Lecture 7
Lectio 7
Christ honors his Father
Christus Patrem suum honorificat
8:45 But if I say the truth, you do not believe me. [n. 1254]
8:45 Ego autem si veritatem dico, non creditis mihi. [n. 1254]
8:46 Who among you will convict me of sin? If I say the truth to you, why do you not believe me? [n. 1255]
8:46 Quis ex vobis arguet me de peccato? Si veritatem dico, quare non creditis mihi? [n. 1255]
8:47 He who is of God hears the words of God. Therefore, you do not hear them, because you are not of God. [n. 1258]
8:47 Qui ex Deo est, verba Dei audit: propterea vos non auditis, quia ex Deo non estis. [n. 1258]
8:48 The Jews therefore answered and said to him: are we not right in saying that you are a Samaritan and have a demon? [n. 1262]
8:48 Responderunt ergo Iudaei, et dixerunt: nonne bene dicimus nos, quia Samaritanus es tu, et daemonium habes? [n. 1262]
8:49 Jesus answered: I do not have a demon, but I honor my Father, and you have dishonored me. [n. 1263]
8:49 Respondit Iesus: ego daemonium non habeo; sed honorifico Patrem meum, et vos inhonorastis me. [n. 1263]
8:50 I do not seek my own glory, but there is one who seeks and judges. [n. 1268]
8:50 Ego autem non quaero gloriam meam: est qui quaerat, et iudicet. [n. 1268]
1253. After mentioning some characteristics of the devil, he then shows that the Jews are imitating these. Our Lord ascribed two kinds of evil to the devil, murder and lying. He reproved them before for their imitation of one of these, namely, murder: but now you seek to kill me, a man who has spoken the truth to you, which I heard from God (John 8:40). Then passing from this, he reproves them for turning away from the truth:
1253. Postquam posuit diabolicam conditionem, hic consequenter ostendit Iudaeos esse diabolicae conditionis imitatores. Duas autem malitiae conditiones Dominus diabolo ascripsit, homicidium scilicet et mendacium. Sed de homicidio quidem, in quo isti diabolum imitabantur, reprehendit eos; supra eodem: nunc autem quaeritis me interficere, hominem, qui veritatem vobis locutus sum, quam audivi a Deo. Et ideo, hoc praetermisso, redarguit eos de aversione eorum a veritate, et
first, he shows that they are turned away from the truth;
primo ostendit eos esse aversos a veritate;
second, he rejects a certain reason they might give for this, at who among you will convict me of sin?
secundo causam quam allegare poterant, excludit, ibi quis ex vobis arguet me de peccato?
Third, he concludes to the true reason for their being turned away from the truth, at if I say the truth to you, why do you not believe me?
Tertio veram causam aversionis concludit, ibi si veritatem dico, quare non creditis mihi?
1254. He says first: it was said that the devil is a liar and the father of lies (John 8:44), and you are imitating him because you do not wish to adhere to the truth. Thus he says, if I say the truth to you, why do you not believe me? If I tell you, you will not believe (Luke 22:67); if I have spoken to you of earthly things, and you do not believe, how will you believe if I speak to you of heavenly things? (John 3:12). And Isaiah complains: who has believed what we have heard? (Isa 53:1).
1254. Dicit ergo primo: dictum est, quod diabolus mendax est, et pater eius, quem quidem vos imitamini, quia veritati non vultis adhaerere. Unde dicit ego autem si veritatem dico vobis, non creditis mihi. Lc. XXII, 67: si autem dixero, non credetis mihi; supra III, 12: quomodo si dixero vobis caelestia, credetis? Unde et Is. LIII, 1, conqueritur dicens: Domine, quis credidit auditui nostro?
1255. The reason which the Jews might allege for their unbelief is that Christ is a sinner, for it is not easy to believe a sinner even when he is telling the truth. Thus we read: but to the wicked God says: what right have you to recite my statutes? (Ps 50:16). So they might have said: we do not believe you since you are a sinner.
1255. Causa autem suae infidelitatis, quam poterant Iudaei allegare est peccatum in Christo; nam peccatori etiam in veritate non de facili creditur. Unde Ps. XLIX, 16: peccatori autem dixit Deus: quare tu enarras iustitias meas? Poterant ergo dicere: non credimus, quia peccator es.
Accordingly, he excludes this reason when he says, who among you will convict me of sin? As if to say: you have no good reason for not believing me when I speak the truth, since you can find no sin in me: he committed not sin; no guile was found on his lips (1 Pet 2:22).
Et ideo hanc causam excludit, dicens quis ex vobis arguit me de peccato? Quasi dicat: non habetis iustam causam quare mihi veritatem dicenti non creditis, cum in me nullum peccatum inveniri possit; I Petr. II, 22: qui peccatum non fecit, nec inventus est dolus in ore eius.
According to Gregory, we are invited to consider the mildness of God, who did not consider it beneath himself to show by rational grounds that he who can justify sinners by the power of his divinity is not a sinner: if I have rejected the cause of my manservant or my maidservant, when they brought a complaint against me; what then shall I do when God rises up? (Job 31:13).
Secundum Gregorium, pensanda est Dei mansuetudo, qui non dedignatur ex ratione ostendere se peccatorem non esse, qui ex virtute divinitatis poterat peccatores iustificare; Iob XXXI, 13: si contempsi subire iudicium meum cum servo meo et ancilla mea, cum disceptarent adversum me.
We should also honor the unique greatness of Christ’s purity, for as Chrysostom says, no mere man could have confidently said, who among you will convict me of sin? Only God, who had no sin, could say this: who can say, I have made my heart clean; I am pure from my sin? (Prov 20:9)—this is like saying: no one but God alone. They have all gone astray, they are all alike corrupt; there is none that does good, no, not one, except Christ (Ps 14:3).
Admiranda est etiam Christi singularis puritatis excellentia, quia, ut Chrysostomus dicit, hoc nullus hominum fiducialiter potuit dicere quis ex vobis arguet me de peccato? Nisi solus Deus noster, qui peccatum non fecit; Prov. XX, 9: quis potest dicere: mundum est cor meum, purus sum a peccato? Quasi dicat, nullus nisi solus Deus. Et in Ps. XIII, v. 3: omnes declinaverunt, simul inutiles facti sunt: non est qui faciat bonum, non est usque ad unum, idest Christum.
1256. Next, at if I say the truth to you, why do you not believe me? he concludes to the real reason they have turned away from the truth.
1256. Veram autem causam aversionis concludit, dicens si veritatem dico, quare non creditis mihi? Et
First, he mentions the reason;
primo ponit eam;
second, he rejects their rejoinder, at the Jews therefore answered: are we not right?
secundo Iudaeorum contradictionem excludit, ibi responderunt ergo Iudaei etc.
As to the first he does three things:
Circa primum tria facit.
first, he asks a question;
Primo ponit quaestionem;
second, he begins with a reasonable starting point;
secundo assumit rationabilem propositionem;
third, he draws from his conclusion.
tertio infert intentam conclusionem.
1257. First, he says: since you cannot say that you do not believe me because I am a sinner, one can ask why if I say the truth to you, why you do not believe me, since I am not a sinner? This is like saying: if you cannot convict me, whom you hate, of sin, it is obvious that you hate me because of the truth, that is, because I say that I am the Son of God: a fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion (Prov 18:2).
1257. Dicit ergo primo: ex quo ergo non potestis dicere, quod ideo non creditis mihi quia peccator sum, nunc restat quaerere quare si veritatem dico, non creditis mihi, ex quo non sum peccator; quasi dicat: si me, quem exosum habetis, non potestis arguere de peccato, manifestum est quoniam propter veritatem me odio habetis, quoniam dico me Filium Dei; Prov. XVIII, 2: non recipit stultus verba prudentiae, nisi ea dixerit quae versantur in corde eius.
1258. He then begins with a reasonable and true starting point, saying, he who is of God hears the words of God. For we read: every creature loves its like (Sir 13:15). Therefore, whoever is of God, to that extent possesses a likeness to the things of God and clings to them. Thus, he who is of God gladly hears the words of God; as it says below: every one who is of the truth hears my voice (John 18:37). The word of God ought to be heard gladly by those, above all, who are of God, since it is the seed by which we are made the children of God: he called them gods to whom the word of God was spoken (John 10:35).
1258. Rationabilem autem propositionem et veram assumit, dicens qui ex Deo est, verba Dei audit. Ut enim dicitur Eccli. c. XIII, 19, omne animal diligit sibi simile, quicumque ergo est ex Deo, inquantum huiusmodi, similitudinem habet horum quae sunt Dei, et eis inhaeret. Unde qui ex Deo est, verba Dei libenter audit; infra XVIII, 37: omnis qui est ex veritate, audit meam vocem. Praecipue autem verbum Dei libenter audiri debet ab his qui ex Deo sunt, cum ipsum sit semen per quod in filios Dei generamur; infra X, 35: illos dixit deos ad quos sermo Dei factus est.
1259. He draws his conclusion from this saying, therefore, you do not hear them, because you are not of God. This is like saying: the reason for your unbelief is not my sin, but your own wickedness; as it is said: wisdom seems very harsh to the uninstructed (Sir 6:21). Augustine says about them that as to their nature, they are of God, indeed; but by reason of their vice and evil affection they are not of God. For this statement was made to those who were not just sinful, for this was common to all; it was made to those of whom it was foreknown that they would not believe with that faith by which they could have been set free from the chains of their sins.
1259. Et ideo ex hoc intentam conclusionem infert, dicens propterea vos non auditis, quia ex Deo non estis; quasi dicat: non ergo peccatum meum est causa incredulitatis vestrae, sed malitia vestra; Eccli. VI, v. 21: quam aspera est nimium indoctis hominibus sapientia. Et, ut dicit Augustinus, ex Deo quidem sunt secundum naturam, sed ex Deo non sunt vitio et prava affectione: nam eis hoc verbum dictum est qui non solum peccato vitiosi erant, hoc enim commune omnibus erat, sed etiam praecogniti quod non fuerant credituri ea fide qua possent a peccatorum obligatione liberari.
1260. It should be noted, as Gregory says, that there are three degrees of being badly disposed in one’s affections. Some refuse to physically hear God’s precepts. Of these we read: like the deaf adder that stops its ear (Ps 58:4). Others hear them physically, but they do not embrace them with the desire of their heart, since they do not have the will to obey them: they hear what you say, but they will not do it (Ezek 33:32). Finally, there are those who joyfully receive the words of God and even weep with tears of sorrow; but after the time of crying is past and they are oppressed with troubles or allured by pleasures, they return to their sins. An example of this is given, where we read of the word being choked by cares and anxieties (Matt 13:18 ff and Luke 8:11 ff). But the house of Israel will not listen to you; for they are not willing to listen to me (Ezek 3:7). Consequently, a sign that a person is of God is that he is glad to hear the words of God, while those who refuse to hear, either in affection or physically, are not of God.
1260. Notandum est autem, quod triplex est gradus male affectorum, ut dicit Gregorius. Nam quidam sunt qui praecepta Dei nec aure corporis, idest exteriori auditu, dignantur audire: de quibus dicitur in Ps. LVII, 5: sicut aspidis surdae, obturantis aures suas. Quidam vero sunt qui haec quidem corporis aure percipiunt, sed nullo ea mentis desiderio complectuntur, non habentes voluntatem implendi: Ez. XXXIII, 31: audiunt sermones, et non faciunt eos. Quidam autem sunt qui libenter verba Dei suscipiunt, ita ut etiam in fletibus compungantur; sed post lacrymarum tempus, vel tribulationibus oppressi, aut allecti deliciis, ad iniquitatem redeunt; cuius exemplum habetur Matth. XIII, 18 ss., et Lc. VIII, 11 ss., de verbo a sollicitudinibus suffocato. Ez. III, 7: domus Israel nolunt audire te, quia nolunt audire me. Est ergo signum quod homo sit a Deo, si libenter audit verba Dei, sed qui recusant audire affectu vel effectu, ex Deo non sunt.
1261. Next he rejects the rejoinder made by the Jews.
1261. Hic excludit Iudaicam contradictionem, et
First, the Evangelist mentions this rejoinder; and
primo ponit Evangelista Iudaeorum contradictionem;
second, our Lord’s rejection of it, at Jesus answered: I do not have a demon.
secundo Domini exclusionem, ibi respondit Iesus: ego daemonium non habeo.
1262. In their response the Jews charge Christ with two things: first, that he is a Samaritan, when they say, are we not right in saying that you are a Samaritan? Second, that he has a demon, when they add, and have a demon?
1262. Duo autem imponunt Iudaei Christo in eorum contradictione. Primo quidem quod sit Samaritanus, cum dicunt nonne bene dicimus nos, quia Samaritanus es? Secundo vero quod daemonium habeat; unde subdunt et daemonium habes.
In saying, are we not right? we can infer that they often reproached Christ this way. In fact, concerning the second, that he has a demon, it is only by Beelzebul, the prince of demons, that he casts out demons (Matt 12:24). But this is the only place where it is recorded that they called him a Samaritan, although they probably said it often: for many of the things that were said and done about Christ and by Christ were not written in the Gospels (John 21:25).
In hoc autem quod dicunt nonne bene dicimus nos? Datur intelligi quod hoc verbum frequenter domino improperabant. Et quidem de secundo quod sit daemoniacus, legimus Matth. IX, 34; et XII, 24, cum dicebant: in Beelzebub principe Daemoniorum eiicit Daemones. Sed quod dixerunt eum Samaritanum, nusquam nisi hic in Evangelio invenitur, licet forte hoc multoties dixerunt: multa enim dicta et facta sunt erga Iesum et a Iesu quae non sunt scripta in Evangeliis, ut dicitur infra XX, 25.
Two reasons can be given why the Jews said this about Christ. First, because the Samaritans were hateful to the people of Israel, for when the ten tribes were led into captivity, they took their land: the Jews do not communicate with the Samaritans (John 4:9). Thus, because Christ reproved the Jews, they believed that he did it out of hatred, so that they regarded him as a Samaritan, an adversary, as it were. Another reason was that the Samaritans observed the Jewish rites in some things and not in others. Therefore, the Jews, seeing that Christ observed the law in some matters and broke it in others, for example, the law of the Sabbath, called him a Samaritan.
Duplex autem causa assignari potest quare Iudaei hoc Christo dicebant. Una quidem, quia Samaritani gens odiosa erat pro populo Israelitico, eo quod decem tribubus in captivitatem ductis, terram eorum possidebant; supra IV, 9: non enim coutuntur Iudaei Samaritanis. Quia ergo Christus Iudaeos arguens, credebatur a Iudaeis quod hoc ex odio faceret, ideo eum Samaritanum et quasi adversarium reputabant etc. Alia ratio, quia Samaritani partim quidem servabant ritus Iudaicos, partim vero non. Videntes ergo Iudaei Christum in aliquo legem servantem, et in aliquo dissolventem, utpote Sabbatum, vocabant eum Samaritanum.
Again, there are two reasons why they said he had a demon. First, because they did not attribute the miracles he worked, and their thoughts that he revealed, to a divine power in Christ; rather, they suspected that he did these things by some demonic art. Thus they said: it is only by Beelzebul, the prince of demons, that he casts out demons (Matt 12:24). The other reason was based on the fact that his words exceeded human understanding, such as his statements that God was his Father, and that he had come down from heaven. And when uneducated people hear such things they usually regard them as diabolical. Accordingly, they believed that Christ spoke as one possessed by a demon: many of them said: he has a devil and is mad: why do you hear him? (John 10:20). Furthermore, they said these things in an attempt to accuse him of sin, to dispute what he had said: who among you will convict me of sin?
Similiter autem duplici de causa dicebant eum Daemonium habere. Una quidem, quia miracula quae faciebat, et cogitationes eorum quas revelabat, non attribuebant virtuti divinae in Christo; sed arte Daemonum ipsum ea facere suspicabantur. Unde dicebant: in Beelzebub principe Daemoniorum eiicit Daemones. Alia vero ratio est propter eius sermones transcendentes capacitatem humanam, dicens, Deum Patrem suum esse, et descendisse de caelo etc. Consuetudo autem rudium est, quod cum talia audiunt, diabolica reputant: et sic isti credebant quod Christus quasi Daemonio plenus loqueretur; infra X, 20: alii dicebant: daemonium habet, et insanit; quid eum auditis? Dicunt autem haec verba, ut arguant de peccato, contra illud quod dixerat: quis ex vobis arguet me de peccato?
1263. Then when he says, Jesus answered: I do not have a demon, our Lord rejects the response of the Jews. Now they had taxed Christ with two things, that he was a Samaritan and that he had a demon. Concerning the first, our Lord makes no apology, and this for two reasons. First, according to Origen, because the Jews always wanted to keep themselves apart from the gentiles. But the time had now come when the distinction between Jews and gentiles was to be removed, and everyone was to be called to the way of salvation. Accordingly, our Lord, in order to show that he had come for the salvation of all, made himself all things to all men, more so than Paul, so that he might win all (1 Cor 9:22); and so he did not deny that he was a Samaritan. The other reason was that Samaritan means keeper, and because he especially is our keeper, as we read, he who keeps Israel will neither slumber nor sleep (Ps 121:4), so he did not deny that he was a Samaritan.
1263. Consequenter cum dicit respondit Iesus: ego daemonium non habeo, repellit Dominus Iudaeorum contradictionem. Duo autem imposuerant Christo: scilicet quod Samaritanus esset, et quod Daemonium haberet. Et de primo quidem Dominus non se excusat; et hoc duplici de causa. Una quidem, secundum Origenem, quia Iudaei semper volebant se a gentilibus separare. Iam autem venerat tempus quo removenda erat distinctio gentilium et Iudaeorum, et omnes ad viam salutis revocandi: et ideo Dominus, ut ostendat se venisse pro salute omnium ut, magis quam Paulus, omnia factus, omnes nanciscatur, I Cor. IX, ideo non negavit se esse Samaritanum. Alia ratio est, quia Samaritanus interpretatur custos: et quia ipse praecipue custos noster est, secundum illud Ps. CXX, 4: ecce non dormitabit neque dormiet qui custodit Israel: ideo se Samaritanum esse non negavit.