549. Having set forth the teaching of Christ on spiritual regeneration, and that Christ had given this grace of spiritual regeneration to the Jews, he now shows how Christ gave this grace to the gentiles. Now the salutary grace of Christ had been dispensed in two ways to the gentiles: through teaching and through miracles. Going forth, they preached everywhere: this is the teaching; the Lord cooperated with them, and confirmed the word with signs. These are the miracles (Mark 16:20). 549. Posita doctrina Christi de spirituali regeneratione, et quod Christus gratiam spiritualis regenerationis Iudaeis communicaverat, hic consequenter ostendit quomodo ipsa gratia etiam ad gentes derivata est per Christum. Salutaris autem gratia Christi derivata est dupliciter in gentibus: per doctrinam et per miracula. Marc. ult., 20: illi autem profecti praedicaverunt ubique, ecce doctrina, Domino cooperante, sequentibus signis, ecce miracula. First, he shows the future conversion of the gentiles through teaching. Primo ergo ostendit futuram gentium conversionem per doctrinam; Second, their future conversion through miracles, at now after two days, he departed from there (John 4:43). secundo futuram gentium conversionem per miracula, ibi post duos autem dies exiit inde. As to the first, he does two things. Circa primum duo facit. First, he sets down certain matters preliminary to the teaching. Primo praemittit quaedam praeambula ad doctrinam; Second, he presents the teaching and its effect, at Jesus answered and said to her: if you knew the gift of God (John 4:10). secundo proponit doctrinam, et eius effectum, ibi respondit Iesus, et dixit ei: si scires donum Dei etc. As to the first, he sets down three preliminary facts. Quantum ad primum tria praeambula praemittit. First, what relates to the one teaching. Primum ex parte ipsius docentis; Second, something about the matter taught, at now Jacob’s well was there. secundum ex parte eius de quo doctrina erat, ibi erat autem ibi fons Iacob; Third, something about who received the instruction, at there came a woman of Samaria. tertium ex parte personae audientis, ibi venit mulier de Samaria, etc. As to the person teaching, the preliminary remark is about his journey to the place where he taught; thus he says, when Jesus therefore understood. Ex parte autem docentis, praeambulum est eius accessus ad locum doctrinae; et ideo dicit ut ergo cognovit Iesus, etc. Here he does three things. Ubi tria facit. First, he gives the place which he left, that is, from Judea. Primo innuit terminum a quo recedit, quia a Iudaea; Second, the place where he was going, to Galilee. secundo terminum ad quem accedit, in Galilaeam; Third, the place through which he passed, Samaria. tertio insinuat medium per quod transit, quia per Samariam. As to the first, he does three things. Quantum ad primum ponit First, he gives the reason for his leaving Judea. primo causam recessus de loco in quo erat; Second, he explains certain facts included in this reason, at although Jesus himself did not baptize, but his disciples did. secundo exponit quaedam dicta in causa assignata, ibi quamquam Iesus non baptizaret etc.; Third, he describes Christ’s departure from Judea, at he left Judea. tertio describit recessum Christi a Iudaea, ibi reliquit Iudaeam, etc. 550. The Evangelist says, when Jesus therefore understood that the Pharisees had heard that he makes more disciples and baptizes more than John, because he wished to show that after the Baptist had calmed the envy of his disciples, Jesus avoided the ill will of the Pharisees. 550. Dicit ergo ut cognovit Iesus quod audierunt Pharisaei etc., volens ostendere Evangelista, quod postquam Baptista repressit discipulorum suorum invidiam, Christus declinavit Pharisaeorum malitiam. 551. Since we read: all things were known to the Lord God before they were created (Sir 23:29), and all things are naked and open to his eyes (Heb 4:13), it seems that we should ask why Jesus is said to acquire new knowledge. 551. Sed cum dicatur Eccli. XXIII, 29: Domino Deo nostro nota sunt omnia antequam fiant; et Hebr. IV, 13: omnia nuda et aperta sunt oculis eius, quaerendum videtur quomodo Iesus dicitur aliquid de novo cognoscere. We must answer that Jesus, in virtue of his divinity, knew from eternity all things, past, present and to come, as the scriptural passages cited above indicate. Nevertheless, as man, he did begin to know certain things through experiential knowledge. And it is this experiential knowledge that is indicated when it says here, when Jesus therefore understood, after the news was brought to him, that the Pharisees had heard. And Christ willed to acquire this knowledge anew as a concession, to show the reality of his human nature, just as he willed to do and endure many other things characteristic of human nature. Ad quod dicendum est, quod Iesus virtute divinitatis suae ab aeterno cognovit omnia praeterita, praesentia et futura, ut praedictae auctoritates ostendunt; sed inquantum homo aliqua de novo cognovit, scientia experimentali; et de hac dicitur hic ut cognovit Iesus, postquam fuit ei nuntiatum, quia audierunt Pharisaei etc. Et hanc cognitionem Christus de novo accipere voluit dispensative, ad ostendendum veritatem humanae naturae, sicut et multa alia humanae naturae propria voluit facere et pati. 552. Why does he say: the Pharisees had heard that he makes more disciples and baptizes more than John, when this would seem to be of no concern to them? For they persecuted John and did not believe in him, for when the Lord questioned them about the source of John’s baptism, they said: if we say from heaven, he will say to us, why then did you not believe him? (Matt 21:25). Thus they did not believe in John. 552. Sed quid est hoc quod dicit quia audierunt Pharisaei, quod Christus plures discipulos facit et baptizat quam Ioannes, cum ad eos non pertineat? Nam ipsi Ioannem persecuti sunt, nec ei credebant: quia, ut dicitur Matth. XXI, 26, cum Dominus quaereret baptismum Ioannis unde esset, dicebant intra se: si dixerimus de caelo, dicet nobis: quare ergo non credidistis? Non ergo crediderant Ioanni. There are two answers to this. One is that those disciples of John who had spoken against Christ were either Pharisees or allies of the Pharisees. For we see, that the Pharisees along with the disciples of John raised questions against the disciples of Christ (Matt 9:11 and 14). And so according to this explanation, then, the Evangelist says that when Jesus therefore learned that the Pharisees had heard, that is, after he learned that John’s disciples, who were Pharisees or allied with the Pharisees, had raised questions and had been disturbed about his baptism and that of his disciples, he left Judea. Sed ad hoc est duplex responsio. Una: quod ipsi discipuli Ioannis, qui supra quaestionem concitaverant contra Christum, erant Pharisaei, vel Pharisaeis confoederati, unde, Matth. IX, 11 et 14 dicitur quod Pharisaei simul cum discipulis Ioannis proposuerunt quaestiones contra discipulos Christi. Et secundum hoc concludit Evangelista ut ergo cognovit Iesus quia audierunt etc.: idest postquam intellexit quaestionem et commotionem discipulorum Ioannis, qui erant Pharisaei, vel Pharisaeis confoederati, super baptismo suo et discipulorum eius, reliquit Iudaeam. Or, we might say that the Pharisees were disturbed at John’s preaching due to their envy, and for this reason they persuaded Herod to arrest him. This is plain where Christ, speaking of John, says, Elijah has already come . . . and they did with him whatever they wanted, and then he adds, so also will the Son of man suffer from them (Matt 17:12). The Gloss comments on this that it was the Pharisees who incited Herod to arrest John and put him to death. Thus it seems probable that they felt the same way toward Christ because of what he was preaching. And this is what it says, that is, the envious Pharisees and persecutors of Christ had heard, with the intention of persecuting him, that Jesus makes more disciples and baptizes more than John. Vel dicendum, quod Pharisaei propter invidiam turbati sunt de praedicatione Ioannis, unde suaserunt Herodi ut caperet eum. Et hoc patet Matth. XVII, 12, ubi cum Christus loqueretur de Ioanne, dicit: Elias iam venit, et fecerunt in eum quaecumque voluerunt: et postea subdit: sic et Filius hominis passurus est ab eis, ubi Glossa dicit quod Pharisaei incitaverunt Herodem ad incarcerationem Ioannis et mortem. Videtur ergo probabile quod similiter moverentur contra Christum, ex hoc quod praedicabat. Et hoc est quod dicitur audierunt, scilicet ad persequendum Pharisaei invidi et persecutores Christi quia Iesus plures discipulos facit et baptizat quam Ioannes. 553. This kind of hearing is described: death and destruction have said: we have heard of his deeds (Job 28:22). The good, on the other hand, hear in order to obey: we have heard him in Ephrathah (Ps 131:6), followed by, we will adore at his footstool. 553. De isto auditu dicitur Iob XXVIII, v. 22: perditio et mors dixerunt: auribus nostris audivimus facta eius. Sed boni audiunt ad obediendum. Ps. CXXXI, 6: ecce audivimus eum in Ephrata: et postea sequitur: adorabimus in loco ubi steterunt pedes eius. The Pharisees heard two things. First, that Christ made more disciples than John. This was right and reasonable, for as we read, he must increase, but I must descrease (John 3:30). The second thing was that Christ baptized; and rightly so, because he cleanses: wash me from my injustice (Ps 50:4), and again: rise up, O Lord, by baptizing, in the command you have given, concerning baptism, and a congregation of people, united through baptism, will surrond you (Ps 7:7). Audierunt, inquam, duo: scilicet quod plures discipulos faceret quam Ioannes, quod quidem iustum erat et rationabile, quia, ut dicitur supra III, 30, Christum oportet crescere, et Ioannem minui. Aliud quod baptizabat; et hoc merito, quia ipse mundat. Ps. l, v. 4: lava me, Domine, ab iniustitia mea. Et alibi, Ps. VII, 7: exurge, Domine (scilicet baptizando), in praecepto quod mandasti (scilicet de baptismo), et synagoga populorum (per baptismum congregatorum) circumdabit te. 554. Then when he says, although Jesus himself did not baptize, he explains what he has just said about Christ’s baptizing: when Jesus therefore understood that the Pharisees had heard that he makes more disciples and baptizes more than John. 554. Consequenter cum dicit quamquam Iesus non baptizaret etc., exponit quod supra dixerat de baptismo Christi quod audierunt Pharisaei etc. Augustine says that there is an apparent inconsistency here: for he had stated that Jesus baptizes, whereas now he says, as though correcting himself, Jesus himself did not baptize. Sed Augustinus dicit, hic apparere inconveniens: nam supra dixerat et baptizat, hic vero quasi corrigens id, utpote falsum, dicit quamquam Iesus non baptizaret. There are two ways to understand this. This first way is that of Chrysostom. What the Evangelist now says is true, i.e., that Christ did not baptize. When he said above that Jesus was baptizing, this was the report received by the Pharisees. For certain people came to the Pharisees and said: you are envious of John because he has disciples and is baptizing. But Jesus is making more disciples than John and is also baptizing. Why do you put up with him? So the Evangelist is not himself saying that Jesus was baptizing, but only that the Pharisees heard that he was. It is with the intention of correcting this false rumor that the Evangelist says: It is true that the Pharisees heard that Christ was baptizing, but this is not true. So he adds: although Jesus did not himself baptize, but his disciples did. And so for Chrysostom, Christ did not baptize, because the Holy Spirit was not given at any time before the passion of Christ in the baptism of John and his disciples. The purpose of John’s baptism was to accustom men to the baptism of Christ and to gather people in order to instruct them, as he says. Moreover, it would not have been fitting for Christ to baptize if the Holy Spirit were not given in his baptism; but the Spirit was not given until after the passion of Christ: for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified (John 7:39). Et ad hoc est duplex responsio. Una Chrysostomi: quod hoc quod Evangelista dicit, verum est, quod Christus non baptizavit aliquem; illud autem quod supra dictum est, scilicet baptizat, intelligendum est secundum famam currentem ad Pharisaeos, quod Christus baptizaret, quod aliqui venientes ad ipsos Pharisaeos dicerent: vos invidebatis Ioanni quod discipulos habebat et baptizabat; sed ecce quod hic, scilicet Iesus, plures discipulos facit quam Ioannes, et baptizat. Quare ergo sustinetis eum? Et ideo non dicit Evangelista ex se, quod baptizat, sed quod audierunt Pharisaei. Et ideo falsum rumorem populi Evangelista corrigere volens, dicit: verum est quod audierunt Pharisaei, quod Christus baptizat, sed est falsum; unde subdit quamquam Iesus non baptizaret, sed discipuli eius. Ideo autem, secundum Chrysostomum, Christus non baptizavit, quia in omni baptismate, quo Ioannes et discipuli baptizaverunt per totum tempus ante Christi passionem, non dabatur Spiritus Sanctus; sed ad hoc erat ut assuescerent homines ad baptismum Christi, et congregarentur ad praedicationem, ut ipse dicit. Inconveniens autem esset quod Christus baptizaret, si non daretur in illo baptismo Spiritus Sanctus, quod non dabatur ante Christi passionem: quia, ut dicitur infra VII, 39, nondum erat Spiritus datus, quia nondum Iesus erat glorificatus. According to Augustine, however, one should say, and this is the preferable, way, that the disciples did baptize with the baptism of Christ, that is, in water and the Spirit, and the Spirit was given in this baptism, and also that Christ did and did not baptize. Christ did baptize because he performed the interior cleansing; but he did not baptize because he did not wash them externally with the water. It was the office of the disciples to wash the body, while Christ gave the Spirit which cleansed within. So in the proper sense Christ did baptize, according to: he upon whom you shall see the Spirit descending, and remaining upon him, it is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit (John 1:33). Sed, secundum Augustinum, dicendum est, et verius, quod discipuli baptizabant baptismo Christi, aqua scilicet et Spiritu, qui in ipso baptismo dabatur: et etiam ipse Christus baptizabat, et non baptizabat. Baptizabat quidem quia ipse mundabat interius; sed non baptizabat, quia ipse non tingebat aqua exterius; nam discipuli praebebant ministerium per ablutionem corporis, Christus vero praebebat Spiritum interius mundantem. Unde ipse proprie baptizabat. Supra I, 33: supra quem videris Spiritum descendentem, et manentem super eum, hic est qui baptizat. With respect to the opinion of Chrysostorn that the Holy Spirit was not yet given and so on, we might say that the Spirit was not yet given in visible signs, as he was given to the disciples after the resurrection; nevertheless, the Spirit had been given and was being given to believers through an interior sanctification. Ad hoc ergo quod Chrysostomus dicit, quod nondum erat Spiritus datus etc., dicendum, quod non erat datus visibilibus signis, sicut post resurrectionem Christi datus est discipulis; sed tamen datus est, et dabatur, per internam sanctificationem, credentibus. The fact that Christ was not always baptizing gives an example to us that the major prelates of the churches should not occupy themselves with things that can be performed by others, but should allow them to be done by those of lesser rank: Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the Gospel (1 Cor 1:17). Per hoc autem quod Christus non semper baptizavit, dat nobis exemplum quod maiores Ecclesiarum praelati in his quae per alios fieri possunt, non occupentur, sed ea minoribus facienda relinquant. I Cor. I, 17: non enim misit me Christus baptizare, sed evangelizare. 555. If someone should ask whether Christ’s disciples had been baptized, it could be said, as Augustine answered Stelentius, that they had been baptized with the baptism of John, because some of Christ’s disciples had been disciples of John. Or, which is more likely, they were baptized with the baptism of Christ, in order that Christ might have baptized servants through whom he would baptize others. This is the meaning of what is said: he who has washed, needs not but to wash his feet, and then follows, and you are clean, but not all (John 13:10). 555. Si autem quaeritur an discipuli Christi baptizati fuerint; dicendum, secundum Augustinum ad Stelentium, quod baptizati fuerunt baptismo Ioannis, quia aliqui ex discipulis Christi fuerant discipuli Ioannis: sive quod magis credibile est baptismo Christi; neque enim ministerio baptizandi defuisse creditur, ut haberet baptizatos servos, per quos ceteros baptizaret. Et hoc intelligendum est per hoc quod dicitur Io. XIII, 10: qui lotus est non indiget nisi ut pedes lavet. Et postea sequitur: et ideo vos mundi estis, sed non omnes. 556. He then mentions Christ’s going away, he left Judea. He left for three reasons. First, to get away from the envy of the Pharisees, who were disturbed because of what they had heard about Christ, and were preparing to harass him. By this he gives us the example that we should, with gentleness, yield ground to evil for a time: do not pile wood on his fire (Sir 8:4). Another reason was to show us that it is not sinful to flee from persecution: if they persecute you in one town, flee to another (Matt 10:23). The third reason was that the time of his passion had not yet come: my hour has not yet come (John 2:4). And there is an additional reason, a mystical one: he indicated by his leaving that because of persecution the disciples were destined to abandon the Jews and go to the gentiles. 556. Consequenter Christi recessum ponit, dicens reliquit Iudaeam: et hoc triplici de causa. Una ut subtraheret se invidiae Pharisaeorum, qui ex his quae audierant de Christo, turbabantur, et persecutionem parabant; dans nobis exemplum, ut per mansuetudinem malis cedamus ad tempus. Eccli. VIII, v. 4: nec strues ligna in ignem illius. Alia de causa ut ostenderet non esse peccatum persecutores fugere. Matth. X, 23: si vos persecuti fuerint in una civitate, fugite in aliam. Tertia causa est, quia nondum venerat tempus suae passionis. Infra II, 4: tempus meum nondum advenit etc. Est autem et alia causa, propter mysterium: nam per huiusmodi recessum significavit quod discipuli propter persecutionem relicturi erant Iudaeos, et ituri ad gentes. 557. Then when he says, and went again into Galilee, he shows where he was going. He says, again, because he had mentioned another time when Christ went to Galilee: after this he went down to Capernaum (John 2:12). Since the other three evangelists did not mention this first trip, the Evangelist says again to let us know that the other evangelists had mentioned none of the matters he mentions up to this point, and that he is now beginning to give his account contemporaneous with theirs. 557. Consequenter cum dicit et abiit iterum in Galilaeam, ostendit locum ad quem accessit. Dicit autem, iterum, quia supra II, v. 12 fecerat mentionem de quodam alio descensu Christi in Galilaeam, quo post miraculum nuptiarum descendit Capharnaum. Quia ergo alii tres Evangelistae non faciunt mentionem de illo descensu primo, ideo Evangelista, ut det intelligere quod alii Evangelistae omnia quae dixerunt usque ad istud capitulum, dimiserunt, et ex hoc loco ipse historiam eis contemporaneam texere incepit, dicit iterum,