Therefore, when he had completed these discourses, Jesus shifted his ministry from Galilee to Judea. He thus showed that the Lord of all loves some servants in such a way that he does not despise others. For just as they all owe him glory, as being Lord, so he renders to all of them mercy, as being servants. For if one place were to keep him all the time, he would not now be the possessor of all people but of some. He went away from Galilee and entered the region of Judea. He left Galilee his homeland, the place where he had been born, as though the sun were climbing higher in the east. He came to Judea, the place where he was going to die, as though the sun were setting in the west, as if reclining in the peace transcending his Passion. He did this so that again from another place he might show us a new sunrise by his resurrection. And so we may say with the apostle: the old has passed away, behold, the new has come.^[1] And many crowds followed him.

He had often before left Judea because of the people’s hostility. Now he returned there at last, as the time of his Passion was near. But he did not go up to Jerusalem yet, but to the borders of Judea.

Entering Judea, large crowds followed him, and he healed them there. And he did not spend all his time either teaching or performing miracles, but at one time taught, at another time healed. Thus Jesus worked for the salvation of those remaining close by him and following him, so as through the miracles to appear, in what he said, a teacher worthy of belief, and to add the gain coming from the miracles to the teaching of his words. In this way he was leading them by the hand to the knowledge of God. But look at this with me. See how the disciples treat briefly whole multitudes in one word, not recording by name all the individuals who were healed. For they did not say so and so, and so and so but many, teaching us not to be boastful. Christ healed them, benefiting them and through them many others. For the healing of their sickness becomes for others the moment of recognition of God.

Note that there is a distinction here between the crowds who simply followed and Peter and the others who left everything and followed and Matthew, who arose and followed him—he did not simply follow but having arisen; for having arisen is an important addition. There are always those, then, who follow at a distance like the great multitudes yet who have not arisen that they may follow, nor have they given up all that was theirs formerly. But they are few who have arisen and followed, who also, in the regeneration, shall sit on twelve thrones.^[1] Only, if one wishes to be healed, let him follow Jesus.

To one who is chaste, marriage is good. Love that is wholesome and complete does not even perceive vices. If a man loves his wife, he does not even think about a law for dissolving marriages. Such a law seems unnecessary.

But when someone begins inquiring about law aimed at dissolving marriage, there is already some sense of alienation present. Where alienation is found, fornication is lurking in the wings. Suppose you see someone who is searching out physicians. You probably would conjecture that he is sick. In the same way also, when you see either man or woman searching out information on the laws of dissolving marriages, you might not be far from wrong in conjecturing that some alienation has occurred between them and that one or the other may be wanton.

So does the question of this passage arise out of alienation.

Note their craftiness from the very form of their questioning. They did not say to him, You told him not to dismiss his wife, for he had already spoken about this law.^[1] They did not mention those words but started off from that point. Thinking to make the ambush greater and wanting to trap him into saying something against the law, they did not say, Why did you command such and such? But, as if nothing had been said, they asked, Is it lawful? expecting that he would have forgotten what he had said. And they were ready if . . . he said, It is lawful to put away, to bring against him the things he himself had spoken and to say, Why did you say the opposite? And if he repeated what he had earlier said, they were ready to challenge him with the words of Moses.

Male and female. Not male and many females, so that a man is allowed to possess many wives, nor males and a female, so that one woman is allowed to have many husbands. No, he said male and female, so that a woman should think that no man has been made in the world except one, and a man should think that no woman has been made in the world except one. For it was not two or three ribs that he took from the side of man; and he did not make two or three women. When, therefore, a second or a third wife stands before your face, as then Eve stood before Adam, how could you say to them, This is bone from my bones? For even if that woman is truly a rib, it is still not yours. If you have not said this to her, you do not affirm that she is your wife; but if you have said it, you lie.

Look carefully at the wisdom of the teacher. For being asked, Is it allowed? he does not immediately say, It is not allowed, lest they should be disturbed and break out in an uproar. Before Jesus made his own statement he made it clear through his opening remarks that what he had to say came from his Father’s commandment. In commanding this he was not in opposition to Moses but fully in agreement with him. Notice how he validates covenant sexuality not from the creation alone but from God’s commandment. For he did not say that God had made only one man and one woman but that God had also commanded that the one man should be joined to the one woman.

If God had wanted Adam to dismiss this wife and marry another, when he made one man, he would have made many women. But as it is, he shows both by the manner of her creation and the form of the commandment that one man must dwell with one woman continually and never break off from her. And see how he says, He who made them at the beginning made them male and female, that is, they sprang from one root and came together as one body, or the two shall be one flesh.

Then he showed that it is a fearful thing to tamper with this law. When establishing this law, he did not say, Therefore, do not sever or separate but What God has joined together, let man not separate. If you quote Moses, I will quote the God of Moses, and with him I am always strong. For God from the beginning made them male and female. This law is very old, even if it appears human beings have recently discovered it. It is firmly fixed. And God did not simply bring the woman to her husband but ordered her also to leave her father and mother. And he not only ordered the man to go to the woman but also to cling to her, showing by his way of speaking that they could not be separated. And not even with this was God satisfied, but he sought also for another greater union: for the two shall be one flesh.

What therefore God has joined together, let no man put asunder. God has joined in making one flesh of man and woman; this no man can put asunder, unless perhaps God alone. Man puts asunder when we dismiss our first wife in desire of a second; God, who also had joined together, puts asunder, when by consent for God’s service, we so have our wives as though not having them.^[1]

The apostle understands the two shall become one flesh, as referring to Christ and the church. So we must say that Christ did not dismiss the former (so to speak) wife, that is, the former synagogue, for any other cause than that the wife committed fornication, being made an adulteress by the evil one. Along with him she plotted against her husband and gave him over to death, saying, Away with such a fellow from the earth, crucify him, crucify him.^[1]

It was she, the synagogue, therefore who left him, rather than that her husband divorced her and sent her away. Therefore it says in Isaiah, rebuking her for this divorce: Where is your mother’s bill of divorce, with which I put her away?^[2]

Now, keeping in mind what we said above in regard to the passage from Isaiah about the bill of divorce, we will say that the mother of the people separated herself from Christ, her husband,^[1] without having received the bill of divorce.

Afterward, however, when an unseemly thing was found in her, she did not find favor in his sight, and the bill of divorce was written out for her. When the new covenant called those of the Gentiles to the house of him who had cast away his former wife, it virtually gave the bill of divorce to her who formerly separated from her husband—the law and the Word. Therefore, he also having separated from her, married, so to speak, another, having given into the hands of the former wife the bill of divorce. So they can no longer do what was ordered to them under the law because of the certificate of divorce. And a sign that she has received the bill of divorce is that Jerusalem was destroyed along with what they called the sanctuary of the things in it which were believed to be holy, the altar of burnt offerings and all the rites contained in it. And a further sign of the bill of divorce is this, that they cannot keep their feasts, even though the letter of the law specifically commanded them [to be celebrated] in the place that the Lord God appointed for keeping feasts. At present the whole synagogue cannot stone those who have committed such and such sins; and thousands of other instructions are proof of the certificate of divorce. Add to this the fact that there is no longer any prophet and that they say, We do not see any signs.^[2]

They ought not to have brought this up to him but rather he to them. Nevertheless he does not take advantage of them, nor does he say, I am not now bound by this, but he explained this, too. In fact, if he had been alien from the old law, he would not have argued on Moses’ side, nor would he have argued from the original events in the beginning; nor would he have striven to show that his views agreed with the old ones. In fact, Moses gave many other commandments, about foods to eat, about the sabbath. Why do they not challenge Jesus with Moses anywhere else, as they do here? The motive of his detractors was that they wanted the crowd of husbands to be stirred up against him. For divorce was viewed as a matter of considerable indifference among the Jews. Yet when so many things had been said on the mount, they remembered this commandment only now.

Nevertheless, with unspeakable wisdom he makes a defense even for these things, saying that Moses for the hardness of your hearts had thus made that law. And he does not let Moses remain accused, since it was he himself who had given Moses the law, but he frees him from blame and turns the whole matter onto their heads, as he does everywhere. Just as when they accused the disciples while they were gleaning grain, he showed the accusers themselves to be at fault.^[1] When they charged them with eating with unwashed hands, Jesus proved that they themselves were the transgressors; and the same happened over the sabbath. So it happened here too.

To commit adultery is to have relations with a woman who is not one’s proper spouse. A man commits adultery if he brings another woman in, instead of the one to whom he was lawfully bound. The law forbade obvious adultery, which is when another man seduces the woman in the house. But the Savior includes also that adultery that has not become known to everyone or that has not been proven as having occurred physically, because it is still adultery. Moreover, Christ agrees that the unfaithful wife has rebelled because she herself has destroyed the natural yoking and is no longer treated as a wife by her husband.

In adultery, every thing is destroyed by the very causes through which it is born. For marriage is not made by intercourse but by will. Therefore it is not destroyed by bodily separation but by separation of the will. Thus he who dismisses his wife and does not take another is still a husband. For although he has now been separated in the body, yet he is still joined in will. When he takes another wife, then he fully dismisses the first. So it is not the man who dismisses his wife who is an adulterer but the one who takes another wife. And just as the man who dismisses a chaste wife is cruel and unjust, so he who keeps a prostitute is foolish and unjust. . . . Therefore we ought to be imitators of God: just as faithfully as God relates to the church, so should we relate to our wife. God will never abandon his people unless they of their own will cross over to the heathen or to heresy.

What then was Christ saying? He did not say, Yes, marriage would be easier; that is what you must do. He did not want the disciples to consider this as a commandment. So he added, Not all receive this word but only those to whom it is given. He raises up the matter of marriage and shows that it is important, both drawing them toward chastity and encouraging them.

Then the Lord did not say that it was expedient, but instead he agreed that it was not expedient. But looking to the weakness of the flesh he said, Not all men can receive this precept but only those to whom it is given. The meaning is that not all men in fact do receive this, even if they are able to. All can indeed receive it, but not all are willing to receive it.

The prize of glory has been laid out. Anyone who desires glory does not think about the toil. No one would win if all were afraid of the danger of the battle. Some are unable and fall from the goal of continence, but we ought not for that reason to become less earnest about the virtue of chastity. For if some who fall in the fight do not dispirit the others but say to them that that is their given lot, they do not apply the matter to the fight but to the person. All the more ought we to impute their fall to the negligence of the fallen and not to the difficulty of virginity.

But he says, To whom it is given. By this he does not mean that to some it is given and to some it is not given. Rather, Jesus shows that unless we receive the help of divine grace, we have no power on our own account. But since grace is not denied to those who are willing, the Lord says in the Sermon on the Mount: Ask, and it will be given you; seek, and you will find. Knock and it will be opened to you. For every one who asks, receives, and every one who seeks, finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened.^[1] We must first will to ask, and then grace follows. For grace cannot achieve anything without will, nor can will have any power without grace. The earth too does not germinate unless it receives rain, nor does rain bring forth fruit without the earth.

There are three kinds of eunuchs, two carnal and the third spiritual. One group are those who are born this way. Another are those who are made into eunuchs by captivity or for pleasuring older women. The third are those who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven and who become eunuchs for Christ though they could be whole men. The last group are promised the reward. The other two, for whom chastity is not a matter of willing but necessity, are due nothing at all. We can put it another way. There are eunuchs from birth who are of a rather frigid nature and not inclined to lust. There are others who are made eunuchs by men, those who are made so by philosophers, others who are made weak toward sex from their worship of idols, and still others who by heretical persuasion feign chastity so as to falsely claim the truth of religion. None of the above is receptive to the kingdom of heaven. Only the person who for Christ seeks chastity wholeheartedly and cuts off sexual impurity altogether [is the genuine eunuch]. So he adds, He who is able to receive this, let him receive it, so that each of us should look to his own strength as to whether he can carry out the commands of virginity and chastity. Chastity in itself is agreeable and alluring; but one must look to one’s strength so that he who is able to receive this may receive it. It is as if the Lord with his words were urging on his soldiers to the reward of chastity with these words: He who is able to receive this let him receive it; he who is able to fight, let him fight and conquer.

As if someone should say, What are you saying, Lord? If for whatever reason a man happened not to have a wife, will he receive the reward of chastity? Not always. For just as without will an action cannot cause sin, so justice is not achieved merely by the action unless there is the will. For many try to be chaste in body but commit adultery in their will. If fornication were not committed through the will alone, the Lord never would have said, Everyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.^[1] Therefore the will frequently sins without action. The continence that brings glory is not the continence that a weakness in our bodies compels us to keep; rather it is the one which we embrace with the will of our holy intention. Therefore he says, There are eunuchs who have been so from birth; there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by men. These are kept chaste by necessity, but the third group, those who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven, are crowned by their willing it.

The children prefigure the Gentiles, to whom salvation is given through faith and the simple word. But since the goal was first to save Israel, they were at first prevented by the disciples from approaching. The action of the apostles is not about their personal desires but rather their serving as a type or prefiguring of the future proclamation of the gospel to the Gentiles. The Lord says that the children should not be prevented because theirs is the kingdom of heaven; for the grace and gift of the Holy Spirit was going to be bestowed on the Gentiles by the laying on of hands, when the work of the law ceased.

Then—that is, when the Lord was preaching about chastity and saying that eunuchs were blessed. For when the Lord was speaking about the glory of chastity and saying, There are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven,^[1] some of those listening offered him their infants, boys of the purest chastity. For they thought that the Lord was praising those who were pure in body only, not those also pure in will. They did not know that the Lord did not call blessed those eunuchs made chaste by the necessity of youth but those made chaste by the virtue of continence. But the disciples rebuked the people. O flesh, friend of wickedness and not of goodness! Because it does not delight in the good, it easily forgets the good.^[2] But whatever evil it hears, it retains forever as though naturally planted in the heart. For a man can never forget what he loves nor remember what he hates.

Only a little before, when receiving a child, Christ had said, Unless you become like this child here, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven. But now look at how the disciples had immediately forgotten the innocence of children and had kept them back as though they were not worthy to come to Christ, even though the disciples themselves had been invited to be like children.^[3] Who would merit to approach Christ if innocent children are kept back from him? The disciples thought they were doing honor to Christ, while actually they were diminishing his glory. For just as it is a loss to a physician if the sick are kept away from him, so it is a loss to Christ not to have those he may save.

Why did the disciples keep the children back? Not because of the children’s wickedness but because it was not the right time. They did not want the Lord to be tired by the great crowd. To them he said, Let the children come to me and do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven. For children are ignorant of wickedness. They do not know how to return evil for evil or how to do someone an injury. They do not know how to be lustful or to fornicate or to rob. What they hear, they believe. They love their parents with complete affection. Therefore, beloved, the Lord instructs us that what they are by the gift of nature, we should become by the fear of God, a holy way of life and love of the heavenly kingdom; for unless we are alien to all sin just like children, we cannot come to the Savior.

Only the wickedness and corruption of the creature stands in the way of our approaching the Creator. Lack of wisdom should not prevent it. He seeks completeness, and your approach is welcome to him for this completeness. Therefore the words For to such belongs the kingdom of heaven are accurate. He did not say of these but to such, since lack of wisdom is a property of children. For the same reason the apostle said, Do not be children in your thinking; be babes in evil.^[1] And Mark also examines the cause, speaking and interpreting as follows: To such belongs the kingdom of heaven and Truly I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it.^[2] Luke also said the same as Matthew above: Whoever humbles himself like this child, he is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.^[3] For those qualities which the child has by nature, God wishes us to have by choice: simplicity, forgetfulness of wrongs done to us, love of our parents, even if struck by them. He laid his hands on the children because the laying on of hands signifies the arming of God’s power.

What then shall the husband do, if the wife continue in this disposition [adultery]? Let him divorce her, and let the husband remain single. But if he divorce his wife and marry another, he too commits adultery.

Concerning chastity, [Jesus] uttered such sentiments as these: “Whosoever looks upon a woman to lust after her, has committed adultery with her already in his heart before God.” And, “If your right eye offend you, cut it out; for it is better for you to enter into the kingdom of heaven with one eye, than, having two eyes, to be cast into everlasting fire.” And, “Whosoever shall marry her that is divorced from another husband commits adultery.” And, “There are some who have been made eunuchs of men, and some who were born eunuchs, and some who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake; but all cannot receive this saying” [Mt 19:12]. So that all who, by human law, are twice married, and those who look upon a woman to lust after her, are in the eye of our master sinners. For not only he who in act commits adultery is rejected by him, but also he who desires to commit adultery: since not only our works, but also our thoughts, are open before God.

Do not tell me about the violence of the ravisher, about the persuasiveness of a mother, about the authority of a father, about the influence of relatives, about the intrigues and insolence of servants, or about household [financial] losses. So long as a husband lives, be he adulterer, be he sodomite, be he addicted to every kind of vice, if she left him on account of his crimes, he is her husband still and she may not take another.

Wherever there is fornication and a suspicion of fornication, a wife is freely dismissed. Because it is always possible that someone may calumniate the innocent and, for the sake of a second joining in marriage, act in criminal fashion against the first, it is commanded that when the first wife is dismissed, a second may not be taken while the first lives.

Neither can it rightly be held that a husband who dismisses his wife because of fornication and marries another does not commit adultery. For there is also adultery on the part of those who, after the repudiation of their former wives because of fornication, marry others. This adultery, nevertheless, is certainly less serious than that of men who dismiss their wives for reasons other than fornication and take other wives. Therefore, when we say: “Whoever marries a woman dismissed by her husband for reason other than fornication commits adultery,” we speak the truth. But we do not thereby acquit of this crime the man who marries a woman who was dismissed because of fornication. We do not doubt that both are adulterers. We pronounce him an adulterer who dismissed his wife for cause other than fornication and marries another, nor do we thereby defend from the taint of this sin the man who dismissed his wife because of fornication and marries another. We recognize that both are adulterers, though the sin of one is more grave than that of the other. No one is so unreasonable to say that a man who marries a woman whose husband has dismissed her because of fornication is not an adulterer, while maintaining that a man who marries a woman dismissed without the ground of fornication is an adulterer. Both of these men are guilty of adultery.

Concerning chastity, [Jesus] uttered such sentiments as these: “Whosoever looks upon a woman to lust after her, has committed adultery with her already in his heart before God.” And, “If your right eye offend you, cut it out; for it is better for you to enter into the kingdom of heaven with one eye, than, having two eyes, to be cast into everlasting fire.” And, “Whosoever shall marry her that is divorced from another husband commits adultery.” And, “There are some who have been made eunuchs of men, and some who were born eunuchs, and some who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake; but all cannot receive this saying” [Mt 19:12]. So that all who, by human law, are twice married, and those who look upon a woman to lust after her, are in the eye of our master sinners. For not only he who in act commits adultery is rejected by him, but also he who desires to commit adultery: since not only our works, but also our thoughts, are open before God.

That the Scripture counsels marriage, and allows no release from the union, is expressly contained in the Law, “You shall not put away your wife, except for the cause of fornication”; and it regards as fornication the marriage of those separated while the other is alive. Not to deck and adorn herself beyond what is becoming renders a wife free of calumnious suspicion, while she devotes herself assiduously to prayers and supplications; avoiding frequent departures from the house, and shutting herself up as far as possible from the view of all not related to her, and deeming housekeeping of more consequence than impertinent trifling. “He that takes a woman that has been put away,” it is said, “commits adultery; and if one puts away his wife, he makes her an adulteress,” that is, compels her to commit adultery. And not only is he who puts her away guilty of this, but he who takes her, by giving to the woman the opportunity of sinning; for if he did not take her, she would return to her husband.

Likewise, let the faithful woman, who has left an adulterous husband and attracts another faithful one, be forbidden to marry; if she should marry, let her not receive Communion unless he whom she has left has previously departed this world; unless by chance the exigency of illness should compel the giving [of Communion as Viaticum].

You dismiss your wife as if by right and without being charged with wrongdoing; and you suppose it is proper for you to do so because no human law forbids it; but divine law forbids it. Anyone who obeys men ought to stand in awe of God. Hear the law of the Lord, which even they who propose our laws must obey: “What God has joined together let no man put asunder”.

Wherever there is fornication and a suspicion of fornication, a wife is freely dismissed. Because it is always possible that someone may calumniate the innocent and, for the sake of a second joining in marriage, act in criminal fashion against the first, it is commanded that when the first wife is dismissed, a second may not be taken while the first lives.

A woman begins to be the wife of no later husband unless she has ceased to be the wife of a former one. She will cease to be the wife of a former one, however, if that husband should die, not if he commit fornication. A spouse, therefore, is lawfully dismissed for cause of fornication; but the bond of chastity remains. That is why a man is guilty of adultery if he marries a woman who has been dismissed even for this very reason of fornication.

It is certainly not fecundity only, the fruit of which is offspring, nor chastity only, whose bond is fidelity, but also a certain sacramental bond in marriage that is recommended to believers in wedlock. Accordingly it is enjoined by the apostle: “Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the Church” [Eph 5:25]. Of this bond the substance is this, that the man and the woman who are joined together in matrimony should remain inseparable as long as they live; and that it should be unlawful for one consort to be parted from the other, except for the cause of fornication [Mt 5:32]. For this is preserved in the case of Christ and the Church; so that, as a living one with a living one, there is no divorce, no separation for ever.

In matrimony, however, let these nuptial blessings be the objects of our love—offspring, fidelity, the sacramental bond. Offspring, not that it be born only, but born again; for it is born to punishment unless it be born again to life. Fidelity, not such as even unbelievers observe one towards the other, in their ardent love of the flesh. For what husband, however impious himself, likes an adulterous wife? Or what wife, however impious she be, likes an adulterous husband? This is indeed a natural good in marriage, though a carnal one. But a member of Christ ought to be afraid of adultery, not on account of himself, but of his spouse; and ought to hope to receive from Christ the reward of that fidelity that he shows to his spouse. The sacramental bond, again, which is lost neither by divorce nor by adultery, should be guarded by husband and wife with concord and chastity.

And, behold, one came and said to him, Good Master, what deed must I do to inherit eternal life? Some criticize this young man as dissembling and wicked, approaching Jesus to put him to the test. I would not hesitate to say that he is avaricious and greedy since Christ also showed him up as such. Yet I would by no means call him a dissembler, because it is not safe to venture on things uncertain and especially in a case of blame. Such is also true because Mark has taken away the suspicion of dissembling. For Mark says, A man ran up and kneeling before him asked him and Jesus looking upon him loved him.^[1] The tyranny of money is a powerful thing, as is clear here. Though we are practiced in the other virtues, avarice brings the others to ruin.

With good reason we should ask here: when the young man had asked Christ, Teacher, what good deed must I do to have eternal life? and the Lord had finished his explanation, why did he add at the end But many that are first will be last and the last first? No one doubts that it was said about the Jews and Gentiles. It is not by chance, therefore, that this young man is introduced as immature in the mystery. He is boasting and frivolous, showing features of a life lived too confidently under the law. Christ usually does this when he is going to speak about the mystery of some subject. First he introduces someone physically, so as to find an opportunity for reflecting spiritually out of the physical situation. He then explains the meaning of the matter. For example, when he was going to talk about restraining the pride of the Pharisees,^[1] he first introduced the man with dropsy and healed him; the passage ends in midsentence but goes on: so that in the physical tumor of the man with dropsy the swollen pride of the Pharisees might be pricked.

Why therefore did Christ reply to him in these words: No one is good? Because he considered Jesus a mere man and one of the crowd, and a Jewish teacher. For this reason he spoke as a man to him. For often he answers the hidden thoughts of the questioner, as when he says, We worship what we know^[1] and If I bear witness of myself, my testimony is not true.^[2] Therefore when he says, No one is good, he does not say this to show that he is not good; far from it. For he does not say, Why do you call me good? I am not good but No one is good, that is, no human being. When he says this, he does not mean to exclude men from goodness but to make a comparison with the goodness of God. Therefore he adds, Except God alone.

The teaching of the law is good, and Christ does not criticize it, but he says, If you would enter life, keep the commandments, indicating the beginning of this route but not its completion. Through this he shows that the law is not alien to himself, but perfection comes from himself.

The Lord said to a certain young man, If you would enter life, keep the commandments. He did not say If you would have life but If you would enter life, defining that life as eternal life. Let us first consider then the love of this life. For this life is loved, whatever its quality; and however troubled it is, however wretched, people are afraid to end it. Hence we should see, we should consider, how much eternal life is to be loved, when this miserable life that must at some time be ended is so loved. Consider, brothers, how much that life is to be loved when it is a life you never end. You love this life, where you work so much, run, are busy, pant. In this busy life the obligations can scarcely be counted: sowing, plowing, working new land, sailing, grinding, cooking, weaving. And after all this hard work your life comes to an end. Look at what you suffer in this wretched life that you so love. And do you think that you will always live and never die? Temples, rocks, marbles, all reinforced by iron and lead, still fall. And a person thinks that he will never die? Learn therefore, brothers, to seek eternal life, when you will not endure these things but will reign with God forever.

Note how prepared the young man is to obey the commandments. For he says, What must I do to have eternal life? He seems ready to do what he would be told. If his purpose had been to put Jesus to a test, the Evangelist would have given some indication of this as he does in other cases, for instance, in the case of the lawyer.^[1] If the young man had remained silent or been deceptive, Jesus would have easily exposed that and brought it into the open. If the young man had come to test him, he would not have retreated downcast at what he heard. This never happened to any of the Pharisees. When refuted they were all the more angry. This man was not angry. He went away in sorrow, which is no little signal that he did not come to him with evil intent. But he did come with too weak a will. Truly he did desire life but was held in the grip of a serious moral infirmity. When therefore Christ said, If you would enter life, keep the commandments, he said Which? not putting him to the test—far from it—but because he thought that there were some other ones beside those in the law which could bring him life. So he seems to be quite earnest.

When Christ says to him, If you would enter life, keep the commandments, the man expects him to add immediately, my commandments. Which ones? he asks. He was quite deceived in his expectation. For Christ did not answer him as he expected but simply pointed him to the law. This is not because the law is perfection, for no one is justified by the law,^[1] as it is written, but because the life lived according to law is a kind of introduction to the eternal life, briefly acquainting trainees to the things above. For the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ.^[2] The law is the starting point for social justice. Christ is the perfection. For the beginning of good is to act justly, he says. Just action then is shown by the law, but goodness is shown by Christ. The law taught us to repay those who wish to harm us, as in eye for eye, tooth for tooth.^[3] But Christ taught us to let go such balanced vengeance with a view to the greater good, teaching that if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also; and if anyone would sue you and take your coat, let him have your cloak as well.^[4]

This young man has grown impudent from studying the law. He is worried about his salvation. Jesus sends him back to the law so that he might understand that, in the very thing in which he takes pride, he has as yet done no righteous work. For the Lord answered him with the words of the law. But the young man, like the boastful and impudent people of whom he is a type,^[1] put his trust in the law, but he did not really comply with it at all. For they had been ordered not to kill, yet they had killed the prophets. They knew they were not to commit adultery, yet they had brought corruption on the faith and adultery on the law and had worshiped other gods. They knew not to steal, yet by stealth they had dissolved the commandments of the law, before Christ restored the freedom of believing in the faith. They knew not to bear false witness, yet they denied that Christ rose from the dead. They were ordered to honor father and mother, yet they had separated themselves from the family of God the Father and their mother the church. They were ordered to love their neighbor as themselves, yet they persecuted Christ, who had assumed the body of us all and had become neighbor to each one of us by the condition of the assumed body; they persecuted him to the punishment of the cross. So the young man was ordered to cast off and cut out all these vices and to return to the law.

These commandments are sufficient for someone entering on the ground level of the path of eternal life. But they are not sufficient to lead one to the higher life, and certainly not to perfection. One who fails in just one of these commandments cannot even enter the beginnings of life. Anyone who wishes to enter the early stages of the path of life must be free from adultery and murder and any kind of theft. For just as the adulterer and murderer will not enter into life, so neither will the thief. Many of those who are said to believe in Christ are guilty of this sin. Just look at their daily business and the way money is entrusted to them and the crafts they practice.

The rich young man claimed to have kept the commandments. Then he heard the greater commandment: If you wish to be perfect, you still lack one thing: sell all that you have and give it to the poor; you will not lose it, but you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me. What good does it do you if you follow the law and do not follow me? He went away sad and sorrowful, as you have heard, for he had great wealth.

What he heard, we too have heard. The Word of Christ is the gospel. He sits in heaven, but he does not cease to speak on earth. Let us not be deaf, for he shouts. Let us not be dead, for he thunders. If you are not willing to do the greater commandments, do the lesser ones. If the burden of the greater is too much for you, take up the lesser. Why are you slow to do either? Why do you oppose both? The greater commandments are Sell everything that you have and give to the poor and follow me.^[1] The lesser are You shall not commit murder; you shall not commit adultery; you shall not bear false witness; you shall not steal; honor your father and mother; love your neighbor as yourself.^[2] So do these things. Why do I shout to you that you must sell your possessions when I cannot get you to admit that you should not take someone else’s? You have heard, You shall not steal. You rob. Before the eyes of so great a judge, I now hold you not a thief but a robber. Spare yourself; pity yourself. This life still gives you time. Don’t reject reproof. Yesterday you were a thief; do not also be one today. Perhaps you have also been one today? Do not be one tomorrow. Sometime end your sin and expect good reward. You want to have your goods, but you are unwilling to be good. Your life is contrary to your hopes. If it is a great good to have a good house, how great an evil is it to have an evil soul?

It is in our power whether we wish to be perfect. Yet whoever wishes to be perfect ought to sell what he has—and not sell them in part, as Ananias did and Sapphira,^[1] but to sell it all. When he has sold it to give it all to the poor, he has begun to prepare for himself a treasure in the kingdom of heaven. Nor is this sufficient for perfection unless after despising riches he follows the Savior, that is, abandons evil and does good. For more easily is a little purse despised than one’s will. Many abandon their wealth but do not follow the Savior. To follow the Savior is to be an imitator of him and walk in his steps. Anyone who says that he believes in Christ must himself also walk in the steps he walked in.

Someone might ask, If a perfect person is one who possesses all the virtues and no longer acts out of malice, how can the person who sells all his possessions and gives it to the poor then be perfect? For granted someone has done this, how will he go forth instantly without rage if he has previously been subject to rage? How will he instantly be immune to grief and rise above all the worries that can beset someone and cause him grief? How can he be free from all fear, whether of troubles or of death or those things which can upset the still imperfect soul? How will it be that anyone who sells his possessions and gives them to the poor will lack all desire?

More wisely a believer would seem to meet the question by keeping to the literal meaning and not expounding it allegorically. You decide for yourself whether what is said is worthily said according to its context or not. Some will say that anyone who gives to the poor is helped by their prayers. He takes for his salvation the abundance of the spiritual goods of those who are poor in material possessions to meet his own lack, as the apostle suggests in the second letter to the Corinthians.^[1] Who else would have this happen to him and be so greatly helped? For God listens to the prayers of so many poor people who have been relieved. Among them perhaps are people like the apostles or at any rate a little inferior to them, poor in material effects but rich in spiritual gifts.

But the young man, when he heard this, went away sorrowful. For he put great trust in wealth. And in him we observe the rational working out of a metaphor. This was a young man. He himself said that since his youth he had obeyed the commandments that are contained in the law. Yet an arrested adolescence remains within his youth, whatever age he may be.^[1]

The needle is the Word of God, which is the Son of God himself. The tip of the needle is sharp and subtle: subtle according to his divinity and sharp as to his incarnation. The needle is straight and without curve, that is, without scruple. Through the wound of his Passion the Gentiles now have entered eternal life. Only this needle, the cross, can stitch wounds together. He sewed together once again the tunic of immortality, which had been torn by Adam. It is the needle that sewed the flesh to the spirit. This needle joined together the Jewish people and that of the Gentiles; the apostle says of it, For he is our peace who has made us both one.^[1] This is the needle that joined the broken friendship of angels and human beings. This is the needle that pierces and passes through but does not wound.

The arrogant young man, when told to make good his failure to obey the law, is downcast and sad. To the people of which he is a prototype,^[1] the cross and Passion are a stumbling block. There is no salvation for this young man there. But he glories in the law, despises the Gentiles and refuses to cross into the freedom of the gospel; therefore it will be difficult for him to enter the kingdom of heaven. For few of them—and compared with the multitude of the Gentiles they are very rare—were those Jews who would believe. It was difficult for them to bend their will, long hardened under the law, to the gospel’s preaching of humility. But more easily will the camel pass through the eye of a needle. A camel cannot fit into the eye of a needle, nor can the bulk of the huge beast be received by the narrow mouth of the tiny hole. In the beginning of this book in discussing John’s clothing I pointed out that the camel signifies the Gentiles. For this beast obeys the word, is restrained by fear, is tolerant of fasting and kneels to take on its burden with a kind of ordered discipline. In this comparison the wildness of the Gentiles has been tamed by obedience to God’s commandments. These then enter the very narrow path of the heavenly kingdom, that is, the needle, which is the preaching of the gospel word. By it the wounds of the body are stitched together, the torn clothing is rewoven, and death itself is pricked. Therefore this is the route of this new preaching. Into it the weakness of the Gentiles will enter with less difficulty than the opulence of the rich man, that is, of the one taking pride in the law.

By camel here he means not the living thing, the beast of burden, but the thick rope^[1] to which sailors tie their anchors. He shows this comparison to be not entirely pointless (as a camel would be), but he makes it an exceedingly difficult matter; in fact, next to impossible.

What then did Christ say? How difficult it will be for the rich to enter the kingdom of heaven. He was not criticizing money itself but the wills of those who are taken captive by it. If it will be difficult for the rich, how much more so for the avaricious! For if stinginess with one’s own wealth is an impediment to gaining the kingdom, think how much fire is amassed for taking someone else’s. But why does he say that it is hard for the rich man to enter the kingdom, to the disciples, who were poor and had nothing? He teaches them not to be ashamed of their poverty and, as it were, gives the reason why he did not allow them to possess anything. After saying it is hard, he also shows them that it is impossible, and not simply impossible but even in an exaggerated way impossible. He shows this from the comparison of the camel and the needle: It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Hence Christ demonstrates that there is a significant reward for the wealthy who can practice self-denial. He also said that this had to be the work of God, that he might show that great grace is needed for anyone who is going to achieve it.

When the disciples were upset, he said, With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible. But why were the disciples upset since they were poor, in fact very poor? They were upset for others’ salvation and because they possessed great love toward them all. Already they were taking on the tenderness of teachers. At least they were in such trembling and fear for the whole world from Jesus’ declaration as to need much comfort.

And so after Jesus had made eye contact with them, he said, With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible. So with a pleasant and gentle look, he soothed those whose hearts were terrorized and relieved their anguish (for this is what the Evangelist meant by looking at him). Then he uplifted them with his words as he focused on the power of God, and thus he gave them faith.

If you also want to learn the way and how the impossible becomes possible, listen. He did not make this statement that what is impossible for man is possible for God merely so you could relax and do nothing and leave it all to God. No, he said this so you could understand the importance of calling upon God to give you help in this rigorous contest and that you might more readily approach his grace.

What is everything, blessed Peter? Is it your fishing rod? your net? your boat? your skill? Are you telling me these are the everything? Yes, he says, I am not saying these things to show off but in order that by this question I may embrace the multitude of the poor. For when the Lord said, If you wish to be perfect, sell what you have and give to the poor and you will have treasure in heaven, one of the poor may say, What then? If I have no possessions, can I not be perfect? Peter asks the question so that you, the poor man, may learn that you are in no way inferior to the disciples. Peter asks the question, not so that you may have doubts if you learn it from Peter (for he was still imperfect and as yet unfilled by the Spirit) but so that you may hear the word from Peter’s Master and so believe. When we dispute on behalf of others, we often make their concerns our own. That is what the apostle did when he offered this question to the Master on behalf of the wider world of the poor.

In gift giving it is not the gift itself that God praises and approves but the will and sincerity of the giver. He excuses and holds more acceptable the one who gave less but gave it with more perfect sincerity than the one who gave more from a fuller store but with less pure affection.^[1] Thus, from what is written about the gifts of the wealthy and from the two mites which the widow in the treasury sent for the poor,^[2] it is clear that the same also happens to those who leave everything that they possess for the love of God so as to follow undistractedly the Christ of God. They will do everything according to his word. The one who leaves the greater wealth is not more acceptable than the one who leaves the lesser. This is especially so if he leaves the lesser with his whole heart. What Peter left, along with his brother Andrew, was small and of no value, but when they both heard, Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men, immediately they left their nets and followed him.^[3] Yet they were not valued lightly by God, who knew that they had done this with great love. God knew that even if they had been endowed with much wealth they would still not have been distracted by it, nor would their desire to follow Jesus have been thwarted by it. . . . Those who follow the Savior, therefore, will sit on the twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel and will receive this power in the resurrection of the dead. For this is the regeneration, a new birth, when the new heaven and the new earth are established for those who renew themselves, and a New Testament with its chalice is given.

But what does it mean that they will judge the twelve tribes of Israel? It means they will judge them insufficient and convicted. For they are not going to sit as jurymen. But just as he said that the queen of the south is to judge that generation^[1] and the Ninevites will condemn them,^[2] so will these too. For this reason he did not say the nations and the world but the tribes of Israel. The Jews and the apostles had been brought up in the same laws and customs and political system. When the Jews said that they were not able to believe in Christ because the law forbade them to receive his commandments, he brings forward these people who had received the same law and had believed, and thus he condemns all those others. That is why he had already said, Therefore they shall be your judges.^[3]

On the day of judgment the Jews will reply, Lord, we did not know that you were the Son of God incarnate. For what man could see the treasure hidden in the earth^[1] or the sun hidden in a cloud? Who suspected that the morning star^[2] was born upon earth? Who thought that the woman who shut us out from paradise and prevented us all from entering it should herself become the first door of paradise? Or that the light should go forth through her who had caused the darkness to enter? And so it was not obstinacy of heart that drove us to injure you, but we were deceived by consideration of the flesh.

You will reply to them, We too were men just like you, having a similar soul and the same carnal nature, and we lived in one and the same world. We were threatened by the same factions of worldly spirits, helped by the same safeguards of God. Further, you had this advantage over us: we were simple, unpolished men and sinners, and obscure in the crowd, while you were priests and scribes and leaders of the people. We, simple, rustic sinners, could recognize him. You, though priests and scribes, who had Scriptures before your eyes like beacons and pathways, still could not recognize him. Even before witnessing his miracles, we understood him. But you, even after witnessing all his powers, could not understand him? How could it be that almost the whole race was ignorant of him whom Twelve knew? You did not believe him. You did not know that he was the Son of God. What caused you to kill him when you did not find any fault in him? In us the goodwill of our rustic ignorance was like a lantern. But in you, the malice of your knowledge enveloped you like darkness.

They followed him in the washing of baptism, the sanctification of the faith, in the adoption of the inheritance and in the resurrection from the dead. For this is that regeneration that the apostles received and that the law could not grant. It joined them together above the twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel, to the glory of the twelve patriarchs. To others following him in scorn of the secular world, he promises the abundance of hundredfold harvests. This hundredfold harvest is the same as that which is filled with heavenly joy at the hundredth sheep.^[1] This hundredfold harvest is that which the fruitfulness of the perfected earth will provide. This honor was also destined to the church in Sarah’s name.^[2] This honor will be merited through the loss of the law and the faith of the gospel. And thus he says that the first are to be made from the last because the last are made from the first.

A hundredfold means that which is incomparably better as regards the future in heaven. When Mark says he will receive a hundredfold in this age,^[1] we should understand him as speaking about spiritual joys far exceeding earthly ones, inasmuch as they are pledges of future blessings.

So the meaning is this: He who has given up the carnal for the Savior will receive the spiritual. In comparison and merit this will be as if a small number were compared with a number in the hundreds. Hence the apostle, who had given up only a house and his small provincial fields, also says, As having nothing, and yet possessing everything.^[1]

So that no one should think that what was said applied only to the disciples, he extended the words to cover all those doing likewise. The rest might not receive the same as the disciples; yet instead of their relatives of the flesh they will have kinship with God and fraternity with the saints. In fact, he means the older men and women of the church, who were, as it were, relatives through love, beloved from disposition, who loved them much more than their relatives of the flesh. They also received money from them to spend as they wished, while the future treasures were laid up in store for them. Instead of their fields they will receive paradise. They will receive paradise instead of their fields. They will receive Jerusalem above, the mother of their firstborn, in place of their houses built of stone.

The synagogue had been first to be called to salvation, but it was enfeebled due to a lack of faith. Then the church, rising in the house of its father—that is, the law—out of the weakness of its sins ran to Christ and overcame its feebleness with faith. The church took from the synagogue the grace thus passed on. But the synagogue, driven more by zeal than faith, saw that the church had not only been cured of its sickness but also made the daughter of God by receiving the Holy Spirit, by which it came to Christ. As the apostle says, Through their trespass salvation has come to the Gentiles, so as to make Israel jealous.^[1] Thus the synagogue, which was the first to be called, was the second to believe. The church, which was the second to be called, obtained the first place of salvation with God.