About 83 different questions in one book

Friends of the blessed Aurelius Augustine presented him with a series of questions about the nature of the soul, about God the Creator, about Platonic ideas, about the origin of evil, about the Trinity and about Christology. He collected them together and answered each one. This is how the essay “On 83 different questions in one book”, written in 386-396, came about. The treatise gives an idea of ​​the gradual transition of interest from the blj. Augustine from purely philosophical problems to theological ones. Questions 1-25 cover theological and philosophical subjects. Questions 26-65 address exegetical problems of the Old Testament and the Gospels. In questions 66-75 - problems of the epistles of the Apostle Paul (especially the Epistle to the Romans). Questions 76-83 are devoted to moral issues. In the ethical system of the bl. Augustine’s contrast between the concepts of “use” and “enjoy” is important. True bliss is the achievement of the highest good. These are the things that should be enjoyed; other things should only be used. The sin of man is that he tries to enjoy what should be enjoyed, and enjoys what should only be used (Question 30). In Question 46 “On Ideas” the original reading of the blessed one is most clearly formulated. Augustine of the classical Platonic doctrine of ideas: the author proposes to understand ideas as the thoughts of God, the Divine plans of things. The essay touches on the topic of the relationship between free human action and Divine grace in salvation (Questions 66-74). Divine grace is manifested, first of all, in the call to faith in Christ. A person can accept or reject this calling. A person's free response constitutes the basis for his election or rejection. (Question 68.4,5). The merit that distinguishes some sinners from others is faith, which God foresees and according to which he initially makes election. Faith itself, according to the bl. Augustine, rather depends on God's mercy than on human will, since without the calling of God there is no human desire (Question 68.3,5). Thus, blzh. Augustine proceeds mainly from the fact that Divine election or rejection, pardon or punishment is based on God's foreknowledge of a free human response to the call to faith, followed by good deeds. *The title of the work in Latin is De diversis quaestionibus LXXXIII. Question 1. Does the soul exist from itself? Question 2. About free decision (or choice, or arbitrariness) Question 3. Is God to blame for the fact that a person becomes worse? Question 4. What is the reason that a person becomes worse? Question 5: Can an unreasonable animal be blessed? Question 6. About evil Question 7. What in the proper sense in an animate being is called a soul? Question 8: Does the soul move by itself? Question 9: Can truth be perceived by the bodily senses? Question 10. Is the body from God? Question 11. Why was Christ born of a woman? Question 12. Saying of a certain sage [Fonteus of Carthage] Question 13. What evidence shows that people are superior to animals? Question 14. The body of our Lord Jesus Christ was not a ghost Question 15. About thinking (De intellectu) Question 16. About the Son of God Question 17. About the knowledge of God Question 18. About the Trinity Question 19. About God and creation Question 20. About the place of God Question 21. Is God the author of evil? Question 22. God is not subject to necessity Question 23. About the Father and the Son Question 24. Are both sin and righteous action in the free decision of the will? Question 25. About the cross of Christ Question 26. About the difference between sins Question 27. About Providence Question 28. Why did God want to create the world? Question 29: Is there something higher or lower in the universe? Question 30. Was everything created for the benefit of man? Question 31. A certain statement (about virtues in Cicero) Question 32. Does one know a certain thing to a greater extent than another, and thus does not the knowledge of the same thing go to infinity? Question 33. About fear Question 34. Should one love only the absence of fear? Question 35. What should love? Question 36. About cultivating love Question 37. About what is always born Question 38. About the structure of the soul Question 39. About types of food Question 40. If the nature of the soul is one, why do people have different desires? Question 41. If God created everything, why didn’t He create everything equally? Question 42. How was the Wisdom of God the Lord Jesus [simultaneously] both in the womb and in heaven? Question 43. Why did the Son of God appear in a man, and the Holy Spirit in a dove? Question 44. Why did the Lord Jesus Christ come so late? Question 45. Against “mathematicians” (astrologers) Question 46. About ideas Question 47. Will we ever be able to see our thoughts? Question 48. About Credibility Question 49: Why did the children of Israel visibly sacrifice livestock? Question 50. About the equality of the Son Question 51. About man created in the image and likeness of God Question 52. About what was said [in Scripture]: “I repented that I made man” (Gen. 6:6-7) Question 53. About the gold and silver that the Israelites received from the Egyptians Question 54. About what is written: “For it is good for me to cleave to God” (Ps. 72:28) Question 55. About what is written: “Sixty queens and eighty concubines, and maidens without number” (Song. 6:8) Question 56. About the forty-six years of building the Church Question 57. About one hundred and fifty-three fish (John 21:11) Question 58. About John the Baptist Question 59. About ten virgins Question 60. [About words:] “But about that day and hour no one knows, neither the angels of heaven, nor the Son of Man, but only one Father” (Matthew 24:36) Question 61. About the fact that the Lord, as it is written in the Gospel, fed the crowds of people on the mountain with five loaves (John 6:9-13) Question 62. About what is written in the Gospel, that Jesus baptized more than John, although He Himself did not baptize, but His disciples (John 4:1–2) Question 63. About the Word Question 64. About the Samaritan woman (John 4:5–43) Question 65. About the resurrection of Lazarus (John 11:1-45) Question 66. About what is written: “Do you not know, brethren (for I speak to those who know the law), that the law has power over a person while he lives?” up to the point where it is written: “He will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you” (Rom. 7:1-25, 8:1-11) Question 67. Regarding what is written: “For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us,” even to the point where it is said: “For we are saved by hope” (Rom. 8:18-24) Question 68. About what is written: “Who are you, man, that you object to God?” (Rom.9:20) Question 69. About what is written: “Then the Son Himself will be subject to Him who put all things in subjection to Him” (1 Cor.15:28) Question 70. About what the apostle says: “Death is swallowed up in victory. Where, death, is your effort? Where, death, is your sting? But the sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law” (1 Cor. 15:54-56) Question 71. About what is written: “Bear one another’s burdens, and thus fulfill the law of Christ” (Gal. 6:2) Question 72. About eternal times Question 73. About what is written: “And he was found to be like a man” (Phil. 2:7) Question 74. About what is written in the letter of [the Apostle] Paul to the Colossians: “In whom we have redemption and the forgiveness of sins, who is the image of the invisible God” (Col. 1:14-15) Question 75. About the inheritance of God Question 76. About what the Apostle James says: “But do you want to know, O unfounded man, that faith without works is dead?” (James 2:20) Question 77. About fear, is it a sin Question 78. About the beauty of images Question 79. Why did Pharaoh’s sorcerers perform some miracles, like Moses, the servant of God? (Exodus 7–8) Question 80. Against the Apollinarians Question 81. About Fourtecost and Pentecost Question 82. About what is written: “For the Lord smites whomever he loves, and smites every son whom he receives” (Heb. 12:6) Question 83. About marriage, to what the Lord said: “If a man lets his wife go, except for the guilt of adultery,” and so on (Matt. 5:32) Question 1. Does the soul exist from itself? Everything that is true is true from the truth; and every soul therefore exists as a soul, due to which it is a true soul. So, for every soul, its very existence as a soul is from the truth. However, the soul is one thing, and truth is another; for truth is not at all subject to error, but the soul is often deceived. So, since the soul is from truth, it is not from itself. Truth is God. Therefore, the soul has God as the Creator of its existence. Question 2. About free decision (or choice, or arbitrariness) Everything that happens cannot be equal to the one from whom it comes, because otherwise justice, which is obliged to give everyone their due, will certainly be removed from nature. Therefore, when God created man, although He created him best, he did not create him as he was. And the person who is good voluntarily is better than the one who is good out of necessity. So, it was necessary to give man free will (voluntas libera). Question 3. Is God to blame for man's deterioration? A person does not become worse through the fault of a wise person. For this is not a small sin, but, on the contrary, so great that it cannot be characteristic of any wise person. And God is superior to every wise man. Consequently, the less through the fault of God a person becomes worse: after all, the will of God is much more perfect [the will] of a wise person. And when they say it’s someone’s fault, they say it’s his will. This means that the reason that a person becomes worse is the depravity of the will. And if this depravity, as reason teaches, is certainly not in the will of God, then we should find out: what is it? Question 4. What is the reason that a person becomes worse? The reason that a person becomes worse is either in himself, or in something else, or in nothing. If nothing, then there is no reason. Or, if nothingness is understood in such a way that man is created from nothing or from that which is created from nothing, the cause will again be in himself, for nothing is something like his matter. If in someone else, then we must ask whether it is in God, or in some man, or in something that is neither God nor man. But not in God, for God is the cause of good. So, if in a person, then [the person becomes worse] either through violence or through persuasion. But in no way through violence, so that it does not turn out to be stronger than God; after all, God created man so perfect that if he wanted to remain the best, nothing opposing could interfere with him. If we agree that a person was corrupted by the conviction of another person, then again we must ask: by whom was he who persuades himself corrupted, for he who convinces of such cannot but be bad. Something unknown remains, which is neither God nor man. But even this, whatever it was, either used violence or convinced. We answer about violence as above. Regarding conviction, whatever it may be, we answer that since conviction does not force the unwilling, the cause of his corruption goes back to the will of this person himself, whether he is corrupted by someone else’s conviction or without any conviction. Question 5: Can an unreasonable animal be blessed? A living being that is devoid of intelligence is also devoid of knowledge. And no living being devoid of knowledge can be blissful. So, it is not typical for animals that are not involved in reason to be blessed. Everything that exists is either corporeal or incorporeal. The corporeal is contained in the sensible form, while the incorporeal is in the intelligible. So, everything that is does not exist without some form. And where there is any kind, there is necessarily a certain way [of being], and the way [of being] is something involved in good. Therefore, the highest evil has no way [of being], because it is devoid of all good. This means that it does not exist, since it is not contained in any form; and this very name of evil comes entirely from the absence of species. Question 7. What in the proper sense in an animate being is called a soul? The soul is sometimes spoken of in such a way that it is thought together with the mind (cum mente), as for example when we say that a person consists of soul and body; sometimes they talk about it excluding the mind. But if they speak, excluding the mind, then as a result of such actions they come to know the soul that we have in common with animals. For animals are deprived of thinking, which is an integral property of the mind. Question 8: Does the soul move by itself? He who knows that there is a will in himself knows that the soul moves of its own accord; for when we desire, no one else desires in us. And this movement of the soul in us is arbitrary, for God granted it to be so. But this is not a movement from one place to another, like the movement of a body; for it is inherent in the body to move spatially. And if the soul, through the will, that is, that movement that is not spatial, nevertheless moves its body in space, then for this reason it is not itself moving spatially. For in the same way we see something rotating by means of an axis over a long distance, but the axis itself does not move spatially. Question 9: Can truth be perceived by the bodily senses? Everything that our bodily sense touches, which is called sensory perception, changes without any delay of time, such as when the hair on our head grows, or the body inclines towards old age, or blossoms in youth - all this happens constantly and does not stop happening at all. And that which does not remain cannot be perceived, for that which is comprehended by knowledge is perceived; however, it is impossible to embrace what is constantly changing. So, one should not expect pure truth from the bodily senses. But lest anyone say that there is something perceptible that remains always the same, and propose to us the question of the sun and the stars, in respect of which it will not be easy to refute it, there is certainly no one who would not be forced to agree that there is nothing perceptible that does not admit of a false resemblance, so that it is impossible to make a distinction [between true and false]. For, to say nothing of other things, even if everything that we perceive through the body is not present in the senses, we still experience the influence of images of it [as] if it were really present, as happens in a dream or in a fever. After all, when we experience [these states], we generally find ourselves unable to distinguish whether we feel something with our senses, or whether these are just images of what is sensed. So, if there are false images of the sensory perceived, which cannot be recognized by the senses themselves [as such], and nothing can be comprehended otherwise than by distinguishing it from the false, then there is no firm judgment about the truth in the senses. That is why, in the highest degree of salvation, we are called to turn away from this world, which is entirely corporeal and sensory, and turn with all zeal to God, that is, to the Truth perceived by the intellect and inner mind, always remaining the same and not having a false image from which it could not be distinguished. Question 10. Is the body from God? Every good thing from God, everything that has a form, is good to the extent that it has a form, and everything that is encompassed by a form has a form. And every body, in order to be a body, is encompassed by a certain species. So, every body is from God. Question 11. Why was Christ born of a woman? If God delivers, he does not deliver a certain part, but delivers the whole of everything that happens to be in danger. So, the Wisdom and Power of God, called the Only Begotten Son, when it assumed human nature, pointed to the deliverance of man. And this deliverance of man was to be manifested in each of the two sexes. So, since it became [God] to accept a husband, because this sex is more honorable, then, as a consequence, the liberation of the female sex was manifested in the fact that this husband was born of a woman. Question 12. Statement of a certain sage [Fonteus of Carthage] “Take care,” says [the sage], “O unfortunate mortals, be careful that an evil spirit does not ever stain this dwelling, so that, mixing with the feelings, it does not defile the purity of the soul and darken the light of the mind. This evil creeps in unnoticed through all sensory perceptions: it penetrates into images, joins colors, accompanies sounds, takes refuge in anger and deceptive speeches, is counterfeited by smells, mixed with tastes and the dirt of disordered excitement, darkens the senses with darkened dispositions, fills with a certain fog all the movements of knowledge with which the ray of the mind usually spreads the light of understanding. And since it is a ray of ethereal light, it is a reflection of the Divine presence; in him is God, in him is the undamaged will, in him the reward for the deed justly shines. God is present everywhere. But then He will be with each of us, when the impeccable purity of our mind recognizes itself as being in His presence. For, just as the visual faculty of the eyes, if it is damaged, then does not consider everything that is not capable of seeing to be present (after all, in vain the present images of things would surround the eyes if the eyes lacked integrity), in the same way, for souls stained by sin, it is in vain that God is present, nowhere absent, for the blindness of the mind cannot see Him.” Question 13: What evidence shows that humans are superior to animals? Among many things that can be used to prove that man is superior in intelligence to animals, the most obvious is that animals can be tamed and tamed by people, but people cannot be tamed by animals. Question 14. The body of our Lord Jesus Christ was not a ghost If the body of Christ was a ghost, then Christ was deceiving, and if He is deceiving, then He is not the Truth; however, Christ is the Truth. So His body was not a ghost. Question 15. About thinking (De intellectu) Everything that thinks itself embraces itself, and everything that embraces itself limits itself; thinking thinks itself, therefore limits itself. And it does not want to be limitless, even though it could, because it wants to be known by itself, because it loves itself. God is the cause of everything that exists; and that which is the cause of all things is also the cause of one's own Wisdom; and God never exists without Wisdom. So, He is the eternal cause of His eternal Wisdom; and in regard to time He does not precede His Wisdom. Finally, if it belongs to God to be the eternal Father, so that He was never not the Father, then He was never without the Son. Question 17. About the knowledge of God All the past no longer exists, all the future does not yet exist; This means that both the past and the future are completely absent. But there is nothing that is absent from God, therefore, both the past and the future are present with Him, for everything for God is present. Everything that exists is maintained unchanged by one thing, differentiated [from everything else] by another, and harmonized [with itself] by a third. So, if the whole creation as a whole, firstly, exists in a certain way, then, in the highest degree, different from what is nothing at all, and finally, agrees with itself by its parts, then it is fitting that its cause should also be threefold: why it is, why it is such, why it is friendly to itself. But we call the cause of creation, that is, the Creator, God. So it is necessary that He be the Trinity, better, more intelligent and more blessed than which perfect reason cannot find. Therefore, when the truth is sought, it is also impossible for there to be more than three kinds of questions: whether [something] exists at all, whether it is this or that, whether it should be approved or condemned. Question 19. About God and creation That which is unchangeable is eternal; for it always exists in the same way. And that which is subject to change is subject to time, since it does not always exist in the same way and therefore cannot rightly be called eternal. For that which changes does not remain, and that which does not remain is not eternal. This is the difference between the immortal and the eternal, for everything eternal is immortal, but the immortal is called eternal not entirely accurately, since if something always lived, but underwent changeability, it would not be called eternal in the proper sense, since it is not always the same; although it could rightly be called immortal, since it always lives. However, sometimes even the immortal is called eternal. As for that which undergoes change and, not being itself a soul, is called living because of the presence of the soul, it is absolutely impossible to think of it as immortal, much less eternal. In the eternal, speaking in the proper sense, there is no past, as if it had passed, and there is no future, as if it had not yet existed, but whatever it is, that is what it is. God is not located anywhere. For what is somewhere is contained by the place; that which is contained by a place is a body, and God is not a body. Therefore He is not located anywhere. And yet, since He is and is not in any place, then everything is located in Him rather than He is somewhere, but not in Him as if He were a place. For a place in space is that which is filled by the length, width and height of a body, and God is not something like that. So, everything is in Him, and yet He is not a place. However, the church of God in an improper sense is called the place of God, not because God is contained in it, but because He is present in it. And one cannot imagine a better church than a pure soul. Question 21: Is God the author of evil? Whoever is the cause of everything that is, on whose goodness only the existence of everything that exists depends, non-existence cannot in any way relate to him. And everything that deteriorates falls away from what is being and moves towards non-existence. To be and not to fall away from anything is good, but to fall away is evil. And the one to whom non-existence does not apply is not the cause of deterioration, that is, movement towards non-existence, for he is the cause, so to speak, of “being”. So, He is the cause of only good, and therefore He Himself is the Supreme Good. In view of this, the Creator of all that is is not the author of evil; for to the extent that all this exists, to that extent it is good. Question 22: God is not subject to necessity. Where there is no lack, there is no need; where there is no damage, there is no lack. And in God there is no harm, therefore no need. Question 23. About the Father and the Son Everything that is pure is pure because of purity, and everything that is eternal is eternal because of eternity, and everything that is beautiful [beautiful] is because of beauty, and everything that is good is because of goodness. This means that everything that is wise [is wise] is due to wisdom, and everything that is like [is similar] is due to likeness. But in two ways what is pure is called pure because of purity: either because it generates it, so that it is pure because of that purity that it generates and the beginning and cause of the existence of which it is; or, in another way, because by virtue of participation in purity, that which could once have been unclean is pure. One should think about the other [qualities] in exactly the same way. For they either know or believe that the soul inherits eternity, but it becomes eternal through participation in eternity. But God is not eternal, but [eternal] because he is the creator of eternity itself. You can think the same way about beauty and goodness. That is why, when God is called wise, and is called wise because of His Wisdom, and it is not permissible to believe that He either once was or can be without it, then He is called wise not because of the participation of wisdom, like the soul, which may or may not be wise, but because He Himself gave birth to that Wisdom from which He is called wise. In the same way, that which, by virtue of participation, is either pure, or eternal, or beautiful, or good, or wise, can, as has been said, be neither pure, nor eternal, nor beautiful, nor good, nor wise. And purity itself, eternity, beauty, goodness, wisdom in no way admit of corruption, or, so to speak, temporaryness, or ugliness, or depravity. Therefore also that which by virtue of participation is similar can perceive dissimilarity. The similarity itself cannot in any way or in any part be dissimilar. Therefore, it turns out that when the Son is called “The Likeness of the Father” (2 Cor. 4:4; Col. 1:15), since by virtue of participation everything is like Him, no matter what is similar either to each other or to God (after all, [the likeness] is the Prototype itself, thanks to which, so to speak, everything is formed; and the Form itself, thanks to which everything that is has a form); then in no respect can [the Son] be dissimilar to the Father. So He is the same as the Father; but so that one is the Son, and the other is the Father; that is, one is a likeness, and the other is that of which the first is a likeness; and because of this [They] have one essence. For if not one, then similarity allows dissimilarity, and the possibility that this will happen will be rejected by any true reason. Question 24. Are both sin and righteous action found in the free decision of the will? Whatever happens by chance happens by chance; and everything that happens by chance happens without Providence. So, if something in the world happens by chance, then the whole world is not governed by Providence. If Providence does not govern the whole world, then there is a certain nature or essence that does not belong to the jurisdiction of Providence. And everything that exists because it exists is good. The Supreme Good is that by virtue of participation in Which all other goods exist. And everything that is changeable, because it exists, is good; but not in itself, but through participation in the unchangeable Good. In turn, the Good, by virtue of participation in Which all other goods exist, not because of anything else, but in itself is Good; and we also call it Divine Providence. So, nothing in the world happens by chance. If this is established, then, apparently, it follows that everything that happens in the world is partly done according to Divine will, partly according to our will. However, God is much and incomparably better and more righteous than any best and most righteous person. And He, having justly ruled and directed the universe, does not allow any punishment to be inflicted on anyone undeservedly, or that any reward to be given undeservedly. Sin is worthy of punishment, but righteous deeds are worthy of reward; Moreover, neither sin nor virtue can be justly imputed to someone who does nothing of his own free will. So, both sin and righteous action are in the free decision of the human will. Question 25. About the cross of Christ The wisdom of God took human nature as an example, so that through this we might live properly. And a righteous life is promoted when we are not afraid of what we should not be afraid of. You shouldn't be afraid of death. So, this had to be revealed by the death of that Man whom God’s Wisdom accepted. However, there are people who, although they are not afraid of death itself, are afraid of a certain type of death. However, just as one should not be afraid of death itself, so it is not appropriate for a person who lives well and righteously to be afraid of some kind of death. Consequently, this [view] should no less be shown through the Cross of That Man. For of all types of death there was none more damned and terrible than this. Question 26. About the difference of sins Some sins are sins of weakness, others of ignorance, and others of malice. Weakness is the opposite of strength, ignorance is the opposite of wisdom; malice - goodness. So, anyone who knows what “God’s Power and [God’s] Wisdom” are (1 Cor. 1:23–24) can guess which sins are forgivable. And anyone who knows what the goodness of God is can guess for what sins the undoubted punishment is due both here and in the next century. Having studied this well, one can judge with a high degree of probability who should not be forced to sad and tearful repentance, although they commit sins, and who should not hope for salvation at all, unless they sacrifice to God a contrite spirit in repentance. It may happen that through a bad person God’s Providence both punishes and helps. For the wickedness of the Jews overthrew them and was salvation for the pagans. In the same way, it can happen that God’s Providence, through a good person, both condemns and helps, as the Apostle said: “To some we are a savor of life unto life, to others a savor of death to death” (2 Cor. 2:16). Every torment, however, is either a punishment for sinners or an exercise for the righteous, for the same thing threshes and chops straw, and extracts grains of bread from the chaff, from which it received its name torment. On the other hand, peace and rest from bodily hardships give profit to the good, and spoil the evil ones. Therefore, all this is arranged by God’s Providence in accordance with the merits of souls. However, the good ones do not choose the service of torment for themselves, and the evil ones do not love peace. Therefore, those themselves, with the help of which something unknown to them is accomplished, do not acquire righteousness, since it ascends to God, but reward for their evil will. In the same way, the good are not held to blame if, when they wish to benefit, someone is harmed, but the good spirit is given a reward for his good will. Likewise, the rest of creation, according to the merits of rational souls, is either knowable or hidden, or painful or favorable [for them]. After all, since the Most High God controls everything that he has created perfectly, there is nothing disorderly and nothing unjust in the universe, whether we know about it or not. But the sinful soul is partially damaged; however, since she deservedly is where she should be, enduring what she should endure, no amount of her depravity disfigures the entire Kingdom of God. That is why, since we do not know everything that the Divine order perfectly does in relation to us, then only in part of good will [we ourselves] act according to the law, and in the rest they act according to the law with us, while the law itself remains unchangeable and governs everything that changes [with its] most beautiful guidance. So, “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men” (Luke 2:14). Question 28: Why did God want to create the world? Whoever asks why God wanted to create the world asks about the reason for God's will. But every cause is productive. Still producing more than what is produced. However, there is nothing greater than the will of God, therefore, one should not ask about its reason. Question 29: Is there something higher or lower in the universe? “Consider the highest things” (Col. 3:2). We are commanded to think about what is highest, namely spiritual. We should not consider it highest in relation to the parts and places of this world, but highest in accordance with its superiority, so that our spirit, through which we must renounce the world, does not chain us to a certain part of this world. And the highest and the lowest are within the limits of the world. For the universe in itself does not have a higher and lower; after all, it is a body, since everything the visible is the body, and there is nothing higher or lower in the body of the universe. And due to the fact that, as it seems, the movement occurs in six directions (that which is called movement correctly, that is, is not circular), namely forward and backward, to the right and to the left, up and down, then there is nothing reasonable in the fact that if the body of the universe has nothing in front and behind or on the right and left, it should have something above and below. But those who consider this are misled by the fact that it is difficult to resist the senses and. habits. For it is not as easy for us to turn the body, which it performs, if someone wishes to move with his head down, as it is easy [the rotation that occurs during movement] from the right to the left or from the front to the back. Therefore, having removed the words, the soul must take care of itself to be able to know this. Question 30. Was everything created for the benefit of man? Just as there is a difference between what is honorable and what is useful, so there is also between what should be enjoyed and what should be used. For, although it can be ingeniously argued that everything that is honorable is useful and everything that is useful is honorable, however, since it is more accurately and commonly called honorable that which should be sought for its own sake, and useful that which should be correlated with something else, we will now speak in accordance with this distinction, carefully observing that the honorable and the useful do not come into conflict with each other. For it is usually unreasonably believed that they sometimes contradict each other. So, we say that we enjoy the thing from which we receive pleasure, and we use the thing that we relate to the thing from which we should receive pleasure. Therefore, all human depravity, also called vice, consists in wanting to use what one should enjoy, and wanting to enjoy what one should use. On the contrary, all orderliness, also called virtue, consists in enjoying what one ought to enjoy and using what one ought to use. And one should enjoy what is honorable and use what is useful. What is honorable, I call intelligible beauty, which in the proper sense we call spiritual, and usefulness - Divine Providence. That is why, although there are many visible beautiful things, which are less accurately called honorable, yet beauty itself, due to which everything that is beautiful is beautiful, is in no way visible. Also, many useful things are visible, but the usefulness itself, thanks to which everything that is useful is useful for us, called God's Providence, is not visible. It is well known that the name of the visible encompasses everything corporeal. So, it is proper to enjoy invisible, that is, honorable, beauty, but whether it is all beauty is another question, although, perhaps, it follows that only that which should be enjoyed should be called honorable. And you need to use everything useful, what is the use of each of them. And it is not so stupid to believe that animals also enjoy food and some kind of bodily pleasure; but no one is capable of using a certain thing except a living being involved in reason. For those who are not privy to reason, and even fools themselves endowed with reason, are not given the ability to know what should be correlated with what. Moreover, no one can use a thing about which he does not know what it should be related to; and no one is capable of knowing this except the wise. Therefore, usually those who do not use something well are more correctly called abusers. For in general, that which is poorly used does not benefit anyone, and that which does not bring benefit, of course, is not useful either. After all, if something is useful, then it is useful due to its use, which means that no one uses anything except what is useful. This means that anyone who uses it poorly does not use it at all. So, the perfect mind of man, which bears the name of virtue, first of all uses itself to know God, to enjoy Him by whom it was created; He also uses other living beings: rational ones - for communication, unreasonable ones - for superiority [over them]. And she relates her life to enjoying God, for in this way she becomes blessed. That's why he uses himself. And it is clear that he begins to suffer from pride if he relates to himself and not to God. [The mind] also uses certain bodies that can be animated for good deeds; for this is how he uses his body; something to be accepted or rejected - for health; something that needs to be endured - for patience; something that needs to be put in order - for justice; something that needs to be thought about - to testify to some truth; uses even what he refrains himself from - for abstinence. So, he uses everything, both received and not received; and there is nothing third. And he judges everything he uses; does not judge only God alone, for he judges everything else, correlating it with God. And he does not use Him, but enjoys it, for God should not be related to anything else, since everything that should be related to something else is lower than what it should be related to, and there is nothing higher than God, not in relation to place, but according to the perfection of His nature. So, everything that was created was created for the benefit of man, since the mind, reasoning, uses everything that is given to man. Before the fall, he did not use what served to cultivate patience in him, but after the fall he uses [everything] if only he turns [to God] and even before his bodily death, as far as possible, becomes a friend of God, since he willingly serves Him. Question 31. A certain statement (about virtues in Cicero) 1. Virtue is a property of the soul that is in accordance with the order of nature and reason. Therefore, by learning all the parts [of virtue], one must survey the full power of simple moral virtues. So [virtue] has four parts: prudence, justice, courage, moderation. Prudence is the knowledge of things good, bad and indifferent. Its parts: memory, understanding, foresight. Memory is that by which the soul returns to the past; understanding is how she comprehends the present; Foresight is something by which something future is seen before it happens. Justice is a property of the soul that rewards everyone according to their dignity while respecting the common good. Its beginning stems from nature, then something entered into custom for reasons of benefit, later both what was begun by nature and what was accepted by custom was established by fear of laws and religion. Natural law is one that was not generated by opinion, but was inspired by some innate force, such as religion, devotion, gratitude, protection of rights, respect, truth. Religion is that which gives honor and reverence to some higher nature called the Divine; devotion is that by virtue of which voluntary debt and diligent care are given to relatives by blood and fatherland; gratitude - that which contains the memory of friendship and services of others and the desire to repay; defense of rights - that by which defense or retribution repels violence, injustice and, in general, everything that can harm; respect is something due to which people who stand out for some merit are awarded some kind of reverence and honor; truth is that through which what is, what was and what will be is expressed unchanged. The right of custom is that which strengthens and makes more useful what is easily received from nature, like religion and anything that we talked about earlier, and which, as we see, originating from nature, has become more valuable thanks to custom; or what antiquity has elevated into custom through popular approbation. Its parts are as follows: agreement, propriety, sentence. A contract is something that is concluded between someone, something proper is something that is the same for everyone, a verdict is something by which a decision is made by the votes of one or many. The rule of law is that which is contained in the written law proposed for observance by the people. Courage is the conscious acceptance of dangers and labor. Parts of it: generosity, self-confidence, patience, perseverance. Generosity is the contemplation and execution of great and outstanding deeds, with some important and glorious spiritual purpose in mind. Self-confidence is that by which, in great and honorable deeds, the spirit itself very often arouses in itself confidence with firm hope. Patience is the voluntary and long-term enduring of painful and difficult things for the sake of honor and benefit. Fortitude is the constant and unchangeable holding of a well-considered opinion. Moderation is the firm and calm dominance of the spirit over passion and other improper aspirations of the mind. Its parts: temperance, meekness, modesty. Temperance is that by which passionate desire is governed by the guidance of prudence; meekness is that by virtue of which souls, rashly involved and impelled to hate someone, are restrained by courtesy; modesty is whereby honorable modesty establishes permanent and valuable guidance. 2. And all this should be sought only for its own sake, so that no profit is added here. The proof of this is not relevant to our present discussion and is far from being succinct. And what must be avoided in itself is not only that which is opposite to the above-mentioned [virtues], like cowardice to courage and injustice to justice, but also that which seems close and similar, but [in fact] is very far away. For the opposite kind of self-confidence is uncertainty, and because of this it is a vice, and insolence is not the opposite, but similar [to self-confidence] and close to it, and, however, is a vice. So for each virtue there is a nearby vice, either already named by an exact name (like insolence, which is close to self-confidence; stubbornness, which is close to fortitude; superstition, like religion), or without any exact name. And all this, as well as the opposite of virtues, is counted among what should be avoided. But enough has been said about the type of good that is sought entirely for its own sake. Now, apparently, it is necessary to talk about that [type] to which benefits are also added, but which we still call honorable. 3. So, there are many things that attract both merit and fruit, each in its own way. Glory, dignity, greatness, and friendship belong to this genus. Fame is a frequent praiseworthy report about someone; dignity is someone's position of honor, worthy of reverence, honor and respect; greatness - great abundance or power, or might, or any property; friendship is the desire for good towards someone, for the sake of the one you love, with his equal desire. Since we are talking here about civil cases, we [and say that] we gain the fruit of friendship, so that the reason why it should be sought will be visible, so that we are not accidentally condemned by those who believe that we are talking about all friendship. Although there are those who think that friendship should be sought only for the sake of benefit, there are those who believe that [it should be done] for its own sake, there are [and some who believe that it should be done] both for its own sake and for the sake of benefit. And which of these is considered the most true will need to be considered elsewhere.” Question 32. Does one know a certain thing to a greater degree than another, and thus does not the knowledge of the same thing go on to infinity? Anyone who knows a certain thing differently from what that thing is is deceived; and everyone who is deceived does not know that about which he is deceived. So, anyone who knows a thing otherwise than what it is does not know it. Consequently, it is generally impossible to know anything other than as it is. We know something as it is, since that which is not known as it is cannot be known at all. Therefore, there should be no doubt that there is a certain perfect knowledge, better than which nothing can be; Consequently, the knowledge of a certain thing does not go to infinity, and one cannot know it more than another. No one doubts that the only reason for fear is that we [are afraid] of either losing what we love, or not finding what we expected. How will anyone love the absence of fear and possess it if he fears lest he lose it? For we are afraid of losing much of what we love and have, and therefore we protect it with fear. No one can protect the absence of fear by being afraid. In the same way, anyone who loves the absence of fear and does not yet have it, but hopes that he will have it, should not be afraid that he will not achieve it. For with this fear what is feared is nothing other than the same fear. After all, every fear avoids something, and nothing escapes itself. This means fear is not deterred. But if anyone decides that it is incorrectly said: fear is afraid of something, because rather the soul is afraid of this very fear, then let him pay attention to this, easy to understand: there is no fear except before the impending and inevitable evil. And it is necessary that the one who is afraid avoids something. So, anyone who is afraid to be afraid is in fact the most stupid, because by avoiding, he receives the very thing that he avoids. For since the only thing that frightens is that some evil may happen, then to be afraid that fear might happen is nothing more than to pick up what you have cast out. And if there is something contrary to this, as in fact there is, then let anyone who loves nothing else than not to be afraid should not be afraid in any way. And therefore no one can love only this and not possess it. Whether one should love only this is another question. For whoever is not deprived of spirit by fear is not led into confusion by passionate attraction, nor is sadness tormented, nor is empty and unbridled joy excited. After all, if he passionately desires, since passionate desire is nothing other than love for transitory things, then it is necessary that he be afraid either that he will lose what he once possessed, or that he will not gain it. But he is not afraid, which means he does not desire passionately. Also, if [someone] is tormented by spiritual grief, it is necessary that he be overwhelmed by fear, since in the presence of any misfortunes anxiety is felt, in those cases fear inevitably [is felt]. However, he is devoid of fear, and therefore anxiety. Also, if [someone] rejoices in vain, he rejoices in those things that he may lose, and therefore is necessarily afraid of losing them. But he is in no way afraid, which means he does not rejoice in vain. Question 34: Should love be only the absence of fear? If not being afraid is a vice, one should not love it. But no one who is most blessed is afraid, and no one who is most blessed has any vice. So, not being afraid is not a vice. But insolence is a vice. Therefore, not everyone who is not afraid is bold, although everyone who is bold is not afraid. Likewise, the corpse is not afraid at all. Therefore, although not being afraid is common to both the blessed, the daring, and the corpse, the blessed one masters this thanks to the peace of the soul, the daring - due to recklessness, and the corpse - because he is generally devoid of feelings. So, we must love the absence of fear, since we desire to be blessed; but this is not the only thing to love, since we do not want to be impudent and breathless. Question 35. What should love? 1. Since everything that does not live is not afraid, and no one would argue that it is necessary to lose life so that we can also lose fear, then we should love to live without fear. But, on the other hand, since a life devoid of fear, if also devoid of understanding, is not what one should strive for, one should love to live with understanding without fear. Should we love only this or also love itself? Exactly so, because without the second the first is not loved. But if love is loved because of another, who is to be loved, then it is incorrectly called beloved. For to love is nothing more than to achieve a certain thing for its own sake. So, should one seek love for its own sake, if in the absence of what is loved, it is an undoubted misfortune? Further, since love is a kind of movement, and there is no movement except movement towards something, then if we ask what should be loved, we thereby ask what is what should be moved towards. Therefore, even if love must be loved, then, of course, not all [love] must be loved. For there is also shameful love, when the spirit enslaves itself to something lower than itself; and it is much more accurately called “passionate desire” (cupiditas), that is, “the root of all evil” (1 Tim. 6:10). So, one should not love that which can be removed from the lover and enjoyer. Therefore, what kind of thing should love be loved, if not that which cannot be absent when it is loved? And this is what having something is nothing more than knowing. But gold and any body [are] not the same; to have something is the same as to know it, which means one should not love it. And since something can be loved and not be present, not only from those things that should not be loved, like some beautiful body, but also from those things that should be loved, like a blessed life; and, in turn, one can have something and not love it, like shackles - then one rightly asks whether someone can not love something, to have something means the same thing as to know, although he has it, that is, has known it. But we see that some, for example, learn counting only in order to become wealthy or valued by people thanks to this very science, and when they have studied it, they attribute it to the same goal that they proposed to themselves when they studied it. However, there is no science, the possession of which [means] something other than knowing it, therefore it can happen that someone has something, having which means knowing it, but does not love it. Although no one can fully know or possess a good that is not loved. For who can know what a good is which he does not enjoy? And if he does not love, then he does not enjoy, and, therefore, the one who does not love does not possess what should be loved, although the one who does not possess is capable of loving. So, there is no one who knows the blissful life and remains unhappy; for if one ought to love her, as indeed [one ought], then to know her is the same as to have her. 2. And if this is so, then what else does it mean to live blissfully, if not to have something eternal through knowledge? For what is eternal is - and this alone is correct to consider as such - that which cannot be removed from the lover, and this is precisely the same thing, to know something is the same as to have it. And of all things, the most excellent is that which is eternal, and therefore we can possess this only with the help of that through which we ourselves become more excellent, that is, with the help of the mind. But everything that is contained by the mind is contained by knowledge, and no good is fully known if it is not fully loved. Moreover, it is not true that if the mind alone can cognize, then only one can love. For love is a kind of striving, and we see that striving is also inherent in other parts of the soul, and if it agrees with the mind and reason, then the mind can contemplate in great peace and serenity what is eternal. Therefore, the soul must also love something great with its other parts, something that should be known with the mind. And since what is loved necessarily gives from itself to the lover, it happens that in this way the beloved eternal gives eternity to the soul. Therefore, it is the blessed life that is eternal. What is eternal and provides eternity to the soul, if not God? Love (amor) for that which ought to be loved is better called [spiritual] love (caritas) or affection (delectio). And therefore, with all the strength of our understanding, we should meditate on this supremely saving commandment: “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind” (Matthew 22:37); and about what the Lord Jesus said: “This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom You have sent” (John 17:3). Question 36. About cultivating love 1. I call love (caritas) that by which something is loved, which should not be considered worse than the loving thing itself, that is, that which is eternal and which itself can love the eternal. So, when God and the soul are loved, then [such love] is called in the proper sense love (caritas), and, if nothing else is loved, the most blameless and perfect love; it, apparently, can also be called affection (dilectio). But when God is loved more than the soul, so that a person prefers to belong more to Him than to himself, then we correctly and best take care of the soul, and therefore of the body, taking care of this not under the influence of some restless desire, but only by accepting what is present and offered. And the poison for love is the hope of something temporary, which must be achieved or what must be protected, while its food is the weakening of passionate desire, and perfection is the absence of passionate desire at all. A sign of its growth is a decrease in fear, a sign of perfection is the complete absence of fear, since both “the root of all evil is passionate desire” (cupiditas) (in the Synod. trans.: “The root of all evil is the love of money” (1 Tim. 6.10)), and “perfect love casts out fear” (1 John 4:18). So, anyone who wishes to cultivate it should diligently engage in the eradication of passionate desires. For passionate desire is the love of acquiring temporary things and possessing them. The beginning of its eradication is the fear of God, for one cannot fear God alone without loving. And [this fear] strives for wisdom, so that nothing is truer than what has been said: “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom” (Proverbs 1:7). After all, there is no one who would seek pleasure more than avoid suffering, for we see that even the most ferocious animals are scared away from the greatest pleasures by the fear of suffering, and if it becomes a habit among them, they are called domesticated and tame. Therefore, since there is an inherent reason in man, which - if, due to deplorable depravity, serves passionate desire, so that people are not afraid - convinces that it is possible to hide sins, and arranges the most cunning tricks to keep sins hidden, it happens that people who are not yet delighted by the beauty of virtue and who, only out of fear of the punishments most surely predicted by holy and divine men, are able to refrain from sin and agree that what is hidden from people cannot be hidden from God; they are tamed with greater difficulty than wild animals. And in order to fear God, one must be convinced that everything is controlled by Divine Providence; and not so much with the help of arguments of reason (which if anyone is able to delve into, he can understand the beauty of virtue), as with examples or recent ones, if any, or from history, and especially from that which, under the guiding action of Divine Providence itself, whether in the Old or New Testament, has received the highest guarantee of religion. The same must be done in relation to the punishments of sinners and in the case of the rewards of the righteous. 2. When a certain habit of not sinning convinces that what was considered painful is easy, the sweetness of piety begins to be tasted and the beauty of virtue is transmitted, so that the freedom of love rises above the slavery of fear. Then believers, having been preceded by [this] with the Sacraments of rebirth, which certainly have a very strong effect [on a person], should be convinced of the difference between two people: old and new, external and internal, earthly and heavenly, that is, between those who strive for carnal and temporal goods, and those who strive for spiritual and eternal; and they should also be instructed to expect from God not disappearing and transitory gifts, which can be found in abundance even among unworthy people, but solid and enduring gifts, for the sake of acquiring which one should completely despise everything that is considered good and evil in this world. Here must be offered a most excellent and extraordinary example of the Lord's Man, who, after having shown by so many miracles that He had such great power over [all] things, rejected what fools consider great good, and accepted what they consider great evil. Let everyone dare to imitate such morals and teachings the more, the more they honor Him; and from His promises and admonitions, as well as from the [example] of the many apostles, martyrs and countless saints who imitated Him, it should be clear that one should not despair of this at all. 3. On the other hand, where the temptations of carnal pleasures have been overcome, one should be vigilant, lest the desire to please people creep up and penetrate either through some miracles performed, or through abstinence, patience, or a certain generosity, or under the name of science or eloquence. The desire for honor also belongs to this family. Against all this, let what is written about the glory of love and the vanity of boasting be offered and taught, namely, how shameful it is to want to please those whom you do not want to imitate: for either they are not good, and then there is nothing special in praising the evil, or they are good, in which case it is appropriate to imitate them. But those who are good are good by virtue, and virtue does not achieve what is in the power of other people. So, whoever imitates the good does not seek the praise of any person, and whoever is evil is not worthy of praise. If you want to please people in order to promote their love for God, then you no longer crave this very thing, but something else. Whoever wants to be liked certainly still has fear, firstly, lest, as a result of secret sins, he might be considered a hypocrite by the Lord; then, if he strives to please those who do well, as if, while seeking this reward, he does not lose the one that will be given by God. 4. But when this desire is conquered, one should beware of pride. For it is difficult for someone to consider himself worthy of comparison with people who no longer wants to please them and considers himself full of virtue. So, fear is still necessary, lest what he thinks he has be taken away from him (Matthew 25:29); and he would not have been thrown with his hands and feet bound into outer darkness (Matthew 22:13). Therefore, the fear of God not only lays the beginning of wisdom, but also makes it perfect in one who loves God to the highest degree and [loves] his neighbor as himself. What dangers and difficulties should be feared on this path and what means should be used is another question. Question 37. About the always born Always born is better than always being born, since he who is always being born is not yet born and has never been born and will never be if he is always born. After all, to be born is one thing, but to be born is another. And therefore he is never the Son if he is never born. But He is the Son because He is begotten, and He is always the Son, and therefore He is always begotten. Question 38. About the structure of the soul Since one is nature, another is learning, the third is experience, and they are thought in one soul without any distinction of essence; Likewise, innate abilities are one thing, virtue is another, peace is a third, and all this equally belongs to one and the same essence; and since the soul is a different essence than God, although it was created by Him, God Himself is the Holy Trinity, known by many in words and by few in deeds, then one should very carefully examine what the Lord Jesus said: “No one comes to Me unless the Father draws him” (John 6:44); and: “No one comes to the Father except through Me” (John 14:6); and: He Himself will “guide you into all truth” (John 16:13). What accepts the thing that changes? A living being is food. What is accepted and changed? Same food. What is accepted and not changed? Light with the eyes and sound with the ears. But the soul receives this through the body. But what does [the soul] accept on its own and change in itself? Another soul, accepted in friendship, makes it similar to itself. And what does [the soul] perceive on its own and not change? The truth. Therefore, we must also know what was said to Peter: “Kill and eat” (Acts 10:13); and what [is said] in the Gospel: “And life was the light of men” (John 1:4). Question 40. If the nature of the soul is one, why do people have different desires? From different ideas - different aspirations of souls, from different aspirations - different ways of achieving, from different ways - different habits, from different habits - different wills. And different ideas are created by the order of things, although hidden, but undoubted under the power of Divine Providence. Therefore, one should not therefore assume that the natures of souls are different, since the desires are different, since even the will of one soul changes depending on different circumstances; since she either longs to become rich, or, despising treasures, wants to be wise. And in the very desire for temporary things, one person likes either trade or military service. Question 41. If God created everything, why didn’t He create everything equally? Because everything would not exist if it were the same. For there would not be many kinds of things by which the universe is formed, containing in itself creations of the first and second order, and so on down to the very last. And this is what everyone calls it. Question 42. How was the Wisdom of God the Lord Jesus [simultaneously] both in the womb and in heaven? Just like a human word: even if many people hear it, everyone hears it in its entirety. Question 43. Why did the Son of God appear in a man, and the Holy Spirit in a dove? Because the first came to show people an example of life, and the second came to designate the very gift by which a good life is achieved. And both became visible for the sake of the carnal, for the sake of those who need to be led along the steps of the sacraments from what is discernible with bodily vision to what is comprehended by the mind. After all, words sound and disappear, but what is signified by words does not disappear in the same way when something Divine or eternal is proposed in speech. Question 44. Why did the Lord Jesus Christ come so late? Since everything beautiful exists from the highest beauty, and this is God, temporary beauty is provided by things that pass away and replace [them]. And in every person, every age from childhood to old age has its own attractiveness. Because it is stupid if someone wants to have only youth in a person subject to time, because he will thereby despise other beauties that appear in other ages alternately and in order; it is just as foolish for anyone to wish that there should be only one age in the entire human race. For the human race also passes through its ages like an individual person, and it was necessary that the Teacher, by imitation of Whom one becomes perfect in morals, should come by the will of God only during the youth [of the human race]. This relates to what the apostle said, that under the law as under a schoolmaster (Gal. 3:23-24) the children were kept until the One for whom they were kept, promised by the prophets, came. And one thing is what God’s Providence does, as it were, privately with everyone, and another thing is what it does, as it were, openly with the entire race as a whole. For any individual [people] achieve accurate wisdom only if they are enlightened by the same truth separately, at an age suitable for each. And this Truth, in order for [the entire] people to become wise, perceived the [nature] of man at the appropriate age of the human race itself. Question 45. Against “mathematicians” (astrologers) 1. The ancients called mathematicians not those who are called so today, but those who carefully studied the intervals of time by [observing] the movements of the sky and stars. The Holy Scripture says about them very correctly: “But they are also inexcusable. For if they could understand so much that they were able to explore the temporary world, then why did they not sooner find its Lord? (Wis.13:8-9) Indeed, the human mind, judging by what is visible, can recognize that it itself is better than everything visible. And when he admits that he himself is changeable, due to success in wisdom or lack thereof, he discovers that above him is the unchangeable Truth, and thus, clinging to It, as it is said: “My soul cleaves to You” (Ps. 62:9), he becomes blessed, finding within himself even the Creator and Lord of all that is visible and not looking for what is visible outside, even if it is heavenly. For all this is either not found, or with great difficulty it is found in vain, unless from what is external, thanks to the beauty of [it], the Creator is revealed, dwelling within and creating first the highest beauties in the soul, and then the lower beauties in the body. 2. And against those who are now called mathematicians, who want to subordinate our actions to the celestial bodies and sell us to the stars, and receive from us the very price for which we are sold, nothing more concise and true can be said than to answer them only by taking into account the horoscopes themselves. In horoscopes they mark parts, of which, they say, there are three hundred and sixty in the circle of stars. The movement of the sky during one hour occurs in fifteen parts, so that in as much time fifteen parts arise as one hour contains. Each of these parts is said to contain sixty minutes. And seconds are no longer found in horoscopes, according to which, as they say, they predict the future. But the conception of twins, since, according to the testimony of doctors, whose science is much more precise and clear, it occurs in one intercourse, occurs in such a small moment of time that it does not last even two seconds. So, why is there such a difference in actions, results and desires in twins, if they necessarily have the same horoscope at conception, and one horoscope would be drawn up for them by an astrologer, as for one person? If they want to adhere to the horoscope at birth, they will be refuted by the same twins, who in most cases come out of the womb one after another in such a way that the time interval [between their birth] is again within seconds, and they are not found in horoscopes as subject to study, and therefore cannot be studied. And the fact that, as they say, they predicted much that was true comes out because people do not remember their delusions and mistakes and, paying attention in their answers only to what has come true, they remember what happens not because of their art, which does not exist at all, but because of some hidden lot of things. For, if they want to pay tribute to their skill, they say that they skillfully predict even from something written on parchment, [after all] and from this a certain lot usually involuntarily falls. And if, regardless of art, a verse often comes out of books that foreshadows the future, then what is surprising if not thanks to art, but by chance, some kind of prediction of the future comes from the soul of the speaker? 1. It is believed that Plato was the first to talk about ideas. However, if this name did not exist before he established it, this does not mean that for this reason either the things themselves which he called ideas did not exist, or that they were not known by anyone; but perhaps this means that they were called by one or the other by different names; for a certain known thing, which has no common name, can be assigned any name. For it does not seem to be true that either there were no wise men before Plato, or, if there were, they did not know what, whatever it is, Plato, as has been said, calls ideas, unless they contain such power that, without comprehending them, no one can be wise. However, it is likely that other nations besides Greece also had sages, which Plato himself not only sufficiently testifies to by staying in a foreign land for the sake of improving in wisdom, but also mentions in his books. So, one should not assume that if there were certain [sages], they did not know about ideas, although they may have called them by a different name. But so far we have talked about the name. Let us consider the thing itself, which must be very well thought out and known, under the guidance of established names, so that whoever wants to call what he knows. 2. So, in Latin we can call ideas either forms or species, in order, as it seems, to translate literally. If we call them plans, then we will deviate from the accuracy of the explanation, because in Greek plans are called λόγοι, not ideas; however, anyone who wants to use this word will not come into conflict with the thing itself. For ideas are certain primary forms or plans of things, constant and unchanging, which themselves have not received form [from the outside], and because of this are eternal and always identical to themselves; and they are contained in the Divine understanding. And although they themselves do not arise and do not perish, nevertheless, according to them, they say, everything that is capable of arising and perishing, and everything that arises and perishes, is formed. They deny that they can be contemplated by [any] soul other than the rational one, and that part of it that is the best, that is, the mind and reason itself, as if by some kind of inner and speculative gaze or eye. Also, this rational soul itself, not any and any kind, but [only] having become holy and pure, is recognized as suitable for this contemplation; that is, she whose very eye with which they are contemplated is sound, blameless, clear and similar to what she strives to contemplate. Indeed, what believer and acquaintance with true religion [man], even if he was not yet capable of contemplating it, would dare to reject it, and, on the contrary, who would not openly declare that everything that exists (that is, everything that is contained in its kind due to its own nature), in order to be, was brought into being by God the Creator, and that by this Creator everything that lives lives; and also that the universal integrity of things and the very order according to which everything that changes, under strict guidance, carries out its temporal movement, is contained and governed by the laws of the highest God? When this is established and accepted, who will dare to say that God created everything without meaning? If it is impossible to believe in this and call it correct, then it remains that everything was created in accordance with the plan, and not according to the same plan for man as for the horse; for it is absurd to assume such a thing. So, everything was created in accordance with special purposes. Where should these plans be recognized as being located, if not in the mind of the Creator? For He did not look at anything located outside Him, in order to arrange in accordance with this what He arranged - it is blasphemous to assume such a thing. So, if these plans of all things that have already been created or will yet be created are contained in the Divine mind, and in the Divine mind there can be nothing but the eternal and unchangeable, and Plato calls these first plans of things ideas, then they are not only ideas, but they are the essence of truths themselves, since they are eternal and remain identical and unchangeable. Thanks to participation in them, everything that exists becomes what it is. But the rational soul, among the things created by God, surpasses everything and is very close to God when it is pure; and to the extent that she clings to Him with love, so filled and enlightened by Him with the light of contemplation, she discerns these plans, thanks to the contemplation of which she becomes truly blessed. And she distinguishes them not through her bodily eyes, but thanks to what dominates in herself, by which she rises [above everything else], that is, through her understanding. These designs, as has been said, can be called either ideas, or forms, or types, or designs; and it is given to many to call them whatever they please, but to few to see what is true. Question 47: Will we ever be able to see our thoughts? They are in the habit of asking how, after the resurrection of the body and the transformation of it, which are promised to the saints, we will be able to see our thoughts. And here we must take consideration from that part of our body that most of all possesses light, since it is proper to believe that the angelic bodies, which we hope to have, are the most luminous and ethereal. So, if many movements of our soul are now known in the eyes, it is quite possible that no movement of the soul will be hidden when the whole body becomes ethereal, for in comparison with it these eyes are flesh. Question 48: About being trustworthy There are three kinds of things that are trustworthy. The first is that which is always believed and never known; and such is every history that embraces temporary human actions. The second is what is known in order to believe in it, and such are all human considerations either about numbers or about any sciences. The third kind is that which is first believed and later known. This is what pertains to Divine things; and no one can know this except the pure in heart. And this [purity of heart] appears if they keep the commandments accepted regarding a good life. Question 49: Why did the children of Israel visibly sacrifice livestock? Because there are also spiritual sacrifices, and the carnal people had to fulfill their images, so that through the slavery of the old people the foreshadowing of the new people would be accomplished. The difference between these two peoples can be noticed in any of us, since everyone from the mother’s womb necessarily emerges as an old man [and remains so] until he reaches the age of adolescence; and then he no longer needs to think carnally, but he is able to turn his will to the spiritual and be born again internally. Therefore, what happens thanks to the order of nature and training in one person, educated correctly, this very thing becomes extremely beautiful when, through God’s Providence, it is accomplished and occurs throughout the entire human race. Question 50. On the equality of the Son Since He whom God begat could not beget better than He Himself (after all, there is nothing better than God), He begot Him equal. For if He wanted, but could not, then He is powerless, and if He could, but did not want, then He is envious. And from this they conclude that He begot the Son equal [to Himself]. Question 51. About man created in the image and likeness of God 1. Since the Divine Scripture mentions the outer and inner man and distinguishes them so much that the Apostle says: “But although our outer man decays, yet our inner man is renewed day by day” (2 Cor. 4:16), the question may arise: is only one of them created in the image and likeness of God? After all, if there is only one, then it is stupid to ask: which one? For who will doubt that it is rather the one of whom [the apostle] says that he is being renewed, than the one of whom he says that he is decaying? But whether it’s both is the big question. After all, if the outer man is Adam, and the inner man is Christ, then it is correct to assume that both are. But since Adam did not remain good, such as he was created by God, and because of the love of the carnal he became carnal, it may seem very appropriate that for him to fall meant losing the image and likeness of God. And therefore he is renewed and is also an internal [man]. How is it also external? Is it not according to the body, just as it is internal according to the soul, and the internal is inherent in resurrection and renewal, which now takes place through death to the former life, that is, for sin, and rebirth for a new life, that is, for righteousness? Also, when mentioning these two people, the one whom we must put off, the apostle calls external, and the other, whom we must put on, internal (Col. 3:9-10). In another place, he calls one of them “the image of earthly man,” since he is born, being bound by the sin of the first man, that is, Adam; and the other “in the image of the heavenly man” (1 Cor. 15:47–49), because he is born through the righteousness of the second Man, Jesus Christ. And the outer man, now decaying, will be renewed in the coming resurrection, after he has paid the tribute to that death that he owes to nature, according to the law given in paradise through the commandment. 2. And for what reason it is not incongruous that, as they say, the body was also created in the likeness of God, one who pays close attention to what is said will easily understand: “And God created all things very good” (Gen. 1:31); after all, no one will doubt that He Himself is the First Good. For things can be called like God in many senses: some - being created in accordance with power and wisdom, since in Himself there abides uncreated Power and Wisdom; others live only because He supremely and originally lives; still others exist because He supremely and originally exists. Therefore, that which only exists, but does not live or does not think, is still His likeness, but not in perfection, but only in part, because this too is something good in its place, while He is good above all that is good from Him. And everything that lives, but does not think, shares a little more with likeness. For that which lives also is, but not everything that is also lives. In turn, that which thinks is already so close to resembling Him that there is nothing closer among creation. After all, that which is involved in wisdom both lives and is, and that which lives necessarily exists, but does not necessarily think. Therefore, since a person can participate in wisdom in accordance with the inner man, then in accordance with him he possesses the image [of God] in such a way that he is formed [by God] without the mediation of any nature, and therefore there is nothing more united with God. For [man] thinks, and lives, and is; so there is nothing better than this creation. 3. Also, if we consider as an external man that life in which we perceive through the body with the five most well-known senses, which we have in common with animals - after all, it can also decay due to sensory burdens produced by persecution - then such a person is very rightly called partaker of the likeness of God, not only because he lives - after all, this is also present in animals, but rather due to the fact that he turns to the ruling mind, enlightened by wisdom - and this impossible for animals devoid of reason. Also, the human body - and it is the only one among the bodies of earthly animals that does not bend down, being bent in the abdominal area, for it is seeing and striving to contemplate the sky - the beginning of everything visible - although it is believed that it does not live on its own, but thanks to the presence of the soul, however, not only because it exists - and insofar as it exists, it is certainly good - but also because it is most suitable for contemplating the sky, it may rightly appear to be more created in the likeness of God than other animal bodies. However, since a person deprived of life would be so incorrectly called, it would be more correct to consider the external man not only the body and not only the life contained in the feeling of the body, but both of them together. 4. And they do not ineptly distinguish that one is the image and likeness of God, also called the Son, and the other is that which is in the image and likeness of God, and we know that this is how man was created. There are also those who, not in vain, think that it was said in a double sense: in the image and likeness, since they argue that if it were one and the same thing, then one name would be enough. But they want the mind to be created in the image, which is formed directly by the Truth itself. This mind is also called spirit, but it is not the Holy Spirit, Who has the same essence as the Father and the Son, but the spirit of man. After all, the apostle divides them in this way: “No one knows what is done in man except the spirit of man, and no one knows what is done in God except the Spirit of God” (1 Cor. 2:11). He also speaks of the human spirit: “May [God] preserve your spirit and soul and body” (1 Thessalonians 5:23). After all, the spirit was created by God, like the rest of creation. For in Proverbs it is written thus: “Know that God knows the hearts of all, and He who created the spirit of all knows all things” (Proverbs 24:12). So, they believe that, without any doubt, that spirit in which there is an understanding of truth was created in the image and likeness of God, for it is directly related to the Truth. And they want to see everything else in a person created in the likeness, since every image is similar, but not everything similar is also an image in the proper sense - this can probably be said [only] in an improper sense. But in this matter we must beware lest we begin to assert anything superfluous, and it would be very reasonable to ensure that, since any body has spatial extension, we do not assume that the essence of God is something similar. After all, a thing, the part of which is smaller than the whole, does not correspond to the dignity of the soul, and even less to the greatness of God. Question 52. Regarding what was said [in Scripture]: “I repented that I had created man” (Gen. 6:6-7) Divine Scripture, raising us from the earthly and human way of thinking to the Divine and heavenly, condescends to such words that even the most stupid people use among themselves in everyday communication. Therefore, those men through whom the Holy Spirit spoke did not hesitate to offer in books, where necessary, also the names of the feelings endured by our soul; although it is clear to anyone who thinks correctly that these feelings are far removed from God. So, for example, since it is difficult for a person to take revenge for anything without anger, they still considered it necessary to call God’s vengeance, which occurs entirely without this excitement, anger. In the same way, since they are accustomed to the fact that the purity of a wife is protected by the jealousy of her husband, then God’s Providence, which prescribes and makes sure that the soul does not become corrupted and corrupted in some way, following first one or other gods, was called the jealousy of God. In the same way, they called the hand of God the power with which He acts, and the feet of God - the power through which He preserves everything and rules everything, and the ears of God or the eyes of God - the power through which He perceives and understands everything, and the face of God - the power through which He reveals Himself and is known; and so on in the same way. And all this, of course, is due to the fact that we, to whom the word [of Scripture] is addressed, are in the habit of working with our hands, walking with our feet and getting to where the spirit leads; to perceive the physical with the ears, eyes and other bodily senses, to acquire fame with the face; and everything else related to this rule. In the same way, we tend to easily put aside something we started and turn to something else only when we repent. Therefore, although it is clear to those who study with a bright mind that everything is controlled by the Providence of God in the strictest order, however, what began to happen but did not last (although it was assumed that it would last), quite in accordance with the weak human understanding, is called postponed, as if through the repentance of God. Question 53: About the gold and silver that the Israelites received from the Egyptians 1. Anyone who will carefully consider the acts of economy related to the two Testaments and distributed in accordance with the proportionality of the periods according to the ages of the human race, will fully understand, as far as I can guess, what is suitable for the first age of the human race, and what for the subsequent one. After all, God's Providence perfectly controls everything, so that the entire succession of generations from Adam to the end of the age is distributed in exactly the same way as for an individual person the course of his time is [distributed] in accordance with certain ages from childhood to old age. And therefore, one who turns a reverent soul to Divine readings must also distinguish between the degrees of virtue in morals, as they approach the highest and perfect human virtue. For if he suddenly discovers that sometimes small things are prescribed for small ones, and sometimes larger things for large ones, he should not, considering the smaller ones to be sins in comparison with the larger ones, conclude from this that it is fitting for God to prescribe such things to people. But now it is too long to talk about the degrees of virtue, and therefore it is enough that it relates to the resolution of the present question. As for deception, the highest and perfect virtue is not to deceive anyone and to observe what is said: “Let it be in your mouth: Yes, yes, no, no” (Matthew 5:37). But since this is prescribed for those who have already been promised the Kingdom of Heaven, and to achieve that greater thing for which such a reward is due is a great virtue; for “The Kingdom of Heaven is taken by force, and those who use force take it away” ( Matthew 11:12), then one should ask by what degrees one can achieve this pinnacle and perfection. It is clear that at these levels there are those who were for the time being promised an earthly kingdom. With such a promise, they, like little children, were prepared, and, having begged earthly joys, so far desired for them, from the one God and Lord of all, starting from this and growing in spirit, they decided to also hope for heavenly ones. Divine virtue is not to deceive anyone, so the ultimate vice is to deceive anyone. For those moving from this extreme vice to that highest virtue there is a degree - not to deceive any friends or strangers, but sometimes to deceive enemies. This also [comes] from what the poet said, which has almost become a proverb: “Cunning and courage in battle with enemies are equal!” (Virgil, Aeneid). However, they can, as often happens, deceive the enemy unfairly, as for example, when they conclude a certain temporary peace agreement, called a truce, and do not keep their promises, and in other similar cases. And therefore, the one who, even if he wants to deceive the enemy, still deceives him only by Divine will, is much purer and closer to the mentioned highest virtue. For what punishment or reward someone deserves, either only God knows, or, in any case, [He knows this] much better and more accurately than people. 2. Therefore, God, of course, does not personally deceive anyone, for He is the Father of Truth and the Truth and the Spirit of Truth. But, giving what is worthy to the worthy (after all, this also applies to justice and truth), He uses for retribution and reward those souls that are at the appropriate levels. So, if someone deserves to be deceived, then God not only does not personally deceive him, but [does not deceive] also through such a person who already loves in a proper way and persists in observing [the Lord's commandment]: “Let it be in your mouth: yea, yea, no, no” (Matthew 5:37). Also [He does not deceive] and with the help of an angel, for whom the disguise of deception does not suit, but [does it] or through such a person who does not has also renounced passionate desires of this kind, or through such an angel, who, due to the perversion of his will, is placed on the lower levels of nature, either for the punishment of sinners, or for the exercise and purification of those who are reborn according to God. After all, we read that the king was deceived by the incorrect prophecy of the false prophets, so we can discover that this did not happen without Divine judgment, since the king deserved to be deceived in this way. And [this was accomplished] not through an angel of God, to whom it is not fitting to accept the duty of deception, but with the help of an angel of error, who voluntarily and joyfully sought to have a similar role assigned to him (1 Kings 22:6-37). Indeed, with the help of some places of Holy Scripture, something is explained more clearly that a diligent and pious reader can also find in other places where it is less clear. For in a similar way, our God, for the good of souls, adapted the Divine Books with the Holy Spirit, since He wanted us not only to feed on the clear, but also to exercise in the dark. So, on the basis of that ineffable and sublime control of things, which is carried out by Divine Providence, a natural law is written, as it were, in the rational soul, so that both in the way of life and in earthly morals people observe a similarity to the above distribution. Therefore, the judge considers it unworthy and lawless to personally execute a condemned person, but according to his verdict, this is done by the executioner, appointed to [fulfill] this duty due to his inclination [to such cases], so that the one who, by his cruelty, can execute even an innocent person, restrained by laws, executes only the condemned person. After all, the judge does not do this himself personally, and not through the ruler, lawyer or anyone else performing his duties, to whom it is not appropriate to entrust such an assignment. Therefore, we also use foolish animals for what it is wicked to do with the help of people. For a thief undoubtedly deserves to be tormented by bites, but a person does not do this himself personally, and not with the help of a son, a relative or someone from his house, but with the help of a dog, and it is appropriate for this animal to do so in accordance with the level of [its] nature. So, if someone must undergo something that is not appropriate for others to do, then certain ministers are intermediaries, and appropriate duties are assigned to them. And by using them, justice itself directs not only that everyone undergoes what he should endure, but also those who act, for it is no less fitting for them to do so. Therefore, since the Egyptians were worthy of deception, and the people of Israel, in accordance with the then age of the human race, were still at such a level of morals that it was not unworthy for them to deceive their enemies, it happened that God commanded or, rather, allowed, in accordance with their desire, that they demand from the Egyptians the gold and silver vessels that they passionately desired, while still striving for an earthly kingdom - they demanded without intending to give them back, and received as if they were going to return them (Ex. 3:21–22). God wished that the reward for such long labors and hardships, in accordance with the level of these souls, should not be unfair; so that the punishment of those whom He worthily forced to lose what they should have received back would not be unjust. So, God is not a deceiver - for who would not consider it criminal and wicked to believe in this? - but the fairest distributor of rewards and roles, something - which is worthy of Him alone and befits Him alone, such as, for example, enlightening souls and presenting Himself to them for complete enjoyment, making them wise and blessed - who does it personally; another [performing] with the help of the creation serving Him, arranged in accordance with immutable laws in accordance with merits; and He commands some, and He allows others, so that in a similar way, Divine Providence extends all the way to the control of small birds, as the Lord says in the Gospel, and to the decoration of the [field] grass, and also to the number of our hair (Matthew 6:26–30, 10:29–30, Luke 12:6–7, 24–28). It is also said about this: “He achieves firmly from end to end, and manages everything pleasantly” (Wis.8:1). 3. And regarding the fact that through the ministries of souls subject to His laws, God punishes and rewards those who deserve deserved punishment, while He Himself remains supremely unperturbed, it is written quite clearly: “You consider it unusual for Your power to condemn someone who does not deserve punishment. For Your power is the beginning of righteousness, and since You are the Lord of all, You force Yourself to spare everyone. You show Your power to those who do not believe in the perfection of strength, and in those who know You reprove insolence. But, being the Lord of hosts, You judge with meekness, and govern us with great mercy” (Wis. 12:15-18). 4. The Lord also confirms that first in earthly things there is an ascent to heavenly righteousness, which is prescribed for the more steadfast, when He says: “And if you were not faithful in what belongs to others, who will give you what is yours?” (Luke 16:12) And the Lord Himself shows that the soul is teachable according to its level, saying: “I still have much to say to you, but you cannot bear it now” (John 16:12), and the Apostle [confirms] when he says: “And I could not speak to you, brethren, as to spiritual people, but as to carnal ones. I fed you with milk, and not with solid food, for you were not yet strong, and even now you are not strong; because you are still carnal” (1 Cor. 3:1–3). So, what happened to them in accordance with their level, we see carried out in the entire human race, so that one thing is commanded to carnal people, another to spiritual people, at appropriate times. So, it is not surprising that those who were still worthy to deceive were ordered to deceive enemies who deserved to be deceived. For they were not yet worthy of being told: “Love your enemies,” but they were such that it was necessary to say to them only this way: “Love your neighbor and hate your enemy” (Matthew 5:43-44). After all, it was not yet time to teach in what broad sense this neighbor should be understood. So, a certain beginning was made under the teacher, so that the teacher could lead to perfection. Moreover, the same God also gave a teacher to infants, namely the law through his servant, and a teacher to those who grew up, that is, the Gospel through His only [Son]. Question 54. About what is written: “It is good for me to cleave to God” (Ps. 72:28) Everything that exists is either always the same or not. And every soul is better than every body; for that which gives life is better than that which is given life; and no one will argue that the body is animated by the soul, and not the soul by the body. That which is not a body and yet is something is either the soul or something better than it. For there is nothing worse than any body, since even if someone named the matter from which the body comes, it is correctly called “nothing”, since it is devoid of any form. On the other hand, between the body and the soul one cannot find anything that is better than the body but worse than the soul. For if there were something in between, it would either animate the soul, or animate the soul, or neither one nor the other; [on the other hand] it would either vivify the body, or be vivified by the body, or neither one nor the other. But everything that is enlivened by the soul is the body, and if something enlivens the soul, then it is better than the soul. Further, that which animates the body is the soul; that which is animated by the body is nothing. And neither one nor the other, that is, not needing any life and not delivering any life, is either nothing at all, or something that is better than body and soul. But whether there is something like that in nature is another question. And now the mind knows that there is nothing between the body and the soul, which is better than the body, but worse than the soul. And that which is better than any soul, we call this God; and everyone who thinks of Him is united with Him. For what they think is true, but not everything they believe in is true. And everything that is true and at the same time removed from the senses and from the mind is only believed in, and it is impossible for it to be felt or thought. So, that which thinks God is united with God. The rational soul thinks of God. For [she] thinks that which is always the same and never undergoes any change. But both the body, through time and places, and the rational soul itself, which is sometimes wise and sometimes foolish, undergo changes. And that which is always the same is certainly better than that which is not. And there is nothing better than a rational soul except God alone. So, when [the soul] thinks of something that always remains the same, then it undoubtedly thinks of Him. And this is the Truth itself. And since the rational soul, thinking, unites with the Truth, and this is good for the soul, they rightly accept that this is precisely what is said: “It is good for me to cleave to God.” Question 55. About what is written: “Sixty queens and eighty concubines, and maidens without number” (Song. 6:8) The number ten can represent knowledge of the universe. And if this knowledge relates to the internal and intelligible, denoted by the number six, then it will be, as it were, six times ten, that is, sixty. If [it refers] to the earthly and perishable, which can be designated by the number eight, then it will be eight times ten, that is, eighty. So, queens are souls who reign in the intelligible and spiritual; concubines are those who receive an earthly reward, about whom it is said: “They have received their reward” (Matthew 6:2). “And the maidens without number” are those who do not have certain knowledge, and who may be in danger from different opinions, for number, as has been said, denotes a certain and undoubted firmness of knowledge. Question 56. About the forty-six years of construction of the Church Six, nine, twelve, ten and eight together make forty-five. So, add here the very unit, it becomes forty-six; if you take this number six times, you get two hundred and seventy-six. And they say that human conception occurs and is accomplished in this way, that for the first six days [a person] has the likeness of milk, in the next nine days it changes into blood, then in twelve days it becomes denser, the remaining ten and eight are formed up to the perfect outlines of all members, and from this period the rest of the time, up to the hour of birth, increases in size. So, adding one to forty-five days, and this number denotes perfection, - since six, nine, twelve, ten and eight, combined into one, give forty-five; so, adding, as was said, one, we get forty-six. And when this number is multiplied by the number six at the head of this order, it gives two hundred and seventy-six, that is, nine months and six days. And this period is calculated from the eighth day of the Kalends of April, the day on which they believe the Lord was conceived, for on the same day He also suffered; - and until the eighth day of the January calendar, - until the day on which He was born. So, it is reasonable to say that the Church was built in forty-six years, because it signified His body, so that no matter how many years it took to build the Church, the perfection of the body of the Lord continued in the same number of days (John 2:19-21). Question 57. About the one hundred and fifty-three fish (John 21:11) 1. “All things are yours, but you are Christ’s, and Christ is God’s” (1 Cor. 3:22–23). If you count starting from the first word, you get one, two, three, four. Also: “The head of a woman is her husband, the head of a husband is Christ, and the head of Christ is God” (1 Cor. 11:3). If you count the same way, you get again: one, two, three, four. And one, two, three and four taken together make ten. Therefore the number ten truly denotes the doctrine which embraces God the Creator and the created creation. And since the perfect and indestructible body will submit to the perfect and indestructible soul, and that in turn will submit to Christ, and He to God, not as dissimilar or having a different nature, but as the Son of the Father, then the same number ten truly designates all that is expected to happen in eternity after the resurrection of the body. Perhaps that is why those who are hired by [the Master to work] in the vineyard receive a denarius as a reward (Matthew 20:2). And just as one, two, three and four together make ten, so one, two, three and four taken four times make forty. 2. Further, if the number four truly denotes the body because of the four most famous natures of which the latter is composed: dry, moist, cold and hot, and because the movement from point to length, from length to width, from width to height creates the volume of the body, again contained by the fourfold number, then it is not foolish to think that the number forty denotes the temporary dispensation accomplished for our salvation, when the Lord took on the body and honored people with [His] visible appearance. For one, two, three and four, signifying the Creator and creation, taken four times, that is, manifested in time through the body, make forty. And the difference between four and four times is that four is a state, and four times is a movement. So, as four relates to the body, so four relates to time; and thus a sacrament is instilled, bodily and temporally accomplished for the sake of those who were bound by the love of bodies and subject to the temporal. Therefore, it is rightly thought that the number forty, as has been said, denotes this temporary dispensation. And perhaps this also includes the fact that the Lord fasted for forty days (Matthew 4:2), showing the need of this age, driven by the movement of bodies and time; and for forty days after the resurrection He was with the disciples, giving them insight, as I believe, into the temporary dispensation that [He] accomplished for our salvation. The number forty, if those [equal] parts into which it can be divided are added up, becomes the number fifty, thereby showing (in the case when the parts dividing it are equal to each other) that under the control of justice, bodily and visible action brings about the perfection of man over time. And this perfection, as has been said, is signified by the number ten, for the number forty, when its equal parts are taken together, acquires ten more, and thus, as said above, reaches fifty. After all, the number forty contains one forty times, two - twenty, four - ten, five - eight, eight - five, ten - four, twenty - two. And if you add these numbers together, you get fifty. For it is impossible that any other number could measure the number forty by means of equal parts, except those [numbers] that we have enumerated and added up to the number fifty. So, after the Lord, after His resurrection, spent forty days with His disciples, conveying to them what had been accomplished in time for our sake, He ascended into heaven and after another ten days sent the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:2-9, 2:1-4). By this Spirit those who believed in the temporal and visible were spiritually perfected to receive the invisible. By these ten days themselves, after which He sent the Holy Spirit, He designated by the number ten the very perfection that is provided by the Holy Spirit. The number forty, when its equal parts are added together, just produces this same number ten, and becomes fifty, just as the temporal economy, carried out with justice, extends to perfection, denoted by the number ten, and this ten together with the number forty makes fifty. So, since as long as we remain in the flesh, although we do not live according to the flesh, the perfection carried out through the Holy Spirit is united with the temporal economy, it seems true that the number fifty refers to the Church, but already purified and perfect, which embraces with love both faith in the temporary economy and hope for a future eternity, that is, as if it joins forty and ten. And if the number denoting [the Church] is taken three times, either because it is composed of three kinds of people: Jews, pagans and carnal Christians, or because it is filled with the sacrament of the Trinity, then this very Church, to which the number fifty refers, will reach [the number] one hundred and fifty; for the number fifty taken three times makes one hundred and fifty. And if you add to this the number three itself, since there must be a clear sign that in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit they are washed in the font of regeneration (Matthew 28:19; Titus 3:5), then it will be one hundred and fifty-three. And this is the number of fish, since the net was cast on the right side and therefore caught the great (John 21:6-11), that is, [people] perfect and fit for the Kingdom of Heaven. Indeed, in another likeness, a net cast from the wrong side caught the good and the evil together, and they were separated on the shore (Matthew 13:47-48). For now, in the present Church, the good and the evil are together within the net of the commandments and sacraments of God. The division will take place at the end of the age, as if at the end of the sea, that is, on the shore, when the righteous will reign first temporarily, as it is written in Revelation, and then forever in the city described there (Rev. 21: 1-27). And then, with the cessation of the temporary economy, designated by the number forty, the number ten will remain; and it is this reward that the saints who labor in the vineyard are to acquire. 3. It may also turn out, if we consider this number, that it applies to the holiness of the Church created by Our Lord Jesus Christ. For creation, if divided into the triple number of the soul and the fourfold number of the body, is included in the number seven, and therefore the very perception [by the Lord] of man is spoken of as three taken seven times, since the Father sent the Son, the Father abides in the Son, and by the gift of the Holy Spirit the Son was born of the Virgin. And three means: Father and Son and Holy Spirit, and seven times taken - [denotes] the person himself, perceived during the temporary economy, so that he becomes eternal. So, their product will be twenty-one, that is, seven times three. And this perception of man contributes to the deliverance of the Church, of which He is the Head (Eph. 5:22–23). And the Church itself, due to the soul and body, is concluded in the same number seven. So twenty-one is also taken seven times for the sake of those who are set free through the Lord's Man, and gives one hundred and forty-seven. To this [number] the number six is ​​added as a sign of perfection, since it consists of its parts, into which it is divided without a remainder, so that neither a larger nor a smaller [number] is obtained. It contains a unit six times, a two three times, and a three twice. And these numbers count him, so that all of them taken together, one, two and three, make six. This perhaps also refers to the mystery that God completed all his works in six days (Gen. 2:2). And if you add six to one hundred and forty-seven, that is, a sign of perfection, you get one hundred and fifty-three. And this is the number of fish [caught] when, by order of the Lord, the nets were cast on the right side, where sinners belonging to the left side are not found. Question 58. About John the Baptist 1. If we consider what can be read about John the Baptist in the Gospel, then, due to many worthy testimonies, it is quite reasonable to recognize him as an image of prophetic ministry, and first of all because of what the Lord said about him: “More than a prophet” (Matthew 11:9). For it really signifies all the prophetic ministry that was performed in the Lord from the beginning of the human race until the coming of the Lord. After all, the image of the Gospel is in the Lord himself, and it was foreshadowed through prophecy, and its preaching increases throughout the entire universe from the very coming of the Lord, but prophecy decreases after the onset of what it foretold. So, the Lord says: “The Law and the Prophets until John the Baptist; “from now on the Kingdom of God is preached” (Luke 16:16); and John himself says: “He must increase, but I must decrease” (John 3:30). Which is symbolized both by the day each of them was born and by the death they suffered. For John was born when the days begin to shorten, but the Lord was born when the days begin to grow. One was reduced by a head when he was killed; the second is lifted up by the cross. So, after the prophecy itself, which was contained in John, pointed with its finger to the presence of the One whose coming it had heralded from the beginning of the human race, it began to diminish, and from then on the preaching of the Kingdom of God [began] to increase. And therefore John baptized into repentance (Matthew 3:11), for the old life extends until repentance, and from here the new life begins. 2. However, not only among those who are called prophets in the proper sense, but also in the history of the Old Testament itself, those who search with piety and who are assisted in such searches by Divine help, can find prophecies that are not silent. And this is especially obvious from the following, most clear, images of things: that Abel the righteous was killed by his brother (Gen. 4:8), and the Lord by the Jews; that Noah's ark in the flood (Gen. 7) was administered in the same way as the Church, that Isaac was led to be sacrificed, and a ram is allowed in his place, as if crucified in a thorn bush (Gen. 22:3–13); that in the two sons of Abraham, one from a slave and the other from a free woman, the two Testaments are known (Gal. 4:22–24); that the two nations are represented in the twins Esau and Jacob (Gen. 25:23); that Joseph, having suffered persecution from his brothers, was honored by strangers (Gen. 41:41-44), just as the Lord, killed by His persecutors the Jews, was glorified by the pagans. It would take a long time to mention each [event], and the apostle ends this way, saying: “All these things happened to them as examples; but it was written for our sake, unto whom the end of the ages has come” (1 Cor. 10:11). And if you take the entire human race to be one person, then the end of the ages, like the old age of the old man, is designated by the sixth age, when the Lord came. After all, in one person there are also six ages: infancy, childhood, adolescence, youth, maturity and old age. So, the first age of the human race is from Adam to Noah, the second is from Noah to Abraham, and these divisions are the most obvious and well-known; the third - from Abraham to David, for this is how the Evangelist Matthew divides (Matthew 1:17), the fourth - from David to the resettlement to Babylon, the fifth - from the resettlement to Babylon until the coming of the Lord. The sixth, presumably, from the coming of the Lord until the end of the age; and at this time the outer man, called the old man, decays as if from old age, but the inner man is renewed day by day (2 Cor. 4:16). And then - eternal rest, signified by the Sabbath. It also agrees with this that man was created in the image and likeness of God on the sixth day (Gen. 1:27-31). Moreover, everyone knows that the life of a person who is already doing something is supported by activity and knowledge. For activity is reckless without knowledge, and knowledge is fruitless without activity. But the original life of man, which is rightly believed to have no control, is subject to the five bodily senses; and these [senses] are sight, hearing, smell, taste, touch. And therefore the first two ages of the human race - infancy and childhood - are limited to ten generations, that is, double five, since the race continues by both sexes. So, ten generations from Adam to Noah, and another ten from Noah to Abraham, and these two ages, as we said, are infancy and childhood of the human race. And boyhood, youth and maturity, that is, from Abraham to David, from David to the migration to Babylon, and from that time until the coming of the Lord, are designated by fourteen generations, seven generations in accordance with the same calculation of each sex; despite the fact that activity and cognition are added to the five related to the senses of the body. Old age usually lasts as long as all other ages. For since they say that old age begins from the sixtieth year, and human life can extend up to one hundred and twenty years, it is clear that old age itself can be as long as all previous ages. It is not known how many generations the last age of the human race is calculated, beginning from the time of the coming of the Lord and [lasting] until the end of the age. And God wanted to hide this with benefit, as it is written in the Gospel (Matthew 24:36), and the apostle confirms it, saying that “the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night” (1 Thessalonians 5:2). 3. However, by the above distinction of generations we learn that in the sixth age the human race was visited by the humble coming of the Lord. And as a result of this visitation, a prophecy hidden throughout the previous five ages begins to become apparent. And since the image of this prophecy was John, as was said above, he was born of elderly parents, for due to the old age of the age this prophecy begins to manifest itself; and his mother hid herself for five months, as it is written: “Elizabeth hid herself for five months” (Luke 1:24). In the sixth month, Mary, the Mother of the Lord, visits her, and the baby leaps in the womb, for at the first coming of the Lord, when He considered it appropriate to appear in humility, the prophecy begins to be revealed, but as if in the womb, that is, not yet so clearly that everything is revealed as revealed in the light; for this, as we believe, [will take place] in the future, at the second coming of the Lord, when He comes in glory. And Elijah is expected to be the forerunner of that coming, just as John was the forerunner of this coming. That is why the Lord says: “Elijah has already come, and people have done many things to him; and, if you want to know, he is John the Baptist, who is to come” (cf. Matt. 11:14, 17:12). [It is said thus], since one has already come, and the other must come in the same spirit and in the same power, namely, in the office of a herald. Because of this, John is called by the Spirit, with whom his seer father was filled, as the coming forerunner of the Lord “in the spirit and power of Elijah” (Luke 1:17). And after spending three months with Elizabeth, Mary left (Luke 1:56). This number, it seems to me, denotes faith in the Trinity and baptism in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit; and thereby, thanks to the humble coming of the Lord, the human race is satisfied and prepared for the coming coming of His glory. Question 59. About the ten virgins 1. Among the parables told by the Lord, the one that is proposed in relation to the ten virgins is usually very interesting to questioners. And many have learned from it much that does not contradict faith. However, care must be taken to ensure that all parts of the explanation are consistent. I even read in some writings, like those called apocrypha, something that is not contrary to the Catholic faith, but when I thought about all the parts of this parable, it seemed to me that [it] had little relevance to this place. Moreover, as for this explanation, I do not dare to say anything rashly, fearing [not that] his inconsistency will cause me difficulty, but [fearing] that my slow-wittedness will not reveal his agreement. And what, it seems to me, is not stupid to accept in this case, I will state as briefly and carefully as I can. 2. So, our Lord, being asked in secret by his disciples about the end of the age, among many other things he spoke about, also said the following: “Then the kingdom of heaven will be like ten virgins, who took their lamps and went out to meet the bridegroom. Of these, five were foolish and five were wise. But the five foolish ones took their lamps and took no oil with them. And the wise... took with them oil in their vessels with lamps. And since the groom hesitated, ... everyone fell asleep. But at midnight a cry was heard: Here, the groom is coming, stand up to meet him. Then these virgins stood up and trimmed their lamps. And the foolish said to the wise: Give us some of your oil, for our lamps are going out. The wise answered, saying: Lest there should be a shortage in us and you; Better go to those who sell and buy for yourself. When they went to buy, the bridegroom came, and those who were ready went in with him to the wedding feast, and the door was shut. Later the rest of the virgins come, saying: Lord, Lord, open to us. And He, answering, said: Amen, I tell you, I don’t know you. Watch therefore, for you know neither the day nor the hour” (Matthew 25:1-13). The fact that out of ten virgins five are allowed in and five are expelled means, of course, the separation of good and evil. However, if the name of virginity is honorable, then why is it common to both those accepted and those expelled? Then, what does the quinary number on each side mean? And what does oil mean? For it seems surprising that the wise did not share with those who ask, since it is sinful to refuse out of ill will for those who are so perfect that they are accepted by the bridegroom - and this name undoubtedly designates the Lord Jesus Christ - and it behooves them to be merciful, giving from what they have, for this is prescribed by the saying of the Lord, who said: “Give to everyone who asks you” (Luke 6:30). What is it that giving may cause neither one nor the other to have enough? This all greatly increases the difficulty of the study; although in relation to a careful analysis of everything else, great care should be taken so that everything is united into one whole, and what is said in one place does not contradict what is said in another. 3. So, it seems to me that the five virgins signify the fivefold abstinence from carnal temptations. For the desire of the soul must refrain from desiring the eyes, desiring the ears, desiring the sense of smell, taste, and touch. But since this abstinence is performed partly before God in order to please Him in the inner joy of conscience, and partly before people only in order to gain human glory, then five are called wise and five foolish. However, both of them are virgins, since both of them are temperate, although they rejoice due to different motives. And the lamps that they carry in their hands are the deeds they perform in accordance with their abstinence. For it is said: “Let your works shine before men” (Matthew 5:16). So, everyone “took their lamps and went out to meet the bridegroom.” Based on this, it is appropriate to think that those who are spoken of here are sealed with the name of Christ, because those who are not Christians cannot come out to meet Christ. “But the five foolish men took their lamps and took no oil with them.” After all, many, although they hope very much in Christ’s goodness, however, living abstinently, have no [other] joy than from human praise. That's why they don't have oil with them. For I believe that oil signifies joy itself. “Therefore I have anointed You,” says [the psalmist], “O God, Your God, with the oil of gladness” (Ps. 45:8). And the one who rejoices not because he is inwardly pleasing to God does not have oil with him. “But the wise took oil in vessels with their lamps,” that is, they placed the joy of good deeds in their hearts and consciences. So the apostle instructs: “Let a man examine himself, and then he will have glory in himself, and not in another” (Gal. 6:4). And since the groom delayed, everyone fell asleep, because people belonging to both one and the other kind of abstinence, both those who rejoiced before God and those who found consolation in human glory, will die during this period of time until the resurrection of the dead occurs at the coming of the Lord. But at midnight, that is, when no one knew or expected - after all, the Lord himself said: “But about that day and hour no one knows” (Matthew 24:36), and the Apostle: “The day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night” (1 Thess. 5:2), and from this it is clear that He completely hid when He will come - “there was a cry: behold, the bridegroom is coming; rise up to meet him.” “In the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet, we will all rise again” (1 Cor. 15:51–52). So, all these virgins stood up and trimmed their lamps, that is, the account that they must give about their deeds. For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that everyone there will receive recompense for what he has done in the body, either good or evil (2 Cor. 5:10). “And the foolish said to the wise, Give us some of your oil, for our lamps are going out.” After all, those whose actions are supported by someone else's praise, if it disappears, they suffer from lack; and out of habit they always strive for that from which the spirit is accustomed to rejoice. So, they want to have the testimony of people who do not know their hearts before God, the tester of hearts. But what did the wise people answer? “Lest there be any shortage for us and you.” For everyone will give an account for himself, and someone else’s testimony will not help anyone with God, to Whom the secret [thoughts] of the heart are revealed. Each one has barely enough time for himself to have his conscience present him with evidence. For “who can boast that he has a pure heart?” ( Proverbs 20:9 ) Therefore, the apostle says: “It [means] very little to me to be judged by you or by another person; and I do not judge myself” (1 Cor. 4:3). For if in relation to himself everyone either cannot, or can barely, pronounce a correct opinion, then how can he judge another if no one knows what is happening in a person except the human spirit? (1 Cor 2:11) “Rather, go to those who sell and buy for yourself.” One should not think that they gave advice, but that from the outside they reminded [those] of their crime. For oil is sold by flatterers, who either with false or ignorant praise lead souls astray, and since they [become] as if weak-minded from vain joy, then, having won over [them to themselves], they receive from them, who do not understand what is said: “Those who call you happy are leading you astray” (Is. 3:12), some reward in the form of food, money, honors or other temporary benefits. But it is better to be blamed by the righteous than to be praised by the sinner. “The righteous will correct me,” says [David], “with mercy and reprove me; Let not the oil of sinners anoint my head” (Ps. 140:5). Therefore, go to those who sell and buy for yourself, that is, now let’s see how those who sold you praise and led you astray will help you, so that you seek glory not before God, but from people. “When they went to buy, the bridegroom came,” that is, when they bowed to what was outside and sought the usual joys, for they did not know the joys of the inside, the One who judges came, “and those who were ready,” that is, those whose conscience provided a good testimony before God, “entered with Him to the wedding feast,” that is, where the pure soul unites, in order to be fertilized, with the pure, perfect and by the eternal Word of God, “and the door was closed,” namely, after those who had changed were accepted into the angelic life, “for we will all rise,” says [the apostle], “but we will not all change” (1 Cor. 15:51), - access to the Kingdom of Heaven was closed. After all, after the trial there is no place left for prayers and merits. “Later the rest of the virgins came, saying: Lord, Lord, open to us.” It is not said that they bought oil, and therefore one must think that when there was no longer any joy left from other people’s praises, in a cramped situation and great sorrow, they again began to ask God for help; but His severity after judgment is great, for His mercy offered before judgment is inexpressible. And therefore He said, answering: “Amen, I say to you, I do not know you,” on the basis, one must think, that the Plan of God, that is, the Wisdom of God, does not allow those who, as it turned out, did something in accordance with His commandments not before God, but in order to please people, to enter into His joy. And he concludes: “Watch therefore, for you do not know the day or hour,” not only that last time when the Bridegroom will come, but no one knows [also] the day and hour of his dormition. So, everyone who became ready before sleep, that is, before [the day of] death, to which everyone is subject, will be found ready in the same way when the voice sounds at midnight, awakening everyone. 4. And the fact that, as He said, the virgins came out to meet the groom, this, I believe, should be understood in the sense that the one called the bride consists of these very virgins. For since all Christians are united into the Church, they are called sons united in the Mother, although from the gathered sons themselves the one called Mother is formed. For now the Church is betrothed and is a Virgin, led to the wedding feast, since she restrains herself from worldly corruption, and she will become a Wife when, with the destruction of all mortality, she is fertilized by an immortal [marriage] union. “I have betrothed,” says [the apostle], “you to one husband, in order to present you to Christ as a pure virgin” (2 Cor 11:2). “You,” he says, “a virgin,” moving from the plural to the singular. Therefore, they can be called both virgins and virgins. And why it is said that there are ten of them, it seems to me, has already been explained. “But now we see... in a riddle, but then face to face” (1 Cor. 13:12); and now in part, but then in full. And the fact that now they recognize something in the Holy. Scripture is a mystery and in part, and moreover, this is done in accordance with the Catholic faith - this happens thanks to the pledge that the Virgin Church received during the humble coming of her Bridegroom. She will become His wife at the last coming, when He comes in glory, so that she will already know him face to face. For He “has given us the Spirit as a pledge” (2 Cor 5:5), as the apostle says. And therefore this explanation does not strictly care about anything other than being in agreement with faith, and does not condemn in advance other [interpretations], for they can no less be in agreement with faith. Question 60. [About the words:] “But about that day and hour no one knows, not the angels of heaven, not the Son of Man, but only one Father” (Matthew 24:36) That God knows [something] is also said when He makes [someone] know, as it is written: “The Lord your God is testing you to know whether you are His lovers” (Deut. 13:3). For it is said this way not because God does not know, but so that they themselves may know how much they have improved in love for God. And this is not fully known to people except through occasional temptations; and the word “tempts” itself is put in the sense that “allows one to be tempted.” So when it is said that [God] does not know, it is said either in the sense that He does not approve, that is, does not recognize this in His instruction and teaching, as it is said: “I do not know you” (Matthew 25:12); or [as they express it] when, for the sake of benefit, He makes [people] ignorant [of something] that it is not useful for them to know. Therefore, regarding the statement that only the Father knows [about that day], it will be correct to think that this is said so, since He makes the Son know. And when it is said that the Son does not know, this means that He does not let people know, that is, He does not reveal to them what is not useful for them to know. Question 61. About the fact that the Lord, as written in the Gospel, fed the crowds of people on the mountain with five loaves of bread (John 6:9-13) 1. The five barley loaves with which the Lord fed the crowd on the mountain signify the Old Law, or due to the fact that it was not yet given to the spiritual, but for now to the carnal [people], that is, devoted to the five carnal senses, because the crowd itself was five thousand people; or because this very law was given through Moses, and Moses wrote five books. And the fact that the loaves were barley is excellently signified either by the law itself, given in such a way that in it life-giving food for the soul was hidden by bodily rituals - and the kernel of the barley was covered with a hard husk; or [this means] a people who have not yet gotten rid of carnal desire, which, like chaff, has stuck to their hearts, that is, [a people] who have not yet been circumcised in heart. After all, [this people] did not lay aside their fleshly coverings as a result of threshing torment, through the enlightenment of the mind, when they were led forty years in the desert, just as barley is not freed from the husk by threshing the surface. So, the corresponding law was given to such a people. 2. And the two fish, which gave a pleasant taste to the bread, apparently signify those two persons who ruled this people, so that with their help their plans were moderated, namely the king and the priest, to whom the sacred unction also applied. Their duty was never to break or crumble under the pressure of popular impulses and unrest, to constantly cut through the violent opposition of the crowds, like nasty waves, to move among them, maintaining their purity, and in general, like fish in a stormy sea, to engage in the restless business of governing the people. These two persons were also types of our Lord; for He alone perceived them both, and He alone fulfilled them not figuratively, but in the proper sense. For Jesus Christ is our King, since he showed us an example of struggle and victory; He took on our sins in a mortal body, yielding neither to the tempting nor the frightening temptations of the enemy; finally, having put off the flesh, He confidently deprived the authorities of authority and power and overcame them in Himself (Col. 2:15). So, under His leadership, we are freed from the burden and burdens of this journey of ours, as from Egypt, and the sins that haunt us are drowned in the sacrament of baptism when we ascend [from it]. And while we remain in the hope of His promise, now still invisible, we are, as it were, led through the wilderness, and the Word of God in the Holy Scriptures comforts us, like those [Israelites] - manna from heaven. We expect that under this very leadership we will be able to enter the heavenly Jerusalem as the promised land and will be preserved there forever through His rule and protection. So, it is clear that our Lord Jesus Christ is our King. He is also our Priest forever, according to the order of Melchizedek (Ps. 109:4), for He offered Himself as a burnt offering for our sins and commanded that the likeness of His sacrifice be made in remembrance of His sufferings. Therefore, what Melchizedek brought to God (Gen. 14:18), we now see brought throughout the world in the Church of Christ. So, since our King took upon Himself our sins in order to show us an example of struggle and victory, the Evangelist Matthew, denoting the perception of these very sins and the royal person, begins His genealogy according to the flesh with Abraham, the father of the faithful people, and, calculating the succession of the descendants from top to bottom, reaches David, in whom the stronghold of royal power most clearly appeared; and from there, through Solomon, born of her against whom his father sinned, following the royal line, he brings the genealogy right up to the Lord (Matthew 1:1-17). Another evangelist, Luke, - after all, he also undertook an exposition of the genealogy of the Lord according to the flesh, but [of the Lord] in the person of the Priest, and this person includes cleansing and forgiveness of sins - begins to gradually set forth the genealogy of his ancestors, not at the beginning of the book, like Matthew, but in the place where [it is said how] Jesus was baptized, [that is] where He prefigured the cleansing of our sins; and moves not from top to bottom, as the one who represented Him as if descending to take away sins, but from bottom to top, as if showing Him ascending after the forgiveness of sins. And at the same time, he does not mention those ancestors whom he first mentioned (Luke 3:23–38). For the priestly origin [of Christ] was different, which was realized through one of the sons of David, who took by lot, as was customary, a wife from the priestly tribe; so that Mary was related by blood to two tribes, namely the royal and the priestly. For when Mary and Joseph went to the census, it is written that they were from the house, that is, from the family of David (Luke 2:4). And Elizabeth, about whom it is also written that she is a relative of Mary, was from a priestly family (Luke 1:5, 36). Therefore, just as Matthew, presenting Christ as a King descending to perceive our sins, descends from David through Solomon, because Solomon was born of the one against whom David sinned; so Luke, portraying Christ as a Priest, as if ascending after the forgiveness of sins, through Nathan ascends to David, since thanks to the reproof of the prophet Nathan sent [to him], David begged in repentance for forgiveness of precisely this very sin (2 Samuel 12:1-13). So, after Luke goes over the face of David, he does not disagree with Matthew in the names of the genealogies. For he names the same ones, ascending from David to Abraham, whom he also names, descending from Abraham to David. From David, this descent is distributed into two families, royal and priestly, and from these two families, as was said, Matthew follows the royal one, descending, and Luke follows the priestly one, ascending; so that our Lord Jesus Christ, our King and Priest, is related by blood to the clan of priests and at the same time does not belong to the clan of priests, that is, to the clan of Levi, but comes from the clan of Judah, that is, from the clan of David, and from this clan no one was dedicated to the altar. And for the most part He is called, according to the flesh, the son of David, since both Luke, ascending, and Matthew, descending, meet on David. For it was necessary that the One who was to abolish the sacrifices performed according to the order of Aaron by the Levitical priesthood should not be from the tribe of Levi, so that it would not seem that the cleansing of sins belonged to the tribe itself and to the priesthood itself, which were a temporary shadow of the future. The Lord accomplished this by offering His burnt offering, which was typified in the old priesthood. And He gave the image of His burnt offering to be performed in the Church in memory of His sufferings, so that He might be a Priest forever, not according to the order of Aaron, but “according to the order of Melchizedek” (Heb. 6:20). The mystery of all this can be considered even more carefully, but what has already been considered is sufficient in relation to [the question of] the two fish, which, as we said, denoted two persons, the royal and the priestly. 3. And the fact that this crowd reclined on the grass means that those who accepted the Old Testament, since they were promised a temporary kingdom and a temporary Jerusalem, indulged in carnal hope; “For all flesh is grass, and the glory of man is like the flower of grass” (Is. 40:6). And the fact that twelve baskets were filled with the remaining pieces of food means that the disciples of the Lord, to whom the number twelve refers, were filled with the explanation and revelation of the very law that the Jews abandoned and abandoned. After all, there was not yet the Scripture of the New Testament when the Lord, as if refracting what was harsh and revealing what was hidden in the law, filled the disciples, when after the resurrection He opened to them the Old Scriptures, beginning with Moses and all the prophets, interpreting to them in all the Scriptures what related to Him. After all, even then two of them knew Him in the breaking of bread (Luke 24:25–31). 4. And therefore they correctly think that the second feeding of the people, accomplished with seven loaves (Matthew 15:34-38), refers to the preaching of the New Testament. For the other evangelist did not say that these loaves were barley, as John said about those five. So, this saturation with seven loaves refers to the grace of the Church, recognized by the well-known sevenfold action of the Holy Spirit. And therefore it is written that there were not two fish here, as in the old law, where only two were anointed, the king and the priest; but there are few fish, that is, those who were the first to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and were anointed in His name, and were sent to preach the Gospel and to tame the stormy sea of ​​this age, which they do on behalf of the greatest “Fish,” that is, Christ, as the Apostle Paul says (2 Cor. 5:20). And in this crowd there were not five thousand people, as where those who were carnal were designated, those who accepted the law, that is, devoted to the five carnal senses, but four thousand; and this number denotes the spiritual, because of the four virtues of the soul, with the help of which they live spiritually in this life: prudence, moderation, courage, justice. Of these virtues, the first is the knowledge of things that should be achieved and which should be avoided, the second is the curbing of passion for temporary pleasure; the third is firmness of spirit against what is temporarily painful, the fourth, extending to all others, is love for God and neighbor. 5. It is reasonable that both five thousand and four thousand are mentioned here, excluding women and children; and this, it seems to me, serves to make us understand that among the people of the Old Testament there were people who were not steadfast in fulfilling the righteousness of the law, and the Apostle Paul said without complaint that he lived in this righteousness (Phil. 3:5-6); there were also others who were easily seduced into idolatry. And these two kinds, that is, weakness and delusion, are designated by the names of women and children. For the female sex is weak in action, but childhood is convenient for play. And what is as similar to child’s play as the veneration of idols, if the apostle included this kind of superstition here when he said: “Let us not serve idols, like some of them, as it is written: The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play? "(1 Cor. 10:7) So, like women are those who, not remaining steadfast in the labors of waiting in order to achieve what God promised, tempted God; and for the children, those who sat down “to eat and drink and stood up to play.” However, not only here, but also among the people of the New Testament, those who, due to weakness of strength, or because of frivolity, are unable to achieve a perfect husband (Eph. 4:13), should be compared with women and children. For it is said first: “If only the beginning of stability be kept strong to the end” (Heb. 3:14); and the second: “Do not be children in your mind, but be babes to evil, so that you may be perfect in your mind” (1 Cor. 14:20). And therefore, neither in the Old nor in the New Testament are they included in the number, but whether there are five thousand or four thousand here, they are spoken of with the exception of women and children. 6. And although both here and there, for the sake of Christ himself, who is constantly called a mountain in the Scriptures, both the people were fed on the mountain, yet in the second case they reclined not on the grass, but on the ground. For there the top of Christ is covered with carnal hope and desire because of carnal people and earthly Jerusalem, but here, when all carnal desire is removed, the table diners of the New Testament were supported without an interval of grass by the firmament of eternal hope, like the firmness of the mountain itself. 7. And since the apostle says very correctly: “Before faith came, we were kept under the law” (Gal. 3:23), then it seems that the Lord also means this when he speaks of those whom he intended to satisfy with five loaves: “They do not need to go, you give them something to eat” (Matt. 14:16). For with these words they are, as it were, figuratively held back for observance, since the disciples urged Him to let them go. And about the crowds related to the seven loaves, He said that He was very sorry for them, for for the third day they, hungry, had not left Him. For in the entire age of the human race, the third time is the one in which the grace of the Christian faith is given. The first time was before the law, the second was under the law, the third was under grace; and since the fourth still remains, when we reach the complete peace of heavenly Jerusalem, where everyone who correctly believes in Christ is heading, then the Lord says that He will strengthen this crowd so that they do not weaken on the way. After all, in completing the economy, the Lord honored us with his temporary and visible appearance in man and gave us as a guarantee the Holy Spirit, by whose sevenfold action we are quickened, in conjunction with the apostolic authority, as if with the taste of a few fish. So, what else does this dispensation serve, if not so that we can achieve the glory of the highest calling without lack of strength? “For we walk by faith and not by sight” (2 Cor 5:7). And the Apostle Paul himself says that he has not yet reached the Kingdom of God: But “forgetting what lies behind and reaching forward to what lies ahead, I press on according to my purpose to the glory of the highest calling... However, as far as we have attained, let us walk in that” (Phil. 3:13–14, 16), since having been united to the Lord on the third day and saturated with Him, we will not weaken on the way. 8. Even here it turned out to be impossible to prudently reach the end of the feast, but crumbs remained. For it is not in vain that it is said about the future: “Do you not suppose that the Son of Man will come and find faith on earth?” (Luke 18:8) And I believe that this will happen because of women and children. However, the remnants of the pieces filled seven baskets, which include the seven-shaped Church, also described in Revelation (Rev. 1:4), that is, everyone who will be preserved to the end. For He who says: “Do you not suppose that the Son of Man will come and find faith on earth?” - makes it clear by this that even at the end of the feast His crumbs can be left and thrown, but since He also says: “Whoever endures to the end will be saved” (Matthew 24:13), he expresses by this that the Church will not become poor, for she will acquire seven times more abundantly the same seven loaves and will hold [them] by the breadth of her heart, which, apparently, means preservation in baskets. Question 62. About what is written in the Gospel that Jesus baptized more than John, although He Himself did not baptize, but His disciples (John 4:1-2) They ask: did those who were baptized receive the Holy Spirit when, as it is written, the Lord through his disciples baptized more than John; for elsewhere in the Gospel it says: “For the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (John 7:39). And the easiest way to answer is this: The Lord Jesus, Who even raised the dead, could not have allowed any of these [baptized] to die until they received the Holy Spirit after His glorification, that is, His resurrection from the dead and His ascension into heaven. But what comes to mind is the thief to whom it was said: “Truly I tell you, today you will be with Me in Paradise” (Luke 23:43), who did not even receive baptism itself. Although Cornelius and the Gentiles who believed with him received the Holy Spirit before they were baptized (Acts 10:44-47); [so] I don’t see how this thief could say without the Holy Spirit: “Remember me, Lord, when you come into Your kingdom” (Luke 23:42); after all, the apostle says: “No one can call Jesus Lord except by the Holy Spirit” (1 Cor. 12:3). The Lord Himself shows the fruit of [the thief’s] faith, saying: “Truly I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise.” Consequently, just as, thanks to the inexpressible power of the ruling God and justice, baptism itself was imputed to the believing thief, so that as received there was present in the free soul that which he was unable to receive with a crucified body, so in the same way the Holy Spirit was given in secret before the glorification of the Lord, and after the manifestation of His Divinity was taught more openly. And it is said: “For the Spirit was not yet given”; that is, He has not yet appeared in such a way that everyone recognizes that He is given; just as the Lord had not yet been glorified among people, but His eternal glory [never] ceased. In accordance with this, His coming is called a manifestation in mortal flesh, for He came to where He was, since “He came to His own, and was in this world, and the world through Him began to be” (John 1:10-11). Therefore, just as the coming of the Lord is understood as His bodily appearance, although even before this appearance He Himself spoke in all the holy prophets, being the Word of God and the Wisdom of God, so the coming of the Holy Spirit is His appearance to bodily eyes, when we began to see the fire divided over the apostles, and they began to speak in tongues (Acts 2:3-4). For if people did not have the Holy Spirit before the visible glorification of the Lord, then how could David say: “And do not take Your Holy Spirit from me” (Ps. 50:13); or how were Elizabeth or Zechariah her husband fulfilled when they prophesied, and Anna and Simeon, since it is written about all of them that what we read today in the Gospel they spoke, being filled with the Holy Spirit? (Luke 1:41–45, 60–69, 2:25–38). And the fact that God does something secretly, and something for the sake of a visible creature in a visible way, refers to the control of Providence, through which all Divine actions, in accordance with the order and difference of time and place, are carried out in the most beautiful way, while the Divinity itself is not limited by place and does not move, nor is It limited or changed by time. But just as the Lord Himself, of course, had the Holy Spirit within Himself when He came to John to be baptized; [had] in the very man whose [image] he bore; and, however, after He was baptized, the Holy Spirit appeared, descending on Him in the form of a dove (Matthew 3:6), - it should also be thought that even before the obvious and visible coming of the Holy Spirit, all saints [people] could secretly have Him. We affirm this so confidently because we also believe that in the most visible manifestation of the Holy Spirit, which is called His coming, His fullness was poured out more abundantly into the hearts of men in an inexpressible or even incomprehensible manner. “In the beginning was the Word” (John 1:1). What is called λόγος in Greek means both “reason” (ratio) and “word” (verbum) in Latin. But in this place it is better to translate “word” so that not only the relation to the Father is indicated, but also to what was created through the Word by active power. And reason, even if nothing is created through it, is [still] correctly called reason. Question 64. About the Samaritan woman (John 4:4–42) 1. The gospel sacraments, expressed in the deeds and words of our Lord Jesus Christ, are not clear to everyone, and some [people], interpreting them less carefully and less soberly, for the most part lead, instead of salvation, to destruction, and instead of knowledge of the truth, to error. Among these is the mystery that, as it is written, the Lord came to Jacob’s well at the sixth hour of the day, and, tired of the journey, sat down and asked a Samaritan woman for a drink, and so on, which is set forth in the same place of Scripture and which needs to be discussed and sorted out. In doing this, one must first of all adhere to that [rule] which is appropriate for all Scriptures to be observed with the highest vigilance, so that the presentation of the Divine Mystery occurs in accordance with faith. 2. So, at the sixth hour of the day, our Lord came to the well. I see dark depths in the well. Therefore, I am forced to believe that these are the lower, that is, earthly, regions of this world, where the Lord Jesus came at the sixth hour, that is, during the sixth age of the human race, as if in [the days of] old age of the old man, which we are ordered to put aside, so that we may put on the new one, created according to God (Eph. 4:22-24). For the sixth age is old age, just as the first is infancy, the second is childhood, the third is adolescence, the fourth is youth, the fifth is maturity. So, the life of the old man, which passes through the flesh in a temporary state, ends, as it were, with the sixth age of old age. During this old age of the human race, as I said, our Lord, the Creator and Renovator, came to us for us, so that, since the old man dies, he could create a new one in Himself and, having freed him from earthly corruption, transfer him to the Heavenly Kingdom. Therefore, the well, as was said, denotes with its gloomy depth the earthly hardships and delusions of this world. And since the old man is external, and the new is internal (after all, the apostle said: “But even if our external man is decaying, the internal man is being renewed day by day” (2 Cor 4:16), then it is absolutely true (since everything visible, which Christian teaching renounces, refers to the external man) that at the sixth hour the Lord came to the well, that is, in the middle of the day, when the visible sun had already begun to set. After all, if we are called Christ, our enjoyment of the visible is diminished so that the inner man, recreated by the love of the invisible, turns to the inner light that never fades, seeking, in accordance with the teaching of the apostles, not “what is visible, but what is invisible; for what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal” (2 Cor 4:18). 3. And the fact that He came to the well tired signifies the weakness of the flesh; the fact that he sat down is humility, since he accepted the painfulness of the flesh for our sake, and considered it decent to humbly appear to people as a man. The prophet speaks about this weakness of the flesh: “A man who is in suffering and consciously bears illness” (Is. 53:3), and the apostle testifies to humility, saying: “He humbled himself, becoming obedient even to death” (Phil. 2:8). Although, since teachers usually sit, the fact that He sat down, understood differently, may show not the submission of humility, but the face of the teacher. 4. But they may ask why He asked the Samaritan woman, who came to fill a jug of water, to drink, if later He Himself declared that He could give those who asked an abundant flow of a spiritual spring. One must think that the Lord thirsted for the faith of this woman, since she was a Samaritan, and it was customary in Samaria to adhere to the custom of idolatry; for they [the Samaritans], being separated from the Jewish people because of the idols of dumb animals, that is, golden cows, sold the virtue of their souls. And Jesus our Lord came to bring many pagans who served idols under the cover of the Christian faith and true religion; for He said: “Those who are healthy do not need a doctor, but those who are sick” (Matthew 9:12). That is why He thirsts for the faith of those for whom He shed blood. So, “Jesus said to her: Woman, give Me a drink” (John 4:7). And so that you understand what our Lord thirsts for, behold, after some time, His disciples return, having gone to the city to buy food, and say to Him: “Teacher, eat. But He said to them: I have food that you do not know. Therefore the disciples said among themselves: Who brought Him anything to eat? Jesus says to them: “My food is to do the will of Him who sent Me and to finish His work” (John 4:31-34). Does this mean that there is another will of the Father who sent Him, and the work of the Father, regarding which He answered that He wanted to do it, and not that [work] to convert us to His faith from the disastrous error of this world? So, as His food is, so is His drink. Therefore, He longed in this woman to fulfill the will of the Father and complete His work. But, thinking in a carnal way, she answered: “How can you, being a Jew, ask me, a Samaritan woman, for a drink? for Jews do not communicate with Samaritans." Our Lord said to her: “If you knew the gift of God, and Who says to you: Give Me a drink, then you yourself would ask Him, and He would give you living water” (John 4:9-10), to show by this that He is not asking for the water that she thinks about, but since He Himself thirsts for her faith, then He also wants to give her, who is thirsty, the Holy Spirit. For then we will rightly consider this living water, which is the gift of God; just as [the Lord] Himself said: “If you knew the gift of God,” and the same Evangelist John testifies in another place, saying that “Jesus stood and cried, saying: If anyone thirsts, let him come to Me and drink. Whoever believes in Me, as the Scripture says, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water” (John 7:37-38). It is clear that He said this: “Whoever believes in Me, streams of living water will flow from his heart,” since we first believe in order to be worthy of this gift. These streams of living water that He wanted to give to the woman are the reward for the faith that He longed for in her above all. And for this living water [the evangelist] offers the following interpretation: “These things He spoke concerning the Spirit, which those who believed in Him were about to receive: for the Spirit was not yet given; because Jesus was not yet glorified” (John 7:39). So, the gift of the Holy Spirit is what [Jesus] gave to the Church after his glorification, as another scripture says: “When he ascended on high, he took captivity captive and gave gifts to men” (Eph. 4:8). 5. But this woman still thinks carnally, for she answers like this: “Sir, you don’t even have a ladle, and the well is deep, where will you give me living water? Are you greater than our father Jacob, who gave us this well, and who drank from it, and his children, and his cattle?” Now the Lord explains what he said [before], saying: “Whoever drinks of this water will thirst again, and whoever drinks of the water that I will give him will never thirst, but the water that I will give him will be in him a source of water flowing into eternal life.” But the woman still has a carnal mindset. Because what does she answer? “Sir, give me this water so that I don’t thirst and don’t come here to draw. Jesus says to her: Go, call your husband and come here." If He knew that she did not have a husband, then one wonders why he said this. For after the woman said: “I have no husband, Jesus objected to her: You said the truth that you do not have a husband. For you have had five husbands, and the one you now have is not your husband, this you have truly said” (John 4:11-18). However, we should not understand this carnally, lest we ourselves turn out to be so similar to this Samaritan woman. But if we have already tasted something of this gift of God, let us reason about it spiritually. 6. Some believe that the five men are the five books that were taught through Moses. And what is said: “And the one whom you now have is not your husband,” [regarding this] they think that the Lord said [so] about Himself, so that is the meaning. At first you served the five books of Moses as if they were five men; The One whom you now have, that is, Whom you listen to, Who speaks to you, is not your husband, for you have not yet believed in Him. But since, not believing in Christ, she is still certainly in union with these five husbands, that is, the five books, then [the question] may arise how He could say: “You had five husbands,” as if now she no longer had them, although she still lives, subject to them. Then, since the five books of Moses do not proclaim anything other than Christ, just as He Himself said: “If you had believed Moses, you would have believed Me, because he wrote about Me” (John 5:46), then is it possible to conclude that a person departs from these five books in order to move to Christ, if [even] the one who believes in Christ, not leaving these five books, but understanding them spiritually, is more ardently attached to him? 7. So, there is another understanding - that by five husbands we should understand the five bodily senses; the first is related to vision, with the help of which we distinguish this visible light and any colors and shapes of bodies; another is hearing, with which we feel the shocks of the voice and all sounds; the third is the sense of smell, thanks to which we enjoy the sweetness of various odors; fourth, taste in the mouth, feeling sweet and bitter and appreciating all kinds of taste sensations; fifth is the sense of touch [widespread] throughout the body, distinguishing between warm and cold, soft and hard, smooth and rough, and anything else that we feel through touch. And it is with these five carnal senses that the first age of man is permeated, by necessity of mortal nature, and because of this [nature], after the sin of the first man, we are born in such a way that if the light of reason has not yet been returned, then, subject to the carnal senses, we lead a carnal life without any knowledge of the truth. These, of necessity, are infants and small children who are not yet able to use reason. And since these feelings, which govern the initial age and given to us by God the Creator, are natural, they are correctly called husbands, that is, as if legitimate spouses, since the fact that they are mistaken does not classify them as vice in the proper sense; but by nature [their] they belong to the work of God. When everyone reaches such an age that he is already able to use reason, if he manages to immediately master the truth, he will no longer use these sensory guides, but will receive a rational spirit as a husband, to whose service he will give these feelings, subordinating his body to slavery; [and] since the soul is no longer subject to five husbands, that is, to the five bodily senses, but has the word of God as a lawful husband, with whom it is united and bound; since the very spirit of a person cleaves to Christ, since the head of a man is Christ (1 Cor 11:3), then in spiritual embraces without any fear of separation he will fully enjoy eternal life. For “Who can separate us from the love of Christ?” (Rom. 8:35) But since this woman was overcome by error, and this meant that she had been in slavery to empty superstitions for a very long time, then, after the period of the five bodily senses, which, as we said, govern the initial age, the Word of God did not accept her into marriage, but the devil took possession of her in an adulterous embrace. So, the Lord says to her, seeing that she is carnal, that is, reasoning carnally: “Go, call your husband and come here,” that is, get away from the carnal state in which you are now, which is why you cannot understand what I am saying, “and call your husband,” that is, become involved in the spirit of knowledge. For the spirit of a person is in some way a kind of spouse of the soul, who controls the state of mind, like a wife. But this is not the Holy Spirit who remains unchanged with the Father and the Son and is invariably given to worthy souls, but the spirit of man, about which the Apostle says: “No one knows what is in a man except the spirit of man.” And the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God, about whom, on the contrary, he says: “Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God” (1 Cor 2:11). And if this spirit of a person is present, that is, is inside, and reverently submits itself to God, then the person understands what is being said spiritually; and when the delusion of the devil, as if in the absence of understanding, dominates the soul, it becomes dissolute. So, [the Lord] says: “Call your husband,” that is, the spirit that is in you; with its help, a person is able to understand the spiritual if the light of truth enlightens him; and the [Light] itself is present here, speaking to you, so that you can receive spiritual water. And when she said: “I have no husband,” He says: “You said well, for you have had five husbands,” that is, five carnal senses possessed you at an early age, “and the one whom you now have is not your husband,” since there is no spirit in you that knows God so that you can enter into a legal marriage, but rather the delusion of the devil prevails, which destroys you through fornication defilement. 8. And it is possible, in order to indicate to those reflecting that under the name of five husbands the mentioned five feelings are designated, after five carnal responses, this woman in the sixth response calls Christ by name. For her first answer was: “You, being a Jew, how do you ask me for a drink?” Second: “Sir, You do not have a ladle, and the well is deep.” Third: “Sir, give me this water, so that I do not have thirst and do not come here to draw.” Fourth: “I have no husband.” Fifth: “I see that You are a prophet. Our fathers worshiped on this mountain.” For this answer is carnal. After all, the carnal were given an earthly place to worship, but the spiritual But the Lord named those who will worship in spirit and in truth. When this was said, the wife in the sixth answer admits that Christ is the teacher of all this; for he says: “I know that the Messiah will come, that is, Christ; when He comes, He Himself will tell us all things” (John 4:25). as an adulterer. For Jesus says to her: “It is I who speak to you.” When she heard this, she did not answer, but immediately, leaving her jug, in a hurry, she went into the city, not only to believe her in the Gospel and the coming of the Lord, but also to announce it. One should not neglect the one who left, leaving the jug. For the jug, perhaps, signifies the love of this age, that is, the passionate desire with which people from the dark depths, the image of which is a well, that is, from the earthly way of life, draw pleasure and, having mastered it, are again inflamed with the desire for it, as [the Lord] said: “Everyone who drinks this water will thirst again.” But it is necessary that the believer in Christ renounce this age and, leaving the pitcher, show that he has abandoned the passionate desire of this age, not only “believing in the heart for righteousness,” but also intending to “confess and preach with his mouth for salvation” (Rom. 10:10) what he has believed. Question 65. About the resurrection of Lazarus (John 11:1–45) Although, in accordance with the gospel story, we recognize with full faith the resurrection of Lazarus, I have no doubt that it also signifies something in allegory; for [even] if real circumstances are interpreted allegorically, then the deeds are not deprived of authenticity, as for example when Paul proposed an allegory regarding the two sons of Abraham, signifying the two Testaments (Gal. 4:22-26). Was it because of this that either Abraham did not exist, or he did not have these sons? So, we can accept allegorically that Lazarus in the tomb is a soul shrouded in earthly sins, that is, the entire human race; in another place the Lord designates [this soul] as a lost sheep and says that for the sake of its liberation He leaves the other ninety-nine in the mountains (Luke 15:4). And what He asks, saying: “Where did they put him?” - this, as I believe, denotes our calling, which is accomplished in secret, for the predestination of our calling is hidden. The sign of this mystery is the question of the Lord, as if He does not know, whereas [in reality] we ourselves do not know; as the apostle says: “That I may know even as I am known” (1 Cor. 13:12). Also, the Lord shows that He does not know sinners in another place, saying: “I do not know you” (Matthew 25:12), which is what the buried Lazarus meant, since there are no sins in [the Lord’s] teachings and commandments. This question is similar to another in Genesis: “Adam, where are you?” (Genesis 3:9) - because he sinned and hid from the face of God. And this concealment here signifies the tomb, so that the dying person is likened to a sinner, the buried one is likened to one hiding from the face of God. And the fact that He said: “Take away the stone” (John 11:39) - this, as I believe, signifies those who, having come into the Church from the pagans, wished to take upon themselves the burden of circumcision, and the Apostle wrote against them in various ways; or those who live wrongly in the Church and are a temptation to those who want to believe. “Martha said to Him: Lord, it is already four days [he has been in the tomb], and he stinks” (John 11:39). The last of the four elements is earth, and therefore means the corruption of earthly sins, that is, carnal desires. “For you are earth,” the Lord said to Adam when he sinned, “and to earth you will return” (Gen. 3:19). And when the stone was taken away, [Lazarus] came out of the tomb with his hands and feet bound, and his face was covered with a handkerchief. The fact that he came out of the tomb signifies a soul that has moved away from carnal vices, and the fact that he was wrapped in cloth means that even leaving the flesh and serving the law of God with our minds, we are still imprisoned in the body and cannot become alien to the hardships of the flesh, according to the words of the apostle: “With the mind I serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin” (Rom. 7:25). And the fact that his face was covered with a scarf shows that in this life we ​​cannot have complete knowledge, as the apostle says: “Now we see as if with a mirror and in a riddle, but then face to face” (1 Cor. 13:12). What Jesus said: “Untie him, let him go” (John 11:44) means that after this life the veils will be removed so that we can see face to face. And how great the difference is between Man, Whom the Wisdom of God received and through Whom we were freed, and other people, is understood from the fact that Lazarus would not have come out of the tomb if he had not been untied, that is, even a regenerated soul, as long as he sees through the glass, can be freed from all sin and ignorance only through separation from the body. And the linens and robes of the Lord, who committed no sin and knew everything, were found in the tomb (John 20:6-7). He Himself, the only one in the flesh, was not only not restrained by the grave, since no sin was found in it (Is. 53:9), but He was also not bound in shrouds, so that nothing would hide Him or hinder His path. Question 66. About what is written: “Do you not know, brothers (for I speak to those who know the law), that the law has power over a person while he lives?” right down to the place where it is written: “He will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you” (Rom. 7:1–25, 8:1–11) 1. The apostle, in this comparison, speaking of husband and wife, since the wife is connected with the husband by means of the law, proposes for consideration certain three things: the wife, the husband, and the law; a wife, as if subordinate to her husband by the bonds of the law, and from these bonds she is freed with the death of her husband, so that she becomes the wife of whomever she wishes. And he says this: “After all, a wife is bound by the law of marriage to her living husband, and if her husband dies, she is freed from the law of her husband. Therefore, if she marries another while her husband is living, she is called an adulteress, but if her husband dies, she is free from the law, and will not be an adulteress if she marries another” (Rom. 7:2-3). Up to this [place] it is still comparison. Then he begins to say something for the sake of explanation and proof of which he makes this comparison. And here we should equally pay attention to three things: man, sin, law. For [the apostle] says that a person is under the law as long as he lives in sin; just as the wife is under the law of her husband as long as the husband lives. Here we must understand the sin that comes through the law. He calls this sin excessive because, after it has become clear that it is a sin, it is further aggravated by the addition of a crime, for “where there is no law, there is no crime” (Rom. 4:15). And this means what he says: “So by the commandment the sin or the sinner is made excessive” (Rom. 7:13). Therefore, he asserts that the law, even if it restrained from sin, was not given to free from sin, but to point out sin; and the soul serving [sin] in order to be freed from it must turn to the grace of the Deliverer. “For the knowledge of sin [comes] through the law” (Rom. 3:20). And in another place he says: “But sin, in order to appear as sin, through good things caused me death” (Rom. 7:13). So, where there is no grace of the Redeemer, the prohibition of sins increases the desire to sin. This, however, is useful so that the soul realizes that it itself is not enough to deliver itself from slavery to sin, and, thus humbled and suppressing all pride, would submit to its Deliverer; and a person would sincerely say: “My soul cleaves to You” (Ps. 62:9), that is, being [no longer] under the law of sin, but in the law of righteousness. And it is called the law of sin not because the law itself is sin, but because it is imposed on sinners, because [it is called] even the law of death, since “the wages of sin is death” (Rom. 6:23); “The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law” (1 Cor. 15:56). For by sinning we are heading towards death. And we sin more when the law prohibits than when we are not restrained by any law. When grace appears, we, without any burden and very willingly, fulfill the very thing that the law prescribed burdensomely. So the law of sin and death, that is, imposed on those who sin and die, dictates that we should not desire passionately at all, and yet we desire passionately. The law of the spirit of life, which relates to grace and frees us from the law of sin and death, makes it so that we do not desire passionately and fulfill the commands of the law no longer as slaves of the law due to fear, but as friends in love and slaves of righteousness, which declared this law. But righteousness must be served not slavishly, but freely, that is, out of love rather than out of fear. And therefore it is very truly said: “Do we then abolish the law by faith? No way; but we establish the law” (Rom. 3:31). For faith does what the law commands. This means that the law is established through faith. And if this faith is not there, then only the law commands and makes those who do not fulfill orders guilty, so that they, groaning and unable to fulfill what was ordered, can finally be converted to the grace of the Deliverer. 2. So, when we see in this comparison certain three things: wife, husband and law, and, on the other hand, in that for the sake of which the comparison is used, also three: soul, sin and the law of sin; then the only difference [in this case] is that in that likeness the husband dies so that the wife can marry whomever she wishes and be freed from the law of her husband; and here the soul itself dies to sin in order to be betrothed to Christ. And when he dies to sin, he also dies to the law of sin. “Therefore,” says the apostle, “my brethren, you also died to the law through the Body of Christ, so that you might belong to another, the One who was raised from the dead, so that we might bear fruit to God. For while we were in the flesh,” that is, when we were hindered by carnal desires, “then the passions of sin, [discovered] by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit to death” (Rom. 7:4-5). Increased concupiscence, forbidden by the law, in the absence of faith and the guilt of crime added to the heap of sins, since “where there is no law, there is no crime” (Rom. 4:15), he calls this passions, revealed by the law, operating in our members to bear fruit in death. The soul is under the [command] of these passions, as under a ruling man, until grace draws near through faith. Therefore, the one who already serves the law of God with his mind dies to these passions, although as long as he serves the law of sin with his flesh, the passions themselves have not yet died. So, until that which has been strengthened in a bad custom is completely put to death, and the one who is under grace still has something [sinful], which [however] does not conquer him and does not make him a captive; and therefore it is said that the body is still dead, [that is] until it perfectly serves the spirit. And it will serve perfectly when this mortal body itself is revived. 3. From this we conclude that there are four different states in one man, and when these are gradually passed through, he will abide in eternal life. For since it was also fair that after our nature had sinned, we should be born spiritual and carnal, since the spiritual bliss denoted by the name of paradise was missed; then the first action is before the law, the second is under the law, the third is under grace, the fourth is in the world. Acting before the law - when we do not know sin and follow carnal lusts. Acting under the law is when we are already restrained from sin, but we commit it out of habit of vice, since faith does not yet assist us. The third action is when we already fully believe in our Savior, and do not attribute something to our merits, but, loving His mercy, we are no longer overcome by the pleasure of a bad custom, when it tries to lead us into sin, but we still endure its seducing influence, although we are not devoted to it. The fourth action is when in a person there is nothing at all opposed to the spirit, but everything united and bound in harmony with each other maintains a certain unity in lasting peace; and this will happen when the mortal body is given life, when this corruptible puts on the incorruptible, and this mortal puts on immortality (1 Cor 15:53–54). 4. In order to show the first action, the following evidence is suitable, by the way: “Through one man sin entered this world, and through sin death; and thus it passed into all men, [since] all sinned in him. For even before the law there was sin in the world. But sin was not imputed when there was no law” (Rom. 5:12–13). And again: “For without the law sin is dead, and I once lived without the law” (Rom. 7:8–9). For what the apostle says here: “dead,” is the same as what he called above: “not imputed,” that is, he was hidden. And he explains this further when he says: “But sin, in order to appear as sin, brought death to me through good things” (Rom. 7:13), that is, through the law, since “the law is good if anyone uses it lawfully” (1 Tim. 1:8). So, from the fact that the apostle here says: “to be revealed as sin,” it is clear that earlier he said: “dead and not accounted for” in the sense that sin does not become obvious until it is revealed by the prohibiting law. 5. The following evidence approaches the second action: “The law came after, and thus the crime increased” (Rom. 5:20), because a crime also appeared that did not exist; and another [testimony] already mentioned: “For while we were in the flesh, then the passions of sin, [detected] by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit to death” (Rom. 7:5); and this: “What shall we say? Is the law really sin? It won't happen! But I did not know sin except through the law; for I would not understand desire if the law did not say: do not desire. So, having received an opportunity, sin through the commandment produced in me every desire” (Rom 7:7-8); and a little lower: “When the commandment came, sin came to life. But I died, and the commandment that was to life turned out to be death to me. For sin, taking occasion from the commandment, deceived me and killed me by it” (Rom. 7:9-11). So, what he says: “I died,” he wants to be understood this way: I found out that I died; since he who, thanks to the law, sees what he should not do, and yet does it, also sins by transgressing [the law]. And what he says: “Sin, taking an occasion from the commandment, deceived me,” [says this] or because the admonition of pleasure to sin is stronger when there is a prohibition; or because, even if a person does something according to the command of the law, but since [he] still does not have faith, which [is contained] in grace, then he wants to attribute it to himself, and not to God, and, being proud, he sins even more. So the apostle continues and says: “Therefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and righteous, and good. So, has good really become death for me? It won't happen. But sin, in order to appear as sin, through the good caused me death, so that because of the commandment the sin or the sinner becomes excessive. For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal” (Rom. 7:12–14), that is, I agree with the flesh and have not yet been liberated by spiritual grace; “sold to sin,” that is, sinning for the sake of reward [in the form of] temporary pleasures. “For I do not know what I do” (Rom. 7:15), that is, I admit that my actions are not in the commandments of the Truth, where true knowledge resides. In accordance with this expression, the Lord says to sinners: “I don’t know you.” For there is nothing hidden from Him, but since sins are not revealed in the rules of the commandments preserved by the Truth, the Truth itself says to sinners: “I do not know you.” And just as darkness is known when the eyes do not see, sins are known when the mind does not know. Based on this, I believe it is said in the Psalms: “Who will discern transgressions?” ( Ps. 19:13 ) “For I do not do what I want, but what I hate, that is what I do. If I do what I do not want, then I agree with the law that it is good. Therefore, it is no longer I who do this, but sin that dwells in me. For I know that no good thing dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. Because desire is characteristic of me, but I do not find doing good. For I do not do the good that I want, but I do the evil that I do not want. If I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but the sin that dwells in me. So, I find that the law is good for me, who wants to fulfill [it], but evil is characteristic of me. For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man; But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me captive to the law of sin that is in my members” (Rom 7:15–23). These are all the words of a man under the law, and not under grace; and even if he does not want to sin, he is overcome by sin. After all, the carnal dispensation and the natural bonds of mortality prevailed over us, since we all came from Adam. So, one who is in a similar position begs for help and knows that it is his [fault] that he fell, but not his [merit] that he gets up. For, having already been delivered, knowing the grace of the Deliverer, he says to himself: “Poor man that I am! Who will deliver me from the body of this death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord” (Rom 7:24–25). 6. And now the words of a person under grace begin to be uttered, in the action that we indicated third, where the opposing mortality of the flesh is present, but it is not able to defeat [man] or entice [him] into agreement with sin. For the apostle says this: “This means that with my mind I serve the law of God, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin. Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set me free from the law of sin and death.” After all, this was impossible for the law, since it was weakened by the flesh (Rom. 7:25, 8:1-4), that is, through carnal desires. For the law was not fulfilled because there was not yet love for righteousness, and this [love] restrains the mind through internal pleasure, so that it would not be drawn to sin by the enjoyment of temporary things. So, the law was made weak by the flesh, that is, it did not make those given over to the flesh righteous, but “God sent His Son in the likeness of sinful flesh” (Rom. 8:3). For [His] flesh was not the flesh of sin, since it was not born from carnal pleasure, but the likeness of the flesh of sin was inherent in it, since it was mortal flesh. And Adam brought death upon himself only through sin. But what did the Lord do? “Out of sin he condemned sin in the flesh,” that is, by virtue of the fact that he took on the flesh of a sinful person and instructed [us] how we should live, condemned sin in the flesh itself, so that the spirit, flaming with love for the eternal, would not be drawn as a captive into an alliance with lust. “That the righteousness of the law,” says the apostle, “may be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit.” So, the commandments of the law, which could not be fulfilled through fear, were fulfilled through love. “For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh,” that is, they thirst for carnal goods instead of higher blessings, “but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on spiritual things. The mind of the flesh is death, but the mind of the Spirit is life and peace, for the mind of the flesh is enmity against God" (Rom 8:5-7). The Apostle himself shows what enmity means, so that no one would think that another principle comes from the opposite, therefore he adds and says: “After all, he does not submit to the law of God, for he cannot.” Therefore, to act against the law means to be in enmity against God, not because something can harm God, but “[since] anyone who opposes the will of God harms himself; for this is the same as going against the pricks, as was said from above to the Apostle Paul when he was still persecuting the Church (Acts 9:5). It is said [by the apostle] in this way: “After all, it does not obey the law of God, for it cannot,” as if they had said: snow does not warm, for it cannot. After all, as long as it is snow, it does not warm, but it can be melted and heated to warm; however, if you are capable of this, then it is no longer snow. So they call it the mind of the flesh when the soul, instead of higher goods, passionately desires temporal goods, since while such an attraction is inherent in the soul, it cannot be obedient to the law of God, that is, it cannot fulfill what the law prescribes. But if she begins to desire spiritual blessings and neglect temporal ones, then she does not resist the spirit, and the mind of the flesh disappears. For the same soul, if it strives for the lower, is said to have the mind of the flesh, if it strives for the higher, it is said to have the mind of the spirit; after all, the thought of the flesh is not an essence into which the soul puts on or discards, but is a state of the soul itself, and it ceases to exist altogether if it turns itself entirely to the highest. “But those who are in the flesh,” says the apostle, “cannot please God” (Rom. 8:8), that is, those who are content with carnal pleasures. And so that no one thinks that this is said about those who have not yet departed from this life, he very opportunely adds: “You are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit” (Rom. 8:9). In any case, he says this to those who are still in this life; and they continued in the spirit, because in faith, hope and love they were content with the desires of spiritual things. “If only,” he says, “the Spirit of God lives in you. If anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His. And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin, but the spirit is alive because of righteousness” (Rom 8:9–10). He calls the body dead as long as it is such that the lack of bodily things burdens the soul and, through certain movements arising from this lack, encourages a search for earthly things. However, although they arise, the mind does not agree to do what is prohibited, for it already serves the law of God and is under grace. This also applies to what is said above: “With my mind I serve the law of God, but with my flesh the law of sin” (Rom. 7:25). So here a person is depicted living under grace, who does not yet have the perfect peace that will come when the body is resurrected and changed. 7. Therefore, it remains for him to speak about the very world (race) of the resurrection of the body, and this is the fourth action, if only that which is the highest peace can be called an action. For he continues and says: “If the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Jesus Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you” (Rom. 8:11). There is also the most obvious evidence of the resurrection of the body; and it is quite clear that while we remain in this life, the burdens of mortal flesh and certain excitements of carnal pleasures are always present in abundance. For at least he who, being under grace, serves the law of God with his mind, does not yield, but with his flesh he serves the law of sin. And when a person completes this ascent, no evil will be revealed in any essence. And the law is not evil, since it shows a person in what bonds of sins he is imprisoned, so that, having called upon the help of the Deliverer with faith, he is worthy to be freed, restored and firmly established. So, in the first act, which is before the law, there is no struggle with the lusts of this age; in the second, which is under the law, we fight, but are defeated; in the third, we fight and win; in the fourth, we do not fight, but rest in perfect and eternal peace. For that which is below us is subject to us; and [before] we did not obey because we abandoned God who was superior to us. Question 67. About what is written: “For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us,” even to the point that it is said: “For we are saved by hope” (Rom. 8:18-24) 1. This passage is obscure, since it is not entirely clear what the apostle in this case calls a creature. And creation is called, in accordance with Catholic teaching, everything that God the Father created and ordered through the Only Begotten Son in the unity of the Holy Spirit. This means that not only our body, but also our soul and spirit are embraced by the name of creation. And it is said [here] this way: “The creation itself will be freed from the slavery of corruption into the freedom of the glory of the sons of God” (Rom. 8:21), as if we were not a creature, but the sons of God, into whose freedom of glory the creation will be freed from slavery. He also says: “For we know that every creation groans and suffers together until now; and not only she, but ourselves also” (Rom. 8:22–23), as if we were one thing and the creature another. So let's look at this whole passage piece by piece. 2. “For I judge,” says the apostle, “that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us” (Rom. 8:18). This is clear, because he said above: “But if you put to death the deeds of the body in the Spirit, you will live” (Rom. 8:13), which cannot be done without suffering, which must be endured. This also includes what he said a little earlier: “If only we have compassion, that we may also be glorified” (Rom. 8:17). So, what he said: “For the creation waits with hope for the revelation of the sons of God” (Rom. 8:19), I believe, was said in this sense. For it is precisely that which suffers in us when we mortify the deeds of the flesh, that is, when we hunger and thirst out of abstinence, when we curb the pleasure of intercourse with purity, when we endure the torments of injustice and the sting of reproaches with the help of patience, when, despising or rejecting our desires, we work for the fruit of the Mother Church; So, whatever suffers in us during this or a similar kind of contrition is a creature. For the body and soul suffer, which is undoubtedly a creature; and it waits for the revelation of the sons of God, that is, it waits for it to appear as it is called to be, in the glory to which it is called. After all, since the Only Begotten Son of God cannot be called a creature, for through Him everything that God created was created, then we, on the one hand, are called creation before this manifestation of glory, and, on the other, we are called sons of God, although we are worthy of this by virtue of adoption, while He is the Only Begotten Son by nature. Therefore, “with hope the creation,” that is, we with our hope, “awaits the revelation of the sons of God,” that is, we wait for what is promised to be revealed, when the very thing for which we now hope becomes clear. For “we are now sons of God, but it has not yet been revealed what we will be. We only know that when He is revealed, we will be like Him, because we will see Him as He is” (1 John 3:2). This is the revelation of the sons of God, which creation now awaits with hope. And this does not mean that the creature is waiting for the revelation of another nature, which is not a creature, but, being such as it is now, is waiting to become what it is destined to become; as if they said: “When an artist works, he, having selected his paints and prepared them for his work, expects with hope the appearance of an image from the paints, not because then they were different, or were not paints, but only because they had a different dignity.” 3. “For the creation,” says the apostle, “was subjected to vanity” (Rom. 8:20); which means: “Vanity of vanities is all vanity! What profit does a man have for all his labors with which he toils under the sun” (Eccl. 1:2-3). He was told: “By the sweat of your brow you will eat bread” (Gen. 3:19). Therefore, “the creation was not subjected to vanity voluntarily.” Good added: “not voluntarily.” For man sinned voluntarily, but was not voluntarily condemned. So, sin was voluntary - to act against the commandment of the truth, but the punishment for sin is to be subject to error. Therefore, the creation did not submit voluntarily to vanity, but “because of Him who subjected it in hope,” that is, thanks to the justice and mercy of Him who did not leave sin unpunished, and did not want the sinner to remain. incurable. 4. “Since the creation itself” (Rom. 8:21) - that is, man himself, namely when, due to sin, having lost the distinctive sign of the image, he remained exclusively a creature - therefore, “the creation itself,” that is, that which is not yet called the perfect form of sons, but is called only the creation, “will be freed from slavery to corruption.” So, when he says: “and she herself will be freed,” she forces us to understand “and herself” as “we,” that is, we should not despair in relation to those who are not yet called sons of God, since they have not yet believed, but only as creatures, for they too will believe and will be freed from the slavery of corruption, like us, who are already sons of God, although it has not yet been revealed to us what we will be. So, they will be freed from the slavery of corruption “into the freedom of the glory of the sons of God,” that is, they will also become free from slaves and glorified from the dead in the perfect life that the sons of God will possess. 5. “For we know that every creation groans and suffers in pain until now” (Rom. 8:22). “The whole creation” refers to man, not because all the angels and great powers and authorities are in him, or heaven, earth and sea and everything that is in them, but because every creature is either spiritual, or mental, or physical. If we consider this, [starting] from the lower [creatures], [then] the corporeal creature extends into space, the spiritual creature animates the corporeal, and the spiritual rules well when it subordinates itself to God for control; but when [people] transgress His commandments, the [spiritual creature] is overwhelmed by burdens and torments because of the very thing that it could rule. but spiritual, since he is led by the careless licentiousness of his soul, because the spirit does not rule it and does not keep it within the limits of the natural order, since it itself does not surrender itself to God for control. The one who, with the help of the spirit, rules the soul, and through the soul rules the body (and cannot do this unless he, in turn, has God as ruler, for just as “the head of a woman is the husband,” so “the head of the husband is Christ” (1 Cor. 11:3)), is called spiritual. And now we lead a similar life with some suffering, but after that we will not endure anything similar. And since the highest angels live spiritually, and the lower ones - spiritually, animals and all livestock live carnally, and the body does not live, but is revived, then every creature is present in man; for he thinks with the spirit, and feels with the soul, and moves in space with the body. So, “every creature, in man, groans and suffers.” After all, he did not say: “all”, but “every”; as if someone said: “All people who are able [to see] see the sun, but not everyone sees in totality, since they see only with their eyes.” Likewise, every creature dwells in man, since he thinks, and lives, and has a body, but not all of creation is contained in him, because besides him there are angels who think, live and are, and animals that live and are, and bodies that only exist; Moreover, living in itself is more than not living, and thinking in itself is more than living without thinking. Therefore, since unfortunate man groans and suffers, then every creature groans and suffers to this day. And “until now” he rightly said, since, even if some are already in Abraham’s bosom (Luke 16:23), and the thief, having settled down with the Lord in Paradise (Luke 23:43), ceased to suffer on the very day when he believed, yet to this day every creature groans and suffers, since in those who have not yet been liberated, all of it is contained in spirit, soul and body. 6. “And not only,” says the apostle, “every creature groans and suffers, but we ourselves,” that is, not only the body, soul and spirit suffer together in man due to the hardships of the body, but we ourselves, not taking into account the bodies, “we groan in ourselves, having the firstfruits of the spirit.” And he said well: “Having the firstfruits of the spirit,” that is, those whose spirit is already, as it were, sacrificed to God and captured With the divine fire of love, these are the firstfruits of man, since the truth first of all occupies our spirit, so that with its help everything else can be grasped. So, the one who says: “With the mind I serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin” (Rom. 7:25); it is said: “The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak” (Matthew 26:41). But since [such a person] still says: “Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from the body of this death? (Rom.7:24); and [in relation to] such it is also said: “He will also give life to your mortal bodies for the sake of the Spirit who is in you” (Rom. 8:11), then he is not yet a burnt offering, but will become [her] when “death is swallowed up in victory,” when it is said to her: “Where, O death, is your effort? Where, death, is your sting? (1 Cor. 15:54–55) Therefore now, he says, “not only every creature,” that is, together with the body, “but we ourselves, having the firstfruits of the spirit,” that is, we, as souls who have already brought the firstfruits of our mind to God, “we groan within ourselves,” that is, in addition to the body, “waiting for adoption as sons, the redemption of our body” (Rom. 8:23), which means [waiting] for the body itself, having received the gift adoption, to which we are called, revealed, after all the hardships, that we are all completely, liberated, in all respects - sons of God. “For we are saved in hope. But hope, when it sees, is not hope” (Rom. 8:24). Therefore, what is now hope will become reality, “when it is revealed what we will be, that is, we will be like Him, because we will see Him as He is” (1 John 3:2). 7. If this passage is explained in the way it has been stated, then we will not fall into those difficulties, due to which many are forced to assert that all the angels and the highest powers remain in sorrow and groaning until we are completely delivered, because it is said: “Every creation groans and is tormented together” (Rom. 8:22). For although they help us in accordance with their high position, fulfilling the commands of God, who was pleased to send even His only Son for our sake, we must believe that they do this without groaning and torment, so as not to consider them unfortunate; Blessed also is that Lazarus from our number who has already been laid to rest in the bosom of Abraham. Moreover, the apostle says that the creation that groans and suffers has submitted to vanity, which is not permissible to believe in relation to the highest and most excellent creatures - powers and authorities. Then, he argues that she should be freed from the slavery of corruption, but we cannot consider that those who lead a blessed life in heaven are subject to it. However, nothing should be asserted rashly, but with pious diligence the Divine words should be considered again and again, for perhaps that creation that groans and is tormented and is subject to vanity can in some way be understood differently, so that it will not be impious to apply the same to the higher angels, while they help [us] in our weakness according to the command of our Lord. But when giving either the interpretation of this passage that we have outlined, or some other one, one must only be careful not to distort the Catholic faith or damage it. For I know that vain heretics have asserted many impious and unreasonable things regarding this passage. Question 68. About what is written: “Who are you, man, that you object to God?” (Rom 9:20) 1. Although the apostle seems to have rebuked the curious by saying, “Who are you, O man, that you contradict God?” they raise a question about the passage itself, and do not cease to be curious about that statement by which curiosity itself is forbidden. And, being also wicked, they add reproach, saying that the apostle was at a loss in resolving the question and blamed those who asked, because he could not explain what was being asked. And some heretics, who will not be able to deceive [anyone] unless they promise knowledge that [in reality] they do not possess, opposing the Law and the Prophets, consider everything that the Apostle instilled in his sermon concerning them to be false and inserted by deceivers, also wanting to consider this [place] one of the so-called “interpolated”. They would like to deny that Paul himself said: “Who are you, O man, that you contradict God,” since if this is said in relation to them, who slander in order to deceive people, then they will undoubtedly remain silent and will not dare to promise any knowledge about the will of Almighty God to the ignorant, [that is,] to those whom they want to deceive. However, some who read the Scriptures with a pure and godly mind ask what answer can be given here to those who slander or slander? However, we, being savingly committed to the apostolic authority and not at all considering that those books preserved by Catholic teaching are forgeries, we will begin to think in accordance with the truth: those from whom they are hidden are unworthy of knowledge of the Divine mysteries and incapable of this. And if they, grumbling and annoyed that they do not understand the advice of God, begin to say: “He has mercy on whomever he wants; and he hardens whomever he wants. What else is reproaching? For who can resist His will? (Rom 9:18-19) So, if they begin either to condemn Scripture with such words, or to seek cover for their sins in order to neglect the commandments calling us to a good life, then let us answer [them] very decisively: “Who are you, a man, that you contradict God?” and, beingware of them, let us not give holy things to dogs, or cast pearls before swine” (Matthew 7:6), unless we ourselves are already dogs and swine. And, when the Holy Spirit reveals to us something regarding the merits of souls, we will, at least partially or speculatively, assume something sublime and very remote from usual considerations. 2. For the apostle here does not restrain the saints from objecting, but those who are not yet rooted and established in love, so as to be able to comprehend with all the saints the width, length, height and depth, and everything else that is set forth in the same place (Eph. 3:18-19). For he does not protect those from the objection of whom he says: “But he who is spiritual judges all things, but he himself is not judged by anyone” (1 Cor 2:15), and especially this: “But we have not received the spirit of this world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we may know what has been given to us from God” (1 Cor 2:12). So, to whom does he forbid [to object to God], if not things of clay and earth? They, not yet regenerated and not strengthened internally, bear the image of that man who was created from the earth first, earthly (1 Cor. 15:47-49). And since this man did not want to obey the One by whom he was created, he fell into that from which he was created and deservedly heard after sin: “You are earth, and to earth you will return” (Gen. 3:19). It is clear that it is precisely to such people that the apostle says: “Who are you, man, that you object to God? Will the product say to the one who made it: Why did you make me like this? (Rom 9:20) So, while you are a workpiece and not a perfect son, since you do not yet have the fullness of grace, which grants us the power to become sons of God (John 1:12), so that you can hear: “I no longer call you servants, but friends” (John 15:15), “who are you, that you contradict God” and want to know the purpose of God? After all, if you wanted to know the [plan] of a person like you, you would act shamelessly if you did not first become his friend. Therefore, just as we have borne the image of an earthly [man], so let us also bear the image of a heavenly one, putting off the old man and putting on the new (Col. 3:9-10), so that it will not be said to us, like a piece of clay: “Shall the piece say to the one who made it: Why have you made me this way?” 3. And to make it clear that this is not said to the sanctified spirit, but to carnal clay, see what follows: “Has not the potter power over the clay, that from the same mixture he may make one vessel for honor, and another for reproach?” (Rom 9:21) So, since our nature sinned in paradise, by the providence of God we are formed as a result of mortal birth, not in heaven, but on earth, that is, not in the spirit, but in the flesh. We have all become one mass of clay, that is, a mass of sin. And therefore, after we have been deprived of merit due to sin, when the mercy of God has withdrawn, by sinning, we are not subject to anything other than eternal condemnation. So what does a person from this mass want by objecting to God and saying: “Why did you do me this way?” If you want to know this, do not be clay, but become a son of God according to His mercy, for He gives “the power to become sons of God” to those who believe in His name (John 1:12), and not to those who, as you would like, want to know the Divine before they believe. After all, the reward of knowledge is given for merit, and merit is acquired through faith. The grace itself, bestowed by faith, is given without any previous merit on our part. For what merit has the sinner and the wicked? But Christ died for the sake of sinners and the ungodly (Rom. 5:6), so that we might be called to faith, not by merit, but by grace, and by believing, we would add merit. So sinners are commanded to believe, so that through faith they may be cleansed from sin. For they do not know what they will see if they live righteously. Therefore, since they cannot see [this] if they do not live righteously, and are powerless to live righteously if they do not believe, then it is clear that they must begin with faith, so that the commandments that turn believers away from this age make the heart pure, that is, [such] in which God can be contemplated. After all, “blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God” (Matthew 5:8); and the prophet sings: “Seek Him in simplicity of heart” (Wis. 1:1). Therefore, it is rightly said to people who are in the old life and therefore have the dark eye of the soul in themselves: “Who are you, man, that you object to God. Will the product say to the one who made it: Why did you make me like this? Does not the potter have power over the clay, to make from the same mixture one vessel for honor and another for reproach?” “Cleanse out the old leaven, so that you may become new lump” (1 Cor. 5:7), and in yourself no longer a child in Christ, so that you need to be nourished with milk (1 Cor. 3:2), but become a perfect man, so that you may be among those of whom it is said: “But we preach wisdom among the mature” (1 Cor. 2:6). Only then will you truly and correctly hear whether Almighty God has something hidden concerning the innermost merits of souls, grace and righteousness. 4. After all, it is easy to answer in relation to Pharaoh that because of the previous punishments with which he struck foreigners in his kingdom, his heart was properly hardened, so that he did not believe even the most obvious signs of the commanding God. For from the same mass, that is, [the mass of] sinners, [God] made vessels of mercy, helping them when the children of Israel besought him; and the vessels of wrath, that is, Pharaoh and his people; and with punishment the second taught the first. For although both were sinners and therefore belonged to the same mass, those who wept bitterly before the one God so that He could help them should be considered differently, and differently those who were the first to groan because of whose heavy burden. So, “with much patience he spared the vessels of wrath, ready to be destroyed” (Rom. 9:22). And thus, what [the apostle] says: “with much patience,” sufficiently shows their previous sins, in which He spared them, so that it is appropriate to punish them when this punishment appears at the same time as a help to those who are to be freed. And “that He might make known the riches of His glory in the vessels of mercy, which He has prepared for glory” (Rom. 9:23). Here, perhaps confused, you will return to the previous question: If He “has mercy on whom He wants and hardens on whom He wants, then what else does He reproach? For who can resist His will? Indeed, God “has mercy on whomever he wants and hardens on whomever he wants,” but this will of God cannot be unjust. For it comes from the innermost merits, since although sinners form one mass due to original sin, there is still some difference between them. So, something stands out in [some] sinners, due to which they, although not yet justified, nevertheless become worthy of justification, and, in the same way, [something] stands out in other sinners, due to which they are worthy of punishment. Now, the same apostle says in another place: “Because they did not care to have God in the knowledge, God gave them over to a depraved mind” (Rom. 1:28). The fact that He gave them over to a perverted mind means the same thing as “hardening the heart of Pharaoh” (Ex. 9:12); and that they did not take care to have God in knowledge, this means that those who were given over to a corrupt mind were shown to be worthy [of this tradition]. 5. However, it is true that [this depends] “neither on him who wills nor on him who strives, but on God who has mercy” (Rom. 9:16). After all, even if someone, having lighter sins, or, although heavy and numerous, but, due to much sorrow and sorrow, through repentance, was awarded the mercy of God, then this is not his merit (after all, he would have died if he had been abandoned), but the merciful God, who heeded his prayers and sorrow. So, it means little to desire if God does not have mercy; but God, who calls for peace, does not have mercy if [this] was not preceded by the will of [man], for “on earth there is peace among people of good will” (Luke 2:14). And since no one can desire without being prompted and called, either in an internal way, not visible to any of the people, or from the outside, through a sounding sermon or other visible signs, it turns out that the desire itself is produced in us by God (Phil. 2:13). After all, not everyone who was called wanted to come to the feast that the Lord called prepared in the Gospel; however, those who came could not have come unless they were called. So, those who came should not attribute this to themselves, because they were called; and those who did not want to come should not blame others, but only themselves, since they were called to come voluntarily (Luke 14:16-24). And it is clear that calling produces will before [all] merit. Therefore, even if someone ascribes to himself that, having been called, he came, he cannot ascribe to himself that he was called. And the one who, having been called, did not come, did not deserve the reward of being called, but begins to deserve punishment, for, being called to come, he neglected it. Thus, these two [properties] are obvious: “I will sing to you of mercy and justice, O Lord” (Ps. 100:1). There is a vocation to charity; to justice - the bliss of those who came when called, and the punishment of those who did not want to come. Didn't Pharaoh know what good consequences Joseph's arrival had for his land? (Gen.41). So, knowledge of his own history was a calling for him, so that, while treating the people of Israel mercifully, he would not be ungrateful. And not wanting to obey this calling and persecuting with cruelty those to whom he was obliged [to show] humanity and mercy, he deserved punishment, so that his heart hardened, and such blindness of reason seized him that he did not believe the very numerous and great clear signs of God. And with this punishment of his - either his bitterness, or his last visible drowning - the people could be instructed, by insulting which he prepared [for himself] the punishment of both secret torment and obvious drowning (Ex. 5-14). 6. And this calling, which occurs at the appropriate time in individuals or in [entire] nations and the human race itself, is of a higher and deeper order. This also includes the following [testimony of Scripture]: “I sanctified you in the womb” (Jer. 1:5); and: “When you were in your father’s loins, I saw you” (Heb. 7:9–10); and: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated” (Mal. 1:2-3), - after all, this was said even before they were born. And [no one] is able to understand [this] except those few who love the Lord their God with all their heart and with all their soul and with all their mind and love their neighbor as themselves (Matthew 22:37-39). After all, those who are established in such love are already capable, perhaps, together with the saints, of cognizing the length, width, height and depth (Eph. 3:18). However, one must, very firmly believing this, adhere to the fact that God does nothing unjustly, and there is no nature that does not owe to God what it is: after all, all perfection, beauty and proportionality of parts depend on God; so if you were to relentlessly pursue [it] and remove [it] from nature down to the last remnants, then there would be nothing left. Question 69. About what is written: “Then the Son Himself will be subject to Him who put all things in subjection to Him” (1 Cor. 15:28) 1. Those who argue that the Son is not equal to God the Father sometimes tend to cite [in their favor] that testimony where the Apostle Paul says: “When all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subject to Him who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all” (1 Cor. 15:28). It is truly impossible that an error disguised in the Christian name could arise among heretics except from a misunderstanding of the Scriptures; after all, they say: “If He is equal, then how will He submit?” And this is very similar to the famous gospel question: If He is equal, how is the Father greater? After all, the Lord Himself said: “For the Father is greater than I” (John 14:28). The rule of the Catholic faith is that when Scripture says something about the Son [in the sense] that He is less than the Father, to understand this as being said in connection with His perception of man; and when we see that He is called equal, we consider this to be said on the basis that He is God. Therefore, it is clear how it is said: “The Father is greater than I,” and: “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30), and: “God was the Word” (John 1:1), and: “The Word became flesh” (John 1:14), and: “He did not consider it robbery to be equal with God” (Phil. 2:6), and: “He made himself of no reputation, taking the form of a servant” (Phil. 2:7). ). But since many things are also said about Him in accordance with the proper property of the person, in addition to those relating to the perception of man; [and it is said] in such a way that the Father should be considered as nothing other than the Father, and the Son as nothing other than the Son, then the heretics believe that on the basis of passages speaking or understood in this way, He cannot be equal [to the Father]. For it is written: “All things were created through Him” (John 1:3), of course, through the Son, that is, through the Word of God, and by whom if not the Father? For nowhere is it written that the Son brought about any creation through the Father. It is also written that the Son is the image of the Father (Col. 1:15), but nowhere is it written that the Father is the image of the Son; further, that This One is the parent, and This One is the begotten, and so on in the same way. All this does not refer to the inequality of essence, but to the own properties of persons, in relation to which those who say that the Son cannot be equal [to the Father] must be convinced by the weight of authority, since they have a [too] rude mind to penetrate into this. After all, if on the basis of these [passages] the equality of the One through whom all things were created, and the One by whom all things were created, the Image and the One whose Image, the Begotten and the Parent cannot be conceivable, then the apostle would not have suggested, stopping the mouths of stubborn people, the following word, saying: “He did not consider it robbery to be equal with God.” 2. Since, then, what is written to distinguish the Father and the Son is written so partly because of the proper properties of persons, and partly because of the perception of man, while the Divine essence of the Father and the Son is characterized by Divinity, unity and equality, it is rightly asked in relation to the following passage, whether the apostle said this from the perception of human nature or from the own properties of persons: “Then the Son himself will be subject to Him who subjected all things to Him.” Usually” [words] placed nearby clarify the saying of Holy Scripture, since what is located around it is analyzed, carefully examining, [everything] related to this issue. So, we find that [the apostle] came to this place, [starting] from what was said above: Now “Christ has risen from the dead, the firstborn of those who died” (1 Cor. 15:20); for he is talking about the resurrection of the dead. And it was accomplished in the Lord in accordance with man’s perception; however, quite clearly [the apostle] continues and says: “For through man is death, and through man is the resurrection of the dead. For just as in Adam all are put to death, so in Christ all will be made alive. And each in its own order: first Christ, then those who are Christ’s at His coming, then the end, when he hands over the Kingdom to God and the Father, when he abolishes every beginning and every authority and power. For it is fitting that He should reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For He has put all things in subjection under His feet. When he said that everything was subdued, it is clear that except for Him who subdued everything to Him. When all things are submitted to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all” (1 Cor. 15:21-28). So, it is clear that this is said in accordance with the perception of human nature. 3. But usually in relation to this passage, the text of which we have given in its entirety, the question is posed differently: firstly, why is it said: “When he gives up the Kingdom to God and the Father,” as if now the Father does not possess the Kingdom. Then, why is it said: “He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet,” as if after that He will not reign, and this is what was said above: “Then is the end.” And this, guided by a blasphemous opinion, is understood as if [the apostle] called the end of His Kingdom the end, although the Gospel says: “And of His Kingdom there will be no end” (Luke 1:33). Finally, what is said: “When all things are submitted to Him, then the Son Himself will submit to Him who subjected all things to Him,” they want to understand as if now something is not subject to the Son, or He Himself is not subject to the Father. 4. So, the question is resolved based on the method of expression. For the Scripture for the most part speaks in such a way that something that exists eternally is then said to be accomplished in someone when it begins to be known by him. After all, in prayer we say: “Hallowed be Thy name” (Matthew 6:9), as if His name were never holy. So, just as “let it be holy” means “let it be clear that it is holy,” in the same way [must be understood] “When He delivers the Kingdom to God and the Father,” that is, “when He shows that the Father reigns,” so that through appearance and appearance it becomes clear what believers now believe in, and what unbelievers do not suppose. And he will abolish all authority and power, of course, by revealing the Kingdom of the Father, so that it will become known to everyone that no authority or authority, whether earthly or heavenly, has independent authority and power, but [receives it] from Him on whom everything depends, not only in relation to being, but also in relation to ordered being. Indeed, as a result of this phenomenon, no one will have any hope for a certain authority or a certain person. Therefore, even today it is sung prophetically: “It is better to trust in the Lord than to trust in man; It is better to trust in the Lord than to hope in princes” (Ps. 118:8-9), so that, thinking in this way, the soul will already ascend to the Kingdom of the Father, not exalting anyone’s power except His, and not deceiving itself into its own destruction. Therefore, then the Son will betray the Kingdom to God and the Father, when thanks to Him the Father will be clearly known. For His kingdom is those in whom He now reigns by faith. Indeed, in one sense the Kingdom of Christ is spoken of in accordance with the power of the Divine, by which the entire creation is subordinate to Him, and in another sense the Church is called His Kingdom, in accordance with the distinctive property of faith in Him, in accordance with which the speaker prays: “Possess us” (Is. 26:13) (after all, it is clear that He always possesses everything); in accordance with this, the following is also said: “When you were slaves to sin, then you were free from righteousness” (Rom. 6:20). So, he will subdue all authority and all authority and power, so that no one who contemplates the Father through the Son will need or want to seek peace in any creation or in his own power. 5. “For it is fitting that He should reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet” (1 Cor. 15:25), that is, it is fitting that His Kingdom should manifest itself until His enemies recognize that He reigns; after all, this is how one must understand that enemies will be under His feet. And if we accept this in relation to the righteous, then it is said this way: “enemies,” because they are justified from among the unrighteous and surrender to Him, believing. And if this should be accepted in relation to the unrighteous, who do not belong to the future bliss of the first, [then it is said so], since they, confused by the appearance of His Kingdom, recognize that He reigns. Therefore [the words]: “It is necessary that He should reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet,” are said not in the sense that when He has put His enemies under His feet, He will reign no more, but, [saying]: “It is necessary that He should reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet,” [the apostle seems to] say: “It is necessary for Him to reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet.” He has clearly extended His Kingdom, so that His enemies will in no way dare to deny that He reigns.” For it is also written: “Our eyes are toward the Lord our God, until he has mercy on us” (Ps. 122:2); however, this does not mean that when He has mercy on us, we should turn our eyes away from Him, because we are as blessed as we enjoy contemplating Him. So it is said here in this sense: the aspiration of our eyes to the Lord extends right up to the receipt of His mercy, not in order to then turn away from Him, but so that in the future we will no longer seek anything more. So, “until” is put so that you understand it as “[so that] no longer.” For what more, that is, what greater [degree of] manifestation can the Kingdom of Christ achieve than that when all enemies recognize that He reigns? Therefore, “to appear no more” means one thing, and “to remain no more” means another. “No longer to appear” means “not to become more apparent,” and “to remain no more” means “not to become more abiding.” And when will the Kingdom of Christ be more manifest than when it becomes obvious to all enemies? 6. “The last enemy to be destroyed is death” (1 Cor. 15:26). For there will be nothing for her to destroy after this mortal has been clothed with immortality. “After all, He put everything under His feet,” that is, to destroy even death. When he said that “everything is subdued” (it is clear that the prophet said this in the Psalms) (Ps. 8:7), it is clear that “except for Him who put everything in subjection to Him.” [Thus, the Apostle] wants us to understand that the Father subjected everything to the Son, as in many places in the Gospel and the Lord Himself conveys and preaches, and [subjected to Him] not only because of the “image of a servant,” but also because of [the fact that the Father] is the Origin from whom [the Son] received being and equality with Him from Whom He received being. For [the Son], as His “Image” ( Col. 1:15 ), yet one in whom “all the fullness of the Godhead dwells” ( Col. 2:9 ), has the habit of relating all things to one Principle. 7. “When all things are subdued to Him, then the Son Himself will be subject to Him who subjected all things to Him.” This does not mean that it was different before, but then it will become manifest, in accordance with the turn of phrase discussed above, “may God be all in all.” This is the “end” that [the apostle] mentioned above when he wanted to conclude everything briefly at first. And then [he pleases] sort it out piece by piece and explain [it]. After all, he spoke about the resurrection where he said: “First Christ, then those who are Christ’s at His coming: then the end.” Of course, this is the end, “let God be all in all.” For in one sense they speak of the end, pertaining to completion, and in another, pertaining to annihilation; for in one sense the tunic ends when it is woven, and in another sense the food ends when it is eaten. And it is said that “God [will be] all in all,” so that none of those united with him would love his own will instead of Him; and everyone knows that the same apostle says in another place: “What have you that you have not received?” (1 Cor. 4:7). 8. There are also those who understand this passage: “He must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet,” in such a way that, as they say, the word “reign” here has a different meaning, that is, not in the sense in which the word “kingdom” is placed, where the apostle says: “When he delivers the kingdom to God the Father.” And they hold that the apostle in one instance uses the word "Kingdom," because God rules over all creation; and in another case he used the verb “to reign” so that it would be understood as if He was leading an army against an enemy or defending a city. That is, [the apostle] said therefore: “He must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet,” because there will be no basis for royal power belonging to the leaders of the troops when the enemy is subdued to such an extent that he cannot start a war again. Of course, the Gospel says: “And His kingdom will have no end” (Luke 1:33), according to which He reigns forever; and as for the fact that under His leadership they fight with the devil, this war will go on until “until He puts all His enemies under His feet”; and after that it will no longer exist, since we will enjoy eternal peace. 9. This is said in this way so that we understand the need for very diligent reflection on the manner in which the Lord now reigns in the dispensation of His Sacrament through the Incarnation and Passion. For in regard to the fact that He is the Word of God, His Kingdom is devoid of both end and beginning or cessation, but on the basis of the fact that the Word became flesh (John 1:14), He begins to reign in believers through faith in His incarnation. That is why it is said: “The Lord reigned from the tree” 1 (Ps. 95:10). Hence He abolishes all authority and all authority and power, for those who believe in Him are saved not by His glory, but by humility. And this is exactly what is hidden from the wise and prudent and revealed to babes (Matthew 11:25), since it pleased God to save those who believe through the stupidity of preaching (1 Cor. 1:21). The apostle also says that he knows nothing among infants except Christ Jesus and Him crucified (1 Cor. 2:2). This preaching is necessary until all enemies are placed under His feet, that is, until all the pride of this age yields and submits to His humility, designated, as I believe, by the name of feet, which in many ways has already happened and, as we see, is constantly happening. But for what purpose is this happening? To transfer the Kingdom to God and the Father, that is, to bring those fed by faith in His incarnation to the image in which He is equal to the Father. After all, He was talking to those who had already believed when He said: “If you continue in My word, then you are truly My disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free” (John 8:31-32). For He will hand over the Kingdom to the Father when He reigns among those who contemplate the truth because He is equal with the Father, and allows the Father to be seen visibly through Himself, the Only Begotten [Son]; and now He reigns among believers because He “humbled Himself by taking the form of a servant” (Phil. 2:7). And then He will hand over the Kingdom to God and the Father, “when He has abolished all rule, and authority, and power.” How will he abolish it, if not through humility, patience and weakness? For what rulership will not be abolished, if the Son of God reigns among those who believe because the rulers of this age condemned Him? What kind of power will not be abolished if He, by whom all things were created, reigns in the believers because, having submitted to the rulers to the highest degree, He said to man: “You would not have any power over Me if it had not been given to you from above?” (John 19:11). What power will not be abolished if the very One through whom the heavens are established rules in the believers because he became weak until the cross and death? Likewise, it is the Son who reigns according to the faith of believers. After all, it is impossible to say or believe that the Father either became incarnate, or was judged, or was crucified. And in the image in which he is equal to the Father, he reigns with the Father in those who contemplate the truth. And the fact that He will hand over the Kingdom to God and the Father, raising those who now believe in Him from faith in His incarnation to the contemplation of His Divinity, does not [mean] that He Himself will leave them, but both He and the Other will present themselves in the unity [of nature] for the enjoyment of those who contemplate. And until then, it is necessary that in people who are not yet able to contemplate the equality of the Father and the Son in the clear light of the mind, Christ should reign with the help of what they can perceive and what exactly He perceived, that is, [through] the humility of the incarnation, “until he puts all his enemies under his feet,” that is, until all the pride of this age submits to the humility of his incarnation. 10. Further, what is said: “Then the Son Himself will be subject to Him who subjected all things to Him” (1 Cor. 15:28), although it is said in accordance with the perception of human nature, because this is where the question arose when it came to the resurrection of the dead, they rightly ask whether this is said only in relation to the fact that He is the head of the Church (Eph. 1:22, 5:23), or in relation to the whole Christ, including His body and members. After all, when Paul says in the Epistle to the Galatians: “It is not said: “and to descendants,” as if about many, but as if about one: “and to your seed,” which is Christ,” then he, so that we do not think that in this place he means only Christ, born of the Virgin Mary, then says: “For you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed” (Gal.3:16, 28-29). And in the letter to the Corinthians, when he talks about love, he cites, as an analogy, the members of the body: “For as the body is one,” he says, “but has many members, and all the members of the body, although there are many, form one body, so is Christ” (1 Cor. 12:12). He does not say: so are Christ’s, but so is Christ, showing that it is also correct to call the entirety of Christ, that is, the head with its body; and this body is the Church. And in many places of Scripture we find that Christ is named in this way, so that we must think of Him with all His members, to whom it is said: “You are the body and members of Christ” (1 Cor. 12:27). Therefore, it will not be stupid if we understand what is said: “Then the Son Himself will be subject to Him who has subjected all things to Him” in such a way that we understand not only the Son as the head of the Church, but also all the saints along with Him, for they are one in Christ, one seed of Abraham. And it will submit in accordance with the contemplation of eternal truth in order to possess bliss. And at the same time, no movement of the soul, no part of the body will oppose, so that - since in such a life no one will love their own power - “God was all in all.” Question 70: What the apostle says: “Death is swallowed up in victory. Where, death, is your effort? Where, death, is your sting? But the sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law” (1 Cor. 15:54–56) They are in the habit of asking what it means: “Death is swallowed up in victory. Where, death, is your effort? Where, death, is your sting? The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law.” I believe that death in this place signifies the carnal way of life, which opposes the good will with the pleasure of temporary pleasures. For it would not be said: “Where, death, is your effort?” – if she hadn’t resisted and fought. Her effort is also described in another place: “The flesh desires what is contrary to the spirit, and the spirit what is contrary to the flesh: they oppose each other, so that you do not do what you would like” (Gal. 5:17). Therefore, thanks to perfect sanctification, it happens that every carnal attraction is subject to our spirit, enlightened and quickened, that is, to our good will. And just as we now see that we are deprived of many childhood pleasures, the absence of which in childhood caused us great torment, so, we must believe, it will be the same with regard to all carnal pleasures, when perfect holiness will restore the whole person. Now, while something opposing good will remains in us, we need God’s help, [given] through good people and good angels, so that our wound, while being healed, does not burden us so much that it deprives us of our good will itself. But we deserved death for sin, and this sin at first was completely within the [power of] free decision, since in paradise no sadness due to the unattainability of pleasure did not oppose the good will of man, as [opposes] now. For example, if there is someone who has never enjoyed hunting, then he is completely free to want to hunt or not, and the one who forbids it does not cause him suffering. But if, having made bad use of this freedom, he begins to hunt contrary to the order of the prohibitor, little by little the creeping pleasure will kill the soul, so that if she wants to refrain from this, she will not be able to without pain and embarrassment, since she did not do this right away when she was in full health. Therefore, “the sting of death is sin,” because pleasure came from sin, which can now resist good will and mix with suffering. And we rightly call this pleasure death, for it consists in the exhaustion of the deteriorating soul. “And the power of sin is the law,” since it is much more criminal and shameful to do something that the law prohibits than something that is not prohibited by any law. So, death will then be swallowed up in victory when, thanks to the complete sanctification of man, carnal pleasure will be destroyed by the perfect enjoyment of spiritual [goods]. Question 71. About what is written: “Bear one another’s burdens, and in this way fulfill the law of Christ” (Gal. 6:2) 1. Since the observance of the Old Testament was supported by fear, the apostle could not have more clearly indicated that the gift of the New Testament is love than here, where he says: “Bear one another’s burdens, and thus fulfill the law of Christ.” For it seems that he calls the law of Christ the commandment of the Lord Himself that we love one another. And the Lord attached such importance to this commandment in his saying that he said: “By this they will know that you are My disciples, if you love one another” (John 13:34–35). And the duty of this love is to bear each other's burdens. This duty, although not eternal, truly leads to eternal bliss, when we will have no burden to bear together. Now, while we are in this life, that is, on this path, let us begin to bear each other’s burdens, so that we can achieve that life that is devoid of any burden. For in a similar way, some who are diligently engaged in this kind of research have written about deer [this]: when deer cross the sea, [going] to an island for food, they arrange themselves in such a way that the burden of their heads, burdened with antlers, is carried on each other, so that the next one places its head on the previous one, stretching out its neck. And since the one who precedes the others, of necessity, has no one in front of him to lay his head on, they say that they do this in turn, so that the one who walked in front, tired of the burden of his head, stands behind everyone, and he is replaced by the one whose head he carried when he himself walked in front. Thus, bearing each other's burdens, they cross the sea until they reach solid land. Perhaps this nature of the deer was what Solomon had in mind when he said: “Let the deer of your friendship and the cub of your gratitude talk with you” (Prov. 5:19). For nothing confirms friendship more than bearing a friend’s burden. 2. However, how would we bear each other’s burdens, if the time of weakness of both who bear their burdens were the same, or the type of weakness were the same? But at different times and of different kinds, weakness occurs, so that we may be able to bear one another’s burdens. For example, you then endure your brother’s anger when you are not angry with him, so that, on the other hand, when anger overtakes you, he will support you with meekness and calmness. This example refers to the [case] when the time of bearing the burden is different, although the weakness itself is not different; for both suffer wrath from the other. And with regard to the difference in the type of infirmity, another example should be obvious: if someone has overcome talkativeness in himself, but has not overcome stubbornness, while the other is still a talker, but no longer stubborn, then the first must endure with love the stubbornness of the second, and the second the talkativeness of the first, until one is healed in the first, and the other in the second. After all, if equal weakness happens to both at the same time, then they are unable to tolerate each other, since they rush against each other. However, against a certain third, the two angry ones agree with each other and tolerate each other; although they should be told that they should not tolerate each other, but rather soften each other. Likewise, those who grieve for one thing bear each other better and, as it were, lean on each other, than if one grieves and the other rejoices. And if they are saddened by each other, then they cannot stand each other at all. And therefore, in states of this kind, the very burden from which you want to free another with your help must be partly perceived, and perceived in such a way that it serves as a help, and not as an equal misfortune: this is how the one bends down who extends his hand to the fallen: he does not throw himself [on the ground] so that both fall, but only bends to raise the fallen one. 3. And nothing makes us more willing to devote ourselves to this proper work of bearing the burdens of others than to realize what the Lord has endured for us. For this is why the apostle, convincingly, says: “Let this mind be in you as was in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation, taking on the form of a servant, becoming in the likeness of a man, and becoming in appearance as a man; He humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death, even death on the cross” (Phil. 2:5-8). And above he said: “Each one is not concerned about his own, but about the things of others” (Phil. 2:4). To this saying he added what was said, for he continues: “Consider this in yourselves what is also in Christ Jesus,” at least in this, that just as He, since “the Word became flesh and dwelt among us” (John 1:14), although without sin, took on our sins, and cared not about His own, but about ours, so we willingly, in imitation To him, they bore each other's burdens. 4. This argument is also joined by the consideration that He took on man, and we are people, and must realize that an illness of body or soul, noticeable to us in another person, we ourselves could or may have. Therefore, we will begin to show in relation to the one whose weakness we want to bear, what we want to discover on his part towards us, if suddenly we find ourselves in trouble, but he is not. This also applies to what the apostle himself said: “I have become all things to all men, in order to benefit all” (1 Cor. 9:22), that is, he could mentally imagine that he himself was in the vice from which he wanted to free another. After all, he did this with compassion, and not with pretense, as some believe, and mainly those who, defending their untruth, which they cannot deny, seek the protection of some great example. 5. Finally, it should also be taken into account that there is no person who would be incapable of possessing any good that you do not already have, even if it were hidden, in which he can undoubtedly surpass you. And this consideration serves to curb and tame pride, so that you do not consider that since some of your goods are revealed and revealed, then another does not have any goods that are hidden and, perhaps, more valuable, and he surpasses you in them, who does not know. For the apostle does not command us to deceive ourselves or, much less, to use flattery, when he says: “Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility of mind consider each other better than yourselves” (Phil. 2:3). And we must consider this, not just pretending that we believe, but truly believing that something may be hidden in another, thanks to which he is superior to us, even if our good, in which we seem to be superior to him, is not hidden. Such reflections, suppressing pride and cultivating love, cause us to bear each other's brotherly burdens not only calmly, but most willingly. Verily, one should in no way pass judgment on any unknown person; and no one is known except through friendship. And we therefore more firmly endure something bad in our friends because we are admired and retained by their good qualities. 6. So, one should not reject anyone's friendship if someone offers to conclude one with him, but one should not immediately accept it, but the one who is to be accepted [as a friend] must be chosen and considered in such a way that he can be accepted. For we can call him a friend to whom we dare to entrust all our thoughts. And if there is someone who does not dare to offer himself for the conclusion of friendship, being restrained by some of our temporary glory or dignity, then we should condescend to him and offer him with a certain meekness and tenderness of soul what he himself does not dare to ask. Of course, although less often, it sometimes happens that we become aware of the shortcomings of someone whom we wish to accept as a friend earlier than his merits, and, embarrassed and as if repelled by them, we leave him and do not extend our research to his merits, perhaps more hidden. So, the Lord Jesus Christ, who wants to make us His imitators, urges us to endure the weakness of the like [person], so that with the help of patience of love we will achieve a certain health, in the enjoyment of which we will rest. For [the Lord] said: “Those who are healthy do not need a doctor, but those who are sick” (Matthew 9:12). Therefore, if for the sake of the love of Christ, even someone who may be sick in all respects, we should not push away from our hearts, since he can be healed by the Word of God, then how much less so for someone who may seem completely sick to us because at the very beginning of friendship we are not able to bear some of his wounds and, what is even worse, we dared with spiritual disgust to pronounce in advance a rash condemning sentence on the whole person, without fear of what was said: “Judge not, lest there be convicted"; and “With the same measure you use, it will be measured back to you” (Matthew 7:1–2). Often what is good [in a person] appears first, and in such a case you must beware of a hasty judgment of benevolence, so that when you consider [the person] to be entirely good, the evil qualities that appear later will not find you careless and unprepared and strike you even more powerfully, so that you will cruelly hate the one whom you recklessly loved, and this should not be done. After all, even if there were no good qualities that preceded him, and the bad ones that appeared later were revealed immediately, they would still have to be tolerated until you tried everything in relation to him that such [qualities] could be cured. And even more so if it was preceded by good qualities, which, as a guarantee, should strengthen us in the patience of subsequent [bad] ones. 7. So this very thing is the law of Christ, that we bear one another’s burdens. And loving Christ, we easily endure the weakness of another, even one whom we do not love yet for his good qualities. After all, we know that the Lord died for the sake of the one we love. The Apostle Paul inspires us with similar love when he says: “And through your knowledge the weak brother for whom Christ died will perish” (1 Cor 8:11), so that if we love this weak man less because of the vice by which he is weak, we will see in him the One who died for him. And not loving Christ is not weakness, but death. Therefore, we must reason [here] with great care and calling on the mercy of God, so as not to despise Christ because of a weak [brother], while we must love a weak [brother] for Christ’s sake. Question 72. About eternal times They may ask in what sense the Apostle Paul said: “Before the times of eternity” (Titus 1:2). After all, if times, then how are they eternal? And if eternal, then why times? Unless he only wants this to be understood in the sense of “before all times,” since if he had said: “Before times,” and had not added: “eternal,” then they might have thought that before certain times that had preceded themselves there were other times. And he preferred to say “eternal” rather than “all sorts”, perhaps because time does not originate from time. And did not [the apostle] designate the age by “eternal times,” and the difference between it and time is that the first is constant, and the second is changeable? Question 73. About what is written: “And he was found to be like a man” (Phil. 2:7) 1. We say “property” (habitus) in many senses: either a property of the soul, when the perception of some teaching is strengthened and strengthened by experience, or a property of the body, and from this point of view we say that one is more slender or stronger than the other (this is usually more accurately called addition), or the property of what is externally adjusted to our members, and by virtue of this we are called clothed, shod, armed, and so on in the same spirit. In relation to all these genera it is clear (if, moreover, this name comes from the verb habeo “to have”) that they say “property” of something that comes to someone in such a way that he might not have possessed it. After all, learning comes to the soul, strength and durability to the body, and undoubtedly clothing and weapons come to the members, so the soul can be ignorant if teaching is not characteristic of it, and the body can be thin and flaccid without the density of flesh and strength, and a person can be naked without clothes, unarmed without weapons and barefoot without shoes. So, “property” is said in relation to something that is inherent in our possession. However, the difference here is that something that comes to us is not changed by us in order to become a property, but itself changes us in itself, remaining integral and unshakable. Such is wisdom, for when it becomes inherent in a person, it does not itself change, but changes the person, making him wise from a fool. And some things come in such a way that they change and change. This is food, for it itself turns into our body, losing its appearance, and we, by processing food, from thin and sluggish, become powerful and strong. The third kind is when that which comes in itself changes to form a property; and is shaped in some way by the one whose property it forms. Such is the clothing, for when it is taken off or put on, it does not have the form characteristic of it when it is put on and covers the members. Therefore, when dressed, it takes on a form that is not inherent in it when removed, while the members themselves, both when dressed and when undressed, remain the same. There may also be a fourth kind, when what comes in does not change to form the properties of what it becomes inherent in, and does not itself change as a result. And this is the ring [put on] the finger, if you don’t delve into it too subtly. However, this genus either does not exist at all, if you consider carefully, or, in any case, is very rare. 2. Therefore, the apostle, when he spoke about the Only Begotten Son of God, then, reasoning about His Divinity, according to the fact that He is the truest God, said that “He is equal with the Father” (Phil. 2:6), and this is characteristic of Him not by robbery, that is, He did not demand someone else’s, because He always abides in this equality, even if He would not want to put on a man and appear to people as a man. But “He humbled Himself,” not changing His image, but taking on the form of a slave, and not being converted or changed into a man and deprived of unchangeable constancy, but through the perception of a true man, He Himself Who Perceived “became like men” not for His own sake, but for those to whom He appeared in [the image of] a man, “and was found to be like a man,” that is, possessing a man, was acquired as a man. For He could not be found by those who had an unclean heart and were incapable of seeing the Word of the Father except through the perception of what they were able to see and with the help of which they were raised to the inner light. And this property is not of the first kind, because the nature of man, being in itself, did not change the nature of God; and not the second, because it is not true that man both changed God and was changed by Him; and not the fourth, because man was not perceived in such a way that he himself did not change God, and was not changed by Him; but most likely this refers to the third kind, because [man] was perceived in such a way that he changed for the better and acquired [from God] an image inexpressibly more excellent and close than clothing when it is put on by a person. So, with this name of “property” the apostle sufficiently shows in what sense he said: “he became like men,” because He became so not by being transformed into a man, but by a property, since He put on man and, in some way uniting and conforming him to Himself, imparted immortality and eternity to him. However, the property that consists in the assimilation of wisdom and teaching is called by the Greeks έξις, and that according to which we talk about being armed and clothed is rather called σχήμα. And from this it is clear that the word “property” was spoken by the apostle in the latter sense, because in the Greek manuscripts it is written σχήμα, which in Latin is translated as habitus “property”. Based on this naming, one must think that the Word was not changed by the perception of human nature, just as the members, when clothed in clothing, do not change, although this perception inexpressibly attached what was perceived to the Perceiver. But insofar as human words are able to correspond to inexpressible deeds, so that God who perceived human frailty would not be considered changed, it was chosen that this perception was called in Latin habitus “property”, and in Greek - σχήμα “appearance”. Question 74. About what is written in the letter of [the Apostle] Paul to the Colossians: “In whom we have redemption and the forgiveness of sins, who is the image of the invisible God” (Col. 1:14–15) It is necessary to distinguish between image, equality and likeness: after all, where there is an image, there is also likeness, but not necessarily equality; where there is equality, there is immediately similarity, but not necessarily an image; where there is similarity, there is no need for an image, there is no need for equality. Where there is an image, there is also likeness, but not necessarily equality: so in the mirror there is an image of a person, and since it reproduces him, [this image] is also necessarily likeness, but not equality, for the image lacks much of what is inherent in what it is imprinted with. Where there is equality, there is immediately similarity, but not necessarily an image: so in two equal eggs, since there is equality, there is also similarity; and everything that is inherent in one is also inherent in the other; however, there is no image, since one is not imprinted on the other. Where there is similarity, an image is not necessary, equality is not necessary; after all, every egg, by virtue of the fact that an egg, is like every egg; but the partridge's egg, although being an egg, is like a hen's egg, is not its image, since it is not imprinted by it and is not equal, since it is smaller and belongs to a different kind of living beings. But when they say “not necessary,” they mean that in some cases it is quite possible. Therefore, there may be a certain image that is also inherent in equality, just as in parents and children we see image, equality and similarity, if we do not take into account the period of time; After all, the likeness of the son is imprinted from the father, so that it is rightly called an image, and [this likeness] can achieve the fact that it will be rightly called equality, if we do not consider that the parent precedes in terms of time. From this it is clear that equality sometimes has not only a similarity, but also an image, as became clear from the previous example. There may also sometimes be similarity and equality present, although the image is absent, as we said about the two eggs. There can be both likeness and image, although there is no equality, as we discovered in the mirror. There can also be likeness where there is image and equality, as we mentioned in relation to sons, without taking into account the time by virtue of which the parents precede. After all, in the same way we say that a syllable is equal to a syllable, although one precedes and the other follows. And since in relation to God the temporal conditions have no force, for it cannot be true that God in time begot the Son by whom he ordered the times, then as a consequence the Son is not only His image, since He is from Him, and likeness, for the Image, but also has such equality that there is no time gap here as an obstacle. Question 75. About the inheritance of God 1. Since the apostle says in the letter to the Hebrews: “A testament is confirmed by the death of the testator” (Heb. 9:16-17), he thereby declares that the New Testament was confirmed when Christ died for us. And the similarity of the New Testament was the Old Testament, in which the death of the testator was represented as a sacrifice. Therefore, if they ask how we, according to the word of the same apostle, are “joint heirs with Christ”, and “children and heirs of God” (Rom. 8:17), then since the inheritance is also confirmed by the death of the previous owner, and the inheritance cannot be understood in any other way, we answer that after Christ Himself died, we became heirs, for we are also called His sons: “The sons of the groom,” He says, “do not fast while with them.” groom" (Matthew 9:15). So, we are called His heirs, since He left us the world of the church in possession through faith in the dispensation taking place in time. And we possess this [world] in this life, which He testified, saying: “My peace I give to you, peace I leave with you” (John 14:27). And we will become joint heirs with Him, when at the end of the age death will be swallowed up in victory (1 Cor 15:54). After all, then “we will become like Him, because we will see Him as He is” (1 John 3:2). And we gain this inheritance not by the death of that Father who cannot die, because He Himself becomes our inheritance, in accordance with what is written: “The Lord is part of my inheritance” (Ps. 15:5), but because when we begin to contemplate face to face, that very thing that we saw fortune-telling will die. For we were called while still children and little fit for contemplating the spiritual, and Divine mercy extended down to our smallest thoughts, so that we might somehow rise to the knowledge of what we did not contemplate clearly and distinctly. After all, that which has ceased is also called dead: “When that which is perfect has come, then that which is in part will cease” (1 Cor 13:10). Thus, for us, it is as if the Father dies in mystery, and He becomes an inheritance when we contemplate Him face to face. And this happens not because He Himself dies, but because our imperfect contemplation of Him is destroyed by perfect contemplation. And yet, if the first had not first nourished us, we would not have become suitable for another, fullest and clearest [contemplation]. 2. And if pious reason also allows this in relation to the Lord Jesus Christ, not as the Word of God in the beginning, God with God (John 1:1), but as a Child growing in years and wisdom (Luke 2:40, 52), and, moreover, the peculiarity of perception [of His human nature] was observed, which was not common to Him with other people, then it is clear that, as if by the death of this [Baby], He Himself received an inheritance. After all, we cannot be joint heirs with Him if He is not an heir. And if piety does not allow that at first the Lord's Man had part of the knowledge, and then completely, although it is said that He grew in wisdom, then one should think that He is an heir in His body, that is, in the Church, of which we are co-heirs, just as we are called her sons, and she is a mother, although she consists of us. 3. But again it may be asked, by whose death we also became God's inheritance, in accordance with the following words: “Will I give Thee the nations for Thy inheritance?” (Ps. 2:8). Is it not [the death] of this world, in the power of which we were previously contained? And then, after the death of him who possessed us [before], when we say: “The world is crucified to me, and I to the world” (Gal. 6:14), Christ possesses us. And we die for the world and it for us when we renounce it. Question 76. About what the Apostle James says: “But do you want to know, you unfounded man, that faith without works is dead?” (James 2:20) 1. The Apostle Paul, preaching that a person is justified by faith without works, was misunderstood by those who took what was said in the sense that, as they believed, since they had once believed in Christ, they were saved through faith, even if they acted badly and lived viciously and shamefully. And this passage in the Epistle of James explains the meaning of [what was said] by the Apostle Paul [and shows] how it should be understood. And therefore [James] uses the example of the great Abraham [to show] that faith is empty unless a person does good works, since Paul also used the example of Abraham to prove that a person is justified by faith without the works of the law (Rom. 4:2). For when James mentions the good deeds of Abraham that accompanied his faith, he convincingly shows that, using the example of Abraham, the Apostle Paul taught about the justification of a person by faith without works, not in the sense that if someone believes, then he does not need to do good works. Rather, Paul meant that no one should consider himself to have achieved the gift of justification by virtue of pious and good works, for justification is by faith. For the Jews desired to exalt themselves above the pagans who had believed in Christ, since they called themselves those who had attained the grace of the gospel through the merits of good works [prescribed] in the law. Therefore, many of them who believed were tempted by the fact that Christ’s grace was being taught to uncircumcised pagans. Because of this, the Apostle Paul says that a person can be justified by faith without previous works. And, having been justified by faith, how can he subsequently act otherwise than righteously, although before, without doing anything righteous, he achieved justification by faith not by the merit of his good deeds, but by the grace of God? This grace cannot remain inactive in him, and now he is capable, moved by love, of doing good. So if, after he believes, he immediately leaves this life, the justification of faith will remain with him; and this was not preceded by good deeds, since he achieved this not by merit, but by grace, and it was not followed by [good deeds], due to the fact that he was not allowed to remain in this life. Therefore, it is clear what the Apostle Paul said: “For we hold that a person is justified by faith, without works” (Rom. 3:28). However, this should not be understood in the sense that if, having accepted faith, he remains alive, we will call him righteous, even if he lives badly. The Apostle Paul uses the same example of Abraham, since without the works of the law, which he did not receive, [Abraham] was justified by faith, and Jacob, because, explaining how to understand what was proclaimed by the Apostle Paul, he shows that Abraham’s good works followed from his faith. 2. After all, those who believe that the statement of the Apostle James contradicts the opinion of the Apostle Paul may decide that Paul himself contradicts himself. For he says in another place: “And it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous with God, but the doers of the law will be justified” (Rom. 2:13); and in another place: “But faith working through love” (Gal. 5:6); and again: “For if you live according to the flesh, you will die, but if in the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the flesh, you will live” (Rom. 8:13). And what are the works of the flesh, which must be put to death by the works of the Spirit, he shows in another place, saying: “The works of the flesh are known; they are: debauchery, uncleanness, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, quarrels, envy, anger, strife, heresies, hatred, drunkenness, rioting and the like, about which I warn you, as I also warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God” (Gal. 5:19-21); and in the letter to the Corinthians: “Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor the idolaters, nor the adulterers, nor the wicked, nor the homosexuals, nor the thieves, nor the money-grubbers, nor the drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you, but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God” (1 Cor. 6:9-11). With these sayings he teaches most clearly that they did not achieve justification of faith by a previous good deed; and grace was not given according to their merits, for he says: “And such were some of you.” But when he says: “Those who do this will not inherit the Kingdom of God,” it sufficiently shows that, having believed, they must already do well. James also says this, and in many other places the same Apostle Paul proclaims in detail and clearly that all who believe in Christ must live righteously, so as not to fall into punishment. The Lord Himself reminds us of this, saying: “Not everyone who says to Me: “Lord, Lord!” will enter the Kingdom of Heaven, but whoever does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter the Kingdom of Heaven” (Matthew 7:21); and in another place: “Why do you say to me: Lord, Lord! “And you do not do what I tell you?” (Luke 6:46); and: “Whoever hears these words of Mine and does them, I will liken him to a wise man who built his house on the rock,” and so on. “And whoever hears these words of Mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand” (Matthew 7:24–27) and so on. Therefore, the sayings of the two apostles, Paul and James, do not contradict each other when one says that a person is justified by faith without works, and the other asserts that faith without works is dead, for the first talks about works that precede faith, and the second about those that follow faith, as the Apostle Paul himself affirms in many places. Question 77. About fear, is it a sin? Every emotion is suffering, every desire is anxiety; therefore, all desire is suffering. And when there is any kind of suffering in us, then we endure both by this suffering itself and to the extent that this is suffering; This means that when a certain lust is present in us, we suffer through this very lust and endure to the extent that it is lust. And any suffering, in the sense that we endure through this very suffering, is not a sin. So exactly, if we endure fear, then this is not a sin. [The line of reasoning here is similar to] as if they said: “If something has two parts, then it is not a domestic animal.” And if in such a case there is no [logical] consequence on the grounds that there are many two-legged domestic animals, then there is no [logical] consequence in our case due to the fact that much of what we endure are sins. For they say against it that from our suffering of fear it does not follow that fear is not a sin. And you say that from our suffering of fear it follows that this is not a sin, but admit [at the same time] that some of what we endure are sins. Question 78. About the beauty of images That supreme Art of almighty God, through whom all things were created out of nothing (John 1:3), also called His Wisdom, also acts through the craftsmen, so that they make what is beautiful and proportionate. Although they produce [no longer] from nothing, but from a certain matter, namely from wood, marble or ivory and from any other type of matter subject to the hands of the master. And they cannot produce anything from nothing, for they act through the body, however, at the same time, those elements and proportionality of outlines that they give to the body through the body, they take in the soul from the highest Wisdom, which much more skillfully gave the whole body of the world, which it produced from nothing, the very elements and proportionality itself. In this [world] there are also bodies of living beings, which are produced from something, namely from the elements of the world, but much more powerful and beautiful than when skillful people repeat the same figures and forms of bodies in their creations. After all, not all the proportionality of the human body can be found in the statue, but all [beauty] found here is transferred by the soul of the master from that Wisdom that naturally produces the human body itself. And therefore one should not highly value those who make such works or admire them, for the soul, attracted by lesser things created bodily through the body, is less drawn to the highest Wisdom from which it has such abilities. And she uses them poorly while she trains them in the external, for, loving what she trains them in, she despises their internal constant form and becomes poorer and weaker. And from this one can understand how far those who even revere such creations have deviated from the truth. For if they revered the very bodies of living beings, produced much more perfectly and serving as a model for these [images], then what could be more pitiful for them [than this]? Question 79. Why did Pharaoh’s sorcerers perform certain miracles, like Moses, the servant of God? (Ex.7–8) 1. Every soul partly has power over something of its own, and partly is restrained and governed by the laws of the whole as social laws. And since every visible thing in this world has angelic power placed over it, as evidenced by several places of Divine Scripture, then [the soul] in relation to that over which [in turn] it is placed, does something as if in accordance with private law, and is forced to do something as if for public benefit. After all, the whole is more powerful than the part, since the part, when doing something privately, receives permission to do it only to the extent that the law of the whole allows. However, every soul is so much more pure in regard to piety to the extent that, less enjoying its particulars, it turns to the law of the whole and obeys it faithfully and willingly. For the law of the whole is Divine Wisdom. And the more [the soul] finds pleasure in its particulars and, having despised God, who rules all souls with benefit and salvation, wants to be instead of God for itself or for others whom it can, loving its power over itself or others more than His power over everyone, the more pitiful it is and the more forced it is to serve the Divine laws as social ones as punishment. So, the more the human soul, having rejected God, begins to enjoy its virtues or its power, the more it will indulge in the forces that rejoice in their privateness and long to be revered by people as gods. And the Divine law often allows these [powers] to show to those whom they have subjugated according to their merits, on the basis of this private right, certain miracles performed in those things over which they are placed at the lowest, but most just level of power. But where the Divine, as it were social, law commands, it certainly defeats the private institution, although the private institution itself does not exist unless there is permission from the universal Divine power. And therefore it happens that the holy servants of God, if it is useful for them to have this gift, in accordance with public and, as it were, royal law, that is, according to the authority of the Most High God, induce the lower authorities to create some visible miracle. After all, God Himself commands in them, since they are His church and, despising their personal power, passionately love Him. And in witchcraft commands [evil spirits], in order to subjugate those who are given it for the purpose of seduction, grant success to their prayers and mysteries, bestowing, in accordance with personal right, what they are allowed to give to those who praise them, serve them and observe a certain agreement with them in their sacraments. And if it seems that the sorcerers are commanding, then [at the same time] they frighten the lower [spirits] with the names of the higher ones in order to show to the astonished something visible, which, due to the weakness of the flesh, seems great to those of people who are not able to contemplate the eternal, which is revealed by the true God Himself who loves Him. But God allows [the success of the sorcerers], having arranged everything fairly, in order to distribute their ministries and freedoms according to their passions and desires, and if ever by calling on the Most High God they achieve anything according to their evil aspirations, then this is punishment, not grace. It was not for nothing that the apostle said: “God gave them up in the lust of their hearts” (Rom. 1:24). For the tendency to commit certain sins is a punishment for others that preceded them. 2. And as for what the Lord said: “It is impossible for Satan to cast out Satan” (Mk. 3:23), then lest anyone consider, if he casts out demons, using the names of certain lower authorities, that this saying of the Lord is false, let him understand that this is said in the sense that in such a case Satan, even if he spares the body or bodily feelings, then spares him so that to dominate with great triumph through the error of wickedness in the very will of man. And thus Satan does not come out, but rather penetrates even deeper to act [in man] as the apostle says: “According to the prince of the power of this air, who is now working in the sons of disobedience” (Eph. 2:2). For he will not confuse or torment their bodily senses or oppress their bodies, but will reign in their will, or rather passionate desire. 3. And when [the Lord] says that false prophets will do many signs and wonders in order, if possible, to deceive even the elect (Matthew 24:24), then by this He, of course, makes us understand that even sinful people work some miracles that saints cannot do. However, one should not assume that their position before God is better because of this. After all, the Egyptian sorcerers were not more pleasing to God than the people of Israel on the grounds that this people could not do what they had done, although Moses, by the power of God, could do more (Ex. 7-12). But for this purpose, this is not granted to all saints, so that the weak do not fall into a very destructive error, believing that in such deeds there are greater gifts than in works of righteousness, by which eternal life is acquired. Therefore, the Lord forbids the disciples to rejoice in such cases, saying: “Rejoice not in this, that the spirits obey you, but rejoice that your names are written in heaven” (Luke 10:20). 4. Therefore, when sorcerers do what saints sometimes do, outwardly it seems the same, but it is done for a different purpose and according to a different right. After all, the first do it in search of their own glory, and the second - the glory of God, the first do thanks to what is allowed to the authorities in private, like private trade and charity, and the second - in the order of public administration by order of Him to Whom all creation is subject. After all, it is one thing when the owner is forced to give a horse to a warrior, and another when he sells it to a merchant, or gives it to someone or lends it. And just as many bad soldiers, whom the imperial order condemns, with the help of signs of imperial power, for their own benefit, intimidate certain owners and extort from them what is not ordered to them by public law, so sometimes bad Christians, schismatics or heretics, in the name of Christ or with the help of Christian words and sacraments, demand something from the authorities who are obliged to obey the dignity of Christ. And when they submit to the will of bad rulers, they submit in order to seduce people, in whose error they rejoice. Therefore, sorcerers, good Christians and bad Christians work miracles in different ways: sorcerers - with the help of private agreements, good Christians - thanks to public justice, bad Christians - with the help of signs of public justice. It is not surprising that these signs are effective when used by them [that is, by bad people], if, even when captured by foreigners who do not at all belong to this service, they still have force because of the dignity of the greatest emperor. Of these [people] there was one about whom the disciples of the Lord proclaimed that he casts out demons in His name, although he does not walk with them (Luke 9:49). And if such authorities do not obey these signs, it means that God Himself forbids [them] in a hidden way, for He finds it fair and beneficial. After all, in no way will any spirits dare to ignore these signs, since they are afraid of them wherever they see them. But, in the ignorance of people, [something] else is ordered by God's will, either for the shame of the wicked, when it is necessary for them to be put to shame (as we read about the sons of Sceva in the Acts of the Apostles, to whom the unclean Spirit said: “I know Jesus, and Paul is known to me, but who are you?” (Acts 19:14-15)), or for the instruction of the good, so that they may succeed in faith and could perform such [actions] not boastfully, but with benefit; or to discern the gifts of the members of the Church, as the apostle says: “Are all miracle workers? Does everyone have gifts of healing?” (1 Cor. 12:29–30). Therefore, most likely for these reasons, as it is said, in the ignorance of people, it is commanded from God that, when these signs are used, such authorities should not obey human will. 5. And if the evil often harm the good, then they gain power over them for the greater benefit of the good, for the sake of exercising patience. So, let the Christian soul always try in its suffering to follow the will of its Lord, so as not to incur a more severe condemnation on itself by opposing the determination of God. After all, what the Lord Himself, acting as a man, said to Pontius Pilate, Job could also say to the devil: “You would not have any power over Me if it had not been given to you from above” (John 19:11). Therefore, not the will of the one who is given the power of evil in relation to the good, but the will of the One by whom this power is given, should be most dear to us. “For tribulation produces patience, and endurance produces experience, and experience produces hope; but hope does not disappoint, since the love of God has been poured out into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us" (Rom. 5:3-5). Question 80. Against the Apollinarians 1. Some heretics, who are said to be called Apollinarians from a certain Apollinaris, their teacher, declare that our Lord Jesus Christ, when it pleased Him to become a man, did not have a human mind. Moreover, some who adhered to them and diligently listened to them found pleasure even in this perverse opinion, following which [Apollinaris] belittled man in God, saying that Christ did not have a mind, that is, a rational soul, by which man is spiritually distinguished from beasts. But when they thought among themselves, they had to admit that if this was so, it means that the Only Begotten Son of God, the Father’s Wisdom and the Word through Whom everything was created, took on a certain beast with the appearance of a human body. They themselves did not like this, however, [it did not serve] to correct them in order to return them to the path of truth and confess that the whole man was assumed by the Wisdom of God without any diminishment of nature, but, deciding on even greater audacity, they, having removed from Him both the very soul and everything related to life, said that He assumed only human flesh. And at the same time they use the testimony of the Gospel and, not understanding this expression, in their wickedness they dare to speak out against Catholic truth, saying that it is written: “The Word became flesh and dwelt in us” (John 1:14). Based on these words, they want to [believe] that the Word was so united and fused with the flesh, as if there were not only a mind, but also a human soul between them. 2. And they must first of all answer that it is said so in the Gospel, since the Lord’s acceptance of human nature extended right up to the [perception of] visible flesh, and in all this integrity of perception, the Word is something original, and the flesh is something ultimate and extreme. So, the evangelist, wanting to convey the condescension of humility for our sake of God who “humbled Himself” and describing to what extent [He humbled Himself], calls [Him] Word and flesh, omitting the nature of the soul, which is lower than the Word, but higher than the flesh. After all, he conveys more humility by saying: “The Word became flesh” than if he said: “The Word became man.” For if we examine these words too carefully, then someone, no less perverse, on the basis of these words can attack our faith in another way, saying that the Word Himself changed, turned into flesh and ceased to be the Word, since it is written: “The Word became flesh.” For human flesh, when it becomes dust, is not flesh and dust, but from the flesh comes dust, and, according to the common manner of expression, everything that becomes what it was not ceases to be what it was. However, we do not understand these words that way. But even the heretics themselves understand them with us in such a way that, while the Word remains what It is, it is said thus: “The Word became flesh,” because It took on the form of a servant, and not because It was transformed into this image through some change. Then, if everywhere where the flesh is mentioned and the soul is not said, this should be understood by recognizing the absence of a soul here, then those about whom it is said: “And all flesh will see the salvation of God” (Luke 3:6), and what is said in the Psalm: “Hear my prayer, all flesh will come to you” (Ps. 65:3), and what is said in the Gospel: “Since You have given Him power over all flesh, so that all what You gave Him did not perish, but had eternal life” (John 17:2). From this it is clear that people [entirely] are usually designated by mentioning only the flesh. Therefore, in relation to this place, it can also be understood that what is said: “The Word became flesh” does not mean anything other than that the Word became man. After all, naming the whole with the help of a part, one soul is often considered a person, as it is written: “All the souls that went into Egypt” (Gen. 46:27). In the same way, when naming a whole by means of a part, when one flesh is mentioned, the whole person is meant, as in those [passages of Scripture] that we have proposed. 3. So, to the objection they proposed from the Gospel, we answered in such a way that there is not [now] a person so foolish that he would see in these words [of Scripture] something obliging us to believe and confess that the Mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus (1 Timothy 2:5) did not have a human soul. Now I will ask how they will answer our quite clear objections, in which we confirm with the help of countless passages of the Gospel Scriptures what is told about Him by the Evangelists, [namely], that He was in those states that could not have existed without a soul. After all, I do not suggest this on my own, but the Lord Himself very often mentions something similar: “My soul is grieved unto death” (Matthew 26:38); and: “I have authority to lay down my life, and I have authority to take it again” (John 10:18); and: “Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends” (John 15:13). A stubborn debater may object to me that the Lord says this figuratively, as in reality much is said in His parables. However, even if this is so, there is still no need to persist, because we have the narrative of the evangelists, from whom we learned that He was born of the Virgin Mary, and was captured by the Jews, and scourged, and crucified, and killed, and buried in a tomb, and He could not do all this without a body. And let no one say, perhaps completely losing their minds, that this should be understood figuratively, too, since this was said by those who, as far as they remembered, told about actual events. Therefore, just as the above testifies that He had a body, so those states that occur only in the soul and which we read about no less often in the same evangelists show that He had a soul. And Jesus was surprised (Matthew 8:10), and was angry (Matthew 21:12–13; Mark 11:15–17; Luke 19:45–46; John 2:13–16), and grieved (Mark 3:5), and rejoiced (John 11:15) and countless other things. He also did what shows the combined actions of the soul and body, such as the fact that He was hungry (Matthew 4:2), slept (Matthew 8:24), tired from the journey, sat down (John 4:6) and so on in the same way. After all, they cannot object that the Old Books also mention the wrath of God, joy and some movements of this kind, but one should not conclude from this that God has a soul. It is clear that all this is said [there] as prophetic visions, and not as an authentic narrative. After all, the members of God are mentioned [in the same place], and hands, and feet, and eyes, and face, and the like; and just as this does not indicate that He had a body, so the above does not indicate that He had a soul. And just as in that narrative where the hands of Christ are mentioned, the head and everything else, they point to His body, so those of the movements of the soul that are named in the same sense in the same narrative point to His soul. After all, it is stupid to believe the evangelist who says that He ate, and not believe him that He was hungry. And although not necessarily everyone who eats is hungry (after all, we read that angels also eat (Gen. 18:8-9; Tob. 12:19), but we do not read that they are hungry), and not everyone who is hungry eats, if either he forbids himself by some duty, or he does not have food and the opportunity to eat, - however, since the evangelist talks about both (Matthew 4:2, 9:11), then we must believe both, for the messenger of deeds and events recorded both as historical narrative. And just as what He ate cannot be conceived without a body, so what He ate could not have happened without a soul. 4. We are not frightened by that empty and absurd slander, driven by which those who oppose them angrily say: “It means that He was subject to necessity if He really had these movements” (afftctiones) of the soul.” After all, we can easily answer: “So He was subject to necessity, since He was captured, scourged, crucified and died.” Let them finally, without perseverance, if they wish, understand that He accepted, by His will, the passions of the soul, that is, mental movements, according to the will to complete the economy, but true [passions and movements], in the same way as He, without any necessity, accepted the passions of the body, in accordance with the same will to complete the economy. After all, just as we die without wanting to, so we are born not of our own will, but He accomplished both, as it should be, voluntarily, and yet He accomplished it quite realistically. Therefore, just as by mentioning the necessity no one will separate us or them from faith in the truest passions of Christ, by which the [reality of] His body is confirmed, so by this mention of necessity no one will separate us from the faith in the truest spiritual movement by which we know His soul. And the heretics themselves should not be deterred by this from recognizing the Catholic faith, unless they are deterred by the disastrous shame of an opinion subject to change; the opinion, although false, has been foolishly defended for a long time. Question 81. About Pentecost and Pentecost 1. Every teaching of wisdom that serves to enlighten people consists in distinguishing between the Creator and the creation, and honoring Him as the Ruler, and recognizing the creation as subordinate. And the Creator is God, from whom are all things, through whom are all things, in whom are all things (Rom. 11:34-36); and therefore the Trinity is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Creation is partly invisible, like the soul, and partly visible, like the body. The invisible is expressed by the number three, because we are commanded to love God in this way - “with all our heart, with all our soul and with all our mind” (Matthew 22:37); and the visible is a fourfold number, because of its most obvious nature, that is, hot and cold, wet and dry; therefore, the entire creation [is designated] by the septenary number. Therefore, every teaching that recognizes and distinguishes between the Creator and the creature is expressed in a decimal number. This teaching, as long as it is indicated in time through bodily movements, is preserved by faith and, like milk, feeds children with the example of coming and passing deeds, in order to make them suitable for contemplating that which does not come and does not pass, but always abides. Because of this, everyone, when he is told about Divine deeds performed in time for the sake of the salvation of people, or those about which it is announced that they are to be accomplished in the future, if he continues in faith, begins to hope for what was promised and with tireless love tries to fulfill what the Divine authority has prescribed, then he will properly spend in this need and this time the life designated by the number forty. For the number ten, which expresses the whole doctrine, when taken four times, that is, multiplied by the number relating to the body - for government is accomplished through bodily movements, and it, as has been said, is observed by faith - will make the number forty. In this way he achieves a wisdom that is constant and does not require any time, signified by the number ten, so that ten is added to forty, since equal parts of the number forty taken together reach fifty. And the equal parts in the number forty are: first, forty-one times, then twenty twice, ten four times, eight five times, five eight times, four ten times, two twenty times. So one, two, four, five, eight, ten and twenty taken together make fifty. Therefore, just as the number forty, when its equal parts are added up, acquires ten more and becomes the number fifty, so the time of faith in things that are perfect and will be accomplished for our salvation, spent with the justice of life, achieves the knowledge of constant wisdom, so that the teaching is confirmed not only by faith, but also by knowledge. 2. And therefore the present Church - although we are sons of God, yet what we will be has not yet appeared - remains in labors and sorrows, and the righteous in her lives by faith (Rom. 1:17). After all, [the prophet] says: “Unless you believe, you will not understand” (Is. 7:9). This is the time during which we suffer and are tormented, waiting for “the redemption of our body” (Rom. 8:23); it is designated by Pentecost. “We only know that when He is revealed, we will be like Him, for we will see Him as He is” (1 John 3:2); [that is] when ten is added to forty, so that we may be worthy not only to believe in the things pertaining to faith, but also to know the clear truth. Such a Church, in which there will be no sorrow, no admixture of bad people, no wickedness, but there will be joy, peace and rejoicing, is represented by the feast of Pentecost. Therefore, after our Lord rose from the dead, having spent forty days with His disciples, that is, by means of this number denoting the temporary dispensation related to faith, He ascended into heaven (Acts 1:3-9) and after another ten days sent the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:1-4), that is, through some inspiration and the heat of love, ten was added to forty for the contemplation of not the human and temporal, but the Divine and eternal. And therefore all this as a whole, that is, the number of fifty days, should be celebrated as a holiday of joy. 3. And these two periods of time, that is, the first - of burdens and worries, and the other - of joy and serenity, our Lord also designates with the help of nets thrown into the sea. After all, before His suffering, it speaks of nets cast into the sea and catching so many fish that they barely reached the shore, dragging the net, and the nets were broken (Luke 5:6-7). After all, they were not thrown on the right side, for at that time there were many bad ones in the Church, and they were not on the left, because there were also good ones, but everywhere, to indicate the mixture of good and evil. And the fact that the networks were broken through means that due to the diminishment of love, many heresies arose. And after the resurrection, since the Lord wanted to show the Church of the future, when everyone would be perfect and holy, He commanded to cast the nets on the right side, and one hundred and fifty-three great fish were caught, and the disciples were surprised that, although there were so many of them, the nets did not break through (John 21:6-11). Their magnitude denotes the magnitude of wisdom and righteousness, and the number is the doctrine itself, which became perfect both through the temporal dispensation and through eternal regeneration, and is designated, as we said, by the number fifty. After all, since there will then be no need for bodily aids, and the soul will contain faith and wisdom, and the soul is designated, as we said, by the number three, then let’s take fifty-three times, and it will be one hundred and fifty. To this number is added the Trinity, since all this perfection is sanctified in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit; and thus there will be one hundred and fifty-three, that is, the number of fish caught on the right side. Question 82. About what is written: “For the Lord smites whomever he loves, and smites every son whom he receives” (Heb. 12:6) 1. Many who murmur against the teaching of God raise the question when they see that the righteous often undergo severe suffering during this life, [namely] as if, as a result, there is no benefit for them from their service to God, since either they indifferently endure general hardships: both bodily, and from losses, reproaches and everything else that mortals consider evil, or they even suffer more than others for the sake of the word of God and righteousness, which cause serious suffering. those who sin restless indignation, or slander, or hatred of the preachers [of the word of God]. We will answer them that if this was the only life for people, then it would not seem at all stupid that a righteous life is either useless or even harmful. Although there will not be a lack of those who will so compare the sweetness of righteousness and the inner joy from it with all the bodily difficulties and sufferings endured by the human race due to the conditions of their mortality, and with everything that is unfairly aroused against those who live righteously because of their righteousness, that [even] without taking into account the hope of a future life, they will more willingly and joyfully suffer for the love of truth than to feast luxuriously from the desire for intoxication. 2. But there are also those who believe that God is unjust when they see the righteous in sorrows and hardships, or, at least, if they do not dare to call God unjust, then they either believe that He does not care about human affairs, or that He once established the necessity of destinies, contrary to which even He Himself does nothing, so that it does not turn out that inconstancy violates the order of things established by Him. But some think something else, [namely] that God, powerless in relation to anything, is not able to remove these evils from the righteous. And here it must be answered that there would be no righteousness in people if God did not care about human affairs. For all that human righteousness, which the human soul can both hold by doing right and lose by sinning, would not be impressed on the soul if there were not some unchangeable righteousness, which in its entirety is acquired by the righteous when they turn to it, and in its entirety is abandoned by sinners when they turn away from its light. This unchangeable righteousness truly belongs to God, and He would not extend it to enlighten those who turn to Him if He did not care about human affairs. If He allows the righteous to endure hardships because He does not want to act contrary to the order of things established by Him, then He Himself is not righteous - not because He wants to observe His establishment, but because He established this very order of things in such a way that the righteous are subjected to undeserved punishments. And anyone who believes that God is powerless in some respect to avert the evil suffered by the righteous is crazy, for he does not understand that just as it is impermissible to call God unjust, it is also impermissible to deny that He is omnipotent. 3. When, in accordance with the circumstances of the question raised, all this has been briefly established (for it is [only] a completely fatal wickedness to doubt that there is a God, and that He is just and omnipotent), then there is no more probable reason that righteous people in this life for the most part bear hardships than that this [occurs] because it serves their benefit. After all, one righteousness is now characteristic of people, [serving] to acquire eternal salvation, and the other had to be provided to a person who was in paradise in order to retain and not miss the same eternal salvation. For just as the righteousness of God consists in prescribing what is beneficial and giving punishments to the disobedient and rewards to the obedient, so the righteousness of man is to obey beneficial injunctions. But since what is health for the body, so is bliss for the soul, just as in relation to the body some medicines are prescribed so as not to lose good health, and others to restore what has been lost, so in relation to the entire situation of man, some commandments were given at first so that he would not lose immortality, and others are proposed now so that he would regain this immortality. And as far as physical health is concerned, if someone does not follow the doctor’s instructions necessary to maintain good health, he falls into some kind of illness and receives other instructions so that he can be healed. And these prescriptions are often not enough when the illness is serious, unless the doctor adds some help, most of which is painful and brings suffering, but serves to restore health. Therefore, it turns out that a person, although he is already subordinate to the doctor, still suffers not only from the disease that has not yet been cured, but also from the help of the doctor. In the same way, man, having fallen as a result of sin into the painful and disastrous mortality of this life, because he did not first want to obey the commandment that preserved eternity and preserved health, having become sick, received new commandments. And if he submits to them, then it is not in vain that he is called one who lives righteously, but he endures the suffering that he still endures either because of the illness itself that has not yet been cured, or because of the help of medicine. And this help applies to what is said: “For the Lord smites whomever he loves, and beats every son whom he receives.” And those who, not fulfilling the supremely saving commandments, live unrighteously, again and again increase their illnesses. Even in this life, either from their illnesses themselves, they endure countless hardships of misfortune and suffering, or through additional punishments they are compassionately notified of the evil they are in, so that what is not healthy is affected and suffers, and they, turning to treatment, become healthy by the grace of God. And if they neglect all this, that is, the commandments of words and suffering, then after this life they will acquire for themselves just eternal condemnation. And therefore, only one can say that all this is happening unfairly, who, believing that there is only the mortal life that we lead now, does not believe in the future predicted by God. And such a one will suffer the heaviest punishments for persistently remaining in sins and his unbelief. Question 83. About marriage, to what the Lord said: “If anyone lets his wife go, except for the guilt of adultery” and so on (Matthew 5:32) If the Lord allowed the wife to be released only in case of adultery and did not forbid breaking off a pagan marriage, then, consequently, paganism is classified as adultery. It is clear that the Lord, when he speaks in the Gospel about a wife who must be let go, makes only one exception, namely the case of adultery. And breaking off a pagan marriage is not prohibited here, because when the apostle gives advice about how a believer should not let go of an unbelieving spouse who wants to stay with him, he says: “I say, not the Lord” (1 Cor. 7:12). Therefore, it seems that the Lord, of course, does not order that [the pagan wife] be released - otherwise it will turn out that the apostle is advising against His command - but still allows [this] so that no one in this matter is bound by the necessity of the command, but can act on the advice of free will. However, if someone insists that the Lord considers as a reason why a wife should be released only that adultery that is usually called adultery, that is, what occurs in unlawful cohabitation, then we can say this: The Lord, speaking about this, spoke about two believers, a husband and a wife, so that if both are believers, no one should leave the other, except in the case of adultery; and here it is impossible to mean paganism, since both are believers. After all, it seems that the apostle also shares this when he says: “To those who remain in marriage, I command not I, but the Lord, that the wife should not leave her husband, but if she does, let her remain unmarried or let her unite again with her husband” (1 Cor. 7:10-11). And from this it is clear that even if a wife leaves her husband for one reason for which the abandonment of her husband is allowed, she must remain unmarried, or, if she does not hold back, then it is better for her to reunite with her husband, either reformed, or, in any case, subject to patience, than to marry another. Further, the apostle continues and says: “And the husband shall not let his wife go” (1 Cor. 7:11), briefly advising in relation to the husband the same thing that he commanded in relation to the wife. Having instilled this on the basis of the Lord’s commandment, he continues: “To the rest I say, not the Lord: If any brother has an unbelieving wife, and she agrees to live with him, then let him not let her go; and if a wife has an unbelieving husband, and he agrees to live with her, let her not let her husband go” (1 Cor. 7:12-13). And thus [the apostle] makes it clear that the Lord is saying that no one should let the other go if both spouses are believers. “And from the ninety-fifth psalm of David they destroyed the following few words: “from the tree.” – See Justin Martyr “Conversation with Tryphon the Jew,” chapter 73. – AB. You might be interested in: