John 10 · The Lantern

Treuli, treuli, Y seie to you, he that cometh not in by the dore in to the foold of scheep, but stieth bi another weie, is a nyyt theef and a dai theef.

Those, then, who follow impious words and dictate them to others, inasmuch as they pervert the divine words instead of using them rightly, neither enter into the kingdom of heaven themselves, nor do they permit those whom they have deluded to attain the truth. They do not have the key for the entrance but a false key.

Very probably it may seem to those who listen carelessly that the language of the parable before us is not introduced very appositely: because after a discussion on blindness and recovery of sight, we straightway come upon statements about sheep, and a fold, and a door.

After our Lord showed that his teaching had power to enlighten, he here shows that he has power to give life. First, he shows this by word; secondly, by a miracle (chap 11). Concerning the first he does three things. First, he shows that he has life-giving power; secondly, his manner of giving life (v 11); thirdly, he explains his power to give life (v 19).

But he that entrith bi the dore, is the scheepherde of the scheep.

(Hom. lix. 2) You have seen His description of a robber, now see that of the Shepherd: But he that entereth in by the door is the shepherd of the sheep.

Here are the signs of the Shepherd. The Shepherd enters through the Scriptures. The Pharisees often called the Lord a deceiver and proved this by their own unbelief, saying, "Have any of the rulers believed in Him?" (John 7:48).

Now he considers the shepherd. First, he mentions the mark of the shepherd; secondly, he shows through signs that he is the shepherd (v 3). The mark of the true shepherd is to enter by the door, that is, by the testimony of Sacred Scripture. Thus Christ said: "Everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the prophets and the psalms must be fulfilled" (Lk 24:44).

To this the porter openeth, and the scheep heren his vois, and he clepith his owne scheep bi name, and ledith hem out.

My child, diligently apply yourself to the reading of the sacred Scriptures. Apply yourself, I say. For we who read the things of God need to do so often, otherwise we might say or think something too rashly about them.

To Him the porter openeth. (Tr. xlvi. 2) Or, the porter is our Lord Himself; for there is much less difference between a door and a porter, than between a door and a shepherd. And He has called Himself both the door and the shepherd. Why then not the door and the porter? He opens Himself, i. e. reveals Himself.

Now he mentions the signs of a good shepherd; and there are three. The first relates to the gatekeeper, and is that the good shepherd is let in by him. As to this he says, to him the gatekeeper opens. This gatekeeper, according to Chrysostom, is the one who opens the way to a knowledge of Sacred Scripture.

And whanne he hath don out his owne scheep, he goith bifor hem, and the scheep suen hym; for thei knowun his vois.

But thei suen not an alien, but fleen from hym; for thei han not knowun the vois of aliens.

(Hom. xlix. 3) The strangers are Theudas, and Judas, and the false apostles who came after Christ. That He might not appear one of this number, He gives many marks of difference between Him and them. First, Christ brought men to Him by teaching them out of the Scriptures; they drew men from the Scriptures.

"But they do not follow a stranger, but flee from him," that is, an evil shepherd or a wolf, because they do not know the voice of strangers, that is, they do not approve of it.

The effect that the thief has is that the sheep do not follow him for very long, but only for a time; so he says, a stranger they will not follow, i.e., they do not follow a false and heretical teacher: "The children who are strangers have lied to me" (Ps 17:46). Thus Paul did not follow false teachers for long.

Jhesus seide to hem this prouerbe; but thei knewen not what he spak to hem.

(Tr. xlv. 10. ct seq.) But here is a difficulty. Sometimes they who are not sheep hear Christ's voice; for Judas heard, who was a wolf. And sometimes the sheep hear Him not; for they who crucified Christ heard not; yet some of them were His sheep. You will say, While they did not hear, they were not sheep; the voice, when they heard it, changed them from wolves to sheep.

Jesus told them in these words a parable, or comparison, and used obscure speech in order to make them more attentive.

Here the Evangelist tells why it was necessary to explain the above similitude; and this necessity was caused by the failure of his listeners to understand. First, he mentions the reason why they failed to understand; secondly, he says they failed to understand. The cause of their failure to understand was that Christ was speaking in figures.

Therfor Jhesus seide to hem eftsoone, Treuli, treuli, Y seie to you, that Y am the dore of the scheep.

No one, then, he says, can be saved or return (into heaven) without the Son, and the Son is the Serpent. For as he brought down from above the paternal marks, so again he carries up from thence those marks roused from a dormant condition and rendered paternal characteristics, substantial ones from the unsubstantial Being, transferring them hither from thence.

He most thoroughly knew, being by nature God, and beholding that which lies in the depth, that the Pharisees understood none of His sayings, although accustomed to pride themselves greatly on their learning in the Law, and excessively supercilious in thinking themselves wise.

Now our Lord explains the similitude. If the above similitude is examined correctly, it contains two principal clauses, followed by others. The first is: "He who does not enter the sheepfold by the door…is a thief and a robber." The second is: "He who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep." Accordingly, this section is divided into two parts.

As many as han come, weren nyyt theues and day theues, but the scheep herden not hem.

The devil is called "thief and robber;" having mixed false prophets with the prophets, as tares with the wheat. "All, then, that came before the Lord, were thieves and robbers;" not absolutely all men, but all the false prophets, and all who were not properly sent by Him. For the false prophets possessed the prophetic name dishonestly, being prophets, but prophets of the liar.

"All that ever came are thieves and robbers." What is this, Lord, "All that ever came"? How so hast Thou not come? But understand; I said, "All that ever came," meaning, of course, exclusive of myself. Let us recollect then. Before His coming came the prophets: were they thieves and robbers? God forbid. They did not come apart from Him, for they came with Him.

Then when he says, All who came before me are thieves and robbers, he explains what he had said about thieves and robbers. First, he shows who the thieves and robbers are; secondly, their sign. In regard to the first, we should avoid the error of the Manicheans, who rejected the Old Testament on the ground that it says here that all who came before me are thieves.

Y am the dore. If ony man schal entre bi me, he schal be sauyd; and he schal go ynne, and schal go out, and he schal fynde lesewis.

The priests indeed are good, but the High Priest is better; to whom the holy of holies has been committed, and who alone has been trusted with the secrets of God. He is the door of the Father, by which enter in Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the prophets, and the apostles, and the Church. All these have for their object the attaining to the unity of God.

(Hom. lix. 3) Or, He refers to the Apostles who went in and out boldly; for they became the masters of the world, none could turn them out of their kingdom, and they found pasture.

I am the door. Here he clarifies his explanation: first, of the door; secondly, of the thief (v 10). Concerning the first, he does two things: first, he repeats what he intends to explain; and secondly, he gives the explanation (v 9).

A nyyt theef cometh not, but that he stele, sle, and leese; and Y cam, that thei han lijf, and haue more plenteousli.

(Hom. lix. 1) The thief cometh not but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy; this was literally fulfilled in the case of those movers of seditiona, whose followers were nearly all destroyed; deprived by the thief even of this present life.

The thief cometh not but for to steal, and to kill. As if He said, And well may the sheep not hear the voice of the thief; for he cometh not but for to steal: he usurpeth another's office, forming his followers not on Christ's precepts, but on his own. And therefore it follows, and to kill, i. e. by drawing them from the faith; and to destroy, i. e. by their eternal damnation.

Now he considers the thief. First, he mentions the mark of the thief; secondly, he says that he himself has the opposite characteristic, I came that they may have life. He says that those who do not enter by the door, i.e., those who have come independently of me, are thieves and robbers; and they are evil.

I am a good scheepherde; a good scheepherde yyueth his lijf for hise scheep.

The divine Instructor is trustworthy, adorned as He is with three of the fairest ornaments-knowledge, benevolence, and authority of utterance;-with knowledge, for He is the paternal wisdom: "All Wisdom is from the Lord, and with Him for evermore;"-with authority of utterance, for He is God and Creator: "For all things were made by Him, and without Him was not anything made;"-an…

(Tr. xlvi. 1) Our Lord has acquainted us with two things which were obscure before; first, that He is the Door; and now again, that He is the Shepherd: I am the good Shepherd. (c. xlvii. 1, 3). Above He said that the shepherd entered by the door. If He is the Door, how doth He enter by Himself?

Here he explains the second clause of the parable, "he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep" (10:2). First, he gives the explanation; secondly, he makes it clear (v 14). First, he explains that he is the good shepherd; secondly, he states the office of a good shepherd (v 11b); thirdly, he shows that the opposite is found in an evil shepherd (v 12).

But an hirid hyne, and that is not the scheepherde, whos ben not the scheep his owne, seeth a wolf comynge, and he leeueth the scheep, and fleeth; and the wolf rauyschith, and disparplith the scheep.

But Christ, confirming these foreshadowings Himself, adds: "The bad shepherd is he who, on seeing the wolf, flees, and leaves the sheep to be torn in pieces." Why, a shepherd like this will be tuned off from the farm; the wages to have been given him at the time of his discharge will be kept from him as compensation; nay, even from his former savings a restoration of the master…

He is called not a shepherd but a hireling who feeds the Lord's sheep not out of heartfelt love but for temporal wages. Indeed, a hireling is one who holds the position of shepherd but does not seek the profit of souls; he gapes after earthly advantages, rejoices in the honor of his office, feeds on temporal gains, and delights in the reverence shown him by men.

Now he considers the evil shepherd, showing that he possesses characteristics contrary to those of the good shepherd. First, he mentions the marks of an evil shepherd; secondly, he shows how these marks follow one another (v 12).

And the hirid hyne fleeth, for he is an hirid hyne, and it parteyneth not to hym of the scheep.

Hence it is soon added: "But the hireling flees, because he is a hireling, and the sheep do not pertain to him." For the sole reason why the hireling flees is because he is a hireling. As if it were said openly: He who in presiding over the sheep does not love the sheep but seeks earthly gain cannot stand firm in danger to the sheep.

"But the hireling flees, because he is a hireling, and the sheep are not his concern," that is, because he loves the reward and not the sheep.

Now he shows how the above-mentioned marks are related, for the third follows from the first two. Since the evil shepherd seeks his own advantage and has no love or solicitude for the flock, it follows that he is not willing to endure any inconvenience for them.

Y am a good scheepherde, and Y knowe my scheep, and my scheep knowen me.

You may learn, if you will, the profound wisdom of the most holy Shepherd and instructor, the Lord of the universe and the Word of the Father. He presents himself to us by way of allegory as the shepherd of the sheep, and so in this way serves also as the teacher of children. Speaking through Ezekiel to the Jewish elders, he gives them a salutary example of true care.

(Hom. in Evang. xiv.) As if He said, I love My sheep, and they love and follow Me. For he who loves not the truth, is as yet very far from knowing it.

Here our Lord proves his explanation. First, he restates what he intends to prove; secondly, he gives the proof, I know my own (v 14b); and thirdly, he amplifies on it (v 17). He says, I am the good shepherd, which has been explained above: "As a shepherd seeks out his flock…so will I seek out my sheep" (Ez 34:12). Then he says, I know my own, he proves what he says.

As the fadir hath knowun me, Y knowe the fadir; and Y putte my lijf for my scheep.

In a later passage He declares that He is known by the Father, and the Father by Him; adding that He was so wholly loved by the Father, that He was laying down His life, because He had received this commandment from the Father.

The force of love makes a person brave because genuine love counts nothing as hard, or bitter, or serious or deadly. What sword, what wounds, what penalty, what deaths can avail to overcome perfect love? Love is an impenetrable breastplate. It wards off missiles, sheds the blows of swords, taunts dangers, laughs at death.

He shows that he is a good shepherd by mentioning that he has the office of a good shepherd, which is to lay down his life for his sheep. First, he shows the reason for this; secondly, he gives a sign of it; and thirdly, he shows the fruit of his sign. The reason for this sign, that is, of his laying down his life for his sheep, is the knowledge he has of the Father.

Y haue othere scheep, that ben not of this foolde, and it bihoueth me to brynge hem togidir, and thei schulen here my vois; and it schal be maad o foolde and o scheepherde.

He is called Jesus: Sometimes He calls Himself a shepherd, and says, "I am the good Shepherd." According to a metaphor drawn from shepherds, who lead the sheep, is hereby understood the Instructor, who leads the children-the Shepherd who tends the babes. For the babes are simple, being figuratively described as sheep.

(de Verb. Dom. s. 1) The sheep hitherto spoken of are those of the stock of Israel according to the flesh. But there were others of the stock of Israel, according to faith, Gentiles, who were as yet out of the fold; predestinated, but not yet gathered together.

Then when he says, and I have other sheep, he sets down the fruit of Christ's death, which is the salvation not only of the Jews but of the Gentiles as well.

Therfor the fadir loueth me, for Y putte my lijf, that eftsoone Y take it.

Callistus corroborated the heresy of these Noetians, but we have already carefully explained the details of his life. And Callistus himself produced likewise a heresy, and derived its starting-points from these Noetians,-namely, so far as he acknowledges that there is one Father and God, viz., the Creator of the universe, and that this (God) is spoken of, and called by the name…

He replies oftentimes not only to the words uttered at the time with the tongue, but to the reasonings in the depth [of the heart]; for being Very God, He has a clear knowledge of all things.

Now our Lord explains his proof: first, he amplifies on the reason for the sign of his death for his sheep; secondly, he explains the sign, or the effect (v 18); thirdly, he shows that the reason is appropriate (v 18b).

No man takith it fro me, but Y putte it of my silf. Y haue power to putte it, and Y haue power to take it ayen. This maundement Y haue takun of my fadir.

Thus then, too, though demonstrated as God, He does not refuse the conditions proper to Him as man, since He hungers and toils and thirsts in weariness, and flees in fear, and prays in trouble. And He who as God has a sleepless nature, slumbers on a pillow. And He who for this end came into the world, begs off from the cup of suffering.

To say that the body of the divine Logos also had a soul does not suggest the divinity of the soul.… In this context, when something like this is stated, we understand the statement to refer to the flesh, which had a soul and was united with the divine Logos.… After all, even when Peter says, "Now I will lay down my soul for you," just like the Lord did, there is no difference.…

Now he explains the effect of the sign. And since the sign was "I lay down my life for the sheep," he explains how he lays it down. First, he excludes violence; secondly, he speaks of his power. The violence he excludes is that which could be employed in taking a life: such violence was not accomplished in Christ.

Eft dissencioun was maad among the Jewis for these wordis.

What then did Christ? He answered nothing to these things. Before this He had replied, "I have not a devil"; but not so now; for since He had afforded proof by His actions, He afterwards held His peace. For neither were they worthy of an answer, who said that He was possessed of a devil, on account of those actions for which they ought to have admired and deemed Him to be God.

But the light shined in darkness, and the darkness comprehended it not. There was a division among the Jews for these sayings. And many of them said, He hath a devil, and is mad.

After showing that he has power to give life and showing his manner of doing so, our Lord here shows how this power to give life belongs to him. First, the Evangelist mentions the dispute which arose among the crowd on this point; secondly, he gives the discussion between the Jewish leaders and Christ (v 22). Concerning the first he does three things.

And many of hem seiden, He hath a deuel, and maddith; what heren ye hym?

Some, to whom these words of His seemed enigmatic, thought that He was out of His mind. Why then did Christ not answer those who said He was possessed by a demon? Because neither their opponents nor His defenders could silence them or be more credible to them.

"And many of them said: He has a devil and is mad": whence they thought that he was mad. These were of those concerning whom First Corinthians chapter two says: "The sensual man does not perceive the things that are of God; for it is foolishness to him, and he cannot understand, because they are spiritually examined." Whence they refused to hear; therefore they say: "Why do you…

The opinion of one party to the argument was false. About this he says, Many of them said. He says, Many, because as we read in Ecclesiastes (1:15): "The number of fools is infinite." They said, He has a demon, and he is mad, for it is the habit of the foolish to always give an evil interpretation to matters about which they are in doubt; whereas the opposite should be done.

Othere men seiden, These wordis ben not of a man that hath a feend. Whether the deuel may opene the iyen of blynde men?

Others, understanding somewhat, said: "These are not the words of one possessed by a demon." Since the Lord could not shut their mouths with words (for even the reasonable ones neither fully understood His words themselves, nor would they have convinced their opponents), they attempt to defend Christ by deeds and say that these are not the words of one possessed by a demon.

"Others were saying: These are not the words of one having a demon": these were beginning to be illuminated in some way, whence they take refuge in the miracle of illumination: "Can a demon open the eyes of the blind?" Chrysostom: "Because they could not shut their mouths with words, they made their demonstration from works"; whence works give credence to words; therefore below…

This opinion is refuted by the statements of the other side, and this is in two ways. First, by the profundity of Christ's words. Thus he says, Others, that is, those who rightly understood, said, These are not the sayings of one who has a demon.

But the feestis of halewyng of the temple weren maad in Jerusalem, and it was wyntir.

And Jhesus walkide in the temple, in the porche of Salomon.

"It was winter. And Jesus walked in the temple in Solomon's porch. Then came the Jews round about Him, and said unto Him, How long dost thou keep our mind in suspense? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly." They were not desiring the truth, but preparing a calumny. "It was winter," and they were chill; because they were slow to approach that divine fire.

Jesus also came to this feast. Now He already often walked in Judea, because the sufferings were at the door. As long as winter lasts, that is, the present life, which always has disturbances from the spirits of evil, strive also to celebrate the renewal of your spiritual temple, constantly renewing yourself and setting "ascents in your heart" (Ps. 83:6).

Then he describes the place, and Jesus was walking in the temple, in the portico of Solomon. He describes it first in a general way, in the temple: "The Lord is in his holy temple" (Ps 11:4); secondly, in more detail, saying, in the portico of Solomon.

Therfor the Jewis camen aboute hym, and seiden to hym, Hou long takist thou awei oure soule? if thou art Crist, seie thou to vs opynli.

For it may be observed as a trait of the character of Jesus, that He on all occasions avoided unnecessary talk about Himself; and on that account said, "If I speak of Myself, My witness is not true." And since He avoided unnecessary talk about Himself, and preferred to show by acts rather than words that He was the Christ, the Jews for that reason said to Him, "If Thou art the…

We have heard of the patience of God, and of salvation preached amid revilings. They obstinately preferred tempting Him to obeying Him.

The persons who question Christ are described as to their malice; thus he says, so the Jews gathered round him, unwarmed by loving charity, but burning with the desire to harm him. They came to attack him, surrounding and pressing him in on all sides: "Many bulls encompass me" (Ps 22:12); "Ephraim has encompassed me" (Hos 11:12).

Jhesus answerde to hem, Y speke to you, and ye bileuen not; the werkis that Y do in the name of my fadir, beren witnessyng of me.

But I shall not linger long over this point for Christ's own definition comes to our aid at once.

And thus they intended to give Him into the hands of the Proconsul for punishment, as an usurper against the emperor. Our Lord so managed His reply as to stop the mouths of His calumniators, open those of the believers; and to those who enquired of Him as a man, reveal the mysteries of His divinity: Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not; the works that I do in My…

Now we have the answer of Christ, where he shows their unbelief, proving they were deceitful in saying they wished to know the truth when they said, "How long will you keep us in suspense?" He shows this in two ways. First, because they did not believe his words; and about this he says, I told you, and you do not believe.

But ye bileuen not, for ye ben not of my scheep.

My scheep heren my vois, and Y knowe hem, and thei suen me.

"And other sheep there are also," saith the Lord, "which are not of this fold" - deemed worthy of another fold and mansion, in proportion to their faith. "But My sheep hear My voice," understanding gnostically the commandments. And this is to be taken in a magnanimous and worthy acceptation, along with also the recompense and accompaniment of works.

Of which sheep indeed he says again: "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me, and I give them eternal life." Of which he also says a little earlier: "If anyone enters through me, he will be saved, and will go in and go out, and will find pastures." For he will go in to faith, but will go out from faith to sight, from belief to contemplation, and will find p…

Now he reveals the dignity of his sheep when he says, my sheep hear my voice. He here mentions four things: two of them are what we do in reference to Christ; the other two, which correspond to the first two are what Christ does in us. The first thing we do is to obey Christ.

And Y yyue to hem euerelastynge lijf, and thei schulen not perische with outen ende, and noon schal rauysche hem fro myn hoond.

For "no one snatches us away from his hands," according to what was said in the Gospel according to John. Yet it is not written that just as no one snatches us away, no one also falls from his hands. For one who is self-determined is free. And, I say, no one will snatch us away from the hand of God, no one can take us. But we are able to fall from his hands if we are negligent.

"And they shall never perish." Hear the undertone, as if He had said to them, Ye shall perish for ever, because ye are not of my sheep. "No one shall pluck them out of my hand." Give still greater heed to this.

The corresponding fourth part, which is what Christ does, is the bestowing of a reward. Concerning this he says, and I give them eternal life. This is like saying: They follow me by walking the path of gentleness and innocence in this life, and I will see that afterwards they will follow me by entering into the joys of eternal life.

That thing that my fadir yaf to me, is more than alle thingis; and no man may rauysche fro my fadris hoond.

(de Trin. vii. c. 22) This is the speech of conscious power. Yet to show, that though of the Divine nature He hath His nativity from God, He adds, My Father which gave Me them is greater than all. He does not conceal His birth from the Father, but proclaims it. For that which He received from the Father, He received in that He was born from Him.

"That which my Father gave me is greater than all." Give still greater heed to this. What did the Father give to the Son that was greater than all? To be His own only-begotten Son. In what sense, then, did He say "gave"? Was He to whom He gave previously existent, or gave He in the act of begetting?

He now proves what he had said above about the dignity of his sheep, namely, that no one can snatch them from his hand. His reason is this: No one can snatch what is in the hand of my Father; but the Father's hand and mine are the same; therefore, no one can snatch what is in my hand.

Y and the fadir ben oon.

These Three are, one essence, not one Person, as it is said, "I and my Father are One," in respect of unity of substance not singularity of number.

(viii. de Trin. c. 5) The heretics, since they cannot gainsay these words, endeavour by an impious lie to explain them away. They maintain that this unity is unanimity only; a unity of will, not of nature; i. e. that the two are one, not in that they are the same, but in that they will the same.

Thirdly, he affirms his unity with the Father, and from this the conclusion follows. Thus he says, I and the Father are one. As if to say: no one shall snatch them out of my hand, because I and the Father are one, by a unity of essence, for the Father and the Son are the same in nature.

The Jewis token vp stoonys, to stoone hym.

When he says, "I and my Father are one" in essence [unum], he shows that there are two, whom he puts on an equality and unites in one. He therefore adds to this very statement, that he had "shown them many good works from the Father," for none of which did he deserve to be stoned.

For not refraining themselves from Him, when He said that Himself was One with the Father, they rush to kill Him; although each of the works wrought by Him proclaimed that He was in His Nature God.

We have seen the teaching of Christ; and now we see the effect this teaching has on the Jews. First, Jesus reproves their fierceness; secondly, he defends himself against the charge of blasphemy; and thirdly, he escapes from their violence (v 39). Concerning the first, two things are done. First, we see the violence of the Jews inciting them to stone Christ.

Jhesus answerde to hem, Y haue schewide to you many good werkis of my fadir, for which werk of hem stonen ye me?

The Jewis answerden to hym, We stoonen thee not of good werk, but of blasfemye, and for thou, sithen thou art a man, makist thi silf God.

And Trypho answered, "We shall remember this your exposition, if you strengthen [your solution of] this difficulty by other arguments: but now resume the discourse, and show us that the Spirit of prophecy admits another God besides the Maker of all things, taking care not to speak of the sun and moon, which, it is written, God has given to the nations to worship as gods; and of…

For a good work we stone Thee not, but for blasphemy. Having a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge, they became angry when they heard Christ saying: I and the Father are One. For what was the impediment to His being One with the Father, if they believed that He was God by Nature?

Now our Lord defends himself from the charge of blasphemy. First, we see him accused of blasphemy by the Jews; and secondly, Christ proves his innocence (v 34). With respect to the first, the Evangelist says, The Jews answered him, We stone you for no good work but for blasphemy. There are five things to be considered here.

Jhesus answerde to hem, Whether it is not writun in youre lawe, That Y seide, Ye ben goddis?

This Spirit, (according to the apostle's showing, ) meant not that the service of these gifts should be in the body, nor did He place them in the human body); and on the subject of the superiority of love above all these gifts, He even taught the apostle that it was the chief commandment, just as Christ has shown it to be: "Thou shalt love the Lord with all thine heart and soul…

(Tract. xlviii) i. e. the Law given to you, I have said, Ye are Gods? (Ps. 82:6) God saith this by the Prophet in the Psalm. Our Lord calls all those Scriptures the Law generally, though elsewhere He spiritually distinguishes the Law from the Prophets. On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets. (Matt.

Here our Lord defends himself against the charge of blasphemy. First, he gives his defense; secondly, he shows them the truth (v 37). He defends himself by divine authority, and so first, he mentions the authority of Scripture; secondly, he explains its meaning; and thirdly, he draws his conclusion.

Yf he seide that thei weren goddis, to whiche the word of God was maad, and scripture may not be vndon,

Do you conceive no anxiety lest you should in something offend the gods themselves, whoever they are, because you believe that it is owing to filthy intercourse that they have reached the light they knew not of, thanks to lewdness?

His words have this meaning: if those who received deification by grace are gods (Ps. 81:6), and this is not imputed to them as a fault, then what justice is there when you condemn Me, Who am God by nature, Whom the Father sanctified, that is, set apart for sacrifice for the world? For that which is set apart for God is called holy.

Then when he says, If he called them gods to whom the word of God came, he shows the meaning of the authority he cited. This was like saying: He called them gods because they participated in something divine insofar as they participated in God's word, which was spoken to them.

thilke that the fadir hath halewid, and hath sent in to the world, ye seien, That `thou blasfemest, for Y seide, Y am Goddis sone?

The Jews thought that what he had said was … hateful and blasphemous, for he had shown himself in these discourses to be God. Therefore they rushed at once to stoning and set to work passionately to hurl stones. He, however, strongly refuted his adversaries by the example and witness of the Scriptures.

How then do I blaspheme when I call Myself the Son of God? For although I bear flesh and descend from the lineage of David, you do not know the mystery, namely that the fleshly human nature could not otherwise receive communion with God unless He appeared to it in the flesh, as if under a veil.

Then when he says, do you say of him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, You are blaspheming, he draws his conclusion. If, with Hilary, we refer this to Christ insofar as he has a human nature, the meaning is this: Some people are called gods only because they participate in God's word.

Yf Y do not the werkis of my fadir, nyle ye bileue to me;

" And in another place it is thus said through the prophet: "The King with His glory ye shall see,"-that is, Christ, doing deeds of power in the glory of God the Father; "and your eyes shall see the land from afar," -which is what you do, being prohibited, in reward of your deserts, since the storming of Jerusalem, to enter into your land; it is permitted you merely to see it w…

What He says is this. Though it is easy for any one to call God Father, yet to demonstrate the fact by works is hard and impossible to a creature.

Then when he says, If I am not doing the works of my Father, then do not believe me, he proves the truth of the foregoing. This is like saying: Although in your opinion I am only human, yet I am not blaspheming when I say that I am truly God, because I truly am.

but if Y do, thouy ye wolen not bileue to me, bileue ye to the werkis; that ye knowe and bileue, that the fadir is in me, and Y in the fadir.

It must therefore be by the works that the Father is in the Son, and the Son in the Father; and so it is by the works that we understand that the Father is one with the Son. All along he therefore strenuously aimed at this conclusion, that while they were of one power and essence, they should still be believed to be two.

Therefore, as there is but One Godhead in Father and Son and Holy Spirit, we say that the Father is seen in the Son, and the Son in the Father.

Secondly, he says that they are convicted by his very works: but if I do them, the same works the Father does, then even though you do not believe me, who appears as a son of man, believe the works, i.e., these works show that I am the Son of God: "If I had not done among them the works which no one else did, they would not have sin" (15:24).

Therfor thei souyten to take hym, and he wente out of her hondis.

(Hom. lxi. 3) Christ, after discoursing on some high truth, commonly retires immediately, to give time to the fury of people to abate, during His absence. Thus He did now: He went away again beyond Jordan, into the place where John at first baptized. He went there that He might recall to people's minds, what had gone on there; John's preaching and testimony to Himself.

They seek to seize the Lord, unable to bear His lofty testimony about Himself, for they could not endure His sublime theology. But He withdraws, yielding to their anger and arranging it so that through His withdrawal the passion of their anger might subside.

Now our Lord turns away from the obstinacy of the Jews. First, the Evangelist shows they were obstinate; secondly, we see that Christ turns away from this; thirdly, we see what effect this had. The Evangelist shows their inflexibility by the fact that after so many confirmations of the truth, after the evidence of so many miracles and wonders, they still persist in their evil.

And he wente eftsoone ouer Jordan, in to that place where Joon was firste baptisynge, and he dwelte there.

"And He went away again beyond Jordan, into the place where John at first baptized; and there He abode. And many resorted unto Him, and said, John, indeed; did no miracle." You remember what was said of John, that he was a light, and bore witness to the day. Why, then, say these among themselves, "John did no miracle"?

We may observe that our Lord often brings out the people into solitary places, thus ridding them of the society of the unbelieving, for their furtherance in the faith: just as He led the people into the wilderness, when He gave them the old Law. Mystically, Christ departs from Jerusalem, i. e. from the Jewish people; and goes to a place where are springs of water, i. e.

We see, secondly, where he went when the Evangelist says, he went away again across the Jordan to the place where John at first baptized. The mystical reason for this is that at some time, through the apostles, Jesus would go to convert the Gentiles. The literal reason is twofold.

And manye camen to hym, and seiden, For Joon dide no myracle;

"Therefore they sought again to take Him, but He escaped out of their hands, and went away again beyond Jordan, into the place where John at first baptized.

That His stay here benefited many is evident from the fact that the Evangelist adds: "Many came to Him and, remembering this place, said that John performed no miracle." Their words have this meaning: if we believed him (John), even though he performed no miracle, then all the more should we believe This One (Jesus), since He performed so many miracles.

The effect of this turning away was that many were converted to the faith. Three points are made about this conversion. First, many imitated his works; so he says, and many came to him, namely, by imitating his works: "Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest" (Matt 11:28). Secondly, many professed him in word, and they said, John did no sign.

and alle thingis what euer Joon seide of this, weren sothe. And many bileueden in hym.

(Tract. xlviii. c. 12) These laid hold of Him while abiding, not, like the Jews, when departing. Let us approach by the candle to the day. John is the candle, and gave testimony to the day.

"But all things whatsoever John said of this man were true. And," thus led by this twofold testimony, "many believed in him," according to what the Lord himself had said above in the same chapter: "And if you do not believe me, at least believe the works"; "many," according to that passage of the Psalm: "I shall number them, and they shall be multiplied above the sand"; and Gen…

Thirdly, he reveals the faith in their hearts, saying, and many believed in him there. As Augustine remarks, they grasped Christ remaining, whom the Jews wanted to seize waning, because through the lamp they had come to the day. For John was that lamp and gave testimony to the day.

John10