Writings of Augustine. Sermon on the Mount
Advanced Information
St. Augustin:
Our Lord's Sermon on the Mount,
according to Matthew.
[De Sermone Domini in Monte secundum Matthaeum.]
Translated by the Rev. William Findlay, M.A., Larkhall.
Revised and annotated by the Rev. D. S. Schaff, Kansas City.
Published in 1886 by Philip Schaff,
New York: Christian Literature Publishing Co.
Book I.
Explanation of the first part of the sermon delivered by our Lord on
the mount, as contained in the fifth chapter of Matthew.
Chapter I.
1. If any one will piously and soberly consider the sermon which our
Lord Jesus Christ spoke on the mount, as we read it in the Gospel
according to Matthew, I think that he will find in it, so far as
regards the highest morals, a perfect standard of the Christian life:
and this we do not rashly venture to promise, but gather it from the
very words of the Lord Himself. For the sermon itself is brought to a
close in such a way, that it is clear there are in it all the precepts
which go to mould the life. For thus He speaks: "Therefore, whosoever
heareth these words of mine, and doeth them, I will liken [3] him unto
a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: and the rain descended,
and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat [4] upon that house;
and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock. And every one that
heareth these words of mine, and doeth them not, I will liken [5] unto
a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: and the rain
descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that
house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it." Since, therefore,
He has not simply said, "Whosoever heareth my words," but has made an
addition, saying, "Whosoever heareth these words of mine," He has
sufficiently indicated, as I think, that these sayings which He
uttered on the mount so perfectly guide the life of those who may be
willing to live according to them, that they may justly be compared to
one building upon a rock. I have said this merely that it may be clear
that the sermon before us is perfect in all the precepts by which the
Christian life is moulded; for as regards this particular section a
more careful treatment will be given in its own place. [6]
2. The beginning, then, of this sermon is introduced as follows: "And
when He saw the great [7] multitudes, He went up into a mountain: [8]
and when He was set, His disciples came unto Him: and He opened His
mouth, and taught them, saying." If it is asked what the "mountain"
means, it may well be understood as meaning the greater precepts of
righteousness; for there were lesser ones which were given to the
Jews. Yet it is one God who, through His holy prophets and servants,
according to a thoroughly arranged distribution of times, gave the
lesser precepts to a people who as yet required to be bound by fear;
and who, through His Son, gave the greater ones to a people whom it
had now become suitable to set free by love. Moreover, when the lesser
are given to the lesser, and the greater to the greater, they are
given by Him who alone knows how to present to the human race the
medicine suited to the occasion. Nor is it surprising that the greater
precepts are given for the kingdom of heaven, and the lesser for an
earthly kingdom, by that one and the same God, who made heaven and
earth. With respect, therefore, to that righteousness which is the
greater, it is said through the prophet, "Thy righteousness is like
the mountains of God:" [9] and this may well mean that the one Master
alone fit to teach matters of so great importance teaches on a
mountain. Then He teaches sitting, as behooves the dignity of the
instructor's office; and His disciples come to Him, in order that they
might be nearer in body for hearing His words, as they also approached
in spirit to fulfil His precepts. "And He opened His mouth, and taught
them, saying." The circumlocution before us, which runs, "And He
opened His mouth," perhaps gracefully intimates by the mere pause that
the sermon will be somewhat longer than usual, unless, perchance, it
should not be without meaning, that now He is said to have opened His
own mouth, whereas under the old law He was accustomed to open the
mouths of the prophets. [10]
3. What, then, does He say? "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for
theirs is the kingdom of heaven." We read in Scripture concerning the
striving after temporal things, "All is vanity and presumption of
spirit;" [11] but presumption of spirit means audacity and pride:
usually also the proud are said to have great spirits; and rightly,
inasmuch as the wind also is called spirit. And hence it is written,
"Fire, hail, snow, ice, spirit of tempest." [12] But, indeed, who does
not know that the proud are spoken of as puffed up, as if swelled out
with wind? And hence also that expression of the apostle, "Knowledge
puffeth up, but charity edifieth." [13] And "the poor in spirit" are
rightly understood here, as meaning the humble and God-fearing, i.e.
those who have not the spirit which puffeth up. Nor ought blessedness
to begin at any other point whatever, if indeed it is to attain unto
the highest wisdom; "but the fear of the Lord is the beginning of
wisdom;" [14] for, on the other hand also, "pride" is entitled "the
beginning of all sin." [15] Let the proud, therefore, seek after and
love the kingdoms of the earth; but "blessed are the poor in spirit,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven." [16]
Footnotes
[3] Similabo. The Vulgate, conforming more closely to the Greek, has
assimilabitur, "shall be likened."
[4] Offenderunt; the Vulgate has irruerunt.
[5] The Vulgate, more closely conforming to the Greek, has similis
erit.
[6] The main purpose of the Sermon on the Mount has been variously
stated. Augustin regards it as a perfect code of morals. Tholuck (Die
Bergpredigt) calls it "the Magna Charta of the kingdom of heaven."
Lange says, "The grand fundamental idea is to present the
righteousness of the kingdom of heaven in its relation to that of the
Old Testament theocracy." Geikie declares it to be the "formal
inauguration of the kingdom of God and the Magna Charta of our faith."
Edersheim regards it as presenting "the full delineation of the ideal
man of God, of prayer, and of righteousness; in short, of the inward
and outward manifestation of discipleship." Meyer (Com. 6th ed. p.
210) says that the aim of Jesus is, as the One who fulfils the Law and
the Prophets, to present the moral conditions of participation in the
Messianic kingdom. Weiss (Leben Jesu) speaks of it as being "as little
an ethical discourse as a new proclamation of law. It is nothing else
than an announcement of the kingdom of God, in which is visible
everywhere the purpose of Jesus to distinguish between its
righteousness and the righteousness revealed in the Old Testament as
well as that taught by the teachers of his day." The Sermon on the
Mount is a practical discourse, containing little of what, in the
strict sense, may be termed the credenda of Christianity. It is the
fullest statement of the nature and obligations of citizenship in
God's kingdom. It is noteworthy for its omissions as well as for its
contents. No reference is made to a priesthood, a ritual, sacred
places, or offerings. There is almost a total absence of all that is
sensuous and external. It deals with the motives and affections of the
inner man, and so comes into comparison and contrast with the Mosaic
law as well as with the Pharisaic ceremonialism of the Lord's Day. The
moral grandeur of the precepts of the Sermon on the Mount has been
acknowledged by believer and sceptics alike. Renan (Life of Jesus)
says, "The Sermon on the Mount will never be surpassed." On the 15th
of October, 1852, two weeks before he died, Daniel Webster wrote and
signed his name to the following words, containing a testimony to this
portion of Scripture, which he also ordered placed upon his tombstone:
"Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief....My heart has assured me
and reassured me that the gospel of Jesus Christ must be a divine
reality. The Sermon on the Mount cannot be a merely human production.
This belief enters into the very depth of my conscience. The whole
history of man proves it" (Curtis, Life of Webster, ii. p. 684). The
relation which the reports of Matthew and Luke (vi. 20-49) sustain to
each other is ignored by Augustin here (who, except in rare cases,
omits all critical discussion), but is discussed in his Harmony of the
Gospels, ii. 19. The agreements are numerous. The differences are
striking, and concern the matter, the arrangement, the language, and
the setting of the sermon. Matthew has a hundred and seven verses,
Luke thirty. Matthew has seven (or eight) beatitudes, Luke but four,
and adds four woes which Matthew omits. According to the first
evangelist Jesus spoke sitting on a mountain: according to the third
evangelist He spoke standing, and in the plain. The views are, (1)
Matthew and Luke give accounts of the same discourse (Origen,
Chrysostom, Calvin, Tholuck, Meyer, Keil, Schaff, Weiss). (2) They
report different sermons spoken at different times (Augustin not
positively, Storr, Plumptre). This is not probable, as so much of the
matter in both is identical: both begin with the same beatitude, and
close with the same parable; and both accounts are followed with the
report of the healing of the centurion's servant. (3) The two sermons
were delivered in close succession on the summit of the mountain to
the disciples, and on the plain to the multitude (Lange). Alford
confesses inability to reconcile the discrepancy.
[7] Multas turbas. The Vulgate omits multas.
[8] The Greek has the definite article to oros. Some, on this ground,
explain the expression to mean "mountain region." According to the
Latin tradition of the time of the Crusaders, the exact spot is the
Horns of Hattin, which Dean Stanley (Sinai and Palestine, Am. ed. p.
436) and most others adopt. The hill, which is horned like a saddle,
is south-west of Capernaum, and commands a good view of the Lake of
Galilee. It seems to meet the requirements of the text. Robinson says
there are a dozen other hills as eligible as this one. Tholuck
enlarges upon the "beautiful temple of nature in which the Lord
delivered the sermon." Matthew Henry says, "When the law was given,
the Lord came down upon the mountain, now the Lord went up; then He
spake in thunder and lightning, now in a still, small voice; then the
people were ordered to keep their distance, now they are invited to
draw near,--a blessed change!"
[9] Ps. xxxvi. 6.
[10] Chrysostom, Euthymius, etc., see in the expression the
implication that Christ also taught by works. Tholuck, with many
modern commentators, finds in it a reference to "loud and solemn
utterance."
[11] Eccles. i. 14.
[12] Ps. cxlviii. 8.
[13] 1 Cor. viii. 1.
[14] Ps. cxi. 10.
[15] Ecclus. x. 13.
[16] Not the intellectually poor (Fritzsche), nor the poor in worldly
goods, as we might gather from Luke (vi. 20). Roman-Catholic
commentators have found here support for the doctrine of voluntary
poverty (Cornelius à Lapide, Maldonatus, etc.). The Emperor Julian, in
allusion to this passage and others like it, said he would only
confiscate the goods of Christians, that they might enter as the poor
into the kingdom of heaven (Lett. xliii.). Some (Olearius, Michaelis,
Paulus) have joined "in spirit" with "blessed." Augustin explains the
passage of those who are not elated or proud, taking "spirit" in an
evil sense. In another place he says, "Blessed are the poor in their
own spirit, rich in God's Spirit, for every man who follows his own
spirit is proud." He then compares him who subdues his own spirit to
one living in a valley which is filled with water from the hills (En.
in Ps. cxli. 4). The most explain of those who are conscious of
spiritual need (Matt. xi. 28), and are ready to be filled with the
gospel riches, as opposed to the spiritually proud, the just who need
no repentance (Tholuck, Meyer, Lange, etc.). "Many are poor in the
world, but high in spirit; poor and proud, murmuring and complaining,
and blaming their lot. Laodicea was poor in spirituals, and yet rich
in spirit; so well increased with goods as to have need of nothing.
Paul was rich in spirituals, excelling most in gifts and graces and
yet poor in spirit; the least of the apostles, and less than the least
of all saints" (M. Henry).
Chapter II.
4. "Blessed are the meek, for they shall by inheritance possess [17]
the earth:" that earth, I suppose, of which it is said in the Psalm,
"Thou art my refuge, my portion in the land of the living." [18] For
it signifies a certain firmness and stability of the perpetual
inheritance, where the soul, by means of a good disposition, rests, as
it were, in its own place, just as the body rests on the earth, and is
nourished from it with its own food, as the body from the earth. This
is the very rest and life of the saints. Then, the meek are those who
yield to acts of wickedness, and do not resist evil, but overcome evil
with good. [19] Let those, then, who are not meek quarrel and fight
for earthly and temporal things; but "blessed are the meek, for they
shall by inheritance possess the earth," from which they cannot be
driven out. [20]
5. "Blessed are they that mourn: [21] for they shall be comforted."
Mourning is sorrow arising from the loss of things held dear; but
those who are converted to God lose those things which they were
accustomed to embrace as dear in this world: for they do not rejoice
in those things in which they formerly rejoiced; and until the love of
eternal things be in them, they are wounded by some measure of grief.
Therefore they will be comforted by the Holy Spirit, who on this
account chiefly is called the Paraclete, i.e. the Comforter, in order
that, while losing the temporal joy, they may enjoy to the full that
which is eternal. [22]
6. "Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness:
for they shall be filled." Now He calls those parties, lovers of a
true and indestructible good. They will therefore be filled with that
food of which the Lord Himself says, "My meat is to do the will of my
Father," which is righteousness; and with that water, of which
whosoever "drinketh," as he also says, it "shall be in him a well of
water, springing up into everlasting life." [23]
7. "Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy." [24] He
says that they are blessed who relieve the miserable, for it is paid
back to them in such a way that they are freed from misery.
8. "Blessed are the pure in heart: [25] for they shall see God." How
foolish, therefore, are those who seek God with these outward eyes,
since He is seen with the heart! as it is written elsewhere, "And in
singleness of heart seek Him." [26] For that is a pure heart which is
a single heart: and just as this light cannot be seen, except with
pure eyes; so neither is God seen, unless that is pure by which He can
be seen. [27]
9. "Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children
of God." It is the perfection of peace, where nothing offers
opposition; and the children of God are peacemakers, because nothing
resists God, and surely children ought to have the likeness of their
father. Now, they are peacemakers in themselves who, by bringing in
order all the motions of their soul, and subjecting them to
reason--i.e. to the mind and spirit--and by having their carnal lusts
thoroughly subdued, become a kingdom of God: in which all things are
so arranged, that that which is chief and pre-eminent in man rules
without resistance over the other elements, which are common to us
with the beasts; and that very element which is pre-eminent in man,
i.e. mind and reason, is brought under subjection to something better
still, which is the truth itself, the only-begotten Son of God. For a
man is not able to rule over things which are inferior, unless he
subjects himself to what is superior. And this is the peace which is
given on earth to men of goodwill; [28] this the life of the fully
developed and perfect wise man. From a kingdom of this sort brought to
a condition of thorough peace and order, the prince of this world is
cast out, who rules where there is perversity and disorder. [29] When
this peace has been inwardly established and confirmed, whatever
persecutions he who has been cast out shall stir up from without, he
only increases the glory which is according to God; being unable to
shake anything in that edifice, but by the failure of his machinations
making it to be known with how great strength it has been built from
within outwardly. Hence there follows: "Blessed are they which are
persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of
heaven."
Footnotes
[17] Hereditate possidebunt. Vulgate omits hereditate. The passage is
quoted almost literally in the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, iii.
7.
[18] Ps. cxlii. 5.
[19] Rom. xii. 21.
[20] The order in which Augustin places this Beatitude is followed in
Cod. D, and approved by Lachmann, Tischendorf, Neander, and others
(not Westcott and Hort). The meek not only bear provocation, but
quietly submit to God's dealings, and comply with His designs. The
temporal possession promised is one of the few temporal promises in
the New Testament. The inheritance of the earth is referred to
"earthly good and possessions," by Chrysostom, Euthymius, Luther,
etc.; to conquest of the world by the kingdom of God, by Neander, to
the actual kingdom on this earth, first in its millennial then in its
blessed state, by Alford; typically to the Messiah kingdom, by Meyer;
to the land of the living beyond the heavens by Gregory of Nyssa.
"Humility and meekness have been proved to be a conquering principle
in the world's history" (Tholuck).
[21] Lugentes. Greek, penthountes. The Vulgate, qui lugent, which
Augustin follows, p. 7.
[22] The mourning is a mourning over sins of their own and others
(Chrysostom, etc.); too restricted, as is also Augustin's explanation.
Spiritual mourning in general (Ambrose, Jerome, Tholuck, etc.) sorrow
according to God (2 Cor. vii. 10). We are helped to the meaning by
comparing the woe on those that laugh (Luke vi. 22); that is, upon
those who are satisfied with earthly things, and avoid the seriousness
of repentance.
[23] John iv. 34, 14.
[24] Ipsorum miserabitur; closer to the Greek than the Vulgate ipsi
misericordiam consequentur. The same thought that underlies the fifth
petition of the Lord's Prayer, as Augustin also says, Retract. I. xix.
3.
[25] Mundi corde; the Vulgate, mundo corde.
[26] Wisd. i. 1.
[27] "Pure in heart." "Ceremonial purity does not suffice" (Bengel).
The singleness of heart which has God's will for its aim, and follows
integrity with our fellow-men (Tholuck). "Shall see God:" the most
infinite communion with God (Tholuck). The promise is fulfilled even
here (Lange, Alford, Schaff, etc.). It concerns only the beatific
vision in the spiritual body (Meyer). Not a felicity to the impure to
see God (Henry). Comp. 1 John iii. 2, Rev. xxii. 4, etc. Augustin has
a brilliant description of the future vision of God in City of God
(this series, vol. ii. pp. 507-509).
[28] Luke ii. 14.
[29] The "peacemakers" not only establish peace within themselves as
Augustin, encouraged by the Latin word, explains, but diffuse peace
around about them,--heal the alienations and discords of others, and
bring about reconciliations in the world; not merely peaceful, but
peacemakers. "In most kingdoms those stand highest who make war: in
the Messiah's kingdom the crowning beatitude respects those who make
peace." The expressions will be remembered, "peace of God" (Phil. iv.
7); "peace of Christ" (Col. iii. 15); "God of peace" (Rom. xv. 33),
etc. "If the peacemakers are blessed, woe to the peacebreakers!" (M.
Henry).
Chapter III.
10. There are in all, then, these eight sentences. For now in what
remains He speaks in the way of direct address to those who were
present, saying: "Blessed shall ye be when men shall revile you and
persecute you." But the former sentences He addressed in a general
way: for He did not say, Blessed are ye poor in spirit, for yours is
the kingdom of heaven; but He says, "Blessed are the poor in spirit,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven:" nor, Blessed are ye meek, for ye
shall inherit the earth; but, "Blessed are the meek, for they shall
inherit the earth." And so the others up to the eighth sentence, where
He says: "Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness'
sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven." After that He now begins
to speak in the way of direct address to those present, although what
has been said before referred also to His present audience; and that
which follows, and which seems to be spoken specially to those
present, refers also to those who were absent, or who would afterwards
come into existence.
For this reason the number of sentences before us is to be carefully
considered. For the beatitudes begin with humility: "Blessed are the
poor in spirit," i.e. those not puffed up, while the soul submits
itself to divine authority, fearing lest after this life it go away to
punishment, although perhaps in this life it might seem to itself to
be happy. Then it (the soul) comes to the knowledge of the divine
Scriptures, where it must show itself meek in its piety, lest it
should venture to condemn that which seems absurd to the unlearned,
and should itself be rendered unteachable by obstinate disputations.
After that, it now begins to know in what entanglements of this world
it is held by reason of carnal custom and sins: and so in this third
stage, in which there is knowledge, the loss of the highest good is
mourned over, because it sticks fast in what is lowest. Then, in the
fourth stage there is labour, where vehement exertion is put forth, in
order that the mind may wrench itself away from those things in which,
by reason of their pestilential sweetness, it is entangled: here
therefore righteousness is hungered and thirsted after, and fortitude
is very necessary; because what is retained with delight is not
abandoned without pain. Then, at the fifth stage, to those persevering
in labour, counsel for getting rid of it is given; for unless each one
is assisted by a superior, in no way is he fit in his own case to
extricate himself from so great entanglements of miseries. But it is a
just counsel, that he who wishes to be assisted by a stronger should
assist him who is weaker in that in which he himself is stronger:
therefore "blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy." At
the sixth stage there is purity of heart, able from a good conscience
of good works to contemplate that highest good, which can be discerned
by the pure and tranquil intellect alone. Lastly is the seventh,
wisdom itself--i.e. the contemplation of the truth, tranquillizing the
whole man, and assuming the likeness of God, which is thus summed up:
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of
God." The eighth, as it were, returns to the starting-point, because
it shows and commends what is complete and perfect: [30] therefore in
the first and in the eighth the kingdom of heaven is named, "Blessed
are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven;" and,
"Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for
theirs is the kingdom of heaven:" as it is now said, "Who shall
separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress,
or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?" [31]
Seven in number, therefore, are the things which bring perfection: for
the eighth brings into light and shows what is perfect, so that
starting, as it were, from the beginning again, the others also are
perfected by means of these stages.
Footnotes
[30] "In the eighth beatitude the other seven are only summed up under
the idea of the righteousness of the kingdom in its relation to those
who persecute it; while the ninth is a description of the eighth, with
reference to the relation in which these righteous persons stand to
Christ" (Lange).
[31] Rom. viii. 35.
Chapter IV.
11. Hence also the sevenfold operation of the Holy Ghost, of which
Isaiah speaks, [32] seems to me to correspond to these stages and
sentences. But there is a difference of order: for there the
enumeration begins with the more excellent, but here with the
inferior. For there it begins with wisdom, and closes with the fear of
God: but "the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom." And
therefore, if we reckon as it were in a gradually ascending series,
there the fear of God is first, piety second, knowledge third,
fortitude fourth, counsel fifth, understanding sixth, wisdom seventh.
The fear of God corresponds to the humble, of whom it is here said,
"Blessed are the poor in spirit," i.e. those not puffed up, not proud:
to whom the apostle says, "Be not high-minded, but fear;" [33] i.e. be
not lifted up. Piety [34] corresponds to the meek: for he who inquires
piously honours Holy Scripture, and does not censure what he does not
yet understand, and on this account does not offer resistance; and
this is to be meek: whence it is here said, "Blessed are the meek."
Knowledge corresponds to those that mourn who already have found out
in the Scriptures by what evils they are held chained which they
ignorantly have coveted as though they were good and useful. Fortitude
corresponds to those hungering and thirsting: for they labour in
earnestly desiring joy from things that are truly good, and in eagerly
seeking to turn away their love from earthly and corporeal things: and
of them it is here said, "Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst
after righteousness." Counsel corresponds to the merciful: for this is
the one remedy for escaping from so great evils, that we forgive, as
we wish to be ourselves forgiven; and that we assist others so far as
we are able, as we ourselves desire to be assisted where we are not
able: and of them it is here said, "Blessed are the merciful."
Understanding corresponds to the pure in heart, the eye being as it
were purged, by which that may be beheld which eye hath not seen, nor
ear heard, and what hath not entered into the heart of man: [35] and
of them it is here said, "Blessed are the pure in heart." Wisdom
corresponds to the peacemakers, in whom all things are now brought
into order, and no passion is in a state of rebellion against reason,
but all things together obey the spirit of man, while he himself also
obeys God: and of them it is here said, "Blessed are the peacemakers."
[36]
12. Moreover, the one reward, which is the kingdom of heaven, is
variously named according to these stages. In the first, just as ought
to be the case, is placed the kingdom of heaven, which is the perfect
and highest wisdom of the rational soul. Thus, therefore, it is said,
"Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven:"
as if it were said, "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom."
To the meek an inheritance is given, as it were the testament of a
father to those dutifully seeking it: "Blessed are the meek, for they
shall inherit the earth." To the mourners comfort, as to those who
know what they have lost, and in what evils they are sunk: "Blessed
are they that mourn, for they shall be comforted." To those hungering
and thirsting, a full supply, as it were a refreshment to those
labouring and bravely contending for salvation: "Blessed are they
which do hunger and thirst after righteousness, for they shall be
filled." To the merciful mercy, as to those following a true and
excellent counsel, so that this same treatment is extended toward them
by one who is stronger, which they extend toward the weaker: "Blessed
are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy." To the pure in heart
is given the power of seeing God, as to those bearing about with them
a pure eye for discerning eternal things: "Blessed are the pure in
heart, for they shall see God." To the peacemakers the likeness of God
is given, as being perfectly wise, and formed after the image of God
by means of the regeneration of the renewed man: "Blessed are the
peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God." And those
promises can indeed be fulfilled in this life, as we believe them to
have been fulfilled in the case of the apostles. For that
all-embracing change into the angelic form, which is promised after
this life, cannot be explained in any words. "Blessed," therefore,
"are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for theirs is
the kingdom of heaven." This eighth sentence, which goes back to the
starting-point, and makes manifest the perfect man, is perhaps set
forth in its meaning both by the circumcision on the eighth day in the
Old Testament, and by the resurrection of the Lord after the Sabbath,
the day which is certainly the eighth, and at the same time the first
day; and by the celebration of the eight festival days which we
celebrate in the case of the regeneration of the new man; and by the
very number of Pentecost. For to the number seven, seven times
multiplied, by which we make forty-nine, as it were an eighth is
added, so that fifty may be made up, and we, as it were, return to the
starting-point: on which day the Holy Spirit was sent, by whom we are
led into the kingdom of heaven, and receive the inheritance, and are
comforted; and are fed, and obtain mercy, and are purified, and are
made peacemakers; and being thus perfect, we bear all troubles brought
upon us from without for the sake of truth and righteousness.
Footnotes
[32] Isa. xi. 2, 3.
[33] Rom. xi. 20.
[34] Augustin follows the Septuagint, which has "piety" instead of
"the fear of the Lord" in the last clause of Isa. xi. 2.
[35] Isa. lxiv. 4 and 1 Cor. ii. 9.
[36] This is guarded against misconstruction in the Retract. I. xix.
1.
Chapter V.
13. "Blessed are ye," says He, "when men shall revile you, and
persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely
for my sake. Rejoice and be exceeding glad: for great [37] is your
reward in heaven." Let any one who is seeking after the delights of
this world and the riches of temporal things under the Christian name,
consider that our blessedness is within; as it is said of the soul of
the Church [38] by the mouth of the prophet, "All the beauty of the
king's daughter is within;" [39] for outwardly revilings, and
persecutions, and disparagements are promised; and yet, from these
things there is a great reward in heaven, which is felt in the heart
of those who endure, those who can now say, "We glory in tribulations:
knowing that tribulation worketh patience; and patience, experience;
and experience, hope: and hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of
God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto
us." [40] For it is not simply the enduring of such things that is
advantageous, but the bearing of such things for the name of Christ
not only with tranquil mind, but even with exultation. For many
heretics, deceiving souls under the Christian name, endure many such
things; but they are excluded from that reward on this account, that
it is not said merely, "Blessed are they which endure persecution;"
but it is added, "for righteousness' sake." Now, where there is no
sound faith, there can be no righteousness, for the just [righteous]
man lives by faith. [41] Neither let schismatics promise themselves
anything of that reward; for similarly, where there is no love, there
cannot be righteousness, for "love worketh no ill to his neighbour;"
[42] and if they had it, they would not tear in pieces Christ's body,
which is the Church. [43]
14. But it may be asked, What is the difference when He says, "when
men shall revile you," and "when they shall say all manner of evil
against you," since to revile [44] is just this, to say evil against?
[45] But it is one thing when the reviling word is hurled with
contumely in presence of him who is reviled, as it was said to our
Lord, "Say we not the truth [46] that thou art a Samaritan, and hast a
devil?" [47] and another thing, when our reputation is injured in our
absence, as it is also written of Him, "Some said, He is a prophet;
[48] others said, Nay, but He deceiveth the people." [49] Then,
further, to persecute is to inflict violence, or to assail with
snares, as was done by him who betrayed Him, and by them who crucified
Him. Certainly, as for the fact that this also is not put in a bare
form, so that it should be said, "and shall say all manner of evil
against you," but there is added the word "falsely," and also the
expression "for my sake;" I think that the addition is made for the
sake of those who wish to glory in persecutions, and in the baseness
of their reputation; and to say that Christ belongs to them for this
reason, that many bad things are said about them; while, on the one
hand, the things said are true, when they are said respecting their
error; and, on the other hand, if sometimes also some false charges
are thrown out, which frequently happens from the rashness of men, yet
they do not suffer such things for Christ's sake. [50] For he is not a
follower of Christ who is not called a Christian according to the true
faith and the catholic discipline.
15. "Rejoice," says He, "and be exceeding glad: for great is your
reward in heaven." I do not think that it is the higher parts of this
visible world that are here called heaven. For our reward, which ought
to be immoveable and eternal, is not to be placed in things fleeting
and temporal. But I think the expression "in heaven" means in the
spiritual firmament, where dwells everlasting righteousness: in
comparison with which a wicked soul is called earth, to which it is
said when it sins, "Earth thou art, and unto earth thou shalt return."
[51] Of this heaven the apostle says, "For our conversation is in
heaven." [52] Hence they who rejoice in spiritual good are conscious
of that reward now; but then it will be perfected in every part, when
this mortal also shall have put on immortality. "For," says He, "so
persecuted they the prophets also which were before you." In the
present case He has used "persecution" in a general sense, as applying
alike to abusive words and to the tearing in pieces of one's
reputation; and has well encouraged them by an example, because they
who speak true things are wont to suffer persecution: nevertheless did
not the ancient prophets on this account, through fear of persecution,
give over the preaching of the truth.
Footnotes
[37] Multa; Vulgate, copiosa.
[38] Anima ecclesiastica.
[39] Ps. xlv. 13.
[40] Rom. v. 3-5.
[41] Hab. ii. 4 and Rom. i. 17.
[42] Rom. xiii. 10.
[43] Col. i. 24.
[44] Maledicere.
[45] Malum dicere.
[46] Verum. The Vulgate more literally has bene.
[47] John viii. 48.
[48] The Vulgate, following the Greek, has bonus,--good man.
[49] Chap. vii. 12.
[50] "It is not the suffering but the cause, that makes men martyrs."
For, says Augustin in another place (En. in Ps. xxxiv. 23), if the
suffering made the martyr, every mine would be full of martyrs, every
chain drag them, every one beheaded with the sword be crowned. They
who suffer for righteousness' sake, suffer for Christ's sake.
[51] Gen. iii. 19.
[52] Phil. iii. 20.
Chapter VI.
16. Hence there follows most justly the statement, "Ye are the salt of
the earth;" showing that those parties are to be judged insipid, who,
either in the eager pursuit after abundance of earthly blessings, or
through the dread of want, lose the eternal things which can neither
be given nor taken away by men. "But [53] if the salt have lost [54]
its savour, wherewith shall it be salted?" i.e., If ye, by means of
whom the nations in a measure are to be preserved [from corruption],
through the dread of temporal persecutions shall lose the kingdom of
heaven, where will be the men through whom error may be removed from
you, since God has chosen you, in order that through you He might
remove the error of others? Hence the savourless salt is "good for
nothing, but to be cast out, and trodden under foot of men." It is not
therefore he who suffers persecution, but he who is rendered
savourless by the fear of persecution, that is trodden under foot of
men. For it is only one who is undermost that can be trodden under
foot; but he is not undermost, who, however many things he may suffer
in his body on the earth, yet has his heart fixed in heaven. [55]
17. "Ye are the light [56] of the world." In the same way as He said
above, "the salt of the earth," so now He says, "the light of the
world." For in the former case that earth is not to be understood
which we tread with our bodily feet, but the men who dwell upon the
earth, or even the sinners, for the preserving of whom and for the
extinguishing of whose corruptions the Lord sent the apostolic salt.
And here, by the world must be understood not the heavens and the
earth, but the men who are in the world or love the world, for the
enlightening of whom the apostles were sent. [57] "A city that is set
on [58] an hill cannot be hid," i.e. [a city] founded upon great and
distinguished righteousness, which is also the meaning of the mountain
itself on which our Lord is discoursing. "Neither do men light a
candle [59] and put it under a bushel measure." [60] What view are we
to take? That the expression "under a bushel measure" is so used that
only the concealment of the candle is to be understood, as if He were
saying, No one lights a candle and conceals it? Or does the bushel
measure also mean something, so that to place a candle under a bushel
is this, to place the comforts of the body higher than the preaching
of the truth; so that one does not preach the truth so long as he is
afraid of suffering any annoyance in corporeal and temporal things?
And it is well said a bushel measure, whether on account of the
recompense of measure, for each one receives the things done in his
body,--"that every one," says the apostle, "may there receive [61] the
things done in his body;" and it is said in another place, as if of
this bushel measure of the body, "For with what measure ye mete, it
shall be measured to you again:" [62] --or because temporal good
things, which are carried to completion in the body, are both begun
and come to an end in a certain definite number of days, which is
perhaps meant by the "bushel measure;" while eternal and spiritual
things are confined within no such limit, "for God giveth not the
Spirit by measure." [63] Every one, therefore, who obscures and covers
up the light of good doctrine by means of temporal comforts, places
his candle under a bushel measure. "But on a candlestick." [64] Now it
is placed on a candlestick by him who subordinates his body to the
service of God, so that the preaching of the truth is the higher, and
the serving of the body the lower; yet by means even of the service of
the body the doctrine shines more conspicuously, inasmuch as it is
insinuated into those who learn by means of bodily functions, i.e. by
means of the voice and tongue, and the other movements of the body in
good works. The apostle therefore puts his candle on a candlestick,
when he says, "So fight I, not as one that beateth [65] the air; but I
keep under my body, and bring it into subjection, lest that by any
means, when I preach to others, I myself should be found a castaway."
[66] When He says, however, "that it may give light to all who are in
the house," I am of opinion that it is the abode of men which is
called a house, i.e. the world itself, on account of what He says
before, "Ye are the light of the world;" or if any one chooses to
understand the house as being the Church, this, too, is not out of
place.
Footnotes
[53] "A warning against pride" (Schaff).
[54] Infatuatum fuerit; Vulgate, evanuerit.
[55] Others follow Augustin in regarding the connection of this verse
and the next with the preceding one as very close. All the more must
they refuse to yield to persecution, as they have a function in the
world which is well represented by salt and light (Weizsäcker, Meyer,
etc.). The function of salt is to preserve and to season. With it
Elisha healed the unwholesome water (2 Kings ii. 21). The use of salt
in the sacrifices is, no doubt, alluded to (Tholuck). It becomes
savourless. Dr. Thomson says (Land and Book, ii. 43), "It is a
well-known fact that the salt in this country (gathered from the
marshes in dry weather), when in contact with the ground, or exposed
to air and sun, does become insipid and useless." The disciples are
appointed to communicate the truth and moral grace, before spoken of
in the Beatitudes, to counteract the error and corruption in the
earth. "Earth" not to be confined to "society as then existing, the
definite form the world then presented" (Lange), but to mankind in
general, as Augustin below. "Wherewith shall it be salted" does not
imply that those who have once fallen cannot be reclaimed (Alford).
The comment of Grotius is good: "Ipsi emendare alios debebent, non
autem exspectare ut ab aliis ipsi emendarentur" ("They ought to
improve others, not expect to be themselves improved by others").
[56] Lumen, also used for a luminary; Vulgate, lux. In a lower and
derivative sense are the disciples "the light," etc. (Alford),
deriving their light-giving quality from Him who is the "Light of the
world" (John viii. 12), so that they become "lights in the world"
(Phil. ii. 15). Augustin (Sermon, ccclxxx.): Johannes lumen
illuminatum, Christus lumen illuminans.
[57] "The influence of salt is internal, of light external: hence the
element in which they work, the earth and the world, both referring to
mankind; the latter more to its organized external form" (Schaff).
[58] Constituta; Vulgate, posita. The city was probably visible. Some
have thought of the village on Mount Tabor, others of an ancient
fortress, predecessor of the present Safed (Dean Stanley, Thomson);
certainly not Jerusalem (Weizsäcker).
[59] Lucerna.
[60] The Greek has the definite article ton modion.
[61] 2 Cor. v. 10. Recipiat unusquisque quĉ gessit in corpore.
Vulgate, referat unusquisque propria corporis, prout gessit, etc.
[62] Matt. vii. 2.
[63] John iii. 34; which words, however, are, as Augustin subsequently
observed (Retract. I. xix. 3), applicable only to Christ.
[64] Candelabrum.
[65] Cĉdens; Vulgate, verberans.
[66] 1 Cor. ix. 26, 27. Ne forte aliis predicans...invenir. Vulgate,
Ne forte cum aliis prĉdicaverim...efficir.
Chapter VII.
18. "Let your light," [67] says He, "so shine before men, that they
may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven."
If He had merely said, "Let your light so shine before men, that they
may see your good works," He would seem to have fixed an end in the
praises of men, which hypocrites seek, and those who canvass for
honours and covet glory of the emptiest kind. Against such parties it
is said, "If I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of
Christ;" [68] and, by the prophet, "They who please men are put to
shame, because God hath despised them;" and again, "God hath broken
the bones of those who please men;" [69] and again the apostle, "Let
us not be desirous of vainglory;" [70] and still another time, "But
let every man prove his own work, and then shall he have rejoicing in
himself alone, and not in another." [71] Hence our Lord has not said
merely, "that they may see your good works," but has added, "and
glorify your Father who is in heaven:" so that the mere fact that a
man by means of good works pleases men, does not there set it up as an
end that he should please men; but let him subordinate this to the
praise of God, and for this reason please men, that God may be
glorified in him. For this is expedient for them who offer praise,
that they should honour, not man, but God; as our Lord showed in the
case of the man who was carried, where, on the paralytic being healed,
the multitude, marvelling at His powers, as it is written in the
Gospel, "feared and glorified God, which had given such power unto
men." [72] And His imitator, the Apostle Paul, says, "But they had
heard only, that he which persecuted us in times past now preacheth
the faith which once he destroyed; and they glorified [73] God in me."
19. And therefore, after He has exhorted His hearers that they should
prepare themselves to bear all things for truth and righteousness, and
that they should not hide the good which they were about to receive,
but should learn with such benevolence as to teach others, aiming in
their good works not at their own praise, but at the glory of God, He
begins now to inform and to teach them what they are to teach; as if
they were asking Him, saying: Lo, we are willing both to bear all
things for Thy name, and not to hide Thy doctrine; but what precisely
is this which Thou forbiddest us to hide, and for which Thou
commandest us to bear all things? Art Thou about to mention other
things contrary to those which are written in the law? "No," says He;
"for think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I
am not come to destroy, but to fulfil."
Footnotes
[67] Lumen; Vulgate, lux. Christ presupposes His righteousness to have
become the principle of their life. "They were to stand forth openly
and boldly with the message of the New Testament" ( Lange).
[68] Gal. i. 10.
[69] Ps. liii. 5.
[70] Gal. v. 26.
[71] Chap. vi. 4.
[72] Matt. ix. 8.
[73] Gal. i. 23, 24. Vastabat...glorificabant; Vulgate,
expugnabat...clarificabant.
Chapter VIII.
20. In this sentence the meaning is twofold. [74] We must deal with it
in both ways. For He who says, "I am not come [75] to destroy the law,
but to fulfil," means it either in the way of adding what is wanting,
or of doing what is in it. Let us then consider that first which I
have put first: for he who adds what is wanting does not surely
destroy what he finds, but rather confirms it by perfecting it; and
accordingly He follows up with the statement, "Verily I say unto you,
[76] Till heaven and earth pass, one iota or one tittle shall in
nowise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." For, if even those
things which are added for completion are fulfilled, much more are
those things fulfilled which are sent in advance as a commencement.
Then, as to what He says, "One iota or one tittle shall in nowise pass
from the law," nothing else can be understood but a strong expression
of perfection, since it is pointed out by means of single letters,
among which letters "iota" is smaller than the others, for it is made
by a single stroke; while a "tittle" is but a particle of some sort at
the top of even that. And by these words He shows that in the law all
the smallest particulars even are to be carried into effect. [77]
After that He subjoins: "Whosoever, therefore, shall break one of
these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called
the least in the kingdom of heaven." Hence it is the least
commandments that are meant by "one iota" and "one tittle." And
therefore, "whosoever shall break and shall teach [men] so,"--i.e. in
accordance with what he breaks, not in accordance with what he finds
and reads,--"shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven;" and
therefore, perhaps, he will not be in the kingdom of heaven at all,
where only the great can be. "But whosoever shall do and teach [men]
so," [78] --i.e. who shall not break, and shall teach men so, in
accordance with what he does not break,--"shall be called great in the
kingdom of heaven." But in regard to him who shall be called great in
the kingdom of heaven, it follows that he is also in the kingdom of
heaven, into which the great are admitted: for to this what follows
refers.
Footnotes
[74] Here begins the second part of the Sermon. In it our Lord sets
forth His relation as a lawgiver to the Mosaic law, especially as
currently interpreted according to the letter only (Meyer, Alford
etc.).
[75] Veni; Greek, elthon.
[76] A decisive assertion of authority. Asseveratio gravissima ei
propria, qui per se ipsum et per suam veritatem asseverat (Bengel).
The prophet's most emphatic statement was, "Thus saith the Lord."
Christ speaks in His own name, as the fount of authority (v. 20 and
often: John iii. 3, xiv. 12, etc.).
[77] "Christ's words are decisive against all those who would set
aside the Old Testament as without significance, or inconsistent with
the New Testament" (Alford). Christ declares the New to be rooted in
the Old; its consummation, not its destruction. The essence and
purport of the law, the "whole law," was fulfilled by Him (Meyer).
Theophylact well compares the law to a sketch, which Christ (like the
painter) does not destroy, but fills out.
[78] Sic; Greek, houtos; Vulgate, hic.
Chapter IX.
21. "For I say unto you, that except your righteousness shall exceed
the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case
enter into the kingdom of heaven;" [79] i.e., unless ye shall fulfil
not only those least precepts of the law which begin the man, but also
those which are added by me, who am not come to destroy the law, but
to fulfil it, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. But you
say to me: If, when He was speaking above of those least commandments,
He said that whosoever shall break one of them, and shall teach in
accordance with his transgression, is called the least in the kingdom
of heaven; but that whosoever shall do them, and shall teach [men] so,
is called great, and hence will be already in the kingdom of heaven,
because he is great: what need is there for additions to the least
precepts of the law, if he can be already in the kingdom of heaven,
because whosoever shall do them, and shall so teach, is great? For
this reason that sentence is to be understood thus: "But whosoever
shall do and teach men so, the same shall be called great in the
kingdom of heaven,"--i.e. not in accordance with those least
commandments, but in accordance with those which I am about to
mention. Now what are they? "That your righteousness," says He, "may
exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees;" for unless it shall exceed
theirs, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Whosoever,
therefore, shall break those least commandments, and shall teach men
so, shall be called the least; but whosoever shall do those least
commandments, and shall teach men so, is not necessarily to be
reckoned great and meet for the kingdom of heaven; but yet he is not
so much the least as the man who breaks them. But in order that he may
be great and fit for that kingdom, he ought to do and teach as Christ
now teaches, i.e. in order that his righteousness may exceed that of
the scribes and Pharisees. The righteousness of the Pharisees is, that
they shall not kill; the righteousness of those who are destined to
enter into the kingdom of God, that they be not angry without a cause.
The least commandment, therefore, is not to kill; and whosoever shall
break that, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but
whosoever shall fulfil that commandment not to kill, will not, as a
necessary consequence, be great and meet for the kingdom of heaven,
but yet he ascends a certain step. He will be perfected, however, if
he be not angry without a cause; and if he shall do this, he will be
much further removed from murder. For this reason he who teaches that
we should not be angry, does not break the law not to kill, but rather
fulfils it; so that we preserve our innocence both outwardly when we
do not kill, and in heart when we are not angry.
22. "Ye have heard" therefore, says He, "that it was said to them of
old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in
danger of the judgment. But I say unto you, that whosoever is angry
with his brother without a cause [80] shall be in danger of the
judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in
danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in
danger of the gehenna of fire." What is the difference between being
in danger of the judgment, and being in danger of the council, and
being in danger of the gehenna of fire? [81] For this last sounds most
weighty, and reminds us that certain stages were passed over from
lighter to more weighty, until the gehenna of fire was reached. And,
therefore, if it is a lighter thing to be in danger of the judgment
than to be in danger of the council, and if it is also a lighter thing
to be in danger of the council than to be in danger of the gehenna of
fire, we must understand it to be a lighter thing to be angry with a
brother without a cause than to say "Raca;" and again, to be a lighter
thing to say "Raca" than to say "Thou fool." For the danger would not
have gradations, unless the sins also were mentioned in gradation.
23. But here one obscure word has found a place, for "Raca" is neither
Latin nor Greek. The others, however, are current in our language.
Now, some have wished to derive the interpretation of this expression
from the Greek, supposing that a ragged person is called "Raca,"
because a rag is called in Greek rhakos; yet, when one asks them what
a ragged person is called in Greek, they do not answer "Raca;" and
further, the Latin translator might have put the word ragged where he
has placed "Raca," and not have used a word which, on the one hand,
has no existence in the Latin language, and, on the other, is rare in
the Greek. Hence the view is more probable which I heard from a
certain Hebrew whom I had asked about it; for he said that the word
does not mean anything, but merely expresses the emotion of an angry
mind. Grammarians call those particles of speech which express an
affection of an agitated mind interjections; as when it is said by one
who is grieved, "Alas," or by one who is angry, "Hah." And these words
in all languages are proper names, and are not easily translated into
another language; and this cause certainly compelled alike the Greek
and the Latin translators to put the word itself, inasmuch as they
could find no way of translating it. [82]
24. There is therefore a gradation in the sins referred to, so that
first one is angry, and keeps that feeling as a conception in his
heart; but if now that emotion shall draw forth an expression of anger
not having any definite meaning, but giving evidence of that feeling
of the mind by the very fact of the outbreak wherewith he is assailed
with whom one is angry, this is certainly more than if the rising
anger were restrained by silence; but if there is heard not merely an
expression of anger, but also a word by which the party using it now
indicates and signifies a distinct censure of him against whom it is
directed, who doubts but that this is something more than if merely an
exclamation of anger were uttered? Hence in the first there is one
thing, i.e. anger alone; in the second two things, both anger and a
word that expresses anger; in the third three things, anger and a word
that expresses anger, and in that word the utterance of distinct
censure. Look now also at the three degrees of liability,--the
judgment, the council, the gehenna of fire. For in the judgment an
opportunity is still given for defence; in the council, however,
although there is also wont to be a judgment, yet because the very
distinction compels us to acknowledge that there is a certain
difference in this place, the production of the sentence seems to
belong to the council, inasmuch as it is not now the case of the
accused himself that is in question, whether he is to be condemned or
not, but they who judge confer with one another to what punishment
they ought to condemn him, who, it is clear, is to be condemned; but
the gehenna of fire does not treat as a doubtful matter either the
condemnation, like the judgment, or the punishment of him who is
condemned, like the council; for in the gehenna of fire both the
condemnation and the punishment of him who is condemned are certain.
Thus there are seen certain degrees in the sins and in the liability
to punishment; [83] but who can tell in what ways they are invisibly
shown in the punishments of souls? We are therefore to learn how great
the difference is between the righteousness of the Pharisees and that
greater righteousness which introduces into the kingdom of heaven,
because while it is a more serious crime to kill than to inflict
reproach by means of a word, in the one case killing exposes one to
the judgment, but in the other anger exposes one to the judgment,
which is the least of those three sins; for in the former case they
were discussing the question of murder among men, but in the latter
all things are disposed of by means of a divine judgment, where the
end of the condemned is the gehenna of fire. But whoever shall say
that murder is punished by a more severe penalty under the greater
righteousness if a reproach is punished by the gehenna of fire,
compels us to understand that there are differences of gehennas.
25. Indeed, in the three statements before us, we must observe that
some words are understood. For the first statement has all the words
that are necessary. "Whosoever," says He, "is angry with his brother
without a cause, shall be in danger of the judgment." But in the
second, when He says, "and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca,"
there is understood the expression without cause, [84] and thus there
is subjoined, "shall be in danger of the council." In the third, now,
where He says, "but whosoever shall say, Thou fool," two things are
understood, both to his brother and without cause. And in this way we
defend the apostle when he calls the Galatians fools, [85] to whom he
also gives the name of brethren; for he does not do it without cause.
And here the word brother is to be understood for this reason, that
the case of an enemy is spoken of afterwards, and how he also is to be
treated under the greater righteousness.
Footnotes
[79] "With all their care, they had not understood the true spirit of
the law" (Schaff). The rest of the Sermon is largely a comment on this
verse, Christ giving His interpretation of the law, and the
righteousness following upon its observance; showing that the purport
goes beyond the external act of obedience to the purpose of the heart,
and that in the external act of obedience the real purport might be
ignored.
[80] Sine causa. The weight of critical evidence is against this
clause, which is omitted by Tischendorf, Westcott, and Hort, the
Vulgate and the Revised Version.
[81] The "judgment" (krisis) was the local court of seven, which every
community was enjoined to have (Deut. xvi. 18). The "council" was the
Sanhedrin, consisting of seventy-two members, sitting in Jerusalem.
The "gehenna" was the vale of Hinnom, on the confines of Jerusalem,
where sacrifices were offered to Moloch, and which became the place
for refuse and the burning of dead bodies. In the New Testament it is
equivalent to "hell."
[82] Raca is from the Chald. R+iJ+oQ+#, and is a term of contempt
equivalent to empty-headed (Thayer's Lexicon). Trench translates, "Oh,
vain man!"
[83] It is important "to keep in mind that there is no distinction in
kind between these punishments, only of degree. The `judgment'
(krisis) inflicted death by the sword, the Sanhedrin death by stoning,
and the disgrace of the gehenna followed as an intensification of
death; but the punishment is one and the same,--death. So also in the
subject of the similitude. All the punishments are spiritual; all
result in eternal death, but with various degrees, as the degrees of
guilt have been" (Alford).
[84] Augustin helps us to understand how the word eike (without cause)
in the preceding clause crept into some of the Mss. In Retract. I.
xix. 4 he makes the critical note and correction: "Codices grĉci non
habent sine causa."
[85] Gal. iii. 1.
Chapter X.
26. Next there follows here: "Therefore, if thou hast brought [86] thy
gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought
against thee; leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way;
first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift."
From this surely it is clear that what is said above is said of a
brother: inasmuch as the sentence which follows is connected by such a
conjunction that it confirms the preceding one; for He does not say,
But if thou bring thy gift to the altar; but He says, "Therefore, if
thou bring thy gift to the altar." For if it is not lawful to be angry
with one's brother without a cause, or to say "Raca," or to say "Thou
fool," much less is it lawful so to retain anything in one's mind, as
that indignation may be turned into hatred. And to this belongs also
what is said in another passage: "Let not the sun go down upon your
wrath." [87] We are therefore commanded, when about to bring our gift
to the altar, if we remember that our brother hath ought against us,
to leave the gift before the altar, and to go and be reconciled to our
brother, and then to come and offer the gift. [88] But if this is to
be understood literally, one might perhaps suppose that such a thing
ought to be done if the brother is present; for it cannot be delayed
too long, since you are commanded to leave your gift before the altar.
If, therefore, such a thing should come into your mind respecting one
who is absent, and, as may happen, even settled down beyond the sea,
it is absurd to suppose that your gift is to be left before the altar
until you may offer it to God after having traversed both lands and
seas. And therefore we are compelled to have recourse to an altogether
internal and spiritual interpretation, in order that what has been
said may be understood without absurdity.
27. And so we may interpret the altar spiritually, as being faith
itself in the inner temple of God, whose emblem is the visible altar.
For whatever offering we present to God, whether prophecy, or
teaching, or prayer, or a psalm, or a hymn, and whatever other such
like spiritual gift occurs to the mind, it cannot be acceptable to
God, unless it be sustained by sincerity of faith, and, as it were,
placed on that fixedly and immoveably, so that what we utter may
remain whole and uninjured. For many heretics, not having the altar,
i.e. true faith, have spoken blasphemies for praise; being weighed
down, to wit, with earthly opinions, and thus, as it were, throwing
down their offering on the ground. But there ought also to be purity
of intention on the part of the offerer. And therefore, when we are
about to present any such offering in our heart, i.e. in the inner
temple of God ("For," as it is said, "the temple of God is holy, which
temple ye are;" [89] and, "That Christ may dwell in the inner man [90]
by faith in your hearts") if it occur to our mind that a brother hath
ought against us, i.e. if we have injured him in anything (for then he
has something against us whereas we have something against him if he
has injured us, and in that case it is not necessary to proceed to
reconciliation: for you will not ask pardon of one who has done you an
injury, but merely forgive him, as you desire to be forgiven by the
Lord what you have committed against Him), we are therefore to proceed
to reconciliation, when it has occurred to our mind that we have
perhaps injured our brother in something; but this is to be done not
with the bodily feet, but with the emotions of the mind, so that you
are to prostrate yourself with humble disposition before your brother,
to whom you have hastened in affectionate thought, in the presence of
Him to whom you are about to present your offering. For thus, even if
he should be present, you will be able to soften him by a mind free
from dissimulation, and to recall him to goodwill by asking pardon, if
first you have done this before God, going to him not with the slow
movement of the body, but with the very swift impulse of love; and
then coming, i.e. recalling your attention to that which you were
beginning to do, you will offer your gift. [91]
28. But who acts in a way that he is neither angry with his brother
without a cause, nor says "Raca" without a cause, nor calls him a fool
without a cause, all of which are most proudly committed; or so, that,
if perchance he has fallen into any of these, he asks pardon with
suppliant mind, which is the only remedy; who but just the man that is
not puffed up with the spirit of empty boasting? "Blessed" therefore
"are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven." Let us
look now at what follows.
Footnotes
[86] Obtuleris; Vulgate, offers.
[87] Eph. iv. 26.
[88] The performance of an act of worship does not atone for an
offence against a fellow-man. The duties toward God never absolve from
man's duties to his neighbour. Inter rem sacram magis subit recordatio
offensarum, quam in strepitu negotiorum (Bengel).
[89] 1 Cor. iii. 17.
[90] Eph. iii. 17. In interiore homine, a different construction from
the Greek, which has eis with the accusative. So Vulgate, in
interiorem hominem.
[91] "Discharge of duty to men does not absolve from duty to God." The
passage has strong bearing upon the relation of morality and religion.
Chapter XI.
29. "Be kindly disposed," [92] says he, "toward thine adversary
quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the
adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the
officer, and thou be cast into prison. Verily I say unto thee, thou
shalt by no means come out thence, till thou hast paid the uttermost
farthing." I understand who the judge is: "For the Father judgeth no
man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son." [93] I understand
who the officer is: "And angels," it is said, "ministered unto Him:"
[94] and we believe that He will come with His angels to judge the
quick and the dead. I understand what is meant by the prison:
evidently the punishments of darkness, which He calls in another
passage the outer darkness: [95] for this reason, I believe, that the
joy of the divine rewards is something internal in the mind itself, or
even if anything more hidden can be thought of, that joy of which it
is said to the servant who deserved well, "Enter thou into the joy of
thy Lord;" [96] just as also, under this republican government, one
who is thrust into prison is sent out from the council chamber, or
from the palace of the judge.
30. But now, with respect to paying the uttermost farthing, [97] it
may be understood without absurdity either as standing for this, that
nothing is left unpunished; just as in common speech we also say "to
the very dregs," when we wish to express that something is so drained
out that nothing is left: or by the expression "the uttermost
farthing" earthly sins may be meant. For as a fourth part of the
separate component parts of this world, and in fact as the last, the
earth is found; so that you begin with the heavens, you reckon the air
the second, water the third, the earth the fourth. It may therefore
seem to be suitably said, "till thou hast paid the last fourth," in
the sense of "till thou hast expiated thy earthly sins:" for this the
sinner also heard, "Earth thou art, and unto earth shall thou return."
[98] Then, as to the expression "till thou hast paid," I wonder if it
does not mean that punishment which is called eternal. [99] For whence
is that debt paid where there is now no opportunity given of repenting
and of leading a more correct life? For perhaps the expression "till
thou hast paid" stands here in the same sense as in that passage where
it is said, "Sit Thou at my right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy
footstool;" [100] for not even when the enemies have been put under
His feet, will He cease to sit at the right hand: or that statement of
the apostle, "For He must reign, till He hath put all enemies under
His feet;" [101] for not even when they have been put under His feet,
will He cease to reign. Hence, as it is there understood of Him
respecting whom it is said, "He must reign, till He hath put His
enemies under His feet," that He will reign for ever, inasmuch as they
will be for ever under His feet: so here it may be understood of him
respecting whom it is said, "Thou shalt by no means come out thence,
till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing," that he will never come
out; for he is always paying the uttermost farthing, so long as he is
suffering the everlasting punishment of his earthly sins. Nor would I
say this in such a way as that I should seem to prevent a more careful
discussion respecting the punishment of sins, as to how in the
Scriptures it is called eternal; although in all possible ways it is
to be avoided rather than known.
31. But let us now see who the adversary himself is, with whom we are
enjoined to agree quickly, whiles we are in the way with him. For he
is either the devil, or a man, or the flesh, or God, or His
commandment. [102] But I do not see how we should be enjoined to be on
terms of goodwill, i.e. to be of one heart or of one mind, with the
devil. For some have rendered the Greek word which is found here "of
one heart," others "of one mind:" but neither are we enjoined to show
goodwill to the devil (for where there is goodwill there is
friendship: and no one would say that we are to make friends with the
devil); nor is it expedient to come to an agreement with him, against
whom we have declared war by once for all renouncing him, and on
conquering whom we shall be crowned; nor ought we now to yield to him,
for if we had never yielded to him, we should never have fallen into
such miseries. Again, as to the adversary being a man, although we are
enjoined to live peaceably with all men, as far as lieth in us, where
certainly goodwill, and concord, and consent may be understood; yet I
do not see how I can accept the view, that we are delivered to the
judge by a man, in a case where I understand Christ to be the judge,
"before" whose "judgment-seat we must all appear," [103] as the
apostle says: how then is he to deliver me to the judge, who will
appear equally with me before the judge? Or if any one is delivered to
the judge because he has injured a man, although the party who has
been injured does not deliver him, it is a much more suitable view,
that the guilty party is delivered to the judge by that law against
which he acted when he injured the man. And this for the additional
reason, that if any one has injured a man by killing him, there will
be no time now in which to agree with him; for he is not now in the
way with him, i.e. in this life: and yet a remedy will not on that
account be excluded, if one repents and flees for refuge with the
sacrifice of a broken heart to the mercy of Him who forgives the sins
of those who turn to Him, and who rejoices more over one penitent than
over ninety-nine just persons. [104] But much less do I see how we are
enjoined to bear goodwill towards, or to agree with, or to yield to,
the flesh. For it is sinners rather who love their flesh, and agree
with it, and yield to it; but those who bring it into subjection are
not the parties who yield to it, but rather they compel it to yield to
them.
32. Perhaps, therefore, we are enjoined to yield to God, and to be
well-disposed towards Him, in order that we may be reconciled to Him,
from whom by sinning we have turned away, so that He can be called our
adversary. For He is rightly called the adversary of those whom He
resists, for "God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace to the
humble;" [105] and "pride is the beginning of all sin, but the
beginning of man's pride is to become apostate from God;" [106] and
the apostle says, "For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to
God by the death of His Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be
saved by His life." [107] And from this it may be perceived that no
nature [as being] bad is an enemy to God, inasmuch as the very parties
who were enemies are being reconciled. Whoever, therefore, while in
this way, i.e. in this life, shall not have been reconciled to God by
the death of His Son, will be delivered to the judge by Him, for "the
Father judgeth no man, but hath delivered all judgment to the Son;"
and so the other things which are described in this section follow,
which we have already discussed. There is only one thing which creates
a difficulty as regards this interpretation, viz. how it can be
rightly said that we are in the way with God, if in this passage He
Himself is to be understood as the adversary of the wicked, with whom
we are enjoined to be reconciled quickly; unless, perchance, because
He is everywhere, we also, while we are in this way, are certainly
with Him. For as it is said, "If I ascend up into heaven, Thou art
there; if I make my bed in hell, behold, Thou art there. If I take the
wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea;
even there shall Thy hand lead me, and Thy right hand shall hold me."
[108] Or if the view is not accepted, that the wicked are said to be
with God, although there is nowhere where God is not present,--just as
we do not say that the blind are with the light, although the light
surrounds their eyes,--there is one resource remaining: that we should
understand the adversary here as being the commandment of God. For
what is so much an adversary to those who wish to sin as the
commandment of God, i.e. His law and divine Scripture, which has been
given us for this life, that it may be with us in the way, which we
must not contradict, lest it deliver us to the judge, but which we
ought to submit to quickly? For no one knows when he may depart out of
this life. Now, who is it that submits to divine Scripture, save he
who reads or hears it piously, deferring to it as of supreme
authority; so that what he understands he does not hate on this
account, that he feels it to be opposed to his sins, but rather loves
being reproved by it, and rejoices that his maladies are not spared
until they are healed; and so that even in respect to what seems to
him obscure or absurd, he does not therefore raise contentious
contradictions, but prays that he may understand, yet remembering that
goodwill and reverence are to be manifested towards so great an
authority? But who does this, unless just the man who has come, not
harshly threatening, but in the meekness of piety, for the purpose of
opening and ascertaining the contents of his father's will? "Blessed,"
therefore, "are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth." Let us
see what follows.
Footnotes
[92] Benevolus; Vulgate, consentiens. What is matter of prudence in a
civil case, becomes matter of life and death in spiritual things. The
Lord does not intend to inculcate simply a law of worldly prudence as
asserted by a few modern commentators.
[93] John v. 22.
[94] Matt. iv. 11.
[95] Matt. viii. 12.
[96] Matt. xxv. 23.
[97] The word translated "farthing" means literally "a fourth part"
and on this original sense Augustin's second interpretation is based.
[98] Gen. iii. 19.
[99] Universalists have quoted the passage to prove the doctrine that
punishment will not be endless, others in favor of purgatory. The main
idea is the inexorable rigor of the divine justice against the
impenitent. "The whole tone of the passage is that of one who seeks to
deepen the sense of danger, not to make light of it; to make men feel
that they cannot pay their debt, though God may forgive it freely"
(Plumptre).
[100] Ps. cx. 1.
[101] 1 Cor. xv. 25.
[102] "The devil" (Clemens Alex.); "conscience" (Euthymius, Zig.);
"the man who has done the injury" (Meyer, Tholuck, Lange, Trench,
etc.)
[103] 2 Cor. v. 10. Exhiberi; Vulgate, manifestari.
[104] Luke xv. 7.
[105] Jas. iv. 6.
[106] Ecclus. x. 13, 12.
[107] Rom. v. 10.
[108] Ps. cxxxix. 8-10.
Chapter XII.
33. "Ye have heard that it was said to them of old time, Thou shalt
not commit adultery: but I say unto you, that whosoever looketh on a
woman to lust after her, hath committed adultery with her already in
his heart." The lesser righteousness, therefore, is not to commit
adultery by carnal connection; but the greater righteousness of the
kingdom of God is not to commit adultery in the heart. Now, the man
who does not commit adultery in the heart, much more easily guards
against committing adultery in actual fact. Hence He who gave the
later precept confirmed the earlier; for He came not to destroy the
law, but to fulfil it. It is well worthy of consideration that He did
not say, Whosoever lusteth after a woman, but," Whosoever looketh on a
woman to lust after her," [109] i.e. turneth toward her with this aim
and this intent, that he may lust after her; which, in fact, is not
merely to be tickled [110] by fleshly delight, but fully to consent to
lust; so that the forbidden appetite is not restrained, but satisfied
if opportunity should be given.
34. For there are three things which go to complete sin: the
suggestion of, the taking pleasure in, and the consenting to.
Suggestion takes place either by means of memory, or by means of the
bodily senses, when we see, or hear, or smell, or taste, or touch
anything. And if it give us pleasure to enjoy this, this pleasure, if
illicit, must be restrained. Just as when we are fasting, and on
seeing food the appetite of the palate is stirred up, this does not
happen without pleasure; but we do not consent to this liking, and
[111] we repress it by the right of reason, which has the supremacy.
But if consent shall take place, the sin will be complete, known to
God in our heart, although it may not become known to men by deed.
There are, then, these steps: the suggestion is made, as it were, by a
serpent, that is to say, by a fleeting and rapid, i.e. a temporary,
movement of bodies: for if there are also any such images moving about
in the soul, they have been derived from without from the body; and if
any hidden sensation of the body besides those five senses touches the
soul, that also is temporary and fleeting; and therefore the more
clandestinely it glides in, so as to affect the process of thinking,
the more aptly is it compared to a serpent. Hence these three stages,
as I was beginning to say, resemble that transaction which is
described in Genesis, so that the suggestion and a certain measure of
suasion is put forth, as it were, by the serpent; but the taking
pleasure in it lies in the carnal appetite, as it were in Eve; and the
consent lies in the reason, as it were in the man: and these things
having been acted through, the man is driven forth, as it were, from
paradise, i.e. from the most blessed light of righteousness, into
death [112] --in all respects most righteously. For he who puts forth
suasion does not compel. And all natures are beautiful in their order,
according to their gradations; but we must not descend from the
higher, among which the rational mind has its place assigned, to the
lower. Nor is any one compelled to do this; and therefore, if he does
it, he is punished by the just law of God, for he is not guilty of
this unwillingly. But yet, previous to habit, either there is no
pleasure, or it is so slight that there is hardly any; and to yield to
it is a great sin, as such pleasure is unlawful. Now, when any one
does yield, he commits sin in the heart. If, however, he also proceeds
to action, the desire seems to be satisfied and extinguished; but
afterwards, when the suggestion is repeated, a greater pleasure is
kindled, which, however, is as yet much less than that which by
continuous practice is converted into habit. For it is very difficult
to overcome this; and yet even habit itself, if one does not prove
untrue to himself, and does not shrink back in dread from the
Christian warfare, he will get the better of under His (i.e. Christ's)
leadership and assistance; and thus, in accordance with primitive
peace and order, both the man is subject to Christ, and the woman is
subject to the man. [113]
35. Hence, just as we arrive at sin by three steps,--suggestion,
pleasure, consent,--so of sin itself there are three varieties,--in
heart, in deed, in habit,--as it were, three deaths: one, as it were,
in the house, i.e. when we consent to lust in the heart; a second now,
as it were, brought forth outside the gate, when assent goes forward
into action; a third, when the mind is pressed down by the force of
bad habit, as if by a mound of earth, and is now, as it were, rotting
in the sepulchre. And whoever reads the Gospel perceives that our Lord
raised to life these three varieties of the dead. And perhaps he
reflects what differences may be found in the very word of Him who
raises them, when He says on one occasion, "Damsel, arise;" [114] on
another, "Young man, [115] I say unto thee, Arise;" [116] and when on
another occasion He groaned in the spirit, and wept, and again
groaned, and then afterwards "cried with a loud voice, Lazarus, come
forth." [117]
36. And therefore, under the category of the adultery mentioned in
this section, we must understand all fleshly and sensual lust. For
when Scripture so constantly speaks of idolatry as fornication, and
the Apostle Paul calls avarice by the name of idolatry, [118] who
doubts but that every evil lust is rightly called fornication, since
the soul, neglecting the higher law by which it is ruled, and
prostituting itself for the base pleasure of the lower nature as its
reward (so to speak), is thereby corrupted? And therefore let every
one who feels carnal pleasure rebelling against right inclination in
his own case through the habit of sinning, by whose unsubdued violence
he is dragged into captivity, recall to mind as much as he can what
kind of peace he has lost by sinning, and let him cry out, "O wretched
man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? I
thank God through Jesus Christ." [119] For in this way, when he cries
out that he is wretched, in the act of bewailing he implores the help
of a comforter. Nor is it a small approach to blessedness, when he has
come to know his wretchedness; and therefore "blessed" also "are they
that mourn, [120] for they shall be comforted."
Footnotes
[109] The Greek pros to epithumesai refers to sin of intent. "The
particle pros indicates the mental aim" (Tholuck, Meyer, etc.). So
Augustin, rightly: "Qui hoc fine et hoc animo attenderit."
[110] Titillari.
[111] The reading "if" has been proposed by some.
[112] Gen. iii.
[113] 1 Cor. xi. 3 and Eph. v. 23.
[114] Mark v. 41.
[115] Juvenis; Vulgate, adolescens.
[116] Luke vii. 14.
[117] John xi. 33-44.
[118] Col. iii. 5 and Eph. v. 5.
[119] Rom. vii. 24, 25.
[120] Lugentes; Vulgate, qui lugent.
Chapter XIII.
37. In the next place, He goes on to say: "And if thy right eye offend
thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for
thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole
body should go [121] into hell." Here, certainly, there is need of
great courage in order to cut off one's members. [122] For whatever it
is that is meant by the "eye," undoubtedly it is such a thing as is
ardently loved. For those who wish to express their affection strongly
are wont to speak thus: I love him as my own eyes, or even more than
my own eyes. Then, when the word "right" is added, it is meant perhaps
to intensify the strength of the affection. [123] For although these
bodily eyes of ours are turned in a common direction for the purpose
of seeing, and if both are turned they have equal power, yet men are
more afraid of losing the right one. So that the sense in this case
is: Whatever it is which thou so lovest that thou reckonest it as a
right eye, if it offends thee, i.e. if it proves a hindrance to thee
on the way to true happiness, pluck it out and cast it from thee. For
it is profitable for thee, that one of these which thou so lovest that
they cleave to thee as if they were members, should perish, rather
than that thy whole body should be cast into hell.
38. But since He follows it up with a similar statement respecting the
right hand, "If thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it
from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members
should perish, and not that thy whole body should go [124] into hell,"
He compels us to inquire more carefully what He has spoken of as an
eye. And as regards this inquiry, nothing occurs to me as a more
suitable explanation than a greatly beloved friend: for this,
certainly, is something which we may rightly call a member which we
ardently love; and this friend a counsellor, for it is an eye, as it
were, pointing out the road; and that in divine things, for it is the
right eye: so that the left is indeed a beloved counsellor, but in
earthly matters, pertaining to the necessities of the body; concerning
which as a cause of stumbling it was superfluous to speak, inasmuch as
not even the right was to be spared. Now, a counsellor in divine
things is a cause of stumbling, if he endeavours to lead one into any
dangerous heresy under the guise of religion and doctrine. Hence also
let the right hand be taken in the sense of a beloved helper and
assistant in divine works: for in like manner as contemplation is
rightly understood as having its seat in the eye, so action in the
right hand; so that the left hand may be understood in reference to
works which are necessary for this life, and for the body.
Footnotes
[121] Eat; Vulgate, mittatur.
[122] Not literally (Fritzsche). Excision of the members would not of
itself destroy the lust of the heart.
[123] So Meyer et al. What Robert South says (Sermon on John vii. 17)
of the Sermon on the Mount as a whole, can certainly be applied here:
"All the particulars of Matt. v.-vii. are wrapt up in the doctrine of
self-denial, prescribing to the world the most inward purity of heart,
and a constant conflict with all our sensual appetites and worldly
interests," etc. Augustin's interpretation is correct as far as it
goes, but it is too restricted. Christ does not here insist upon the
renunciation of sinful lusts, but upon the evasion of occasions of
sin. What is harmless and innocent of itself, when through any
temperament or condition it becomes an occasion of sinning, is to be
relinquished.
[124] Eat. So Vulgate.
Chapter XIV.
39. "It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him
give her a writing of divorcement." This is the lesser righteousness
of the Pharisees, which is not opposed by what our Lord says: "But I
say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the
cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: [125] and
whosoever shall marry her that is loosed from her husband committeth
adultery." [126] For He who gave the commandment that a writing of
divorcement should be given, did not give the commandment that a wife
should be put away; but "whosoever shall put away," says He, "let him
give her a writing of divorcement," in order that the thought of such
a writing might moderate the rash anger of him who was getting rid of
his wife. And, therefore, He who sought to interpose a delay in
putting away, indicated as far as He could to hard-hearted men that He
did not wish separation. And accordingly the Lord Himself in another
passage, when a question was asked Him as to this matter, gave this
reply: "Moses did so because of the hardness of your hearts." [127]
For however hard-hearted a man may be who wishes to put away his wife,
when he reflects that, on a writing of divorcement being given her,
she could then without risk marry another, he would be easily
appeased. Our Lord, therefore, in order to confirm that principle,
that a wife should not lightly be put away, made the single exception
of fornication; but enjoins that all other annoyances, if any such
should happen to spring up, be borne with fortitude for the sake of
conjugal fidelity and for the sake of chastity; and he also calls that
man an adulterer who should marry her that has been divorced by her
husband. And the Apostle Paul shows the limit of this state of
affairs, for he says it is to be observed as long as her husband
liveth; but on the husband's death he gives permission to marry. [128]
For he himself also held by this rule, and therein brings forward not
his own advice, as in the case of some of his admonitions, but a
command by the Lord when he says: "And unto the married [129] I
command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife [130] depart from
her husband: but and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be
reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife."
[131] I believe that, according to a similar rule, if he shall put her
away, he is to remain unmarried, or be reconciled to his wife. For it
may happen that he puts away his wife for the cause of fornication,
which our Lord wished to make an exception of. But now, if she is not
allowed to marry while the husband is living from whom she has
departed, nor he to take another while the wife is living whom he has
put away, much less is it right to commit unlawful acts of fornication
with any parties whomsoever. More blessed indeed are those marriages
to be reckoned, where the parties concerned, whether after the
procreation of children, or even through contempt of such an earthly
progeny, have been able with common consent to practise self-restraint
toward each other: both because nothing is done contrary to that
precept whereby the Lord forbids a spouse to be put away (for he does
not put her away who lives with her not carnally, but spiritually),
and because that principle is observed to which the apostle gives
expression, "It remaineth, that they that have wives be as though they
had none." [132]
Footnotes
[125] Per alias nuptias, quarum potestatem dat divortium ("by another
marriage, power of which divorce gives."--Bengel). So also Meyer,
Alford, etc.
[126] Solutam a viro...moechatur; Vulgate, dimissam...adulterat.
[127] Matt. xix. 8.
[128] Rom. vii. 2, 3.
[129] In conjugio...mulierem; Vulgate, matrimonio...uxorem.
[130] In conjugio...mulierem; Vulgate, matrimonio...uxorem.
[131] 1 Cor. vii. 10, 11.
[132] 1 Cor. vii. 29.
Chapter XV.
40. But it is rather that statement which the Lord Himself makes in
another passage which is wont to disturb the minds of the little ones,
who nevertheless earnestly desire to live now according to the
precepts of Christ: "If any man come to me, and hate not his father,
and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea,
and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple." [133] For it may
seem a contradiction to the less intelligent, that here He forbids the
putting away of a wife saving for the cause of fornication, but that
elsewhere He affirms that no one can be a disciple of His who does not
hate his wife. But if He were speaking with reference to sexual
intercourse, He would not place father, and mother, and brothers in
the same category. But how true it is, that "the kingdom of heaven
suffereth violence, and they that use violence take it by force!"
[134] For how great violence is necessary, in order that a man may
love his enemies, and hate his father, and mother, and wife, and
children, and brothers! For He commands both things who calls us to
the kingdom of heaven. And how these things do not contradict each
other, it is easy to show under His guidance; but after they have been
understood, it is difficult to carry them out, although this too is
very easy when He Himself assists us. For in that eternal kingdom to
which He has vouchsafed to call His disciples, to whom He also gives
the name of brothers, there are no temporal relationships of this
sort. For "there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor
free, there is neither male nor female;" "but Christ is all, and in
all." [135] And the Lord Himself says: "For in the resurrection they
neither marry, nor are given in marriage, [136] but are as the angels
of God in heaven." [137] Hence it is necessary that whoever wishes
here and now to aim after the life of that kingdom, should hate not
the persons themselves, but those temporal relationships by which this
life of ours, which is transitory and is comprised in being born and
dying, is upheld; because he who does not hate them, does not yet love
that life where there is no condition of being born and dying, which
unites parties in earthly wedlock.
41. Therefore, if I were to ask any good Christian who has a wife, and
even though he may still be having children by her, whether he would
like to have his wife in that kingdom; mindful in any case of the
promises of God, and of that life where this incorruptible shall put
on incorruption, and this mortal shall put on immortality; [138]
though at present hesitating from the greatness, or at least from a
certain degree of love, he would reply with execration that he is
strongly averse to it. Were I to ask him again, whether he would like
his wife to live with him there, after the resurrection, when she had
undergone that angelic change which is promised to the saints, he
would reply that he desired this as strongly as he reprobated the
other. Thus a good Christian is found in one and the same woman to
love the creature of God, whom he desires to be transformed and
renewed; but to hate the corruptible and mortal conjugal connection
and sexual intercourse: i.e. to love in her what is characteristic of
a human being, to hate what belongs to her as a wife. So also he loves
his enemy, not in as far as he is an enemy, but in as far as he is a
man; so that he wishes the same prosperity to come to him as to
himself, viz. that he may reach the kingdom of heaven rectified and
renewed. This is to be understood both of father and mother and the
other ties of blood, that we hate in them what has fallen to the lot
of the human race in being born and dying, but that we love what can
be carried along with us to those realms where no one says, My Father;
but all say to the one God, "Our Father:" and no one says, My mother;
but all say to that other Jerusalem, Our mother: and no one says, My
brother; but each says respecting every other, Our brother. But in
fact there will be a marriage on our part as of one spouse (when we
have been brought together into unity), with Him who hath delivered us
from the pollution of this world by the shedding of His own blood. It
is necessary, therefore, that the disciple of Christ should hate these
things which pass away, in those whom he desires along with himself to
reach those things which shall for ever remain; and that he should the
more hate these things in them, the more he loves themselves.
42. A Christian may therefore live in concord with his wife, whether
with her providing for a fleshly craving, a thing which the apostle
speaks by permission, not by commandment; or providing for the
procreation of children, which may be at present in some degree
praiseworthy; or providing for a brotherly and sisterly fellowship,
without any corporeal connection, having his wife as though he had her
not, as is most excellent and sublime in the marriage of Christians:
yet so that in her he hates the name of temporal relationship, and
loves the hope of everlasting blessedness. For we hate, without doubt,
that respecting which we wish at least, that at some time hereafter it
should not exist; as, for instance, this same life of ours in the
present world, which if we were not to hate as being temporal, we
would not long for the future life, which is not conditioned by time.
For as a substitute for this life the soul is put, respecting which it
is said in that passage, "If a man hate not his own soul [139] also,
he cannot be my disciple." For that corruptible meat is necessary for
this life, of which the Lord Himself says, "Is not the soul [140] more
than meat?" i.e. this life to which meat is necessary. And when He
says that He would lay down His soul [141] for His sheep, He
undoubtedly means this life, as He is declaring that He is going to
die for us.
Footnotes
[133] Luke xiv. 26.
[134] Matt xi. 12. Qui vim faciunt diripiunt illud; Vulgate, violenti
rapiunt illud.
[135] Gal. iii. 28 and Col. iii. 11.
[136] Uxores ducent; Vulgate, nubentur.
[137] Matt. xxii. 30.
[138] 1 Cor. xv. 53, 54.
[139] Luke xiv. 26.
[140] Matt. vi. 25.
[141] John x. 15.
Chapter XVI.
43. Here there arises a second question, when the Lord allows a wife
to be put away for the cause of fornication, in what latitude of
meaning fornication is to be understood in this passage,--whether in
the sense understood by all, viz. that we are to understand that
fornication to be meant which is committed in acts of uncleanness; or
whether, in accordance with the usage of Scripture in speaking of
fornication (as has been mentioned above), as meaning all unlawful
corruption, such as idolatry or covetousness, and therefore, of
course, every transgression of the law on account of the unlawful lust
[involved in it]. [142] But let us consult the apostle, that we may
not say rashly. "And unto the married I command," says he, "yet not I,
but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: but and if she
depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband."
For it may happen that she departs for that cause for which the Lord
gives permission to do so. Or, if a woman is at liberty to put away
her husband for other causes besides that of fornication, and the
husband is not at liberty, what answer shall we give respecting this
statement which he has made afterwards, "And let not the husband put
away his wife"? Wherefore did he not add, saving for the cause of
fornication, which the Lord permits, unless because he wishes a
similar rule to be understood, that if he shall put away his wife
(which he is permitted to do for the cause of fornication), he is to
remain without a wife, or be reconciled to his wife? For it would not
be a bad thing for a husband to be reconciled to such a woman as that
to whom, when nobody had dared to stone her, the Lord said, "Go, and
sin no more." [143] And for this reason also, because He who says, It
is not lawful to put away one's wife saving for the cause of
fornication, forces him to retain his wife, if there should be no
cause of fornication: but if there should be, He does not force him to
put her away, but permits him, just as when it is said, Let it not be
lawful for a woman to marry another, unless her husband be dead; if
she shall marry before the death of her husband, she is guilty; if she
shall not marry after the death of her husband, she is not guilty, for
she is not commanded to marry, but merely permitted. If, therefore,
there is a like rule in the said law of marriage between man and
woman, to such an extent that not merely of the woman has the same
apostle said, "The wife hath not power of her own body, but the
husband;" but he has not been silent respecting him, saying, "And
likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the
wife;"--if, then, the rule is similar, there is no necessity for
understanding that it is lawful for a woman to put away her husband,
saving for the cause of fornication, as is the case also with the
husband.
44. It is therefore to be considered in what latitude of meaning we
ought to understand the word fornication, and the apostle is to be
consulted, as we were beginning to do. For he goes on to say, "But to
the rest speak I, not the Lord." Here, first, we must see who are "the
rest," for he was speaking before on the part of the Lord to those who
are married, but now, as from himself, he speaks to "the rest:" hence
perhaps to the unmarried, but this does not follow. For thus he
continues: "If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be
pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away." Hence, even now
he is speaking to those who are married. What, then, is his object in
saying "to the rest," unless that he was speaking before to those who
were so united, that they were alike as to their faith in Christ; but
that now he is speaking to "the rest," i.e. to those who are so
united, that they are not both believers? But what does he say to
them? "If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be
pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away. And the woman
which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to
dwell with her, let her not put him away." If, therefore, he does not
give a command as from the Lord, but advises as from himself, then
this good result springs from it, that if any one act otherwise, he is
not a transgressor of a command, just as he says a little after
respecting virgins, that he has no command of the Lord, but that he
gives his advice; and he so praises virginity, that whoever will may
avail himself of it; yet if he shall not do so, he may not be judged
to have acted contrary to a command. For there is one thing which is
commanded, another respecting which advice is given, another still
which is allowed. [144] A wife is commanded not to depart from her
husband; and if she depart, to remain unmarried, or to be reconciled
to her husband: therefore it is not allowable for her to act
otherwise. But a believing husband is advised, if he has an
unbelieving wife who is pleased to dwell with him, not to put her
away: therefore it is allowable also to put her away, because it is no
command of the Lord that he should not put her away, but an advice of
the apostle: just as a virgin is advised not to marry; but if she
shall marry, she will not indeed adhere to the advice, but she will
not act in opposition to a command. Allowance is given [145] when it
is said, "But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment." And
therefore, if it is allowable that an unbelieving wife should be put
away, although it is better not to put her away, and yet not
allowable, according to the commandment of the Lord, that a wife
should be put away, saving for the cause of fornication, [then]
unbelief itself also is fornication.
45. For what sayest thou, O apostle? Surely, that a believing husband
who has an unbelieving wife pleased to dwell with him is not to put
her away? Just so, says he. When, therefore, the Lord also gives this
command, that a man should not put away his wife, saving for the cause
of fornication, why dost thou say here, "I speak, not the Lord"? For
this reason, viz. that the idolatry which unbelievers follow, and
every other noxious superstition, is fornication. Now, the Lord
permitted a wife to be put away for the cause of fornication; but in
permitting, He did not command it: He gave opportunity to the apostle
for advising that whoever wished should not put away an unbelieving
wife, in order that, perchance, in this way she might become a
believer. "For," says he, "the unbelieving husband is sanctified in
the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified in the brother."
[146] I suppose it had already occurred that some wives were embracing
the faith by means of their believing husbands, and husbands by means
of their believing wives; and although not mentioning names, he yet
urged his case by examples, in order to strengthen his counsel. Then
he goes on to say, "Else were your children unclean; but now are they
holy." For now the children were Christians, who were sanctified at
the instance of one of the parents, or with the consent of both; which
would not take place unless the marriage were broken up by one of the
parties becoming a believer, and unless the unbelief of the spouse
were borne with so far as to give an opportunity of believing. This,
therefore, is the counsel of Him whom I regard as having spoken the
words, "Whatsoever thou spendest more, when I come again, I will repay
thee." [147]
46. Moreover, if unbelief is fornication, and idolatry unbelief, and
covetousness idolatry, it is not to be doubted that covetousness also
is fornication. Who, then, in that case can rightly separate any
unlawful lust whatever from the category of fornication, if
covetousness is fornication? And from this we perceive, that because
of unlawful lusts, not only those of which one is guilty in acts of
uncleanness with another's husband or wife, but any unlawful lusts
whatever, which cause the soul making a bad use of the body to wander
from the law of God, and to be ruinously and basely corrupted, a man
may, without crime, put away his wife, and a wife her husband, because
the Lord makes the cause of fornication an exception; which
fornication, in accordance with the above considerations, we are
compelled to understand as being general and universal.
47. But when He says, "saving for the cause of fornication," He has
not said of which of them, whether the man or the woman. [148] For not
only is it allowed to put away a wife who commits fornication; but
whoever puts away that wife even by whom he is himself compelled to
commit fornication, puts her away undoubtedly for the cause of
fornication. As, for instance, if a wife should compel one to
sacrifice to idols, the man who puts away such an one puts her away
for the cause of fornication, not only on her part, but on his own
also: on her part, because she commits fornication; on his own, that
he may not commit fornication. Nothing, however, is more unjust than
for a man to put away his wife because of fornication, if he himself
also is convicted of committing fornication. For that passage occurs
to one: "For wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself;
for thou that judgest doest the same things." [149] And for this
reason, whosoever wishes to put away his wife because of fornication,
ought first to be cleared of fornication; and a like remark I would
make respecting the woman also.
48. But in reference to what He says, "Whosoever shall marry her that
is divorced [150] committeth adultery," it may be asked whether she
also who is married commits adultery in the same way as he does who
marries her. For she also is commanded to remain unmarried, or be
reconciled to her husband; but this in the case of her departing from
her husband. There is, however, a great difference whether she put
away or be put away. For if she put away her husband, and marry
another, she seems to have left her former husband from a desire of
changing her marriage connection, which is, without doubt, an
adulterous thought. But if she be put away by the husband, with whom
she desired to be, he indeed who marries her commits adultery,
according to the Lord's declaration; but whether she also be involved
in a like crime is uncertain,--although it is much less easy to
discover how, when a man and woman have intercourse one with another
with equal consent, one of them should be an adulterer, and the other
not. To this is to be added the consideration, that if he commits
adultery by marrying her who is divorced from her husband (although
she does not put away, but is put away), she causes him to commit
adultery, which nevertheless the Lord forbids. And hence we infer
that, whether she has been put away, or has put away her husband, it
is necessary for her to remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her
husband. [151]
49. Again, it is asked whether, if, with a wife's permission, either a
barren one, or one who does not wish to submit to intercourse, a man
shall take to himself another woman, not another man's wife, nor one
separated from her husband, he can do so without being chargeable with
fornication? And an example is found in the Old Testament history;
[152] but now there are greater precepts which the human race has
reached after having passed that stage; and those matters are to be
investigated for the purpose of distinguishing the ages of the
dispensation of that divine providence which assists the human race in
the most orderly way; but not for the purpose of making use of the
rules of living. But yet it may be asked whether what the apostle
says, "The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband; and
likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the
wife," can be carried so far, that, with the permission of a wife, who
possesses the power over her husband's body, a man can have
intercourse with another woman, who is neither another man's wife nor
divorced from her husband; but such an opinion is not to be
entertained, lest it should seem that a woman also, with her husband's
permission, could do such a thing, which the instinctive feeling of
every one prevents.
50. And yet some occasions may arise, where a wife also, with the
consent of her husband, may seem under obligation to do this for the
sake of that husband himself; as, for instance, is said to have
happened at Antioch about fifty years ago, [153] in the times of
Constantius. For Acyndinus, at that time prefect and at one time also
consul, when he demanded of a certain public debtor the payment of a
poundweight of gold, impelled by I know not what motive, did a thing
which is often dangerous in the case of those magistrates to whom
anything whatever is lawful, or rather is thought to be lawful, viz.
threatened with an oath and with a vehement affirmation, that if he
did not pay the foresaid gold on a certain day which he had fixed, he
would be put to death. Accordingly, while he was being kept in cruel
confinement, and was unable to rid himself of that debt, the dread day
began to impend and to draw near. He happened, however, to have a very
beautiful wife, but one who had no money wherewith to come to the
relief of her husband; and when a certain rich man had had his desires
inflamed by the beauty of this woman, and had learned that her husband
was placed in that critical situation, he sent to her, promising in
return for a single night, if she would consent to hold intercourse
with him, that he would give her the pound of gold. Then she, knowing
that she herself had not power over her body, but her husband,
conveyed the intelligence to him, telling him that she was prepared to
do it for the sake of her husband, but only if he himself, the lord by
marriage of her body, to whom all that chastity was due, should wish
it to be done, as if disposing of his own property for the sake of his
life. He thanked her, and commanded that it should be done, in no wise
judging that it was an adulterous embrace, because it was no lust, but
great love for her husband, that demanded it, at his own bidding and
will. The woman came to the villa of that rich man, did what the lewd
man wished; but she gave her body only to her husband, who desired
not, as was usual, his marriage rights, but life. She received the
gold; but he who gave it took away stealthily what he had given, and
substituted a similar bag with earth in it. When the woman, however,
on reaching her home, discovered it, she rushed forth in public in
order to proclaim the deed she had done, animated by the same tender
affection for her husband by which she had been forced to do it; she
goes to the prefect, confesses everything, shows the fraud that had
been practised upon her. Then indeed the prefect first pronounces
himself guilty, because the matter had come to this by means of his
threats, and, as if pronouncing sentence upon another, decided that a
pound of gold should be brought into the treasury from the property of
Acyndinus; but that she (the woman) be installed as mistress of that
piece of land whence she had received the earth instead of the gold. I
offer no opinion either way from this story: let each one form a
judgment as he pleases, for the history is not drawn from divinely
authoritative sources; but yet, when the story is related, man's
instinctive sense does not so revolt against what was done in the case
of this woman, at her husband's bidding, as we formerly shuddered when
the thing itself was set forth without any example. But in this
section of the Gospel nothing is to be more steadily kept in view,
than that so great is the evil of fornication, that, while married
people are bound to one another by so strong a bond, this one cause of
divorce is excepted; but as to what fornication is, that we have
already discussed. [154]
Footnotes
[142] Augustin expresses himself (Retract. I. xix. 6) as having
misgivings about his own explanation of this matter here. He advises
readers to go to his other writings on the subject of marriage and
divorce, or to the works of other writers. He says all sin is not
fornication (omne peccatum fornicatio non est); and to determine which
sins are fornication, and when a wife may be dismissed, is a most
broad (latebrosissima) question. He calls the question a most
difficult (difficillimam) one, and says, "But verily I feel that I
have not come to the perfect conclusion of this matter (imo non me
pervenisse ad hujus rei perfectionem sentio." Retract. ii. 57). Some
of his treatises on the marriage relation: De Bono Conjugali; De
Conjugiis Adulterinis; De Nuptiis et Concupiscientia.
[143] John viii. 11. Vide deinceps ne pecces; Vulgate, jam amplius
noli peccare.
[144] Ignoscitur, lit. "is pardoned."
[145] Lit. "it is pardoned."
[146] 1 Cor. vii. 14. Augustin conforms to the approved reading in the
Greek text: in uxore...in fratre. Vulgate, per mulierem,...per virum.
(See Revised Version.)
[147] Luke x. 35.
[148] Modern commentators do not spring this question, agreeing that
the fornication referred to is of the wife. Paulus, Döllinger (in
Christ. u. Kirche, to which Professor Conington replied in Cont. Rev.,
May, 1869) think the fornication of the woman was committed before her
marriage. Plumptre also prefers the reference to ante-nuptial sin.
[149] Rom. ii. 1.
[150] /=aolelumenen; that is, one divorced unlawfully who has not been
guilty of fornication (so Meyer very positively, Stier et. al., Alford
hesitatingly). This explanation might seem to limit re-marriage to
such an one, inasmuch as the essence of the marriage bond has not been
touched (So Alford et. al.).
[151] That is, innocent or guilty, she cannot marry without committing
adultery. The Roman-Catholic Church forbids divorces, but permits an
indefinite separation a mensa et toro ("from table and bed").
[152] Abraham taking Hagar with Sarah's consent.
[153] About the year 343; for Augustin wrote this treatise about the
year 393.
[154] The law permitted divorce for "some uncleanness" (Deut. xxiv.
1). In the time of Christ divorce was allowed on trivial grounds.
While Schammai interpreted the Deuteronomic prescription of moral
uncleanness or adultery, Hillel interpreted it to include physical
uncleanness or unattractiveness. A wife's cooking her husband's food
unpalatably he declared to be a legitimate cause for dissolution of
the marriage bond. Opposing the loose views current, Christ declared
that it was on account of the "hardness of their hearts" that Moses
had suffered them to put away their wives, and asserted adultery to be
the only allowable reason for divorce. The question whether the
innocent party may marry, is beset with great difficulties in view of
this passage and Matt. xix. 9. The answer turns somewhat upon the
construction of the passage. Augustin here, the Council of Trent (and
so the Roman-Catholic Church), Weiss, Mansel, and others hold that all
marriage of a divorced person is declared illegal. In another place
(De Conj. Adult. i. 9) Augustin says, "Why, I say, did the Lord
interject `the cause of fornication,' and not say rather, in a general
way, `Whosoever shall put away his wife and marry another commits
adultery'?...I think, because the Lord wishes to mention that which is
greater. For who will deny that it is a greater adultery to marry
another when the divorced wife has not committed fornication than when
any one divorces his wife and then marries another? Not because this
is not adultery, but because it is a lesser sort." The Apost.
Constitutions (vii. 2) say, "Thou shalt not commit adultery, for thou
dividest one flesh into two," etc. Weiss: "Jesus everywhere takes it
for granted that in the sight of God there is no such thing as a
dissolution of the marriage bond" (Leben Jesu, i. 529). President
Woolsey, on the other hand, unhesitatingly declares, that, by Christ's
precepts, marriage is dissolved by adultery, so that the innocent
party may marry again. According to this passage, the woman divorced
on other grounds than adultery seems to be declared adulterous if she
marry. According to Matt. xix. 9 the man who puts away his wife for
adultery, seems to be permitted to marry without becoming adulterous
himself. According to Mark x. 12 the woman had the privilege in that
day of putting away her husband, but "there is no evidence in the
Hebrew Scriptures that the woman could get herself divorced from her
husband." To the able treatment of Augustin, which might seem either
exceedingly fearless or mawkish at the present day, according to the
stand-point of the critic, the reader would do well to read Alford and
Lange on this passage; Stanley on 1 Cor. vii. 11; and Woolsey, art.
"Divorce" in Schaff-Herzog Encycl. Whatever may be the exact meaning
of our Lord concerning the marriage of the innocent party, it is
evident that He regards the marriage bond as profoundly sacred, and
warrants the celebrant in binding the parties to marriage to be
faithful one to the other "till death do you part." He Himself said,
"What, therefore, God hath joined together, let not man put asunder"
(Mark x. 9).
Chapter XVII.
51. "Again," says He, "ye have heard that it hath been said to them of
old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the
Lord thine oath: [155] But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither
by heaven, for it is God's throne; nor by the earth, for it is His
footstool; neither by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King.
Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one
hair white or black. But let your communication be Yea, yea; Nay, nay:
for whatsoever is more [156] than these cometh of evil." The
righteousness of the Pharisees is not to forswear oneself; and this is
confirmed by Him who gives the command not to swear, so far as relates
to the righteousness of the kingdom of heaven. For just as he who does
not speak at all cannot speak falsely, so he who does not swear at all
cannot swear falsely. But yet, since he who takes God to witness
swears, this section must be carefully considered, lest the apostle
should seem to have acted contrary to the Lord's precept, who often
swore in this way, when he says, "Now the things which I write unto
you, behold, before God I lie not;" [157] and again, "The God and
Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is blessed for evermore,
knoweth that I lie not." [158] Of like nature also is that
asseveration, "For God is my witness, whom I serve with my spirit in
the gospel of His Son, that without ceasing I make mention of you
always in my prayers." [159] Unless, perchance, one were to say that
it is to be reckoned swearing only when something is spoken of by
which one swears; so that he has not used an oath, because he has not
said, by God; but has said, "God is witness." It is ridiculous to
think so; yet because of the contentious, or those very slow of
apprehension, lest any one should think there is a difference, let him
know that the apostle has used an oath in this way also, saying, "By
your rejoicing, I die daily." [160] And let no one think that this is
so expressed as if it were said, Your rejoicing makes me die daily;
just as it is said, By his teaching he became learned, i.e. by his
teaching it came about that he was perfectly instructed: the Greek
copies decide the matter, where we find it written, Ne ten kauchesin
humeteran, an expression which is used only by one taking an oath.
Thus, then, it is understood that the Lord gave the command not to
swear in this sense, lest any one should eagerly seek after an oath as
a good thing, and by the constant use of oaths sink down through force
of habit into perjury. And therefore let him who understands that
swearing is to be reckoned not among things that are good, but among
things that are necessary, refrain as far as he can from indulging in
it, unless by necessity, when he sees men slow to believe what it is
useful for them to believe, except they be assured by an oath. To
this, accordingly, reference is made when it is said, "Let your speech
be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay;" this is good, and what is to be desired. "For
whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil;" i.e., if you are
compelled to swear, know that it comes of a necessity arising from the
infirmity of those whom you are trying to persuade of something; which
infirmity is certainly an evil, from which we daily pray to be
delivered, when we say, "Deliver us from evil." [161] Hence He has not
said, Whatsoever is more than these is evil; for you are not doing
what is evil when you make a good use of an oath, which, although not
in itself good, is yet necessary in order to persuade another that you
are trying to move him for some useful end; but it "cometh of evil" on
his part by whose infirmity you are compelled to swear. [162] But no
one learns, unless he has had experience, how difficult it is both to
get rid of a habit of swearing, and never to do rashly what necessity
sometimes compels him to do. [163]
52. But it may be asked why, when it was said, "But I say unto you,
Swear not at all," it was added, "neither by heaven, for it is God's
throne," etc., up to "neither by thy head." I suppose it was for this
reason, that the Jews did not think they were bound by the oath, if
they had sworn by such things: and since they had heard it said, "Thou
shalt perform unto the Lord thine oath," they did not think an oath
brought them under obligation to the Lord, if they swore by heaven, or
earth, or by Jerusalem, or by their head; and this happened not from
the fault of Him who gave the command, but because they did not
rightly understand it. Hence the Lord teaches that there is nothing so
worthless among the creatures of God, as that any one should think
that he may swear falsely by it; since created things, from the
highest down to the lowest, beginning with the throne of God and going
down to a white or black hair, are ruled by divine providence.
"Neither by heaven," says He, "for it is God's throne; nor by the
earth, for it is His footstool:" i.e., when you swear by heaven or the
earth, do not imagine that your oath does not bring you under
obligation to the Lord; for you are convicted of swearing by Him who
has heaven for His throne, and the earth for His footstool. "Neither
by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King;" a better
expression than if He had said, "My [city];" although, however, we
understand Him to have meant this. And, because He is undoubtedly the
Lord, the man who swears by Jerusalem is bound by his oath to the
Lord. "Neither shall thou swear by thy head." Now, what could any one
suppose to belong more to himself than his own head? But how is it
ours, when we have not the power of making one hair white or black?
Hence, whoever should wish to swear even by his own head, is bound by
his oath to God, who in an ineffable way keeps all things in His
power, and is everywhere present. And here also all other things are
understood, which could not of course be enumerated; just as that
saying of the apostle we have mentioned, "By your rejoicing, I die
daily." And to show that he was bound by this oath to the Lord, he has
added, "which I have in Christ Jesus."
53. But yet (I make the remark for the sake of the carnal) we must not
think that heaven is called God's throne, and the earth His footstool,
because God has members placed in heaven and in earth, in some such
way as we have when we sit down; but that seat means judgment. And
since, in this organic whole of the universe, heaven has the greatest
appearance, and earth the least,--as if the divine power were more
present where the beauty excels, but still were regulating the least
degree of it in the most distant and in the lowest regions,--He is
said to sit in heaven, and to tread upon the earth. But spiritually
the expression heaven means holy souls, and earth sinful ones: and
since the spiritual man judges all things, yet he himself is judged of
no man, [164] he is suitably spoken of as the seat of God; but the
sinner to whom it is said, "Earth thou art, and unto earth shall thou
return," [165] because, in accordance with that justice which assigns
what is suitable to men's deserts, he is placed among things that are
lowest, and he who would not remain in the law is punished under the
law, is suitably taken as His footstool.
Footnotes
[155] Jusjurandum; Vulgate, juramenta; Greek, tous horkous.
[156] Amplius; Vulgate, abundantius.
[157] Gal. i. 20.
[158] 2 Cor. xi. 31.
[159] Rom. i. 9.
[160] 1 Cor. xv. 31.
[161] Matt. vi. 13.
[162] Revised Version, Evil One. So Euthymius, Zig. (auctorem habet
diabolum), Chrysostom, Theophylact, Fritzsche, Keim, Meyer, Plumptre,
etc. The interpretation of Augustin is shared by Luther, Bengel, De
Wette, Tholuck, Ewald, etc.
[163] Augustin is somewhat perplexed about the meaning, but decides
the injunction to be directed against the abuse of the oath, not to
forbid it wholly. The oath was permitted by the law (Lev. xxii. 11),
was to be held sacred (Num. xxx. 2), and to be made in God's name
(Deut. vi. 13). It was customary under the Old Testament to swear
(Gen. xxiv. 37, Josh. ix. 15; perhaps only a solemn affirmation), and
in the name of the Lord (1 Sam. xx. 42; Irenĉus, Clement, Origen,
Chrysostom, etc.). The Anabaptists, Mennonites, and Quakers understand
the precept to forbid all oaths, even in the civil court.
"Christendom, if it were fully conformed to Christ's will, as it
should be, would tolerate no oaths whatever" (Meyer). "The proper
state of Christians is to require no oaths" (Alford). If interpreted
as a definite prohibition of all swearing, the passage comes into
conflict with Christ's own example (Matt. xxvi. 63), and the apostle's
conduct in the passages quoted by Augustin. The meaning has been
restricted to rash and frivolous oaths on the street and in the market
(Keim); in daily conversation (Carr, Camb. Bible for Schools). In the
ideal Christian community, where truth and honesty prevail, oaths will
be superfluous: the simple asseverations, "Yea, nay," will be
sufficient. To this, Christ's precept ultimately looks. But He, no
doubt, had in mind the widespread profanity of His day, and the
current opinion that only oaths containing the name of God were
binding (Lightfoot cites from the Rabbinical books to this effect).
All unnecessary appeals to God, as well as careless and profane
swearing, are forbidden, as coming either from bad passions within or
a want of reverence. "Prohibition would be repeal of the Mosaic law"
(Plumptre). "All strengthening of the simple `Yea and nay' is
occasioned by the presence of sin and Satan in the world. There is no
more striking proof of the existence of evil than the prevalence of
the foolish, low, useless habit of swearing. It could never have
arisen if men did not believe each other to be liars," etc. (Schaff).
"Men use their protestations because they are distrustful one of
another. An oath is physic, which supposes disease" (M. Henry). When
the oath is performed for the "sake of ethical interests, as when the
civil authority demands it," as seems to be necessary and safe for
society in its present unsanctified cond