for a good one, it might be ascribed to gluttony. For that reason, the Lord says that before they enter, they ask who was worthy in that place.

And when you come into the house, salute it. Here the greeting of the host is noted. First, He sets forth the salutation; and second, He sets forth the effect, where it is said, And if that house be worthy, your peace shall come upon it. For it is fitting that, to them who were supplying temporal things, they would supply spiritual things, and not only spiritual things, but those things which are necessary for salvation, by saying, Peace be to this house, etc. And this was a suitable manner of greeting, because the world was at war; the world, however, has been reconciled in Christ. For these men were the Lord’s legates, and for what purpose? Certainly for peace; for that reason this greeting was suitable. The effect follows with respect to the good, and with respect to the evil. And if that house be worthy, etc. We can say that that house will thence have some power of a blessing. Hence, the Apostles, or bishops, in the first turning towards the people say, Pax vobis. Hence, it is said: They shall invoke my name upon the children of Israel, and I will bless them (Numbers 6:27). … but if it be not worthy, your peace shall return to you.

But what is this that He says? Had He not said that first they ought to inquire who was worthy? For that reason, He shows that in such inquiries men can be deceived: For man sees those things that appear, but the Lord beholds the heart, as it is stated in 1 Samuel 16:7. For they were not yet so perfect that they could know who was worthy. Your peace shall return to you; and this is because someone sometimes prays and labors for the salvation of another, and, nevertheless, the effect is not attained; and, nevertheless, what he does, he does not lose, but it returns unto himself. Hence, shall return to you, that is, the fruit is given back to you.

And whosoever shall not receive you. Here it treats of those who do not receive them. First, He teaches them what they ought to do; and second, He teaches them what they shall receive from God. He says, therefore, And whosoever shall not receive you. And He sets forth two faults. One is that they had not received them; and the other is that, as the Apostles had been sent to preach, those who did not receive them were not listening to the Word of God. Therefore, going forth out of that house or city, because sometimes they were received in the city, but not in a house; but other times they were neither received in a house nor in the city, just as it is related in the Acts of the Apostles. What, therefore, ought to be done? Shake off the dust from your feet. And it is read that Paul and Barnabas did this literally, as is stated in Acts 14:51 (This reference seems to be Acts 13:51. As per instructions, I will keep 14:51). And why did the Lord command this? Dust, of course, adheres to the feet. Hence, He ordered this to show that they had made the labor of their journey in vain. And this was as a punishment to those who had not received them; as though He were to say, ‘For which sake you are worthy of condemnation’; nevertheless, the Apostle says, I have not labored in vain (Philippians 2:16).

Likewise, another reason is that the least thing that can be possessed is dust; for that reason, He willed that they shake off the dust from their feet as a sign that they possess nothing from them. A third reason is that by dust, temporal things are signified, and by their feet the affections are signified, to indicate that nothing temporal ought to remain in their affections. A fourth cause is mystical. The feet are their affections: for howsoever much preachers are holy, it is necessary that their affections be moved by some dust, or from some vainglory, etc., as is stated in John 13, where it is said that the Lord washed the feet of the disciples, and said, He that is clean needeth not but to wash his feet, but is clean wholly (John 13:10). Hence, they needed a washing in regard to sellable goods. And why did the Lord command this? It was to show that a preacher chooses a dangerous course. Wherefore, if they do not believe him, this reverts unto their condemnation.

But what is this? Will they be worse off? No, I say to you, it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment, than for that city. Because as it is written, If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have sin (John 15:22). For they who hear and do not fulfill sin more than those who have never heard. Therefore, perhaps, because these Sodomites did not hear, for that reason it will be more tolerable for them. Likewise, although these men were unclean, nevertheless they were hospitable. Hence, in regard to this it will be more tolerable for them.

But the contrary is stated in Genesis 19, that the sin of the Sodomites is the gravest sin, as appears from its punishment. And one ought to reply that in the category of sins of the flesh that sin is the gravest. That sin, however, which is immediately opposed to God, such as idolatry, is graver than it. Or it ought to be answered that He is not comparing one sin to another, but He is comparing in regard to a circumstance: because these men were sinning to whom the Gospel had been preached, but it had not been preached to the others. Likewise, He is reproving certain heretics who were saying that all sins, and all punishments, and all merits, and all rewards were equal. For that reason, He excludes this, when He says, it shall be more tolerable, etc., for some sins there will be a worse punishment.

It should be observed that this name for hell, ‘Gehenna,’ is not found in the Old Testament. Nevertheless, it is derived by the Savior from Jeremiah 19:6, where it is said: Therefore behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that this place shall no more be called the valley of the sons of Hinnom, but the valley of slaughter.

Therefore, Hinnom is a valley at the foot of the mountain of Jerusalem, a rich valley that was called the valley of Hinnom. Now it happened that this place was consecrated to an idol. And for that reason, because the inhabitants had turned to pleasures, the Lord threatened that they would be killed, and that it would no longer be called the place of Hinnom, but Polyandrion (that is, a burial-place of the dead). For this reason, He calls this place Gehenna.

Therefore, He says: Fear not those who only kill the body, but rather fear him that can destroy both soul and body in hell. This is because one should not be subject to God on account of fear of punishment, but on account of the love of justice, as is stated: For you have not received the spirit of bondage again in fear: but you have received the spirit of adoption of sons of God (Romans 8:15).

It should also be noted that here He excludes two errors. First, some were saying that the soul perishes when the body has died; and He refutes this when He says: Who can send the soul into hell. Therefore, it is evident that it remains after the body. Second, it was the position of certain people that there was no resurrection, as is said in 1 Corinthians 15. And He excludes this, because if the body and soul are sent into hell, it is established that there will be a resurrection. This is stated in Revelation 20:9: They shall be cast into the pool of fire and brimstone.

Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? This was said because these things should not be feared, as they can do little harm. Nor should they be feared because what little they can do, they can do only by Divine Providence.

And He proceeds in three steps:

1. First, He sets forth Divine Providence concerning the birds.
2. Second, He sets forth Divine Providence concerning humans, where it is said, But the very hairs of your head are all numbered.
3. Third, He proclaims their security to them: Fear not therefore.

Therefore, He says, Are not two sparrows—by "two sparrows" He means all small birds—sold for a farthing? In this He indicates their trifling value, because two are bought for a farthing; for just as one is the smallest number, so a farthing is the smallest unit of weight.

But note, according to Augustine, that something is said to have value in two ways:

• Either according to the dignity of its nature; and in this respect, one sparrow is worth more than a penny.
• Or according to our use; and in this way, a penny is worth more.

But it is objected that Luke mentions five sparrows and two farthings. It should be said that there is little difference: if two are bought for a farthing, and five are bought for two, there is not a great difference.

And not one of them shall fall on the ground without your Father; that is, without your Father’s providence. And why does He say this? It is because this statement agrees with the statement of the Law (Leviticus 14): when someone was cured from leprosy, he offered two sparrows. One was sacrificed, but the other was dipped with cedar wood and hyssop in the blood of the one killed, and the leper to be cleansed was sprinkled; in this way, the living sparrow was let go. Therefore, He intends that two be taken, and one not be killed; and this does not happen without God’s providence.

Hilary expounds the passage this way: “By two sparrows are understood the body and the soul, and they are given for a farthing, that is, for a little pleasure; behold you are sold for your iniquities, and for your wicked deeds have I put your mother away (Isaiah 50:1). And of these only one falls to the ground, namely, the body; the soul, however, goes to judgment.”

But it is objected: God does not care about oxen; therefore, neither does He care about sparrows. It should be said that God takes care of all things, as it is stated: There is no other God but thou, who hast care of all . But it should be known that He provides for all things according to the manner of their natures.

Now there is a diversity among created things: some are naturally free, while others are not. A creature is said to be free if it has the power to do what it wants; a creature that does not have this power is not free. Therefore, He provides for rational creatures as free beings, but He provides for others as servants. Just as the head of a family provides in one way for his children and in another way for his servants—he provides for his children for their own sake, but he provides for the servants according to what is useful for their masters and according to how suitable each one is for serving—so Divine Mercy distributes His gifts to rational creatures for their own sake, because everything happens for their good or for their punishment. Therefore, for them, all things are either rewards or punishments for their merits.

The things that happen to irrational animals happen either for the salvation of humans or for the completion of the universe. As it is stated in 3 Kings, a certain prophet was killed by a lion, and this was on account of his fault. A mouse is killed by a cat to keep the order of the universe, for this is the universal order, that one animal lives on another.

For that reason, He afterward shows Himself to have a different care for both humans and animals, when He says: But the very hairs of your head are all numbered. He shows that there is a different kind of Divine Providence, according to the diverse ways it operates. For He had said concerning sparrows that one does not fall to the ground without the Father; but here He says that much less will you fall, nor even your hairs, without the Father. And here He indicates providence over the smallest actions, because all things that are in the actions themselves are ordained for them, and God provides for these.

But it should be observed that He says, are numbered. The reason is that it is customary for someone to number what they wish to retain; however, what they wish to bestow, they hand over to another. Therefore, there is a difference between providence for rational people and for other things, because the former are immediately ordained to God (as such a creature has a capacity for God), while the others do not.

Likewise, we wish to keep for ourselves the things we number. And for that reason, He did not say above that the sparrows are numbered, because they do not continue to exist forever. But humans exist in such a way that they continue to exist forever, because the soul is everlasting.

But here a question arises: If the hairs are numbered, will not everything that was cut from the hairs be reintegrated at the resurrection? And if so, their length will be unbecoming.

Some say that matter does not perish, but what is superfluous in one part will belong to another part. But supposing that nothing will be diminished, what would be the result? For that reason, it should be understood that there were three opinions on this point:

1. Some said that flesh will not rise again, except for what is from true human nature.
2. Others, however, said that flesh will not rise again, except for what was taken from Adam, which was multiplied in this way into a great quantity.
3. Still others said that flesh will not rise again, except for what was not only taken from Adam but also what was taken from a near ancestor.

Therefore, whatever is added that is from true human nature will rise again; but that which pertains to the quantity of the parts will not rise again.

But against this, it seems that the heat acting upon the nutritive fluid also acts upon the foundational fluid, and in this way, a person does not consume the one unless they consume the other, since they are mixed together.

For that reason, it seems one should say otherwise: that whatever is from true human nature will remain, only insofar as it pertains to a person’s completeness. However, I call that which is from true human nature, ‘flesh according to the species’; ‘flesh according to the matter,’ however, is something else. The flesh, however, will rise again according to the species, not according to the matter.

But what is meant by the expression, ‘flesh according to the species’? It should be said that a person’s parts can be considered either concerning their form or concerning their matter. Concerning their form, they always remain. If, however, we consider the matter apart, something appears and disappears, as is evident with fire.

And if wood is added to a fire, the fire remains the same according to its species; nevertheless, the matter of the wood disappears as it is consumed. Therefore, what is more perfect will rise again. Thus, He does not say, ‘Your hairs are weighed’; but on the contrary, He says, Your hairs are numbered. Therefore, the parts of the body will not rise again in weight, but in form.

Fear not therefore. Here He shows their security, based on the fact that their enemies can do but little, and what they can do, they cannot do without God’s providence. Fear not therefore: you are better than many sparrows. Thou hast subjected all things under his feet, all sheep and oxen: moreover, the beasts also of the fields, as it is stated in Psalm 8:8. And, Let us make man to our image and likeness (Genesis 1:26); and it continues: And let him have dominion over the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the air, and the beasts, and the whole earth, and every creeping creature that moveth upon the earth.

Every one therefore that shall confess me before men, I will also confess him before my Father who is in heaven. Here He touches upon two things: first, the benefit that results from confessing Him; second, the harm that results from denying Him, where it is said, But he that shall deny me before men, I will also deny him before my Father who is in heaven.

Therefore, He says: ‘Therefore I wish that you die and suffer.’ And why? Certainly, it is for your benefit. Because Everyone therefore that shall confess me before men... And He refutes the error of a certain person who was saying that it is necessary to confess the faith only before God in one’s heart, and not with the mouth before men. This error is here proven manifestly false, because, With the heart, we believe unto justice; but, with the mouth, confession is made unto salvation (Romans 10:10).

I will also confess him before my Father, namely, when I will have access to the Father, when it will be said: Come, ye blessed of my Father (Matthew 25:34). But they could say: ‘You are on earth, so for this reason confessing You can avail little.’ For that reason, He adds, who is in heaven, and He has power.

He that shall deny by word, such as Peter, or by deed, as those of whom it is said: They profess that they know God: but in their works they deny him (Titus 1:16). I will also deny them, when He will say, as it is stated above: I never knew you (Matthew 7:23), that is, I never approved of you.

Do not think that I came to send peace upon earth...

Previously, He admonished the disciples not to desist from preaching the truth due to reproaches or the fear of death. Now, He similarly admonishes them not to desist because of domestic affection. He addresses this in two main ways:

1. First, He shows that separation from domestic affection is imminent.
2. Second, He explains how they should conduct themselves regarding this, where He says, He that loveth father or mother more than me, is not worthy of me.

Regarding the first point (the imminent separation), He proceeds in three stages. They might have thought, ‘Lord, why will so many things happen to us? We believed we would have peace at Your coming.’ Therefore:

1. First, He corrects their potential misunderstanding of His intention, saying, Do not think that I came to send peace upon earth.
2. Second, He states His actual purpose, where it is said, I came not to send peace, but the sword.
3. Third, He explains this, saying, For I came to set a man at variance against his father, etc.

But what does He mean? Is it not stated in Luke 2:14 that when the Lord was born the angels sang, Glory to God in the highest: and on earth peace to men of good will? And the Bishop himself, when he first turns towards the people, says, “Peace be with you.” And earlier, the Lord announced peace.

For that reason, it should be said that there are two types of peace: good and evil. The word ‘peace’ signifies concord. There is an evil peace, about which it is spoken in Wisdom 14:12: But living in a great war of ignorance, they call so many and so great evils peace. This peace pertains to domestic affections.

And it is as though He were saying, ‘This peace I have not come to establish.’ Therefore: It was given that he should take peace from the earth (Revelation 6:4). But He Himself is the good peace, about whom it is said: He is our peace, who hath made both one (Ephesians 2:14). For that reason, the angels sang: And on earth peace to men of good will (Luke 2:14). Thus, He says, I came not to send peace, but the sword.

It belongs to the nature of a sword to divide. This sword is the word of God: The word of God is living and effectual and more piercing than any two edged sword (Hebrews 4:12). Therefore, it is likewise said, The sword of the Spirit (which is the word of God) (Ephesians 6:17). This word of God was sent to the earth. Some people believed, and some did not. For that reason, a conflict occurred, as it was stated: How turn you again to the weak and needy elements which you desire to serve again? (Galatians 4:9). Therefore, He came to separate these two groups.

He came, therefore, to send the sword (namely, the word of God), but with a divided result: some people believed, and this was due to Him; others, however, did not believe, and this was due to their malice. This, nevertheless, was also caused by Him, in that He permits this to happen, as it is stated: For this cause, God delivered them up to shameful affections (Romans 1:26).

But someone might say: ‘You have come to set people at variance. Among whom did You come? Was it not among dissimilar people and strangers?’ And He shows that it was not so, but rather among those closely related. For I came, He said, to set a man at variance against his father, etc.

For a close relationship is twofold: one kind is natural, and another kind is called domestic or household. And for that reason, He sends the sword against both. Natural friendship is founded upon a natural act, which is generation or the union of man and woman. The domestic or household relationship is founded upon affinity. Therefore, concerning the first type (natural friendship), He came to set a man at variance against his father.

But a question arises. It was said above: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill (Matthew 5:17). But the Law commanded: Honor thy father and mother, etc. The solution is as follows: I say that you should obey your father whenever he does not draw you away from the love of God; but whenever he does draw you away, you are not bound to obey.

And the daughter against her mother; this also refers to generation. And the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.

In this, the New Law agrees with the Old Law, as it is stated in Exodus 32: If any man be on the Lord’s side, let him join with me. And all the sons of Levi gathered themselves together unto him, and he said to them: Put every man his sword upon his thigh. And it continues: And let every man kill his brother, and friend (Exodus 32:26–27). This is accounted to the praise of the Levites, as it is stated in Deuteronomy 33:8: To Levi also he said: Thy perfection, and thy doctrine be to thy holy man. And it continues: Who hath said to his father, and to his mother: I do not know you; and to his brethren: I know you not: and their own children they have not known (Deuteronomy 33:9).

But here a question arises, because here the Evangelist enumerates six persons, while in Luke only three are enumerated. It should be said that it is the same in either case, because a man’s mother is the same thing as his wife’s mother-in-law. Likewise, He sets forth those who pertain to the family circle, where He says, And a man’s enemies shall be they of his own household, etc.

And it is stated: For I heard the reproaches of many, and terror on every side: Persecute him, and let us persecute him: from all the men that were my familiars (Jeremiah 20:10). Notice also that the whole passage is found in Micah 7:6: For the son dishonoureth the father, and the daughter riseth up against her mother, the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law: and a man’s enemies are they of his own household.

He that loveth father or mother more than me, is not worthy of me. Here He shows how they should conduct themselves in this separation. If you wish to receive the Lord’s word, it is necessary that you be separated from the persons of whom I spoke. But someone might say: ‘I do not want to be separated from my father,’ or something of this kind. For that reason, He says, He that loveth father or mother more than me, is not worthy of me. The Lord exhorts that He be placed before any domestic affection. First, He sets forth the exhortation; and second, He sets forth the benefit following from it, where it is said, He that receiveth you, receiveth me: and he that receiveth me, etc.

And He sets forth three degrees of domestic affection. For it is natural that a man love his father, but it is more natural that a father love his son. Again, it is more natural that a man love himself. Why, therefore, does a father love his son more, rather than the contrary? Some assign this reason: that the father has more knowledge about the son, if he is his, than the son about his father.

Likewise, the longer someone is attached to another, the more deeply rooted they are in the love of that person. Similarly, another reason is that everyone loves himself more than another.

But a son is what one might call a part of his father; the father, on the other hand, is not a part of the son; therefore, etc. Likewise, it is natural that everything loves what has been made by itself.

But there is a different explanation, according to some, because in a certain respect the son loves the father more. For, naturally, lineal descent occurs from the father to the son; nevertheless, the son is naturally subject to the father. For that reason, the father naturally loves the son—even a spiritual father, as it is stated: I write not these things to confound you: but I admonish you as my dearest children (1 Corinthians 4:14). But sons are naturally subject to their fathers; for that reason, they naturally honor their father and are more angered about an injury inflicted upon their father than about an injury inflicted upon themselves: The glory of children are their fathers (Proverbs 17:6). Hence, He that loveth father or mother more than me, is not worthy of me, because He Himself is God. And God is to be loved before all things: I will not accept the person of man, and I will not level God with man (Job 32:21). For God is goodness itself; for that reason, He ought to be loved more. He is not, therefore, worthy of Me who loves his father or mother more than Me. And he that loveth son or daughter, etc. Why does a son love his father? It should be said that whatever a son has, he has from his father: for he has from his father nourishment and teaching. And this a son cannot give to his father; but what things a son receives from his father, he receives more abundantly from God. For He Himself teaches us, as it is stated: Who teacheth us more than the beasts of the earth, and instructeth us more than the fowls of the air, etc. (Job 35:11). Likewise, He feeds us, as it is said in Genesis concerning Jacob. Moreover, He preserves us in perpetuity. And this a person has more from God than a son has from his father. For that reason, God must always be loved more. For I know that my Redeemer liveth, and in the last day I shall rise out of the earth. And I shall be clothed again with my skin, and in my flesh I shall see my God (Job 19:25–26). And he that taketh not up his cross. It was said that he who loves his father, etc.; indeed, I say more: he who loves himself more than Me, is not worthy of Me. Because nothing can fill the whole heart except God. And therefore it is said: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole strength (Deuteronomy 6:5). Hence, He says, And he that taketh not up his cross, and followeth me, is not worthy of me. He means that he who is not prepared to suffer even death on account of the truth, and the greatest death, namely, the death of the cross, is not worthy of me. Indeed, he ought to glory in the cross, as it is stated: But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of the Lord (Galatians 6:14). And in saying this, He foretells His own death, and the manner of his death: Christ suffered for us, leaving you an example that you should follow his steps (1 Peter 2:21). It is also expounded otherwise. It may be expounded that he accepts the cross who afflicts his flesh, as it is stated: They that are Christ’s have crucified their flesh, with the vices and concupiscences, etc. (Galatians 5:24). Likewise, the cross is carried in the heart when one is saddened on account of sin, as the Apostle said: Who is scandalized, and I am not on fire? (2 Corinthians 11:29). Likewise, that does not suffice unless the Lord is followed. Hence, and followeth me. If you fast, if you have compassion upon your neighbor, yet not for My sake, you are not worthy of me. For it is a great thing to follow the Lord, as it is stated: “It is great glory to follow the Lord.” But they could say, ‘What will we have from that?’ For that reason, He shows the punishment of the disobedient; hence, He says, He that findeth his soul, shall lose it. The soul denotes one’s life: when someone is in danger of losing money, one is accustomed to say, ‘I lost the money’; and if he is freed from the danger, he says that he found the money. Similarly, if someone is in bodily danger and is freed by some occasion, he says that he found his life. Therefore, he who finds his life—and will have been in danger for My sake, and denies Me, so that he may find life—is not worthy of me. And he that shall lose his soul, that is to say, his life, meaning if one will have exposed himself to death for My sake, shall find it. He that shall find me, shall find life, and shall have salvation from the Lord (Proverbs 8:35).

He that receiveth you, receiveth me. Here He sets forth a remedy. You say that we should make our living thus. Give us an indulgence. Just as the Pope gives to his legates the power of granting an indulgence, so the Lord gives a reward to those receiving them. And He sets forth three things, of which two pertain to lesser matters. He says, therefore, He that receiveth you, receiveth me: because they will have God as a guest, because you are My members, because you are the body of Christ, members of member. Hence, He receiveth Me. But they could say: ‘You are a poor man: it is not a great thing to receive a poor man, such as yourself.’ On the contrary, he that receiveth me, receiveth him that sent me: because, as it is stated, He who honoureth the Son honoureth also My Father (John 5:23). It is a great thing to have God as a guest, just as it was reputed to the praise of Abraham, as it is stated in Hebrews 13. Likewise, something else will be obtained, namely, the reward of a prophet. Hence, He that receiveth a prophet in the name of a prophet, shall receive the reward of a prophet. There are two excellent things in a prophet. The first is prophecy: And it shall come to pass after this, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy (Joel 2:28). Likewise, in them is the gift of justice: But of him are you, who is made unto us wisdom and justice (1 Corinthians 1:30). This verse can also be understood thus: He that receiveth a prophet in the name of a prophet, that is, because he is a prophet, shall receive the reward of a prophet. You say that we ought to receive the Apostles. But some false prophets or false apostles will come. Therefore, He says: ‘I do not make a fuss about the truth, but about the name. Because he who receives someone in the name of a prophet will have a reward.’ And what reward? It will be the same which you would have if you would receive a true prophet. Hence, He says, the reward of a prophet, that is, which he would have for a prophet. Likewise, He does not make a fuss who he is, whether he be this or that prophet. For he who receives a prophet receives the reward of a prophet, because the prophet therefrom is more inclined to perform his work; because not only he who does receives a reward, but they also that consent to them that do them, as it is stated at the end of Romans 1. Hence, if you cooperate in a good work, from that good work you receive a reward; if you furnish what is needed to support a prophet’s life, you will receive the reward of a prophet, because otherwise he could not fulfill his office. And what follows is similar: He that receiveth a just man in the name of a just man, shall receive the reward of a just man. But someone could say: ‘If Peter or Elijah were to come, I would willingly receive him.’ For that reason, He adds, And whosoever shall give to drink to one of these little ones, that is, to the faithful, as it is stated below: Amen I say to you, as long as you did it to one of these my least brethren, you did it to me, etc. (Matthew 25:40). It is as though He said: ‘I do not care whether they are great or small.’ Someone could say: ‘I am poor; I do not have anything to give.’ For that reason, He adds, A cup of cold water: He does not say, of cold water, on account of a scarcity of wood, lest one could thus excuse himself. Hence, He wishes to say: ‘Whatever least thing one shall have done, will have a reward.’ And He confirms this, saying, Amen I say to you he shall not lose his reward. Behold the Lord shall come (Isaiah 40:10); and it continues, And his reward is with him and his work is before him.