4. Likewise, Second Corinthians eight: If the willing mind is ready according to what one has: the Gloss says: "Let him retain what is necessary, not giving beyond his means": therefore he acts wrongly who so distributes that he reserves absolutely nothing for himself.
5. Likewise, he who tempts God sins mortally; but he who has a human refuge, and passing that over, seeks a divine one, tempts God; but this is what he does who has the means to sustain himself, and abandoning them, expects to be sustained divinely: therefore such a person acts against the Gospel.
6. Likewise, virtue consists in the mean: but to relinquish absolutely everything is to decline to the extreme: therefore this is more a matter of vice than of virtue or evangelical perfection.
Likewise, just as always to hold all things is avarice, so always to give all things is prodigality; but always to hold all things is a vice: therefore likewise also always to give all things.
8. Likewise, he who takes away necessities from another sins mortally; but one is bound to provide for oneself as much as for another: therefore he who relinquishes everything and reserves nothing for himself sins mortally, because he acts against evangelical perfection.
9. Likewise, he who exposes himself to the danger of being killed sins mortally: therefore likewise he who exposes himself to the danger of starvation; but such is he who relinquishes everything and reserves nothing for himself: therefore etc.
10. Likewise, no one ought to entirely reject that which he daily asks of God; but every day we ask in the Lord's Prayer for our daily bread: therefore he acts wrongly who abandons everything.
CONCLUSION.
To renounce all things both in private and in common is a matter of Christian perfection, not only of sufficient perfection, but also of superabundant perfection.
I respond: It must be said that to renounce all things both in private and in common is a matter of Christian perfection, not only of sufficient perfection, but also of superabundant perfection, as the principal counsel of evangelical perfection, and its fundamental principle, and its sublime foundation. The first is urged by nature, the second by Scripture, the third by grace.
First, I say, it is the principal counsel, because it provides the way to the others. For abundant poverty disposes one to the mortification of the flesh and to the perfect abnegation of one's own will, since one retains nothing for oneself, neither house nor place nor any thing. Moreover, nature itself especially makes the way to this, whether instituted or fallen. For man was formed naked, and if he had remained in that state, he would have appropriated absolutely nothing to himself; but fallen man is born naked and dies naked. And therefore this is the most direct way: that, not turning aside from these extremes, one should walk poor and naked, as far as nature can endure. And this is what is said in 1 Timothy 6: We brought nothing into this world, and without doubt we can carry nothing out. And from this he concludes: Having food and covering, let us be content with these. Now this is nothing stricter or poorer than to be content with simple food and covering; which the Apostle urges from the teaching of nature as good and perfect.
It is also a fundamental principle. For the old Law differs from the new in this, that the former induces fear, the latter love: the former promises temporal things, the latter teaches to despise temporal things. If therefore the foundation of the perfection of the city of God consists principally in charity, and that charity is most especially perfect when all cupidity is excluded, because the poison of charity is cupidity, and he who entirely relinquishes all things in deed and in will entirely casts out this cupidity: just as the root of all evils is cupidity, so the root and principle of perfection is the highest poverty. Whence Augustine, in the book of Eighty-Three Questions: "The poison of charity is the hope of acquiring or retaining temporal things; its nourishment is the diminishing of cupidity, its perfection is no cupidity. The sign of its progress is the diminishing of fear, the sign of its perfection is no fear: because the root of all evils is cupidity, and perfect charity casts out fear ." That poverty therefore is most perfect which entirely exterminates cupidity.
It is nonetheless a sublime foundation: because, since the grace that disposes us leads to a twofold life, namely the active and the contemplative: the active directs downward, but the contemplative raises upward to heaven. Moreover, no spirit is more suited to this than the one who is entirely unburdened from the weight of temporal things, and who has his whole treasure in heaven , and whose kingdom is not of this world, who does not have here a lasting city, but seeks the one to come. Such a one, however, is he who has perfectly renounced all earthly things; and therefore such a one already has the foundation of his edifice set on high. Whence Augustine, in the book On the Christian Combat: "Since knowledge and action make a man blessed: just as in knowledge error must be guarded against, so in action wickedness must be guarded against. For he errs who thinks he can know the truth while he still lives wickedly; moreover, wickedness is to love this world, and to esteem as great the things that are born and pass away, and to desire them, and to labor for them so that they may be acquired, and to rejoice when they have abounded, and to fear lest they perish, and to be saddened when they do perish." Therefore, he is most supremely suited for the contemplation of sublime things and is sublimely grounded therein, who is the most perfect despiser of all such things: such is he who casts his whole care upon the Lord and all solicitude, who possesses absolutely nothing.
It is therefore a matter of Christian perfection to possess nothing in the world for Christ, neither in common nor in private. For this reason the Lord most expressly counseled this: for this reason He showed the example in Himself: for this reason the Holy Spirit persuaded the Saints of this in manifold ways. For poverty of this most arduous kind, as has been shown, is commended by nature, Scripture, and grace: Christ the Lord commends it by teaching, by His manner of life, and by inspiration. For what spirit other than God's makes a man despise present things and love heavenly things? For this is not done by the diabolical spirit, nor the worldly, nor one's own, since they always incline toward private good; therefore the Holy Spirit does this.
And hence it is that, by the dictation of the Holy Spirit, the Supreme Pontiff approved this mode of living, as the decretal on the Excesses of Prelates, Nimis prava, states, that "the Apostolic See is known to have approved the order and rule of the Friars Preachers and Minors." Whence it is permitted to no one whatsoever to hold the contrary to this, as if such men were seen to act foolishly, to expose themselves to dangers, and to tempt God. For against such persons it is said in the Rule of blessed Francis, in which poverty of this kind is confirmed: "Let it therefore be permitted to no man whatsoever to infringe this document of our confirmation or to oppose it with rash audacity." Against such persons Augustine also says in his Treatise on Almsgiving: "Elijah in the wilderness is fed by the ministry of ravens, and to Daniel, shut up in the den at the king's command as prey for the lions, a meal is divinely brought; and do you fear that sustenance will be lacking to one who labors and merits favor with the Lord? When He Himself in the Gospel, for the reproach of those whose mind is doubtful and faith small, solemnly declares and says: Behold the birds of the heavens, for they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they? God feeds the birds, and daily sustenance is provided to the birds, and to those which have no sense of any divine thing, neither food nor drink is lacking; and do you think that something will be wanting to a Christian, to a servant of God, to one devoted to good works, to one dear to his Lord? Or do you think that he who feeds Christ will not himself be fed by Christ? Or will earthly things be lacking to those to whom heavenly and divine things are granted? Whence comes this unbelieving thought? Whence this impious and sacrilegious reflection? What does a faithless heart do in the house of God? Why is one who does not believe in Christ at all called and named a Christian? The name of Pharisee better suits you. For when He was discoursing in the Gospel about almsgiving, and was faithfully and salutarily admonishing us that by provident action we should make for ourselves friends from earthly gains, who would afterward receive us into eternal tabernacles, the Scripture adds after this, saying: The Pharisees, who were covetous, heard all these things, and they derided Him. Such as we now see certain men in the Church to be, whose closed ears and blinded hearts admit no light from spiritual and salutary admonitions. Concerning whom we ought not marvel that they despise the servants in such matters, when we see that the Lord Himself was despised by such men."
From these things it is evident that to renounce absolutely all things universally for Christ is not to be blamed, but rather to be praised as the summit of evangelical perfection. Whence the arguments, examples, and authorities are to be granted in favor of this position; for establishing which most sufficiently, a single authority expressed from the mouth of Christ, who counsels the leaving of all things, would be most sufficient, even if many sayings of the Glosses and expositors and doctors seemed to be contrary. For Augustine says to Paulina, in On Seeing God, thus: "Attend to what you believe, and in those very things to which, though unseen, you accommodate faith, weigh carefully the authority of the witnesses to be discerned. For you do not believe me in the same way as Ambrose; or if you think both of us are to be believed with equal measure, will you in any way compare us to the Gospel? Or will you make our writings equal to the canonical Scriptures? Assuredly, if you judge rightly, you see that we stand far below that authority, and I indeed even further. But however much you may believe either of us, you by no means compare either to that excellence." Therefore, since the divine authority so expressly says that all things are to be relinquished by him who wishes to ascend to evangelical perfection, it is manifest that this truth ought to be held with such certitude that it cannot be opposed without peril to the faith.
1. To that, therefore, which is first objected to the contrary concerning want, that it draws one to sin, and concerning destitution, which causes one to commit perjury, it must be said that want is twofold: one kind is voluntary, and another involuntary. Involuntary want induces a defect of mind and a proneness and occasion to sin. But voluntary want or poverty has sufficiency joined to it, according to that passage of Second Corinthians six: As having nothing, etc. And this disposes one to perfect justice, because it makes the mind fit for every good, just as conversely the root of all evils is avarice. And this is what Chrysostom says, in the forty-seventh homily on Matthew: "If you wish to see the soul of one who loves gold, just as a garment consumed by ten thousand worms and having nothing sound, so will you find it pierced on every side by anxieties and putrefied by sins and full of rust. But the soul of one voluntarily poor is not such, but it shines indeed like gold, and gleams like a pearl, and blooms like a rose. There is no moth there, there is no thief there, there is no anxiety of the affairs of this life, but like an Angel, so does he live. He is not subject to demons, he does not attend upon kings, but attends upon God; he does not wage war with men, but with Angels; he does not have the earth as his treasure, but heaven; he has no need of servants, but rather he has as servants the passions and thoughts that lord over kings. What then is better than this poor man? For his pavement is heaven. But if the pavement is such, imagine the roof. But he does not have horses and a chariot? Yet what need has he of these, who is to be carried upon a cloud and to be with Christ "?
From these things it is apparent that in voluntary poverty there is great sufficiency, great nobility, which makes one transcend all earthly things.
Or it can be said otherwise, that those things were said in the time of the written law, which promised temporal things, not eternal, in which poverty was despised. Whence Chrysostom, in the eighteenth homily on the Epistle to the Hebrews, treating the aforesaid word: Riches and beggary etc., says: "These things were said in the Old Testament, where much account was made of riches, where there was very great contempt for poverty, where this indeed was a curse, namely poverty, but that was a blessing, namely riches. But now it is by no means so. But if you wish to hear the praise of poverty, Christ Himself professed it and said: But the Son of man has not where to lay His head; and again He said to the disciples: Do not possess gold ." From which it is apparent that the authority is not contrary to those who assume voluntary poverty, since that was said in the time of the written law, but this in the time of the law of grace. Nor was that said in the person of a perfect man, but rather of a weak one, as is clear from the word of Chrysostom.
And through this the response to the first three authorities is clear.
2. To that which is objected, that Christ had a money-bag: it must be said that Christ had a money-bag for three reasons. For He had a money-bag for other poor persons, according to what Jerome says in the authority cited above: "Christ was of such great poverty" etc.: and this does not take away supreme poverty.
He also had a money-bag in condescension to the weak, as is said in the Gloss on that verse of the Psalm: Producing hay for beasts of burden: "The Lord had a money-bag for the use of those who were with Him, His own and the devout women in His company, who ministered to Him from their substance, in these things taking on rather the person of the weak. For He foresaw that many weak persons would come and would seek these things, just as He also took on the person of the same where He said: My soul is sorrowful even unto death ." And concerning these two, on that passage of John twelve: The things that were contributed etc.; the Gloss says: "He whom Angels serve has a money-bag for the expenses of the poor, condescending to the weak."
He also had a money-bag in a time of necessity, as for instance when He was passing through the Samaritans. In which time of necessity He also permitted the disciples to have money-bags, according to that passage of Luke twenty-two: When I sent you without purse and scrip etc.; the Gloss says: "He does not instruct the disciples with the same rule of living in a time of persecution as in a time of peace. When He sent the disciples to preach, He gave the ordered precept that they should take nothing for the journey, namely, that he who proclaims the Gospel should live by the Gospel. But when the moment of death was at hand, and that entire nation was persecuting both shepherd and flock together, He decreed a rule fitting for that time, permitting them to take the necessities of sustenance, until, the madness of the persecutors being calmed, the time for evangelizing should return."
From these Glosses it manifestly appears that the manner of having money bags in the Lord in no way diminished poverty. For the Lord so condescended to weakness and necessity that nevertheless the form of poverty and the example which He had come principally to show to men were preserved. In accordance with what the Apostle says: He became poor for our sakes, that by His poverty we might be rich, namely by voluntarily imitating the highest poverty.
3. To that which is objected from the Gloss on First Timothy six: Having food etc., where it is said that temporal things are not to be entirely cast away: it must be said that it understands the casting away of temporal things with respect to use, not with respect to ownership. For the use of temporal things is necessary for human life, which nevertheless can be had without ownership and property, as is evident in the poor, who have nothing of property.