John Chrysostom

The blessed Paul wishes to show in the next place that this covenant is far better than the old. This then he does by first laying down remote considerations. For inasmuch as there was nothing bodily or that made a show, no temple for instance, nor Holy of Holies, nor Priest with so great apparel, no legal observances, but all things higher and more perfect, and there was nothing of bodily things, but all was in things spiritual, and things spiritual did not attract the weak, as things bodily; he thoroughly sifts this whole matter.

And observe his wisdom: he makes his beginning from the priest first, and continually calls Him an High Priest, and from this first point shows the difference of the two Dispensations. On this account he first of all defines what a Priest is, and shows whether He has any things proper to a Priest, and whether there are any signs of priesthood. It was however an objection in his way that He Christ was not even well-born, nor was He of the sacerdotal tribe, nor a priest on earth. How then was He a Priest? some one may say.

And just as in the Epistle to the Romans having taken up an argument of which they were not easily persuaded, that Faith effects that which the labor of the Law could not, nor the sweat of the daily life, he betook himself to the Patriarch and referred the whole question to that time: so now here also he opens out the other path of the Priesthood, showing its superiority from the things which happened before. And as, in the matter of punishment, he brings before them not Hell alone, but also what happened to their fathers, so now here also, he first establishes this position from things present. For it were right indeed that earthly things should be proved from heavenly, but when the hearers are weak, the opposite course is taken.

Up to a certain point he lays down first the things which are common to Christ and their High Priests, and then shows that He is superior. For comparative excellence arises thus, when in some respects there is community, in others superiority; otherwise it is no longer comparative.

"For every High Priest taken from among men," this is common to Christ; "is ordained for men in things pertaining to God," and this also; "that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for the people," and this too, yet not entirely: what follows however is no longer so: "who can have compassion on the ignorant, and on them that are out of the way," from this point forward is the superiority, "inasmuch as himself also is encompassed with infirmity; and by reason hereof he ought as for the people, so also for himself, to offer for sins."

"Who in the days of His flesh, when He had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears, to Him that was able to save Him from death, and was heard in that He feared." Seest thou that he sets forth nothing else than His care and the exceeding greatness of His love? For what means the expression "with strong crying"? The Gospel nowhere says this, nor that He wept when He prayed, nor yet that He uttered a cry. Seest thou that it was a condescension? For he could not merely say that He prayed, but also "with strong crying."

Be it with "crying," why also "strong crying and tears"?

"Having offered," (he says), "and having been heard in that He feared." What sayest thou? Let the Heretics be ashamed. The Son of God "was heard in that He feared." And what more could any man say concerning the prophets? And what sort of connection is there, in saying, "He was heard in that He feared, though He were Son, yet learned He obedience by the things which He suffered"? Would any man say these things concerning God? Why, who was ever so mad? And who, even if he were beside himself, would have uttered these things? "Having been heard," (he says), "in that He feared, He learned obedience by the things which He suffered." What obedience? He that before this had been obedient even unto death, as a Son to His Father, how did He afterwards learn? Seest thou that this is spoken concerning the Incarnation?

Tell me now, did He pray the Father that He might be saved from death? And was it for this cause that He was "exceeding sorrowful, and said, If it be possible, let this cup pass from Me"? Yet He nowhere prayed the Father concerning His resurrection, but on the contrary He openly declares, "Destroy this temple and within three days I will raise it up." And, "I have power to lay down My life, and I have power to take it again. No man taketh it from Me, I lay it down of Myself." What then is it; why did He pray? And again He said, "Behold we go up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man shall be betrayed unto the chief priests and scribes, and they shall condemn Him to death. And they shall deliver Him to the Gentiles, to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify Him; and the third day He shall rise again" and said not, "My Father shall raise Me up again." How then did He pray concerning this? But for whom did He pray? For those who believed on Him.

And what he means is this, "He is readily listened to." For since they had not yet the right opinion concerning Him, he said that He was heard. Just as He Himself also when consoling His disciples said, "If ye loved Me, ye would rejoice, because I go to My Father", and "My Father is greater than I." But how did He not glorify Himself, He who "made Himself of no reputation", He who gave Himself up? For, it is said, "He gave Himself" up "for our sins." And again, "Who gave Himself a ransom for us all." What is it then? Thou seest that it is in reference to the flesh that lowly things are spoken concerning Himself: So also here, "Although He were Son, He was heard in that He feared," it is said. He wishes to show, that the success was of Himself, rather than of God's favor. So great (he says) was His reverence, that even on account thereof God had respect unto Him.

"Of whom," he says, "we have many things to say and hard to be explained, seeing ye are dull of hearing." Because they do not hear, the doctrine is "hard to be explained." For when one has to do with men who do not go along with him nor mind the things that are spoken, he cannot well explain the subject to them.

But perhaps some one of you that stand here, is puzzled, and thinks it a hard case, that owing to the Hebrews, he himself is hindered from hearing the more perfect doctrines. Nay rather, I think that perhaps here also except a few, there are many such as they, so that this may be said concerning yourselves also: but for the sake of those few I will speak.

Did he then keep entire silence, or did he resume the subject again in what follows; and do the same as in the Epistle to the Romans? For there too, when he had first stopped the mouths of the gainsayers, and said, "Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God?", he then subjoined the solution. And for my own part I think that he was not even altogether silent, and yet did not speak it out, in order to lead the hearers to a longing for the knowledge. For having mentioned the subject, and said that certain great things were stored up in the doctrine, see how he frames his reproof in combination with panegyric.

For this is ever a part of Paul's wisdom, to mix painful things with kind ones. Which he also does in the Epistle to the Galatians, saying, "Ye did run well; who did hinder you?" And, "Have ye suffered so many things in vain? if it be yet in vain", and, "I have confidence in you in the Lord." Which he says also to these Hebrews, "But we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation." For these two things he effects, he does not overstrain them, nor suffer them to fall back; for if the examples of others are sufficient to arouse the hearer, and to lead him to emulation; when a man has himself for an example and is bidden to emulate himself, the possibility follows at the same time. He therefore shows this also, and does not suffer them to fall back as men utterly condemned, nor as being alway evil, but says that they were once even good; for "when for the time ye ought to be teachers," he says. Here he shows that they had been believers a long while, and he shows also that they ought to instruct others.

But what produces this dullness? This he pointed out especially in the Epistle to the Corinthians, saying, "For whereas there is among you envy and strife and divisions, are ye not carnal?" But observe, I beseech you, his great wisdom, how he always deals according to the distempers before him. For there the weakness arose more from ignorance, or rather from sin; but here not from sins only, but also from continual afflictions. Wherefore he also uses expressions calculated to show the difference, not saying, "ye are become carnal," but "dull": in that case "carnal," but in this the pain is greater. For they the Corinthians indeed were not able to endure his reproof, because they were carnal: but these were able. For in saying, "Seeing ye are become dull of hearing", he shows that formerly they were sound in health, and were strong, fervent in zeal, which he also afterwards testifies respecting them.

At all events observe him continually travailing to introduce the discourse concerning the High Priest, and still putting it off. For hear how he began: "Having a great High Priest that is passed into the heavens"; and omitting to say how He was great, he says again, "For every High Priest taken from among men, is appointed for men in things pertaining to God." And again, "So Christ also glorified not Himself to be made an High Priest." And again after saying, "Thou art a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedech", he again puts off the subject, saying, "Who in the days of His Flesh offered prayers and supplications." When therefore he had been so many times repulsed, he says, as if excusing himself, The blame is with you. Alas! how great a difference! When they ought to be teaching others, they are not even simply learners, but the last of learners. "For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need again that some one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God." Here he means the Human Nature of Christ. For as in external literature it is necessary to learn the elements first, so also here they were first taught concerning the human nature.

Thou seest what is the cause of his uttering lowly things. So Paul did to the Athenians also, discoursing and saying, "The times of this ignorance God winked at: but now commandeth all men everywhere to repent, because He hath appointed a day in the which He will judge the world in righteousness by that Man whom He hath ordained, whereof He hath given assurance unto all men, in that He hath raised Him from the dead." Therefore, if he says anything lofty, he expresses it briefly, while the lowly statements are scattered about in many parts of the Epistle. And thus too he shows the lofty; since the very lowliness of what is said forbids the suspicion that these things relate to the Divine Nature. So here also the safe ground was kept.

"And are become such as have need of milk, not of strong meat." He always calls the lowly doctrine "milk," both in this place and in the other. "When," he says, "for the time ye ought to be teachers": because of that very thing, namely the time, for which ye ought especially to be strong, for this especially ye are become backsliding. Now he calls it "milk," on account of its being suited to the more simple. But to the more perfect it is injurious, and the dwelling on these things is hurtful. So that it is not fitting that matters of the Law should be introduced now or the comparison made from them, such as that He was an High Priest, and offered sacrifice, and needed crying and supplication. Wherefore see how these things are unhealthful to "us"; but at that time they nourished them being by no means unhealthful to them.

So then the oracles of God are true nourishment. "For I will give unto them," he saith, "not a famine of bread, nor a thirst of water, but a famine of hearing the word of the Lord."

"I gave you milk to drink, and not meat"; He did not say, I fed you, showing that such nourishment as this is not food, but that the case is like that of little children who cannot be fed with bread. For such have not drink given them, but their food is to them instead of drink.

Moreover he did not say, "ye have need," but "ye are become such as have need of milk and not of strong meat." That is, ye willed it; ye have reduced yourselves to this, to this need.

"For every one that partaketh of milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe." What is "the Word of righteousness"? He seems to me here to hint at conduct also. That which Christ also said, "Except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees", this he says likewise, "unskilled in the word of righteousness," that is, he that is unskilled in the philosophy that is above, is unable to embrace a perfect and exact life. Or else by "righteousness" he here means Christ, and the high doctrine concerning Him.

That they then were "become dull," he said; but from what cause, he did not add, leaving it to themselves to know it, and not wishing to make his discourse hard to bear. But in the case of the Galatians he both "marveled" and "stood in doubt", which tends much more to encourage, as it is the language of one who would never have expected that this should happen. For this is what the doubting implies.

Thou seest that there is another infancy, Thou seest that there is another full age. Let us become of "full age" in this sense: It is in the power even of those who are children, and the young to come to that "full age": for it is not of nature, but of virtue.

"But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even them who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil." Those had not "their senses exercised," nor did they "know good and evil." He is not speaking now concerning life and conduct, when he says "to discern good and evil," for this is possible and easy for every man to know, but concerning doctrines that are wholesome and sublime, and those that are corrupted and low. The babe knows not how to distinguish bad and good food. Oftentimes at least it even puts dirt into its mouth, and takes what is hurtful; and it does all things without judgment; but not so the full grown man. Such babes are they who lightly listen to everything, and give up their ears indiscriminately: which seems to me to blame these Hebrews also, as being lightly "carried about," and now giving themselves to these, now to those. Which he also hinted near the end of the Epistle, saying, "Be not carried aside by divers and strange doctrines." This is the meaning of "to discern good and evil." "For the mouth tasteth meat, but the soul trieth words."

Let us then learn this lesson. Do not, when thou hearest that a man is not a Heathen nor a Jew, straightway believe him to be a Christian; but examine also into all the other points; for even Manichaeans, and all the heresies, have put on this mask, in order thus to deceive the more simple. But if we "have the senses" of the soul "exercised to discern both good and evil," we are able to discern such teachers.

But how do our "senses" become "exercised"? By continual hearing; by experience of the Scriptures. For when we set forth the error of those Heretics, and thou hearest today and to-morrow; and provest that it is not right, thou hast learnt the whole, thou hast known the whole: and even if thou shouldest not comprehend to-day, thou wilt comprehend to-morrow.

"That have," he says, their "senses exercised." Thou seest that it is needful to exercise our hearing by divine studies, so that they may not sound strangely. "Exercised," saith he, "for discerning," that is, to be skilled.

What is "the beginning of the doctrine"? He goes on to state it himself, saying, "not laying again" (these are his words) "the foundation of repentance from dead works, and faith toward God, of the doctrine of baptisms and of laying on of hands, of the resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment."

But if this be "the Beginning," what else is our doctrine save to repent "from dead works," and through the Spirit to receive "the faith," in "the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment"? But what is "the Beginning"? "The Beginning," he says, is nothing else than this, when there is not a strict life. For as it is necessary to instruct one who is entering on the study of grammar, in the Elements first, so also must the Christian know these things accurately, and have no doubt concerning them. And should he again have need of teaching, he has not yet the foundation. For one who is firmly grounded ought to be fixed and to stand steady, and not be moved about. But if one who has been catechised and baptized is going ten years afterwards to hear again about the Faith, and that we ought to "believe" in "the resurrection of the dead," he does not yet have the foundation, he is again seeking after the beginning of the Christian religion. For that the Faith is the foundation, and the rest the building, hear him [the Apostle] saying; "I have laid the foundation and another buildeth thereupon." (1 Cor. iii. 10.) "If any man build upon this foundation, gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble." (1 Cor. iii. 12.)

"Not laying again" (he says) "the foundation of repentance from dead works."

But what is, "let us go on unto perfection"? Let us henceforth proceed (he means) even to the very roof, that is, let us have the best life. For as in the case of the letters the Alpha involves the whole, and as the foundation, the whole building, so also does full assurance concerning the Faith involve purity of life. And without this it is not possible to be a Christian, as without foundations there can be no building; nor skill in literature without the letters. Still if one should be always going round about the letters, or if about the foundation, not about the building, he will never gain anything.

Do not however think that the Faith is depreciated by being called elementary: for it is indeed the whole power: for when he says, "For every one that useth milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, for he is a babe" (c. v. 13), it is not this which he calls "milk." But to be still doubting about these things is [a sign] of a mind feeble, and needing many discourses. For these are the wholesome doctrines. For we call him "a perfect man" [i.e. "of full age"] who with the faith has a right life; but if any one have faith, yet does evil, and is in doubt concerning [the faith] itself, and brings disgrace on the doctrine, him we shall with reason call "a babe," in that he has gone back again to the beginning. So that even if we have been ten thousand years in the faith, yet are not firm in it, we are babes; when we show a life not in conformity with it; when we are still laying a foundation.

But besides [their way of] life he brings another charge also against these [Hebrews], as being shaken to and fro, and needing "to lay a foundation of repentance from dead works." For he who changes from one to another, giving up this, and choosing that, ought first to condemn this, and to be separated from the system, and then to pass to the other. But if he intends again to lay hold on the first, how shall he touch the second?

What then of the Law (he says)? We have condemned it, and again we run back to it. This is not a shifting about, for here also [under the Gospel] we have a law. "Do we then" (he says) "make void the law through faith? God forbid, yea we establish the Law." (Rom. iii. 31.) I was speaking concerning evil deeds. For he that intends to pursue virtue ought to condemn wickedness first, and then go in pursuit of it. For repentance cannot prove them clean. For this cause they were straightway baptized, that what they were unable to accomplish by themselves, this might be effected by the grace of Christ. Neither then does repentance suffice for purification, but men must first receive baptism. At all events, it was necessary to come to baptism, having condemned the sins thereby and given sentence against them.

But what is "the doctrine of baptisms"? Not as if there were many baptisms, but one only. Why then did he express it in the plural? Because he had said, "not laying again a foundation of repentance." For if he again baptized them and catechised them afresh, and having been baptized at the beginning they were again taught what things ought to be done and what ought not, they would remain perpetually incorrigible.

"And of laying on of hands." For thus did they receive the Spirit, "when Paul had laid his hands on them" (Acts xix. 6), it is said.

"And of the resurrection of the dead." For this is both effected in baptism, and is affirmed in the confession.

"And of eternal judgment." But why does he say this? Because it was likely that, having already believed, they would either be shaken [from their faith], or would lead evil and slothful lives, he says, "be wakeful."

It is not open to them to say, If we live slothfully we will be baptized again, we will be catechised again, we will again receive the Spirit; even if now we fall from the faith, we shall be able again by being baptized, to wash away our sins, and to attain to the same state as before. Ye are deceived (he says) in supposing these things.

And see how putting them to shame, and forbiddingly he begins. "Impossible." No longer (he says) expect that which is not possible; (For he said not, It is not seemly, or, It is not expedient, or, It is not lawful, but "impossible," so as to cast [them] into despair), if ye have once been altogether enlightened.

Then he adds, "and have tasted of the heavenly gift. If ye have tasted" (he says) "of the heavenly gift," that is, of forgiveness. "And been made partakers of the Holy Ghost, and tasted the good word of God" (he is speaking here of the doctrine) "and the powers of the world to come" (what powers is he speaking of? either the working of miracles, or "the earnest of the Spirit" - 2 Cor. i. 22).

What is, "having tasted of the heavenly gift"? it is, "of the remission of sins": for this is of God alone to bestow, and the grace is a grace once for all. "What then? shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? Far from it!" (Rom. vi. 1, Rom. vi. 2.) But if we should be always going to be saved by grace we shall never be good. For where there is but one grace, and we are yet so indolent, should we then cease sinning if we knew that it is possible again to have our sins washed away? For my part I think not.

He here shows that the gifts are many: and to explain it, Ye were counted worthy (he says) of so great forgiveness; for he that was sitting in darkness, he that was at enmity, he that was at open war, that was alienated, that was hated of God, that was lost, he having been suddenly enlightened, counted worthy of the Spirit, of the heavenly gift, of adoption as a son, of the kingdom of heaven, of those other good things, the unspeakable mysteries; and who does not even thus become better, but while indeed worthy of perdition, obtained salvation and honor, as if he had successfully accomplished great things; how could he be again baptized?

"And tasted," he says, "the good word of God"; and he does not unfold it; "and the powers of the world to come," for to live as Angels and to have no need of earthly things, to know that this is the means of our introduction to the enjoyment of the worlds to come; this may we learn through the Spirit, and enter into those sacred recesses.

What are "the powers of the world to come"? Life eternal, angelic conversation. Of these we have already received the earnest through our Faith from the Spirit. Tell me then, if after having been introduced into a palace, and entrusted with all things therein, thou hadst then betrayed all, wouldest thou have been entrusted with them again?

"and have fallen away, to renew them again unto repentance, seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh and put Him to an open shame." "Renew them," he says, "unto repentance," that is, by repentance, for unto repentance is by repentance. What then, is repentance excluded? Not repentance, far from it! But the renewing again by the laver. For he did not say, "impossible" to be renewed "unto repentance," and stop, but added how "impossible, [by] crucifying afresh."

To "be renewed," that is, to be made new, for to make men new is [the work] of the layer only: for (it is said) "thy youth shall be renewed as the eagle's." (Ps. ciii. 5.) But it is [the work of] repentance, when those who have been made new, have afterwards become old through sins, to set them free from this old age, and to make them strong. To bring them to that former brightness however, is not possible; for there the whole was Grace.

"Crucifying to themselves," he says, "the Son of God afresh, and putting Him to an open shame." What he means is this. Baptism is a Cross, and "our old man was crucified with [Him]" (Rom. vi. 6), for we were "made conformable to the likeness of His death" (Rom. vi. 5; Phil. iii. 10), and again, "we were buried therefore with Him by baptism into death." (Rom. vi. 4.) Wherefore, as it is not possible that Christ should be crucified a second time, for that is to "put Him to an open shame." For "if death shall no more have dominion over Him" (Rom. vi. 9), if He rose again, by His resurrection becoming superior to death; if by death He wrestled with and overcame death, and then is crucified again, all those things become a fable and a mockery. He then that baptizeth a second time, crucifies Him again.

But what is "crucifying afresh"? [It is] crucifying over again. For as Christ died on the cross, so do we in baptism, not as to the flesh, but as to sin. Behold two deaths. He died as to the flesh; in our case the old man was buried, and the new man arose, made conformable to the likeness of His death. If therefore it is necessary to be baptized [again], it is necessary that this same [Christ] should die again. For baptism is nothing else than the putting to death of the baptized, and his rising again.

And he well said, "crucifying afresh unto themselves." For he that does this, as having forgotten the former grace, and ordering his own life carelessly, acts in all respects as if there were another baptism. It behooves us therefore to take heed and to make ourselves safe.

On two grounds then he said that the thing was impossible, and he put the stronger last: first, because he who has been deemed worthy of such [blessings], and who has betrayed all that was granted to him, is not worthy to be again renewed; neither is it possible that [Christ] should again be crucified afresh: for this is to "put Him to an open shame."

There is not then any second layer: there is not [indeed]. And if there is, there is also a third, and a fourth; for the former one is continually disannulled by the later, and this continually by another, and so on without end.

What then (you say)? Is there no repentance? There is repentance, but there is no second baptism: but repentance there is, and it has great force, and is able to set free from the burden of his sins, if he will, even him that hath been baptized much in sins, and to establish in safety him who is in danger, even though he should have come unto the very depth of wickedness. And this is evident from many places. "For," says one, "doth not he that falleth rise again? or he that turneth away, doth not he turn back to [God]?" (Jer. viii. 4.) It is possible, if we will, that Christ should be formed in us again: for hear Paul saying, "My little children of whom I travail in birth again, until Christ be formed in you." (Gal. iv. 19.) Only let us lay hold on repentance.

For behold the love of God to man! We ought on every ground to have been punished at the first; in that having received the natural law, and enjoyed innumerable blessings, we have not acknowledged our Master, and have lived an unclean life. Yet He not only has not punished us, but has even made us partakers of countless blessings, just as if we had accomplished great things. Again we fell away, and not even so does He punish us, but has given medicine of repentance, which is sufficient to put away and blot out all our sins; only if we knew the nature of the medicine, and how we ought to apply it.

In this passage he intimates the lovingkindness of God towards man: and the teaching [of the Gospel] he calls "rain": and what he said above, "when for the time ye ought to be teachers" (c. v. 12), this he says here also. Indeed in many places the Scripture calls the teaching "rain." For (it says) "I will command the clouds that they rain no rain upon it" (Isa. v. 6), speaking of "the vineyard." The same which in another place it calls "a famine of bread, and a thirst of water." (Amos viii. 11.) And again, "The river of God is full of waters." (Ps. lxv. 9.)

"For land," he says, "which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft upon it." Here he shows that they received and drank in the word, yea and often enjoyed this, and yet even so they were not profited. For if (he means) thou hadst not been tilled, if thou hadst enjoyed no rains, the evil would not have been so great. For (it is said) "If I had not come and spoken unto them they had not had sin." (John xv. 22.) But if thou hast often drunk and received [nourishment], wherefore hast thou brought forth other things instead of fruits? For (it is said) "I waited that it should bring forth grapes, and it brought forth thorns." (Isa. v. 2.)

Thou seest that everywhere the Scripture calleth sins "thorns." For David also saith, "I was turned into mourning when a thorn was fixed in me." (Ps. xxxii. 4, so Ps. xxxii. 4 LXX.) For it does not simply come on us, but is fixed in; and even if but a little of it remain in, even if we take it not out entirely, that little of itself in like manner causes pain, as in the case of a thorn. And why do I say, 'that little of itself'? Even after it has been taken out, it leaves therein for a long time the pain of the wound. And much care and treatment is necessary, that we may be perfectly freed from it. For it is not enough merely to take away the sin, it is necessary also to heal the wounded place.

But I fear however lest the things said apply to us more than to others. "For," he says, "the earth which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft upon it." We are ever drinking, ever hearing, but "when the sun is risen" (Matt. xiii. 6) we straightway lose our moisture, and therefore bring forth thorns. What then are the thorns? Let us hear Christ saying, that "the care of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, choke the word, and it becometh unfruitful." (Matt. xiii. 22.)

Let us hear the oracles of God with fear, with fear and much trembling. For (it is said) "Serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice unto Him with trembling." (Ps. ii. 11.) But if even our joy and our exultation ought to be "with trembling," of what punishment are we not worthy, if we listen not with terror to what is said, when the things spoken, as now, are themselves fearful?

For having said that "it is impossible for those who have fallen away" to be baptized a second time, and to receive remission through the layer, and having pointed out the awfulness of the case, he goes on: "for the earth which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft upon it, and bringeth forth herbs meet for them by whom it is dressed, receiveth blessing from God. But if it bear thorns and thistles, it is rejected, and nigh unto cursing; whose end is to be burned."

Let us then fear, beloved! This threat is not Paul's, these words are not of man: they are of the Holy Ghost, of Christ that speaketh in him. Is there then any one that is clear from these thorns? And even if we were clear, not even so ought we to be confident, but to fear and tremble lest at any time thorns should spring up in us. But when we are "thorns and thistles" through and through, whence (tell me) are we confident? And are becoming supine? What is it which makes us inert? If "he that thinketh he standeth" ought to fear "lest he fall"; for (he says) "Let him that thinketh he standeth, take heed lest he fall" (1 Cor. x. 12); he that falleth, how anxious ought he to be that he may rise up again! If Paul fears, "lest that by any means, when he had preached to others, he himself should be a castaway" (1 Cor. ix. 27); and he who had been so approved is afraid lest he should become disapproved: what pardon shall we have who are already disapproved, if we have no fear, but fulfill our Christianity as a custom, and for form's sake. Let us then fear, beloved: "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven." (Rom. i. 18.) Let us fear, for it "is revealed" not "against impiety" only, but "against all unrighteousness." What is "against all unrighteousness"? [Against all] both small and great.

"For the earth which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft upon it," he says, "and bringeth forth meet herbs." Because nothing is so meet as purity of life, nothing so suitable as the best life, nothing so meet as virtue.

"And bringeth forth" (saith he) "herbs meet for them by whom it is dressed, receiveth blessing from God." Here he says that God is the cause of all things, giving the heathen a blow, who ascribed the production of fruits to the power of the earth. For (he says) it is not the hands of the husbandman which stir up the earth to bear fruits, but the command from God. Therefore he says, "receives blessing from God."

And see how in speaking of the thorns, he said not, "bringing forth thorns," nor did he use this word expressive of what is useful; but what? "Bearing" [literally "putting out"] "thorns," as if one should say, "forcing out," "throwing out."

"Rejected" (he says) "and nigh unto cursing." Oh! how great consolation in this word! For he said "nigh unto cursing," not "a curse." Now he that hath not yet fallen into a curse, but is come to be near [thereto], may also come to be far off [therefrom].

And not by this only did he encourage them, but also by what follows. For he did not say "rejected and nigh unto cursing," "which shall be burned," but what? "Whose end is to be burned," if he continue [such] (he means) unto the end. So that, if we cut out and burn the thorns, we shall be able to enjoy those good things innumerable and to become approved, and to partake of blessing.

And with good reason did he call sin "a thistle," saying "that which beareth thorns and thistles"; for on whatever side you lay hold on it, it wounds and stings, and it is unpleasant even to look at.

Having therefore sufficiently rebuked them, and alarmed and wounded them, he in turn heals them, so as not to cast them down too much, and make them supine. For he that strikes one that is "dull," makes him more dull. So then he neither flatters them throughout, lest he should make them supine, nor does he wound them throughout, but having inserted a little to wound them, he applies much to heal in what follows.

For what does he say? We speak not these things, as having condemned you, nor as thinking you to be full of thorns, but fearing lest this should come to pass. For it is better to terrify you by words, that ye may not suffer by the realities. And this is specially of Paul's wisdom.

Moreover he did not say, We think, or, we conjecture, or, we expect, or, we hope, but what? "But beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak." Which word he also used in writing to the Galatians: "But I am persuaded of you in the Lord, that ye will be none otherwise minded." (Gal. v. 10.) For in that instance, inasmuch as they were greatly to be condemned, and he could not praise them from things present, he does it from things future ("that ye will be none otherwise minded," he says): he said not, ye are, but "ye will be none otherwise minded." But here he encourages them from things present. "We are persuaded better things of you, beloved, and things that accompany to salvation, though we thus speak." And since he was not able to say so much from things present, he confirms his consolation from things past.