Trust

Passages

Every passage tagged with this emotion in the Vela corpus. Search the body text, narrow by source or register, click through to a book’s profile to see how the passage sits with the rest of the work.

Page 12 of 29 · 20 per page

• From New Testament Words (1964)

  We are now in a position to come at the real meaning of the Beatitude, ‘Blessed are the poor in spirit’. (i) It means: blessed is the man who has an utter sense of his own abject destitution in the sight of God, the man who feels not simply unsatisfactory, but who can only say, God be merciful to me, a sinner. (ii) But equally it means: blessed is the man who feels this sense of destitution and who has then put his utter and complete trust in God. So then the Beatitude means: blessed is the man who is conscious of a desperate need and who is utterly certain that in God, and in God alone, that need can be supplied. In the NT the ‘poor’ are those who realize their own abject helplessness and the wealth of the riches of the grace of God. SEMNOS AND SEMNOTĒSTHE MAJESTY OF THE CHRISTIAN LIFEThe adjective semnos and the noun semnotēs are characteristic words of the Pastoral Epistles. Only once does semnos occur outside the Pastoral Epistles. It is used in Phil. 4.8 in the phrase ‘whatsoever things are honest’. In the Pastoral Epistles semnos occurs three times. The deacons must be grave (I Tim. 3.8); the women, or perhaps it should be translated their wives, should have the same quality (I Tim. 3.11). The aged women must live as becometh holiness (Titus 2.3). The noun semnotēs also occurs three times in the Pastoral Epistles. Prayer is to be made for kings and those in authority that we may live a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and in all honesty (I Tim. 2.2). Semnotēs, gravity, is the quality which should be the outstanding quality of a good father (I Tim. 3.4), and of a good teacher (Titus 2.7). Clearly this quality of gravity and dignity was meant to be the characteristic of the Christian life. These words have a most notable background and atmosphere in secular Greek. It may truly be said that there are no more majestic words in the whole Greek language. Let us study their usage in ordinary Greek that we may see just what they demand of the Christian, and that we may understand the quality in which the Christian life is to be clothed. (i) The word semnos is particularly connected with the gods. It means revered, august, holy. Apollo is called by Aeschylus the august commander (The Seven against Thebes 800). Poseidon is called awful Poseidon by Sophocles (Oedipus Coloneus 55). The sacrifices of the gods are holy sacrifices (Pindar, Olymp. 7.42); the temple of Apollo is a holy house (Pindar, Nem. 1.72). In every case the word used is semnos, for semnos is a word with the majesty of divinity in it.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  (11.) To the next objection, we reply that although he who leaves all things for the love of Christ, does, to a certain extent, deprive himself of the means of existence; yet, he can always count on the assistance of Divine Providence, which will never fail him; he can also reckon on the charity of the faithful. St. Augustine, in his book, On Almsdeeds, thus expresses himself on this subject: “Do you think that anything wil be lacking to a Christian, to a servant of God, to one devoted to good works, and to one precious in the sight of his Master? Shall he who feeds Christ not likewise be fed by Him? Shall earthly things be wanting to him, on whom divine and heavenly gifts are bestowed? Where do such unbelief and such impious and sacrilegious ideas spring from? How then can any be found in the house of God with so little confidence in Him? Does he who does not trust Christ absolutely deserve to be called a Christian? No, rather such a one should be named a Pharisee. For, as we read in the Gospel, the Pharisees, hearing our Lord teach the duty of giving alms and of making to ourselves friends of earthly goods, derided Him in their avarice. And even now we behold in the Church men who resemble the Pharisees, whose ears are closed and whose eyes are blinded, so that they can perceive no ray of the light of spiritual and salutary teaching. We have no reason then to wonder that such men hold the servants of God in contempt, when we know that the Lord Himself was despised.” These words point out, clearly that it is sacrilegious to say that they who abandon all things for the love of Christ, expose themselves to the risk of suicide.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  1. The nature of faith requires that the Body of Christ should be hidden when it is given to us. Faith has to do with things that are not seen, and, as St. Augustin says, ‘Faith is to believe what you do not see, or to trust words about a hidden thing which truly exists, though you cannot see it with your eyes. About the things that we see we have knowledge, and not faith.’ 2. The healing of unbelief requires this veiling of our Lord, in order that a fitting manner of satisfaction may answer the guilt of unbelief. The unbelief of our first parents began from listening to the words of the devil, when he was persuading them to take food that had in it veiled death. Then their senses took a false delight in his words. So it is fitting that the faith of those to whom salvation is offered should begin from the words of the Redeemer, leading them to take food that has in it veiled life. It is also fitting that only by the hearing, from among our senses, we should know truly what that food is. Thus faith comes from hearing, and our hearing by the words of Christ. If you were to say of the Blessed Sacrament, ‘This is the substance of bread,’ or, ‘This is the substance of wine,’ nothing could be more untrue; but if you listen to the words of Jesus, ‘This is My Body,’ or, ‘This is My Blood,’ nothing can be truer: you are listening to God, who cannot lie. Thus the faithful soul is not deceived. The hands are the hands of Esau; we touch the accidents of bread and wine: but the voice is the voice of the true Jacob, the prince of the Israel of God. 3. The veiling of the Incarnate Word is necessary for the merit of faith. St. Gregory says, ‘Faith has no merit if human reason give us a convincing proof. Our Lord willed to give us His Body veiled, because it is great merit to trust His words rather than our own senses. They who have not seen, and yet have believed, are blessed.’ N. In this merit of faith there is a threefold fruit: a, the fulness of spiritual good; b, abundance of earthly good; c, overflowing of eternal good. The dew of Heaven in the blessing that Isaac gave Jacob is the grace of God; the fatness of the earth is our daily bread, and all that God chooses to give us; the abundance of corn and wine is joy in God’s presence for evermore. The Voice of the Holy Ghost About our hidden gift; It is good to hide the secret of a king. Tobias 12:7. (1) The unworthiness of the wicked; 1. Shrinking back in heart; My Flesh is meat indeed, and My Blood is drink indeed. St. John 6:56.

• From The Triumph of Christianity (2018)

  < 135 < Lecture 20  Did Constantine Really Convert? ` Many of Constantine’s actions do not seem at all Christian. But do we evaluate whether a person is a Christian based on whether they do only the things Christians are supposed to do? On those grounds, who among us is really a Christian? y Additionally, it is important to recall that Constantine was indeed power hungry and that he became the sole ruler of a massive empire. y He would not have lasted long if he tried to govern the Roman world according to the guidelines set out by Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount. However, that does not mean Constantine did not worship Christianity’s God and him alone. ` As for Constantine’s delaying his baptism until his deathbed, aristocrats often did this at the time, and for a very good reason. The New Testament indicates anyone who sins after baptism will lose their salvation, or at least it has long been interpreted that way. Anyone who truly believed that can hardly be blamed for waiting until the very end. Many did so. ` Overall, the reasons for doubting the sincerity of Constantine’s conversion are not overly persuasive. We will never know what he was actually thinking in his head, but external evidence suggests that Constantine really was highly committed to the Christian cause. ` One of the very first things he did after the battle for Rome in 312 was to put an end to the Great Persecution and declare, for the first time, that Christianity was a licit religion. From there, he started providing enormous benefits to the church and its leaders. y For centuries, local aristocracies were burdened with required public service that involved considerable outlays of cash. That’s how public buildings and public services were funded. y Constantine absolved wealthy aristocrats from these duties when they assumed Christian clerical positions. They were allowed to keep their wealth. y Constantine also bestowed fantastic funds on the church throughout the empire, provided extensive lands, and engaged in large construction projects. < 136 < Lecture 20  Did Constantine Really Convert? y The building projects were highly significant. One was the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem. Building it required destroying a temple of the pagan goddess Aphrodite on the site. y Most impressive was his founding of the entire city of Constantinople, which he made an explicitly Christian city with no pagan influence. ` Constantine was highly active in church affairs, including both practical arguments over what kinds of Christianity were “true” and theological arguments of a most technical obscure nature. Most famously, he called for and presided over the Council of Nicaea in 325 to help resolve the major theological controversy of his day. < 136 < Church of the Holy Sepulchre

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  c. Eternal good; Receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls. 1 Pet. 1:9. He that shall hear Me shall rest without terror, and shall enjoy abundance without fear of evils. Prov. 1:33. Prayer Cleanse my heart, O Holy Spirit, by this heavenly food, wherein Jesus gives me Himself. Strengthen my faith, that I may see Jesus in this Sacrament of His Body and Blood. There is in me a law by which I am in danger of falling into the captivity of sin. I have often to go on my heavenward way through darkness and many temptations, but Thou art my light and my strength. In Thee I trust. By Thy grace I can do all things that Jesus wishes me to do. Be ever in my soul as the dew of the light. With utter trust I rest upon Thee, and believe the testimony which Thou givest. Set up more and more Thy kingdom in my soul, that I may keep my body under, and bring it to subjection, test I should be a castaway from Jesus and from Thee. Thanksgiving Glory be to Thee, O Jesus, King and Spouse, whom my soul loveth. Thou hast given me for my food the Living Bread. Thou art dwelling in me. I praise Thee and thank Thee, O Thou lover of souls, as Thou dwellest in the Tabernacle. I praise Thee and thank Thee, as Thou dwellest in the souls of all who have received Thee worthily this day, wherever they may be. I praise Thee and love Thee for giving Thyself to the unworthy, who gave no welcome to Thee. I hope and pray, dear Jesus, that Thou art dwelling in my soul and filling it with grace. Thou drivest the darkness from me and makest me glad. Thou art light to me in every danger and strength in every weakness. Thou art my comfort in all sorrow and my rest in all weariness and pain. Thou art the healer of every woe. Thy voice, O Thou Beloved of the Father, is in my heart like the song of the morning stars. Keep me faithful, Thou Lord of life and love, that I may rejoice with the sons of God. VIII About the other two reasons why our Lord’s Body is veiledA. (3) The third reason for this veiling of Jesus is moral instruction. Three things which perfect us in holiness are hidden in this Sacrament: 1, the person of our Saviour; 2, the beauty of His great brightness; 3, the wonderful work of the Almighty. From this we learn that three things in us may sometimes be virtuously hidden: 1, our person; 2, bodily beauty; 3, the intention of good works. The first is hidden from the rage of persecutors; the second from the gaze of fools; the third from human respect.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  (12.) Our answer to the twelfth objection, is that he who leaves all things for God does not incur any danger of dying of hunger. For Divine Providence will never abandon him: “I will not leave you, neither will I forsake you” (Hebr. xiii.). The Gloss thus comments on these words: “But in case any should say: ‘What are we to do if necessary help should fail us?’ the consoling words from the book of Joshua are added, ‘I will not fail you nor forsake you.’ A man who should die of hunger would certainly be forsaken; but, as this will never happen, let no one be covetous. For God speaks these words to every man that trusts in Him, as well as to Joshua.” He makes this promise to us on condition that we place our trust in Him. His words are not spoken to the avaricious nor to the covetous, but to “such as trust in God. It is not true to say that it is not lawful for a man to expose himself to danger; for a man may meritoriously expose himself to death for the name of Christ, even if it be possible for him to act otherwise. Thus, we read of many martyrs who, in the time of persecution, offered themselves to death by confessing their faith. If it were unlawful to expose oneself to peril, soldiers would not be justified in crossing the sea and incurring risks for the glory of God. (13) To the thirteenth objection, we reply that a man is a master of his own, not of his neighbour’s property. He, therefore, injures another if he deprives him of what belong to him; but he does no injury to himself by sacrificing his own possessions. Hence Aristotle says (V Ethic) that “a man cannot, strictly speaking, commit an injustice against himself.” Furthermore, he who deprives his neighbour of what belongs to him, reduces him to involuntary poverty, which is dangerous. He who abandons his own possessions, accepts voluntary poverty which, if it is embraced for the love of God, is meritorious. (14.) Our answer to the next objection is that our Lord reserved a certain sum of money for necessary uses out of condescension to the weak; just as, out of condesconsion to human infirmity, he willed to eat and to drink wine with the Pharisees. It must not then be reputed as superstition in the holy fathers in the desert, if they refused to keep money for their own use, or if they chose to abstain from wine or from delicate fare. The money which our Lord reserved was not his own private property; it had been given to Him as alms. For, we are told (Luke viii) that “certain women... ministered to Him out of their resources.

• From The Triumph of Christianity (2018)

  < 134 < Lecture 20  Did Constantine Really Convert? y Guardians of girls who had been seduced were to have molten lead poured down their throats. y Slaves who informed on their masters were to be crucified. ` The final argument against the legitimacy of Constantine’s conversion is the fact that even though he claimed it happened in 312 CE, he did not actually get baptized as a Christian until he was on his deathbed in 337. That was 25 years later. Is that plausible if he had actually committed himself to Christ and the Christian church? The Argument for Constantine’s Sincerity ` There are responses that can made from the other side. A sizable bit of counterevidence against the aforementioned points needs to be considered. ` First, it is absolutely true that Constantine continued to use the image of Sol Invictus on his coinage after 312. However, when he became a dedicated follower of Christ, it was not because he converted from following Sol Invictus to following Christ. It was because he became convinced that Sol Invictus was Christ. The traditional portrayal of the sun god was a portrayal of Christ. ` It is also true that, in his public presentation of himself, Constantine did not promote just the Christian cause. However, there are plenty of explanations for this. Among other factors, Constantine never showed any interest in compelling others to convert to his religious perspective. He affirmed the truth claims of his own faith, but he showed no concern in forcing others to accept it. y And when it comes to the public statements of faith, such as those found on the Arch of Constantine, it is important to realize that Constantine himself did not design the arch or dictate the terms of the inscription. y It was conceived and constructed by others in his honor. These others were almost certainly not Christians themselves.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  AUGUSTINE. (De Op. Monach. 23.) Some argue that they ought not to labour, because the fowls of the air neither sow nor reap. Why then do they not attend to that which follows, neither gather into barns? Why do they seek to have their hands idle, and their storehouses full? Why indeed do they grind corn, and dress it? For this do not the birds. Or even if they find men whom they can persuade to supply them day by day with victuals ready prepared, at least they draw water from the spring, and set on table for themselves, which the birds do not. But if neither are they driven to fill themselves vessels with water, then have they gone one new step of righteousness beyond those who were at that time at Jerusalem, (vid. Acts 11:29.) who of corn sent to them of free gift, made, or caused to be made, loaves, which the birds do not. But not to lay up any thing for the morrow cannot be observed by those, who for many days together withdrawn from the sight of men, and suffering none to approach to them, shut themselves up, to live in much fervency of prayer. What? will you say that the more holy men become, the more unlike the birds of the air in this respect they become? What He says respecting the birds of the air, He says to this end, that none of His servants should think that God has no thought of their wants, when they see Him so provide even for these inferior creatures. Neither is it not God that feeds those that earn their bread by their own labour; neither because God hath said, Call upon me in the day of trouble, and I will deliver thee, (Ps. 50:15.) ought the Apostle therefore not to have fled, but to have remained still to have been seized, that God might save him as He did the Three Children out of the midst of the fire. Should any object in this sort to the saints in their flight from persecution, they would answer that they ought not to tempt God, and that God, if He pleased, would so do to deliver them as He had done Daniel from the lions, Peter from prison, then when they could no longer help themselves; but that in having made flight possible to them, should they be saved by flight, it was by God that they were saved. In like manner, such of God’s servants as have strength to earn their food by the labour of their hands, would easily answer any who should object to them this out of the Gospel concerning the birds of the air, that they neither sow nor reap; and would say, If we by sickness or any other hindrance are not able to work, He will feed us as He feeds the birds, that work not. But when we can work, we ought not to tempt God, seeing that even this our ability is His gift; and that we live here we live of His goodness that has made us able to live; He feeds us by whom the birds of the air are fed; as He says, Your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are not ye of much greater value?

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  AUGUSTINE. (Tr. vii. c. 13) Messias in Hebrew, Christus in Greek, Unctus in Latin. Chrism is unction, and He had a special unction, which from Him extended to all Christians, as appears in the Psalm, God, even Thy God, hath anointed Thee with the oil of gladness above Thy fellows1. (Ps. 44, [45]) All holy persons arc partakers with Him; but He is specially the Holy of Holies, specially anointed. CHRYSOSTOM. (Hom. xix. 1, 2) And therefore he said not Messias, but the Messias. Mark the obedience of Peter from the very first; ho went immediately without delay, as appears from the next words: And he brought him to Jesus. Nor let us blame him as too yielding, because he did not ask many questions, before he received the word. It is reasonable to suppose that his brother had told him all, and sufficiently fully; but the Evangelists often make omissions for the sake of brevity. But, besides this, it is not absolutely said that he did believe, but only, He took him to Jesus; i. e. to learn from the mouth of Jesus Himself, what Andrew had reported. Our Lord begins now Himself to reveal the things of His Divinity, and to exhibit them gradually by prophecy. For prophecies are no less persuasive than miracles; inasmuch as they are preeminently God’s work, and are beyond the power of devils to imitate, while miracles may be phantasy or appearance: the foretelling future events with certainty is an attribute of the incorruptible nature alone: And when Jesus beheld him, He said, Thou art Simon the son of Jonas; thou shall be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, A stone. BEDE. (Hom. i. Temp. Hier. in Vig. S. Andr.) He beheld him not with His natural eye only, but by the insight of His Godhead discerned from eternity the simplicity and greatness of his soul, for which he was to be elevated above the whole Church. In the word Peter, we must not look for any additional meaning, as though it were of Hebrew or Syriac derivation; for the Greek and Latin word Peter, has the same meaning as Cephas; being in both languages derived from petra. He is called Peter on account of the firmness of his faith, in cleaving to that Rock, of which the Apostle speaks, And that Rock was Christ; (1 Cor. 10:4) which secures those who trust in it from the snares of the enemy, and dispenses streams of spiritual gifts.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  CHRYSOSTOM. (Hom. xviii. 1 et sq.) Observe; when he said, He that cometh after me is made before me, and, Whose shoe’s latchet I am not worthy to unloose, he gained over none; but when he made mention of the economy, and gave his discourse a humbler turn, saying, Behold the Lamb of God, then his disciples followed Christ. For many persons are less influenced by the thoughts of God’s greatness and majesty, than when they hear of His being man’s Helper and Friend; or any thing pertaining to the salvation of men. Observe too, when John says, Behold the Lamb of God, Christ says nothing. The Bridegroom stands by in silence; others introduce Him, and deliver the Bride into His hands; He receives her, and so treats her that she no longer remembers those who gave her in marriage. Thus Christ came to unite to Himself the Church; He said nothing Himself; but John, the friend of the Bridegroom, came forth, and put the Bride’s right hand in His; i. e. by his preaching delivered into His hands men’s souls, whom receiving He so disposed of, that they returned no more to John. And observe farther; As at a marriage the maiden goes not to meet the bridegroom, (even though it be a king’s son who weds a humble handmaid,) but he hastens to her; so is it here. For human nature ascended not into heaven, but the Son of God came down to human nature, and took her to His Father’s house. Again; There were disciples of John who not only did not follow Christ, but were even enviously disposed toward Him; but the better part heard, and followed; not from contempt of their former master, but by his persuasion; because he promised them that Christ would baptize with the Holy Ghost. And see with what modesty their zeal was accompanied. They did not straight way go and interrogate Jesus on great and necessary doctrines, nor in public, but sought private converse with Him; for we are told that Jesus turned, and saw them following, and saith unto them, What seek ye? Hence we learn, that when we once begin to form good resolutions, God gives us opportunities enough of improvement. Christ asks the question, not because He needed to be told, but in order to encourage familiarity and confidence, and shew that He thought them worthy of His instructions. THEOPHYLACT. (in loc.) Observe then, that it was upon those who followed Him, that our Lord turned His face and looked upon them. Unless thou by thy good works follow Him, thou shalt never be permitted to see His face, or enter into His dwelling. ALCUIN. The disciples followed behind His back, in order to see Him, and did not see His face. So He turns round, and, as it were, lowers His majesty, that they might be enabled to behold His face.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  I answer that, As stated above ([3073]AA[1],2), a vow is a promise made to God about something acceptable to Him. Now if you promise something to anyone it depends on his decision whether he accept what you promise. Again in the Church a prelate stands in God’s place. Therefore a commutation or dispensation of vows requires the authority of a prelate who in God’s stead declares what is acceptable to God, according to 2 Cor. 2:10: “For . . . have pardoned . . . for your sakes . . . in the person of Christ.” And he says significantly “for your sakes,” since whenever we ask a prelate for a dispensation we should do so to honor Christ in Whose person he dispenses, or to promote the interests of the Church which is His Body. Reply to Objection 1: All other vows are about some particular works, whereas by the religious life a man consecrates his whole life to God’s service. Now the particular is included in the universal, wherefore a Decretal [*Cap. Scripturae, de Voto et Voti redempt.] says that “a man is not deemed a vow-breaker if he exchange a temporal service for the perpetual service of religion.” And yet a man who enters religion is not bound to fulfil the vows, whether of fasting or of praying or the like, which he made when in the world, because by entering religion he dies to his former life, and it is unsuitable to the religious life that each one should have his own observances, and because the burden of religion is onerous enough without requiring the addition of other burdens. Reply to Objection 2: Some have held that prelates can dispense from vows at their will, for the reason that every vow supposes as a condition that the superior prelate be willing; thus it was stated above [3074](A[8]) that the vow of a subject, e.g. of a slave or a son, supposes this condition, if “the father or master consent,” or “does not dissent.” And thus a subject might break his vow without any remorse of conscience, whenever his superior tells him to.

• From Heptaméron (1559)

  The husband assured him he had never harboured such a thought, and that those who had spread this re- port had foully lied. " I know well," said the friend, " that jealousy is a passion as insupportable as love ; and though you were jealous, and even of me, I should not be angry with you, for you could not help it. But I should have reason to complain of a thing which it is in your own power to do or not to do, and that is, to conceal the matter from me, seeing that you have never yet concealed from me any opinion or emotion you have known. On my part, if I were in love with your wife, you ought not to make it a crime in me, for love is a fire which no one can master ; but if I concealed the fact from you, and sought means to make it known to your wife, I should be the worst man that ever lived. Be- sides, though you have a good wife and a worthy, I c^ assure you that, even though she were not yours, she is, of all the women I have ever seen, the one I should give myself the least concern ai)out. I pray you, however, if you have the least suspicion, to tell me so, in order to take measures accordingly, so that our long friendship Fifth day. QUEEN OF NA VARRE. 407 may not be broken for the sake of a woman ; for even if I loved your wife above all the women in the world, I would never speak to her in that case, because I prefer your friendship to any other." The husband protested to him with great oaths that he never had such a thought, and begged that he would continue with him in all respects upon the old footing. " I will do so, since you desire it," replied the friend ; " but allow me to tell you that I never will live with you if, after this, you have such a thought of me, and keep a secret from me, or take it amiss."

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  AUGUSTINE. (Tr. xi. in Joan. c. 2. 3) What meaneth this, Many believed in His Name—but Jesus did not commit Himself unto them? Was it that they did not believe in Him, but only pretended that they did? In that case the Evangelist would not have said, Many believed in His Name. Wonderful this, and strange, that men should trust Christ, and Christ trusts not Himself to men; especially considering that He was the Son of God, and suffered voluntarily, or else need not have suffered at all. Yet such are all catechumens. If we say to a catechumen, Believest thou in Christ? he answers, I do believe, and crosses himself. If we ask him, Dost thou eat the flesh of the Son of man? he knows not what we sayk, for Jesus has not committed Himself to him. ORIGEN. (tom. x. c. 28) Or, it was those who believed in His Name, not on Him, to whom Jesus would not commit Himself. They believe on Him, who follow the narrow way which leadeth unto life; they believe in His Name, who only believe the miracles. CHRYSOSTOM. (Hom. xxv. 1) Or it means that He did not place confidence in them, as perfect disciples, and did not, as if they were brethren of confirmed faith, commit to them all His doctrines, for He did not attend to their outward words, but entered into their hearts, and well knew how short-lived was their zeal1. Because He knew all men, and needed not that any should testify of man, for He knew what was in man. To know what is in man’s heart, is in the power of God alone, who fashioned the heart. He does not want witnesses, to inform Him of that mind, which was of His own fashioning. AUGUSTINE. (Tr. xi. c. 2) The Maker knew better what was in His own work, than the work knew what was in itself. Peter knew not what was in himself when he said, I will go with Thee unto death; (Luke 22:33. ver. 61) but our Lord’s answer shewed that He knew what was in man; Before the cock crow, thou shalt thrice deny Me. BEDE. An admonition to us not to be confident of ourselves, but ever anxious and mistrustful; knowing that what escapes our own knowledge, cannot escape the eternal Judge. CHAPTER 3 3:1–31. There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews: 2. The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him. 3. Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  35. He was a burning and a shining light: and ye were willing for a season to rejoice in his light. 36. But I have greater witness than that of John: for the works which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me. 37. And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape. 38. And ye have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him ye believe not. 39. Search the Scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. 40. And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life. CHRYSOSTOM. (Hom. xl. 1) He now brings proof of those high declarations respecting Himself. He answers an objection: If I bear witness of Myself, My witness is not true. These are Christ’s own words. But does not Christ in many places bear witness of Himself? And if all this is false, where is our hope of salvation? Whence shall we obtain truth, when the Truth Itself says, My witness is not true. We must believe then that true, here, is said, not with reference to the intrinsic value of His testimony, but to their suspicions; for the Jews might say, We do not believe Thee, because no one who bears witness to himself is to be depended on. In answer then, he puts forth three clear and irrefragable proofs, three witnesses as it were, to the truth of what He had said; the works which He had done, the testimony of the Father, and the preaching of John: putting the least of these foremost, i. e. the preaching of John: There is another that beareth witness of Me: and I know that the witness which he witnesseth of Me is true. AUGUSTINE. (de Verb. Dom. s. 43) He knew Himself that His witness of Himself was true, but in compassion to the weak and unbelieving, the Sun sought for candles, that their weak sight might not be dazzled by His full blaze. And therefore John was brought forward to give his testimony to the truth. Not that there is such testimony really, for whatever witnesses bear witness to Him, it is really He who bears witness to Himself; as it is His dwelling in the witnesses, which moves them so to give their witness to the truth.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  But the reason why prayer is necessary for obtaining something from a man is not the same as the reason for its necessity when there is question of obtaining a favor from God. Prayer is addressed to man, first, to lay bare - the desire and the need of the petitioner, and secondly, to incline the mind of him to whom the prayer is addressed to grant the petition. These purposes have no place in the prayer that is sent up to God. When we pray we do not intend to manifest our needs or desires to God, for He knows all things. The Psalmist says to God: “Lord, all my desire is before You” (Psalm 37:10); and in the Gospel we are told: “Your Father knows that you have need of all these things” (Matt. 6:32). Again, the will of God is not influenced by human words to will what He had previously not willed. For, as we read in Numbers 23:19, “God is not a man, that He should lie, nor as the son of man, that He should be changed”; nor is God moved to repentance, as we are assured in 1 Samuel 15:29. Prayer, then, for obtaining something from God is necessary for man on account of the very one who prays, that he may reflect on his shortcomings and may turn his mind to desiring fervently and piously what he hopes to gain by his petition. In this way he is rendered fit to receive the favor. Yet a further difference between the prayer offered to God and that addressed to man is to be marked. Prayer addressed to a man presupposes a certain intimacy that may afford the petitioner an opportunity to present his request. But when we pray to God, the very prayer we send forth makes us intimate with Him, inasmuch as our soul is raised up to God and converses with Him in spiritual affection, and adores Him in spirit and truth. The familiar affection thus experienced in prayer begets an inducement in the petitioner to pray again with yet greater confidence. And so we read in Psalm 16:6: “I have cried to You,” that is, in trusting prayer, “for You, O God, have heard me”; as though, after being admitted to intimacy in the first prayer, the Psalmist cries out with all the greater confidence in the second. For this reason, in prayer to God, perseverance or repetition of our supplication is not unseemly, but is regarded as acceptable to God. Indeed, “we ought always to pray and not to faint,” as we learn from Luke 18: 1. Our Lord, too, invites us to pray, for He said: “Ask, and it shall be given you... knock, and it shall be opened to you” (Matt. 7:7). But in prayer addressed to man, persistence in begging becomes irritating. CHAPTER 3

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  PSEUDO-CHRYSOSTOM. These words, As in heaven so in earth, must be taken as common to all three preceding petitions. Observe also how carefully it is worded; He said not, Father, hallow Thy name in us, Let Thy kingdom come on us, Do Thy will in us. Nor again; Let us hallow Thy name, Let us enter into Thy kingdom, Let us do Thy will; that it should not seem to be either God’s doing only, or man’s doing only. But He used a middle form of speech, and the impersonal verb; for as man can do nothing good without God’s aid, so neither does God work good in man unless man wills it. 6:1111. Give us this day our daily bread. AUGUSTINE. (Enchir. 115.) These three things therefore which have been asked in the foregoing petitions, are begun here on earth, and according to our proficiency are increased in us; but in another life, as we hope, they shall be everlastingly possessed in perfection. In the four remaining petitions we ask for temporal blessings which are necessary to obtaining the eternal; the bread, which is accordingly the next petition in order, is a necessary. JEROME. The Greek word here which we render ‘supersubstantialis,’ is ἐπιούσιος. The LXX often make use of the word περιούσιος, by which we find, on reference to the Hebrew, they always render the word sogolac. Symmachus translates it ἐξαίρετος, that is, ‘chief,’ or ‘excellent,’ though in one place he has interpreted ‘peculiar.’ When then we pray God to give us our ‘peculiar’ or ‘chief’ bread, we mean Him who says in the Gospel, I am the living bread which came down from heaven. (John 6:51.) CYPRIAN. (ubi sup.) For Christ is the bread of life, and this bread belongs not to all men, but to us. This bread we pray that it be given day by day, lest we who are in Christ, and who daily receive the Eucharist for food of salvation, should by the admission of any grievous crime, and our being therefore forbidden the heavenly bread, be separated from the body of Christ. Hence then we pray, that we who abide in Christ, may not draw back from His sanctification and His body. AUGUSTINE. (De Don. Pers. 4.) Here then the saints ask for perseverance of God, when they pray that they may not be separated from the body of Christ, but may abide in that holiness, committing no crime. PSEUDO-CHRYSOSTOM.d. Or by ‘supersubstantialis’ may be intended ‘daily.’ CASSIAN. (Coll. ix. 21.) In that He says, this day, He shews that it is to be daily taken, and that this prayer should be offered at all seasons, seeing there is no day on which we have not need, by the receiving of this bread, to confirm the heart of e inward man.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  Reply to Objection 3: The magnanimous man is said to be “slow and leisurely” not because he is solicitous about nothing, but because he is not over-solicitous about many things, and is trustful in matters where he ought to have trust, and is not over-solicitous about them: for over-much fear and distrust are the cause of over-solicitude, since fear makes us take counsel, as stated above ([2747]FS, Q[44], A[2]) when we were treating of the passion of fear. Whether solicitude belongs to prudence?Objection 1: It would seem that prudence does not extend to the governing of many, but only to the government of oneself. For the Philosopher says (Ethic. v, 1) that virtue directed to the common good is justice. But prudence differs from justice. Therefore prudence is not directed to the common good. Objection 2: Further, he seems to be prudent, who seeks and does good for himself. Now those who seek the common good often neglect their own. Therefore they are not prudent. Objection 3: Further, prudence is specifically distinct from temperance and fortitude. But temperance and fortitude seem to be related only to a man’s own good. Therefore the same applies to prudence. On the contrary, Our Lord said (Mat. 24:45): “Who, thinkest thou, is a faithful and prudent [Douay: ‘wise’] servant whom his lord hath appointed over his family?” I answer that, According to the Philosopher (Ethic. vi, 8) some have held that prudence does not extend to the common good, but only to the good of the individual, and this because they thought that man is not bound to seek other than his own good. But this opinion is opposed to charity, which “seeketh not her own” (1 Cor. 13:5): wherefore the Apostle says of himself (1 Cor. 10:33): “Not seeking that which is profitable to myself, but to many, that they may be saved.” Moreover it is contrary to right reason, which judges the common good to be better than the good of the individual. Accordingly, since it belongs to prudence rightly to counsel, judge, and command concerning the means of obtaining a due end, it is evident that prudence regards not only the private good of the individual, but also the common good of the multitude. Reply to Objection 1: The Philosopher is speaking there of moral virtue. Now just as every moral virtue that is directed to the common good is called “legal” justice, so the prudence that is directed to the common good is called “political” prudence, for the latter stands in the same relation to legal justice, as prudence simply so called to moral virtue.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  GLOSS. I will that he tarry, i. e. I will not that he suffer martyrdom, but wait for the quiet dissolution of the flesh, when I shall come and receive him into eternal blessedness. THEOPHYLACT. When our Lord says to Peter, Follow Me, He confers upon him the superintendence over all the faithful, and at the same time bids him imitate Him in every thing, word and work. He shews too His affection for Peter; for those who are most dear to us, we bid follow us. CHRYSOSTOM. (Hom. lxxxviii. 2) But if it be asked, How then did James assume the see of Jerusalem? I answer, that our Lord enthroned Peter, not as Bishop of this see, but as Doctor of the whole world: Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following, which also leaned on his breast at supper. It is not without meaning that that circumstance of leaning on His breast is mentioned, but to shew what confidence Peter had after his denial. For he who at the supper dared not ask himself, but gave his question to John to put, has the superintendence over his brethren committed to him, and whereas before he gave a question which concerned himself to another to put, he now asks questions himself of his Master concerning others. Our Lord then having foretold such great things of him, and committed the world to him, and prophesied his martyrdom, and made known his greater love, Peter wishing to have John admitted to a share of this calling, says, And what shall this man do? as if to say, Will he not go the same way with us? For Peter had great love for John, as appears from the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles, which give many proofs of their close friendship. So Peter does John the same turn, that John had done him; thinking that he wanted to ask about himself, but was afraid, he puts the question for him. However, inasmuch as they were now going to have the care of the world committed to them, and could not remain together without injury to their charge, our Lord says, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? as if to say, Attend to the work committed to thee, and do it: if I will that he abide here, what is that to thee? THEOPHYLACT. Some have understood, Till I come, to mean, Till I come to punish the Jews who have crucified Me, and strike them with the Roman rod. For they say that this Apostle lived up to the time of Vespasian, who took Jerusalem, and dwelt near when it was taken. Or, Till I come, i. e. till I give him the commission to preach, for to you I commit now the pontificate of the world: and in this follow Me, but let him remain till I come and call him, as I do thee now.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  CHRYSOSTOM. (Hom. xxxii) The woman is not offended at Christ’s rebuke. She does not leave Him, and go away. Far from it: her admiration for Him is raised: The woman saith unto Him, Sir, I perceive that Thou art a Prophet: as if she said, Thy knowledge of me is unaccountable, Thou must be a prophet. AUGUSTINE. (Tr. xv. c. 23) The husband was beginning to come to her, though He had not yet fully come. She thought our Lord a prophet, and He was a prophet: for He says of Himself, A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country. (Mat. 13:57) CHRYSOSTOM. (Hom. xxxii. 2) And having come to this belief she asks no questions relating to this life, the health or sickness of the body: she is not troubled about thirst, she is eager for doctrine. AUGUSTINE. (Tr. xv. c. 23) And she begins enquiries on a subject that perplexed her; Our fathers worshipped in this mountain; and ye say that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship. This was a great dispute between the Samaritans and the Jews. The Jews worshipped in the temple built by Solomon, and made this a ground of boasting over the Samaritans. The Samaritans replied, Why boast ye, because ye have a temple which we have not? Did our fathers, who pleased God, worship in that temple? Is it not better to pray to God in this mountain, where our fathers worshipped? CHRYSOSTOM. (Hom. xxxii. 2) By, our fathers, she means Abraham, who is said to have offered up Isaac here. ORIGEN. (tom. xiii. c. 13) Or thus; The Samaritans regarded Mount Gerizim, near which Jacob dwelt, as sacred, and worshipped upon it; while the sacred place of the Jews was Mount Sion, God’s own choice. The Jews being the people from whom salvation came, are the type of true believers; the Samaritans of heretics. Gerizim, which signifies division, becomes the Samaritans; Sion, which signifies watch-tower, becomes the Jews. CHRYSOSTOM. (Hom. xxxii. 3) Christ however does not solve this question immediately, but leads the woman to higher things, of which He had not spoken till she acknowledged Him to be a prophet, and therefore listened with a more full belief: Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe Me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father. He says, Believe me, because we have need of faith, the mother of all good, the medicine of salvation, in order to obtain any real good. They who endeavour without it, are like men who venture on the sea without a boat, and, being able to swim only a little way, are drowned.

• From Martin Luther (2016)

  An early portrait of 1509 shows Spalatin with delec- table curls, dressed in a simple grey gown with a black lining which combines academic reserve with courtly display. A woodcut from 1515 depicts a serious young man in sober garb, meditating on the Cross. But Spalatin was not a courtier by birth. His father was a tanner, and he came from Spalt near Nuremberg. One of the ‘new men’, he had risen through education. He joined the court but knew that, as a - commoner, he was not an aristocrat’s equal; there was also specula- tion that he may have been illegitimate. While he was a trusted servant and important advisor — and on occasion intimate enough to be present when the Elector did his toilette before dinner — he was not invited to join the table afterwards.* Spalatin seems to have had a sure touch for negotiation and manoeuvre, a grasp of the possible and a sense of realism which Luther lacked. Like Luther he was educated in Greek as well as Latin, and he became part of the humanist circles around Conrad Mutian and Nikolaus Marschalk at the University of Erfurt. He did not possess Luther’s abrasive self-confidence, and was a poor speaker. But the two men formed a hugely creative partnership. Spalatin bought books for the university library and supported university reforms that brought in biblical studies and those of the Church Fathers. Together they made a series of brilliant appointments, of whom Melanchthon was the star. Repeatedly Luther would recommend people to Spalatin, asking for small favours, pensions from Friedrich or seeking posts for them. Spalatin worked tirelessly in the service of the Elector, often late into the night; he nevertheless found time to translate Luther’s Latin works into German, and did so with a fine musical sense.? We have just Luther’s side of the friendship, because it is only his letters that have survived — carefully catalogued and reverentially THE DIET OF WORMS 175 34. Lucas Cranach the Elder, Georg Spalatin Honouring the Cross, 1515. annotated, often in Greek, by Spalatin.° As the sheer number of Luther’s letter indicates — over 400 — this was perhaps the central rela- tionship in his life in between 1518 and 1525: he wrote more letters to Spalatin than to anyone else, even though they saw each other regularly.