> ‎Chapter 12‎ > ‎Chapter 13‎ >   

 

 

Heb. 11:1

1 Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.

551. – Above, the Apostle showed Christ’s superiority in many ways by preferring Him to the angels, to Moses and to Aaron, and advised the faithful to be united to Christ. Since this union consists principally in faith and begins with faith: ‘That Christ may dwell by faith in your hearts’ (Eph. 3:17), the Apostle proceeds to recommend this faith and does three things: first he describes faith; secondly, he gives various examples of it (v. 2); thirdly, he exhorts them to the things which pertain to faith (chap. 12).

552. – He gives a definition of faith which is complete but obscure. Hence, it should be noted that in attempting to define any virtue perfectly, one must mention its proper matter with which it deals, and its end; because habits are recognized by their acts, and acts by their objects. Therefore, it is necessary to mention the act and its order to its object and end. Thus, the definition of courage must mention its proper matter with which it deals, namely, fears and aggressions, and its end, which is the good of the republic. Now, since faith is a theological virtue, its object and end are the same, namely, God. First, he mentions its order to the end; secondly, its proper matter (v. 1b).

553. – But it should be noted that the act of faith is to believe, because it is an act of the intellect narrowed to one thing by the command of the will. Hence, to believe is to cogitate with assent, as Augustine says in The Predestination of the Saints. Therefore, the object of faith and of the will must coincide. But the object of faith is the first truth, in which the end of the will consists, namely, happiness, But it is present one way on earth, and another way in heaven, because on earth the first truth is not possessed and, consequently, not seen: for in regard to things that are above the soul, to possess and to see are the same, as Augustine says in Book of 83 Questions. Hence, they are only hoped for: ‘But hope that is sees in not hope. For what a man sees, why does he hope for?’ (Rom. 8:24). Therefore, the first truth, not seen but hoped for, is the end of the will on earth and, consequently, is the object of faith, because its end and object are the same. But the ultimate end of faith in heaven, which we tend toward by faith, is happiness, which consists in the clear vision of God: ‘This is eternal life: to know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent’ (Jn. 17:3). But such is the hope of believers: ‘He has regenerated us unto a lively hope’ (1 Pt. 1:3). The end, therefore, of faith on earth is the attainment of the thing hoped for, namely, of eternal happiness; hence, he says, of things hoped for.

554. – But a question arises: since faith is prior to hope, why is it defined in terms of hope? For it is customary to define the later by the previous, and not vice versa. I answer that the answer should be obvious from what has been said, namely, that the object and end of faith are the same. Therefore, since the attainment of the things hoped for is its end, it must also be its object. For it has been stated above that a habit must be defined by the order of its act to its object. But the true and the good, even though when considered in themselves are convertible as far as their supposits are concerned, differ in conception. Hence, they are diversely related to each other, because the true is a good and a good is true. In like manner, the intellect and will, which are distinguished on the basis of the distinction between the true and the good, have a diverse relationship to each other. For inasmuch as the intellect apprehends truth and anything contained in it, the true is a good; hence, the good is under the true: but inasmuch as the will moves, the true is under the good. Therefore, in the order of knowing, the intellect is prior; but in the order of moving, the will is prior. Therefore, because the intellect is moved to the act of faith by the command of the will, in the order of moving, the will is prior. Therefore, the prior is not being defined in terms of the later, because, as has been stated, in the definition of faith, the order of the act to its object, which is the same as the end, must be mentioned. But the end and the good are the same, as it says in Phys. II. But in the order to the good, the will, which is the subject of hope, is prior.

555. – But why not say, ‘of things to be loved,’ rather than of things to be hoped for? The reason is because charity is concerned with things that are present or absent. Therefore, because the unpossessed end is the object of faith, he says, of things to be hoped for. Nor does it make any difference that the thing to be hoped for is also the object of hope, because it is necessary that faith be ordained to an end, which coincides with the object of those virtues by which the will is made perfect; since faith pertains to the will as moved by the intellect.

556. – But since faith is one virtue, because it is called one habit (for its object is one), why not say ‘of the thing to be hoped for,’ instead of things to be hoped for? I answer that happiness, which is essentially one thing in itself, because it consists in the vision of God, is the principle and root from which the many good things contained under it are derived: for example, the characteristics of the body, companionship with the saints, and many other good things. Therefore, in order to show that all these pertain to faith, he speaks in the plural.

557. – The word, substance, which appears in the definition, can be explained in a number of ways: in one way, causally, and then it has two senses: one which is substance, i.e., making the things hoped for be present in us. This it does in two ways: in one way, by meriting, as it were; for from the fact that a person makes his intellect captive and submissive to the things of faith, he deserves some day to see the things he hopes for: for vision is the reward of faith. In another way, as though by its property, bringing it about that what is believed really to lie in the future, be somehow already possessed, provided one believe in God. In another way, we can explain the word, substance, essentially, as if faith is the substance, i.e., the essence of things to be hoped for. Hence, in Greek it is defined as ‘the hypostasis of things to be hoped for.’ For the essence of happiness is no less than the vision of God: ‘This is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent’ (Jn. 17:3). Hence, in the book, On the Trinity. Augustine says: ‘This contemplation is promised to us; the end of all actions.’ Therefore, the full vision of God is the essence of happiness. We also see this in the liberal sciences, which, if a person wishes to learn them, he must first accept its principles, which he must believe when they are delivered to him by the teacher. For a learner must believe, as it is stated in 1 Posterior Analytics. And in those principles the entire science is somehow contained, as conclusions are contained in their principles, and an effect in its cause. Therefore, one who has the principles of a science, say geometry, has its substance. And if geometry were the substance of happiness, a person who possessed the principles of geometry would, in a sense, have the substance of happiness. But our faith consists in believing that the blessed will see and enjoy God. Therefore, if we will to reach that state, it is necessary that we believe the principles of that knowledge. And these principles are the articles of faith, which contain the summary of this knowledge, because the vision of the triune God makes us happy. And this is one article; hence we believe this. Consequently, he says, the assurance [substance] of things to be hoped for: ‘We see now through a glass in a dark manner; but then face to fact’ (1 Cor. 13:12). As if to say: we shall be happy when we see face to face that which we now see in a glass and in a dark manner. In these words is shown the relationship of the act of faith to its end, because faith is ordained to things to be hoped for, being, as it were, a beginning in which the whole is, as it were, virtually contained, as conclusions in principles.

558. – Then when he says, the conviction [evidence] of things that appear not, he touches the act of faith in regard to its proper matter. But the act proper to faith, even though it is in relation to the will, as has been said, is nevertheless in the intellect, as in a subject, because its object is the true, which properly pertains to the intellect. But there is a difference among the acts of the intellect: for some are habits of the intellect which imply complete certitude and perfect understanding of that which is understood, as is clear in the habit of understanding, which is the habit of first principles, because one who understands that every whole is great than its part sees this and is certain. But the habit of science also does this: thus the habits of understanding and of science will produce certitude and vision. But there are others which beget neither, namely, doubt and opinion. But faith is midway between these: because, as has been stated, faith produces assent in the intellect which can be caused in two ways: in one way, because the intellect is moved to assent because of the evidence of the object which is per se knowable, as in the habit of principles, or known through something else, which is per se knowable, as in the science of astronomy. In another way, it assents to something not because of the evidence of the object, by which it is not sufficiently moved (hence it is not certain), but it either doubts, namely, when there is no more evidence for one side than for the other; or it opines, if it does have reason for one side, but without satisfying the intellect, so that there is fear in regard to the opposite side. But faith does not suggest either of these absolutely: because there is no evidence, as there is in understanding and science, nor is there doubt, as in doubt and opinion; but it fixes on one side with certainty and firm adherence by a voluntary choice. But this choice rests on God’s authority, and by it the intellect is fixed, so that it clings firmly to the things of faith and assents to them with the greatest of certainty. Therefore, to believe is to know with assent. Therefore, the proper matter of the habit of faith are things that appear not. For appearance has knowledge, but not faith, as Gregory says. But the act of faith is certain adherence, which the Apostle calls evidence, taking the cause for the effect, because evidence produces faith about a doubtful matter. For evidence is the reason for believing a doubted thing. Or if we follow the etymology of the word, evidence (argument), which means arguing the mind, then he is taking the effect for the cause, because the mind is compelled to assent because of the thing’s certainty. Hence, it is called the evidence of things that appear not, i.e., a sure and certain apprehension of things it does not see. Now, if someone were to reduce those words to their correct form, he could say that faith is a habit of the mind by which eternal life is begun in us and makes the intellect assent to things that it does not see. Therefore, it is obvious that the Apostle has defined faith completely, but not clearly. [Where we have evidence another version has conviction, because on God’s authority the intellect is convinced about things it does not see].

559. – By that definition, faith is distinguished from all the other habits of the intellect. For the fact that it is called evidence, faith is distinguished from opinion, doubt and suspicion, because these three doe not cause the intellect to adhere to something firmly. By the words, of things to be hoped for, it is distinguished from ordinary faith which is not ordained to happiness. For by proper definition a thing is made known and distinguished from all else, as in this case; hence, all the others are reduced to it.

560. – But it seems incorrect to say, of things that appear not, as it says in Jn (20:26): ‘Thomas saw and believed.’ Furthermore, we believe that there is one God, a fact which is demonstrated by philosophers. I answer that faith is taken in two senses: in the proper sense, it is concerned with things not seen and not known, as is clear from the above. But inasmuch as there cannot be greater certainty of a conclusion than of the principle from which it is drawn, because principles are always more certain than the conclusions, it follows that since the principles of faith are not evident, neither are its conclusions. Hence, the intellect does not assent to the conclusions as to things known or seen. But taken in a general sense, it excludes all knowledge that is certain; that is the sense in which it is taken by Augustine in the Gospel Questions, when he says that faith is concerned with things that are seen. But the Apostle is speaking in the first sense. Furthermore, it must be said of Thomas that, as Gregory says, he saw one thing and believed something else: for he saw the humanity and believed the divinity. To the objection based on demonstration, the answer is that nothing prohibits one thing being seen by one person and believed by another, as is obvious in diverse states. For what is not seen on earth is seen by the angels. Therefore, what I believe, an angel sees. Similarly, what is seen by the prophets, for example, that God is one and incorporeal, must be believed by the illiterate; just as an illiterate person believes in an eclipse which an astronomer sees. However, in such matters faith is taken in a different sense. But there are some things which absolutely transcend the state of the present life; and in regard to these there is faith in the strict sense.

 

11-2

            Heb. 11:2-7

2 For by it the men of old received divine approval. 3 By faith we understand that the world was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was made out of things which do not appear. 4 By faith Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain, through which he received approval as righteous, God bearing witness by accepting his gifts; he died, but through his faith he is still speaking. 5 By faith Enoch was taken up so that he should not see death; and he was not found, because God had taken him. Now before he was taken he was attested as having pleased God. 6 And without faith it is impossible to please him. For whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him. 7 By faith Noah, being warned by God concerning events as yet unseen, took heed and constructed an ark for the saving of his household; by this he condemned the world and became an heir of the righteousness which comes by faith.

561. – Having given a description, the Apostle now clarifies it with an example. In regard to this he does two things: first, he manifests his thesis in general; secondly, in detail (v. 2).

562. – In regard to the first he says: Thus, therefore, I describe and command the faith, and this is nothing new: for by this, i.e., faith, the men of old, i.e., the holy fathers, obtained divine approval, i.e., believed, and were made ready by faith: ‘Abraham believed God and it was reputed to him unto justice’ (Gen. 15:6): ‘I have believed; therefore, have I spoken’ (Ps. 115:10). But among all the fathers of the Old Testament two especially, namely, David and Abraham, have the testimony of faith.

563. – Then (v. 3) he clarifies his thesis is detail with examples of the ancients: first, as to what they believed and taught; secondly, as to what they did (v. 4); thirdly, as to what they suffered (v. 35b).

564. – Now the doctrine of the Old Testament was twofold: one was clearly given; the other was hidden behind the veil of figures and mysteries. The first concerned the unity of God and the creation of the world; the second the mystery of the incarnation and reparation. Hence, just as they observed the Sabbath in memory of the creation, so we observe Sunday in memory of the resurrection. In regard to the doctrine of the creation of the world he says, by faith we understand that the world was created by the word of God. This can be read in two ways: in one way so that by the word of God is in the ablative case. Then the sense is we, as the ancients, by faith, i.e., by the doctrine of faith, namely, of the Old Testament: ‘God said: Let there be light; and the light was made’ (Gen. 1:3); ‘He spoke and they were made’ (Ps. 32:9), understand that the world was created, i.e., arranged, by the word of God, i.e., by God’s command. But it pertains to faith that we understand this, because, since faith is concerned with things unseen, even the world was made of invisible things, namely, of prime matter, which, when it is bare and devoid of all form, is invisible and lacks all form and disposition. Hence, he says, so that what is seen was made out of things which do not appear. In the second way, so that word is in the dative case. Then the sense is: We understand thought faith, as before, that the world was framed, i.e., suited and corresponded to the word, that from invisible things visible things might be made. Here it should be noted that the word of God is God’s very concept, by which He understands Himself and other things. But God is compared to the creature as artisan to artifact. But we notice that an artisan produces what he produces outside himself in a likeness of his concept; hence, he makes a house in matter in the likeness of the house formed in his mind. But if the external house conforms to the preconceived house, it is a work properly arranged; if not, not. But because all creatures are arranged in the best way, as produced by an artisan in Whom no error or defect can occur, they all conform in the fullest way to the divine concept according to their mode. Hence Boethius in the Consolations says: ‘The most beautiful on bringing forth in His mind a beautiful world forms it in His likeness and image.’ Therefore, he says, we understand by faith that the world, i.e., the entire universe of creatures, was framed, i.e., fittingly corresponded, to the word, i.e., to God’s concept as artifacts correspond to their art: ‘And he poured her out,’ i.e., His wisdom, ‘upon all his works’ (Sir. 1:10).

565. – He continues, that from invisible things visible things might be made. But because the common notion among the ancients was that the soul was produced from nothing (2 Physics), when they saw a new work, they said that it was made from invisible things. Hence, they either supposed that everything was in everything else, as Empedocles and Anaxagoras, of whom we shall say nothing at present; or thought that forms were in hiding, as Anaxagoras. Still others supposed that they were formed from ideas, as Plato; and others from a mind, as Avicenna. Hence, according to all these philosophers, visible things were made from invisible ideal reasons. But we say, according to the aforesaid manner, that visible things were produced from invisible ideal reasons in the Word of God, by Whom all things were made. These reasons, even thought they are the same reality, differ in aspect by diverse relations connoted in respect to the creature. Hence, man was created by one reason, and a horse by another reason, as Augustine says in the Book of 83 Questions. Thus, therefore, the world was framed by the word of God, that from invisible ideal reasons in the World of God, visible things, i.e., every creature, might be made.

566. – But all those words are expressly against the Manicheans, who say that what a man believes is not important, but what he does. But the Apostle sets faith down as the principle of every work; hence he says that it is the substance, i.e., the foundation. Therefore, without faith, works are performed in vain. Furthermore, they say that one should believe only those things for which a reason is had. Against this he says, of things that appear not. Again, they condemn the Old Testament, saying that it was formed by an evil principle, namely, the devil. Against this he says that in this faith the ancients obtained a testimony.

567. – Then (v. 4) he shows what the ancient fathers did: first, he shows this of the fathers who lived before the deluge; secondly, of those who lived before the Law (v. 8); thirdly, of those who lived under the Law (v. 24). Before the deluge there were three especially pleasing to God, namely, Abel (Gen. 4:4), Enoch (Gen. 5:22) and Noah (Gen. 6:9). First, he mentions Abel’s faith; secondly, Enoch’s (v. 5); thirdly, Noah’s (v. 7).

568. – In regard to Abel he shows what he did by faith and what he obtained. By faith Abel offered to God a sacrifice; hence, as confession witnesses to the faith within, so from his external sacrifice, his faith is commended by reason of his external worship in sacrifice. His chosen faith is shown by his offering a chosen sacrifice, for it was from the firstlings of his flock, and of their fat. For the best sacrifice was a sign of his chosen and approved faith: ‘Cursed is the deceitful man that has in his flock a male, and making a vow, offers in sacrifice what is feeble to the Lord’ (Mal. 1:14). No mention is made of the excellence of Cain’s sacrifice, but only that he offered it from the fruits of the earth. He says that Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain, i.e., he offered a better sacrifice than Cain to God, because it was offered for the honor of God. Otherwise, it would not have been pleasing to God. A Gloss says: By an exceeding faith, but this is not found in the Greek. Unless one were to say, by an exceeding faith, i.e., by a better and more excellent one than Cain’s, because, as has been said, the external sacrifice was a sign of the faith within.

569. – But two things follow upon faith: one on this earth, namely, a witness to justice; hence, he says, through which he received approval as righteous, namely, by faith: ‘From the blood of Abel, the just’ (Mt. 23:35). Yet it is not because of Christ’s testimony that he says, Abel obtained approval as righteous, because he intends to introduce the authority of the Old Testament only, but because of what is said in Genesis (4:4): ‘God had respect to Abel, and to his offering,’ because God has respect especially to the just: ‘The eyes of the Lord are upon the just’ (Ps. 33:16). And this by God bearing witness by accepting his gifts, which perhaps happened because his gifts were kindled by a heavenly fire. And this was God’s respect. Yet He had respect first to the one offering them than to his offering, because an offering which is not sacramental is accepted because of the goodness of the one offering; for the wickedness of the minister does not alter the sacramental goodness. But in regard to the one offering, goodness is required, if the sacrifice is to benefit him. The other he obtained after death; hence, he says, he died, but through his faith he is still speaking, for as a Gloss says: His faith is still commended after death, because it gives us material for speaking of him. Thus, we give examples of faith and patience, when we exhort others to penance. But this is not the Apostle’s aim, because all the things he uses here he takes from the Scriptures. Hence, what is said in Genesis (4:10) is understood of him: ‘The voice of your brother’s blood cries to me from the earth;’ ‘Which speaks better than that of Abel’ (Heb. 12:24). For he takes by it, i.e., by the merit of faith, that being dead, i.e., the blood of the dead Abel, cries to God and speaks to God.

570. – Then when he says, by faith Enoch was taken up, he commends Enoch: first, he states his intent; secondly, he proves it (v. 5b).

571. – The Apostle makes no mention of his works, because Scripture says little about him, but merely shows what God did to him, because by faith, i.e., by the merit of faith, he was taken up from the present life, and kept from death in another; hence, he says, that he should not see death: ‘He was seen no more, because God took him’ (Gen. 5:24). And it is true that he was not dead yet, but he will die some time, because the sentence, which the Lord imposed on our first parents for their sin: ‘In what day soever you shall eat of it, you shall die the death’ (Gen. 2:17), will continue on all who are born of Adam in any way, as even in the case of Christ: ‘Who is the man that shall live and not see death?’ (Ps. 88:49). But the death of two persons, namely, Enoch and Elijah, has been deferred, the reason being that the doctrine of the Old Testament is ordained to the promises of the New Testament, in which the hope of eternal life is promised to us: ‘Do penance, for the kingdom of God is at hand (Mt. 4:17). Therefore, after the sentence of death was pronounced, the Lord willed to lead men to a hope for life. He did this in the case of the fathers of all the states, namely, of nature, of the Law, and of grace. Hence, in the first state He offered the hope of evading death in the case of Enoch; in the Law in Elijah; in the time of grace in Christ, by Whom the effect of this promise is given to us. Therefore, the others will die. But Christ, rising from the dead, dies now no more. But the first two will be put to death by Antichrist. Thus, therefore, he was taken up that he should not see death, and not only that he should not feel death; and this in that generation.

572. – Then (v. 5b) he proves that he obtained this by the merit of faith: first, he proves that he was taken up; secondly, that he obtained this by the merit of faith (v. 5c).

573. – He proves the first on the authority of Genesis (5:24), which is presented in other words, because there it says that he was seen no more, because God took him, but here, he was not found, because God had taken him. But the sense is the same: ‘He pleased God and was beloved, and living among sinners he was taken up’ (Wis. 4:10). For just as it was fitting that man be expelled from paradise because of sin, so also that the just be brought into it. For by Seth he was the seventh and best descendant of Adam, as Lamech by Cain was the seventh and worst descendant of Adam, being the first who, contrary to nature, introduced bigamy.

574. – Then (v. 5b) he proves that he was taken up on account of the merit of faith, because the Scripture says of him before his being taken up that ‘he walked with God’ (Gen. 5:24), which is to consent to God and please Him. But God took him for this reason; for without faith it is impossible to walk with God and please Him, therefore, etc. He gives the entire reason as to the premises: and first the major, because before he was taken up he was attested as having pleased God. Therefore, God translated him. ‘Enoch pleased God and was translated into paradise, that he may give repentance to the nations’ (Sir. 44:16). But the fact that he pleased God is shown by the Scripture, which says that he walked with God: ‘He walked with me in peace and in equity’ (Mal. 2:6); ‘The man that walked in the perfect way, he served me’ (Ps. 100:6).

575. – He states the minor, saying: And without faith it is impossible to please God: ‘Faith is agreeable to him’ (Sir. 1:34); ‘For we account a man to be justified by faith’ (Rom. 3:28). He proves the minor when he says, Whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists. But no one can please God without coming to him: ‘Draw near to God and he will draw near to you’ (Jas. 4:8); ‘Draw nigh to him and be enlightened’ (Ps. 33:5). But no one draws near to God except by faith, because faith is a light of the intellect. Therefore, no one can please God except by faith. But anyone drawing near by faith must believe the Lord. For just as we see that in every natural motion the moveable object must tend to two things in its motion that the motion not be in vain, namely, to a definite terminus and a certain cause why it is moved (but the terminus is reached before the effect of the motion is reached), so in the movement by which one draws near to God, the terminus of motion is God Himself. Hence, he says, Whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists. He says this because of His eternity: ‘He that is, sent me’ (Ex. 3:14). Secondly, that he know that God exercises providence over things. For otherwise no one would go to Him, if he had not hope of a reward from Him; hence, he says, and rewards those who seek him: ‘Behold the Lord God shall come…. And his reward is with him’ (Is. 40:10). But a reward is what a man seeks for his labor: ‘Call the workers and give them their hire’ (Mt. 20:8). This reward is no less than God Himself, because a man should seek nothing outside of Him: ‘I am your protector and your reward exceeding great’ (Gen. 15:1). For God gives nothing but Himself: ‘The Lord is my portion, said my soul’ (Lam 3:24). He says, therefore, and rewards those who seek him, which is no different from Ps. 104 (v. 4): ‘Seek the Lord and be strengthened: seek his face forevermore.’

576. – But are these two sufficient for salvation? I answer that after the sin of our first parents, no one can be saved from the debt of original sin except by faith in the Mediator: but that faith varies as far as the mode of believe is concerned, for different times and states. But we to whom such a great benefit has been shown must believe more explicitly than those who existed before the time of Christ. At that time some believed more explicitly, as the greater fathers and some to whom a special revelation was made. Furthermore, those under the Law believed more explicitly than those before the Law, because they were given certain sacraments by which Christ was represented as by a figure. But for the Gentiles who were saved it was enough if they believed that God is a rewarder; and this reward is received through Christ alone. Hence, they believed implicitly in a mediator.

577. – But an objection is raised against the statement that it is necessary to believe that God exists, because it was stated above that something believed is not seen or known. But God’s existence is demonstrated. I answer that knowledge about God can be had in a number of ways: in one way through Christ, inasmuch as God is the Father of an only begotten and consubstantial Son, and other things which Christ specifically taught about God the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit regarding the unity of essence and trinity of persons. All this was believed, but in the Old Testament it was believed only by the greater fathers. In another way, that God alone is to be worshipped; this is the way the Jews believed. In a third way, that there is one God: and this was known even by the philosophers and does not fall under faith.

578. – Then (v. 7) he shows that Noah did by faith and what he obtained as a result: and was instituted heir of the justice which is by faith. He mentions five things that he did: first, that he believed God’s words about the judgment to come, but which was not yet seen. Hence, he says, By faith, Noah, being warned by God concerning events as yet unseen, believed. Secondly, he was moved to fear by faith, because faith is the beginning of fear: ‘The fear of God is the beginning of his love; and the beginning of faith is to be fast joined unto it’ (Sir. 25:16). Hence, he says, moved by fear, namely, of the promised deluge, which, nevertheless, was not seen. Therefore, faith is concerned with invisible things. Thirdly, he fulfilled God’s command by building the ark; hence, he says, he constructed an ark, i.e., he did what was suitable according to God’s arrangement. Fourthly, he hoped for salvation from God, hence he says, for the saving of his household, i.e., his family, because they alone were saved: ‘herein a few, that is eight souls, were saved by water’ (1 Pt 3:20). Fifthly, since he did all the foregoing because of faith, he condemned the world, i.e., showed that worldly people deserve condemnation. But the revelation he received about constructing the ark was an answer to his desire and of the righteousness which is by faith.

579. – Then when he says, and was instituted heir of the justice which is by faith, he shows what he obtained by faith. For just as after someone’s death another person succeeds in his inheritance, so too, because justice had not entirely died in the world, because the world still continued, but in the deluge almost the entire world perished, therefore, Noah was made heir, as it were, because of his faith. Or of the righteousness which is obtained by faith. Or, just as his fathers were justified by faith, so he was made the heir of justice by faith, namely, an imitator of his fathers’ justice by faith.

 

11-3

            Heb. 11:8-12

8 By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place which he was to receive as an inheritance; and he went out, not knowing where he was to go. 9 By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a foreign land, living in tents with Isaac and Jacob, heirs with him of the same promise. 10 For he looked forward to the city which has foundations, whose builder and maker is God. 11 By faith Sarah herself received power to conceive, even when she was past the age, since she considered him faithful who had promised. 12 Therefore from one man, and him as good as dead, were born descendants as many as the stars of heaven and as the innumerable grains of sand by the seashore.

580. – Having given an example of faith from the fathers who existed before the deluge, i.e., those who were the fathers of both the Gentiles and the Jews; the Apostle now treats specifically of the fathers who existed after the deluge, namely, the fathers of the Jews. First of all, he gives the example of the faith of Abraham, who was the father of believers; hence, he was the first to receive the seal of faith before the Law. First, he shows what Abraham did; secondly, what Isaac did (v. 20); thirdly, what Jacob did (v. 21); fourthly, what Joseph did (v. 22). The first is divided into two parts: in the first he shows what he did in regard to external and human knowledge; secondly, what he did in regard to God (v. 17). In regard to the first he does three things: first, he shows what he did in regard to his dwelling place; secondly, what he did in regard to generation (v. 11); thirdly, what he did in regard to his own conversion (v. 13). In regard to the dwelling place he does two things: first, what he did in regard to his first change of location; secondly, in regard to his other change (v. 9).

581. – In order to show how great is the authority of his example of Abraham, he mentions the renown of his name, saying, he that is called Abraham, by God: ‘You shall be called Abraham’ (Gen. 17:5). He is also called by men: ‘Abraham was the great father of a multitude of nations’ (Sir. 44:20). Therefore, such a one called by God and preached by men is a worthy example. Secondly, he gives the example, saying, by faith Abraham obeyed. For by faith we are enabled to believe God concerning invisible things: ‘For obedience to the faith’ (Rom. 1:5); When he was called to go out to a place which he was to receive as an inheritance: ‘Go forth out of your country and from your kindred, and out of your father’s house, into the land which I shall show you’ (Gen. 12:1). But the Lord was to give him that land for an inheritance: ‘All the land which you see, I will give to you’ (Gen.13:15).

582. – But did he not leave his own land along with his father, Thares? Therefore, he did not leave because of God’s command, but his father’s. I answer that he left with his father with the intention of returning again, but in response to the Lord’s command he went into Mesopotamia to Syria where he intended to remain after his father’s death. But in response to the Lord’s command he went into the land of Canaan. But was this so wonderful that he had to have faith about it and believe God? Yes, because he went out, not knowing where he was to go. But what is unknown is invisible. By Abraham’s obedience we are instructed to go out from all carnal affection, if we would obtain our inheritance: ‘Forget your people and your father’s house’ (Ps. 44:11); ‘The eye has not seen, O God, besides you, what things you have prepared for them that wait for you’ (Is. 64:4). Hence, that inheritance is unknown to us.

583. – Then (v. 9) he shows what he did by faith in regard to his dwelling place: first, what he did; secondly, the reason why (v. 10).

584. – For we sometimes notice a person leaving his native land and going elsewhere to make a lasting home. Not so Abraham, for he lived as a stranger in the land of Canaan and dwelt there as a stranger. This is obvious from the fact that he did not build a house there, but lived in huts and tents, which are transportable dwellings; hence, mention is always made of tents, when he speaks of Abraham. Therefore, he lived there as a stranger because of the Lord’s command: ‘And he gave him no inheritance in it; no, not the pace of a foot’ (Ac. 7:5); ‘He was a sojourner in the land of the Philistines many days’ (Gen. 21:34). This is true as to what the Lord was to give him gratis, but not as to what he bought. Hence, he says, by faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as is clear from Genesis (12 to 21), as in a foreign land; which is obvious from his living in tents. That he had no intention of returning to his native land, even if he had lived longer, is shown by the fact that he lived with Isaac and Jacob not at the same time, but successively. These were the children of the promise, because the promise was made to them (Gen. 17 and 28). He says, heirs with him of the same promise, in which we are given to understand that we should live in the world as foreigners and strangers: ‘And they that use this world, as though they used it not’ (1 Cor. 7:31); ‘For we have not here a lasting city, but we seek one that is above’ (Heb. 13:14).

585. – Then when he says, he looked forward to the city which has foundations, he shows why he lingered there as a stranger, namely, because he did not consider himself as having anything on earth, but was seeking a heavenly city as his inheritance: ‘Our feet were standing on your courts, O Jerusalem. Jerusalem, which is built as a city’ (Ps. 121:2); ‘your eyes which see Jerusalem, a rich habitation, a tabernacle that cannot be removed’ (Is. 33:20). It is called a city, first of all, because of the unity of the citizens, which unity is true peace: ‘Praise the Lord, O Jerusalem, praise your God, O Sion’ (Ps. 147:12) and in v. 14: ‘Who puts peace in your borders.’ Your people shall sit in the beauty of peace, and in the tabernacle of confidence, and in wealthy rest’ (Is. 23:18); That they may be one, as we also are one’ (Jn. 17:22). Secondly, it is ordered, because it exists for justice and not for doing evil. But perpetual justice is there: ‘And the name of the city from that day is, the Lord is here’ (Ez. 48:35). Thirdly, it was sufficient unto itself in all things that are necessary, for whatever is necessary will be there most perfectly, because it is a state made perfect by the assemblage of all good things: ‘Jerusalem, which is built as a city, which is compact together’ (Ps. 121:3).

586. – This city has foundations, in which stability is signified: ‘A tabernacle that cannot be removed’ (Is. 33:20). But the foundations are the first part of a building; hence, the angels are the foundations of a city: ‘The foundations therefore are in the holy mountains’ (Ps. 86:20); for men will be raised to the orders of angels.

587. – The founder of this city is God, not the wisdom of human art: ‘We know, if our earthly house of this habitation be dissolved, that we have a building of God, a house not made with hands, eternal in heaven’ (2 Cor. 5:1). Now two things are required for the erection of a city: the first is the authority of the prince, by means of whom it is made firm and who is called its founder, and from whom it takes its name, as Rome from Romulus. And so God is called the founder of that city: ‘In the city of our God: God has founded it forever’ (Ps. 47:9). The second is the way it is put together, which commends the wisdom of the artisan. And so God is called its artisan, because it was put together according to the disposition and wisdom of God: ‘Great is the Lord and exceedingly to be praised in the city of God, in his holy mountain’ (Ps. 47:2). For the proper arrangement of a work commends the workman. But divine wisdom will never be so resplendent as there; and, therefore, it is exceedingly to be praised.

588. – Then when he says, by faith Sarah herself received power to conceive, he shows what his wife obtained by faith. In regard to this he does two things: first, he shows what she obtained; secondly, what she obtained in her children (v. 12).

589. – But there were two defects in his wife that made it seem almost impossible for her to be able to conceive: one was that she was sterile: ‘And Sarah was barren’ (Gen. 11:30). The other was that due to her age she was not naturally suited to bear children: ‘It had ceased to be with Sarah after the manner of women’ (Gen. 18:11). But the Apostle touches on these two defects: first, when he says, being barren; secondly, when he says, even when she was past the age. Yet in spite of all this, she received the power to conceive by faith, namely, her own or Abraham’s, because even though it was impossible according to nature that a woman of ninety conceive of a man of ninety, nevertheless, both believed God, for Whom nothing is difficult. Hence, he says, since she considered him faithful who had promised.

590. – But on the contrary, it seems that Abraham did not believe, because in Genesis (17:17) he asked: ‘Shall a son, think you, be born to him that is a hundred years old? And shall Sarah, that is ninety years old, bring forth?’ Again, in regard to Sarah it is stated in Genesis (18:12): ‘She laughed secretly, saying: ‘After I am old, and my lord is an old man, shall I give myself to pleasure?’ I answer that in regard to Abraham, his laughing was not due to doubt, but to wonder: ‘He staggered not by distrust; but was strengthened in faith, giving glory to God. Most fully knowing that whatsoever he has promised, he is able also to perform’ (Rom. 4:20). Hence, his laughter is not reproved by God, Who knows the hearts of all. But Sarah at first doubted in the first promise, but when the angel referred to the power of God, when he said: ‘Is there anything hard to God?’ (Gen. 18:14), she then believed; and this was, as it were, a second promise. Therefore, he says that he re-promised, because when He promised the first time, she did not believe, but only when He re-promised.

591. – But it should be noted that all the miraculous conceptions which took place in the Old Testament were as a figure of that greatest of miracles which occurred in the incarnation. For it was necessary that His birth from the Virgin be prefigured by certain things, to prepare souls to believe. But it could not be prefigured by something equal, because a figure necessarily falls short of what is prefigured. Therefore, the Scripture shows the Virgin birth by the birth from sterile women, namely, Sarah, Anna, and Elizabeth. But there is a difference: because Sarah received the power to conceive from God miraculously, but from human seed; but in the Blessed Virgin He even prepared that most pure matter from her blood, and along with that, the power of the Holy Spirit was there in place of seed. For the Word was made flesh not from human seed but by a mystical spiration.

592. – Then when he says, for which cause there sprung even from one man, he shows what she obtained in her children by God’s power, namely, a multiplying of seed in the merit of faith, from one, namely, Abraham, they were sprung: ‘I called him alone, and blessed him, and multiplied him’ (Is. 51:2). Secondly, his condition should be considered, because he was as good as dead; for he was already an old man, as was stated above. But on the other hand, because Sarah was dead, he begot sons by another wife, as it is stated in Genesis (25:2). Therefore, it is incorrect to describe him as good as dead. I answer that an old man can well produce from a young woman, but not from an old. Consequently, his power to produce was dead in regard to Sarah, but not in regard to others. Or, one might say that from one refers to Sarah’s womb already as good as dead: ‘Nor the dead womb of Sarah’ (Rom. 4:19); ‘Look upon Abraham, your father and to Sarah that bore you’ (Is. 51:2). Thirdly, the difference between those who come forth from Abraham should be considered. For, as it is stated in Romans (9:6): ‘Just as some who are of the seed of Abraham are not Israelites, so not all who are of the seed of Abraham are sons; but those who are children of the promise are accounted for the seed.’ Therefore, his offspring are divided into two branches, the good and the wicked. The good are signified by the stars, of whom he says that they have sprung as the stars of heaven in number: ‘The stars have given light in their watches, and rejoiced’ (Bar. 3:34). But the wicked are signified by the sands of the seashore, because the wicked Jews of Abraham’s seed are conformed to the Gentiles. But the sand is everywhere buffeted by the waves of the sea, and the wicked by the winds of the world: ‘The wicked are like the raging sea’ (Is. 57:20). But the Jews were not altogether sand, but as the sand, because they shared their wickedness with the Gentiles: ‘I have set the sand a bound for the sea’ (Jer. 5:22). Again, sand is sterile and fruitless; so, too, the wicked are sterile of all work of good fruit. Hence, he says, they sprung as the innumerable grains of sand by the seashore. The figure is hyperbole. Or it is described as innumerable, not because it cannot be counted, but because it cannot be counted easily: ‘I will multiply your seed as the stars of heaven, and as the sand that is by the sea shore’ (Gen. 22:17).

 

11-4

            Heb. 11:13-19

13 These all died in faith, not having received what was promised, but having seen it and greeted it from afar, and having acknowledged that they were strangers and exiles on the earth. 14 For people who speak thus make it clear that they are seeking a homeland. 15 If they had been thinking of that land from which they had gone out, they would have had opportunity to return. 16 But as it is, they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared for them a city. 17 By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was ready to offer up his only son, 18 of whom it was said, “Through Isaac shall your descendants be named.” 19 He considered that God was able to raise men even from the dead; hence, figuratively speaking, he did receive him back.

593. – Having commended Abraham’s faith in regard to his dwelling place and offspring, The Apostle now commends him on his way of life until death. In regard to this he does three things: first, he shows what he did by faith; secondly, he mentions one thing that pertains to faith (v. 14); thirdly, he shows what he received by faith (v. 16).

594. – He commends the faith of Abraham and of his children on its perseverance, because they preserved in the faith until death: ‘He that shall persevere until the end, he shall be saved’ (Mt. 24:13). Therefore, he says, These all died in faith, except Enoch. Or, these all, namely, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. And this is better, because the promise was made only to them. Furthermore, he commends them on the long delay of the promise; hence, he says, not having received what was promised.

595. – But on the other hand, it seems that they received the promise: ‘Abraham was one and he merited the land’ (Ez. 33:24). I answer that he possessed, i.e., was the first to receive the promise of possessing; yet he did not actually possess, as is evident from Acts (7:5). He continues, having seen it and greeted it from afar by faith’. As if to say: Looking on with the vision of faith. Perhaps the response in the first Sunday of Advent is taken from this passage: ‘Behold from afar off, behold I see the power of God coming, and a cloud covering the whole earth;’ ‘Behold the name of the Lord comes from afar’ (Is. 30:27). And saluting it, i.e., venerating. He speaks, according to Chrysostom, in the manner of sailors, who when they first see the port, break out in praise and salute the city they have reached. So the holy fathers, seeing by faith the Christ to come and the glory they were to obtain through Him, saluted, i.e., venerated Him: ‘Blessed is he that comes in the name of the Lord. He is God and has shone upon us’ (Ps. 117:26); ‘Abraham, your father, rejoiced that he might see my day: he saw it and was glad’ (Jn. 8:56).

596. – He also commends their faith for its sincere confession, because, as it says in Romans (10:10): ‘With the heart we believe until justice; but with the mouth, confession is made unto salvation.’ Hence, he says, having acknowledged that they were strangers and exiles on the earth: for those three called themselves strangers and pilgrims, for in Genesis (23:4) Abraham says: ‘I am a stranger and a sojourner among you.’ Furthermore, the Lord says to Isaac: ‘Stay in the land that I shall tell you, and sojourn in it’ (Gen. 26:2), and Jacob himself says: ‘The days of my pilgrimage’ (Gen. 47:9). Now a pilgrim is one who is en route to some place. But a sojourner is one who lives in a foreign land with no intention of going anywhere else. But they not only confessed themselves sojourners, but pilgrims as well. So, too, a holy person does not make his home in the world, but is always busy and tending toward heaven: ‘I am a stranger with you, and a sojourner as all my fathers were’ (Ps. 38:13).

597. – Then (v. 14) he shows that this confession pertains to hope. For one is a guest and a stranger, unless he is outside his country and going to it. Therefore, since they confess themselves guests and strangers, they signify that they are heading toward their native land, i.e., the heavenly Jerusalem: ‘But that Jerusalem which is above is free’ (Gal. 4:26). And this is what he says, for people who speak thus make it clear that they are seeking a homeland.

598. – But because someone might say that it is true that they were pilgrims in the land of the Philistines and Canaanites, among whom they dwelt, but they intended to return to the land they had left; he rejected this when he says, If they had been thinking of that land from which they had gone out, they would have had time to return, because it was nearby. But as it is, they desire a better country, i.e., heavenly; hence in Genesis (24:6) ‘Abraham said to his servant: Beware you never bring back my sons again thither;’ ‘I have chosen to be an abject in the house of my God, rather than to dwell in the tabernacles of sinners’ (Ps. 83:11); ‘One thing I have asked of the Lord, this will I seek after: that I may dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of my life’ (Ps. 26:4). Therefore, they were seeking a country, but not their father’s house, which they had left. In this is signified that those who go out from the world’s vanity, should not return to it mentally: ‘Forget your people and your father’s house’ (Ps. 44:11); ‘No man putting his hand to the plow and looking back is fit for the kingdom of God’ (Lk. 9:62); ‘forgetting the things that are behind, and stretching forth myself to those that are before’ (Phil 3:13). It is also clear that these confessions of theirs by word and deed pertain to faith, because they most firmly believed until death what was promised but never shown to them. Therefore, in faith, i.e., having their faith next to them as an inseparable companion, they died: ‘Be faithful until death’ (Rev. 2:10).

599. – Then (v. 16b) he shows what they merit to receive by their faith. But this was the highest honor, when someone gets a name derived from a solemn office or from the service of a great and excellent lord or prince, as the Pope’s notary, or the king’s chancellor. But it is a greater honor, when that great lord wishes to be named after those who serve him. So it is with these three, namely, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, whose Lord, the great King over all other gods, specifically calls Himself their God; hence, (Ex. 3:6): ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob;’ hence, he says, ‘God is not ashamed to be called their God’.

600. – Three reasons can be given for this: first, because God is known by faith. But they are recorded to have first separated themselves for unbelievers by a special cult; hence, too, Abraham was the first to receive the seal of faith to become the father of many nations (Rom. 4:17). Therefore, they are proposed to us as an example, as the ones by whom God was first known, and by them God was named as an object of faith. Therefore, He willed to be named by them.

601. – Secondly, according to Augustine in a Gloss, because a mystery lies hidden in them. For in them we find a likeness to the generation by which god regenerated spiritual sons. But we observe in them a fourfold way of generating. The first way is of free children by free women, as Abraham by Sarah begot Isaac, who begot Jacob by Rebecca, and Jacob the eight patriarchs by Leah and Rachel. The second way was of free children through bondwomen, as Jacob begot Dan and Naphtali by Bilhah and Zilpah. The third way was to servants by free women, as Isaac begot Esau by Rebecca; of him it was said, ‘The elder shall serve the younger’ (Gen. 25:23). The fourth was of servants by bondwomen, as Abraham begot Ishmael by Hagar. In this the diverse ways in which the Lord begets spiritual children is designated, because sometimes the good by the good, as Timothy by Paul; sometimes the good by the wicked, and this is the generation of free men by bondwomen; sometimes the wicked by the good, as Simon Magus by Philip, and this is the generation of servants by free women. But the generation of the wicked by the wicked is accounted in the seed; hence ‘Cast out the bondwoman and her son’ (Gal. 4:30).

602. – The third reason, which seems to be more in keeping with the Apostle’s intention, is that it is customary for a king to be called by the chief city, or from the entire country, as King of Jerusalem, King of the Romans, King of France. Therefore, the Lord is properly called the King and God of those who specifically look at that city, the heavenly Jerusalem, whose architect and founder is God. And because they showed by word and deed that they belong to that city, He is called their God; hence he says, for he, the founder of that city, has prepared for them a city.

603. – Then (v. 17) another famous example of Abraham’s faith is given, inasmuch as it regards God, namely, that supreme sacrifice of his when at the Lord’s command he willed to immolate his only begotten son (Gen. 22:1). In regard to this he does three things: first, what he did; secondly, that this pertains to faith (v. 17b); thirdly, what he received for this (v. 19b).

604. – He says, therefore: Abraham, when he was tested, was ready to offer Isaac by faith, as is clear from Genesis (22). But there are two questions here: first of all, to kill the innocent is against the law of nature and is, consequently, a sin, Therefore, in willing to offer him he sinned. I answer that a person who kills at the command of a superior lawfully commanding, lawfully obeys and can lawfully carry out his duty. But God has power over life and death: ‘The Lord kills and makes alive’ (1 Sam 2:6). But God does no injury, when He takes the life even of the innocent. Hence, by God’s decree many wicked and many innocent people die every day. Therefore, it is lawful to carry out God’s commands. There is question also about the statement, when he was tested. For God tests no one, since to test implies ignorance. I answer that the devil tests in order to deceive: ‘Lest perhaps he that tempts should have tempted you’ (1 Th. 3:5). This is clear in the temptation of Christ (Matt. 4). But a man tests in order to learn. Thus, in 1 Kg. (10:1) it is recorded that the queen of Sheba went to Solomon to try him with questions. But God does not test in that way, for He knows all things; but He tests in order that the man himself learn how strong or how weak he is: ‘To afflict you and prove you, and that the things that were in your heart might be made known’ (Dt. 8:2); and 2 Chr (32:31) tells of Hezekiah being tested that all things might be made known that were in his heart. Furthermore, in order that others know the one tested and take him as an example, as Abraham and Job (Sir. 44:21).

605. – Then when he says, was ready to offer up his only son, he shows quite subtly that that obedience pertains to faith. For, as has been stated above, Abraham in his old age believed God promising that in Isaac he would be blessed in his seed. He also believed that God could raise the dead. Therefore, when he was commanded to kill him, there was no further hope for Sarah, who was now very old, to have a child, since Isaac was already a youth. Therefore, since he believed that God’s commands must be obeyed, nothing else remained but to believe that He would revive Isaac, by whom his seed would be called. Hence, he says, his only son, namely, of Sarah, in whom, i.e., in the only son, God was to fulfill His promise, as Genesis (18:19) indicates. Or, the only son, namely, among the free children: ‘Take your only begotten son, Isaac’ (Gen. 22:2). He who had received the promises, of whom it was said, i.e., by reason of whom; Through Isaac shall your descendants be called, considered that God was able to raise men even from the dead. This, therefore, was the greatest proof of his faith, because the article of the resurrection is one of the most important.

606. – Then (v. 19b) he shows what he merited by faith; because, since nothing remained but to immolate him, an angel called him, and, in place of his son, he immolated a ram sticking fast by the horns. But this was a parable, i.e., a figure of Christ to come. For the ram sticking fast by the horns among the briars is the humanity which suffered, fixed to the cross. And so it is clear that the figure was not at all equal to the one prefigured. Therefore, he received him back, i.e., Isaac, for a parable, i.e., for a figure of Christ to be crucified and immolated.

 

11-5

            Heb. 11:20-26

20 By faith Isaac invoked future blessings on Jacob and Esau. 21 By faith Jacob, when dying, blessed each of the sons of Joseph, bowing in worship over the head of his staff. 22 By faith Joseph, at the end of his life, made mention of the exodus of the Israelites and gave directions concerning his burial. 23 By faith Moses, when he was born, was hid for three months by his parents, because they saw that the child was beautiful; and they were not afraid of the king’s edict. 24 By faith Moses, when he was grown up, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh’s daughter, 25 choosing rather to share ill-treatment with the people of God than to enjoy the fleeting pleasures of sin. 26 He considered abuse suffered for the Christ greater wealth than the treasures of Egypt, for he looked to the reward.

607. – Above, the Apostle gave an example of Abraham’s faith; here he gives the example of the faith of Isaac, Jacob and Joseph: and first of Isaac’s faith. He says, therefore, that by faith of things to come, i.e., of things that extended into the future, Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau. Or, he blessed them for things to come; or with a blessing which extended to the future. For his words had efficacy from God’s power alone. Through this blessing the younger ruled the older. But this did not pertain to their persons, but to the two peoples that sprang from them: ‘over Edom I will stretch out my shoe’ (Ps. 107:10). For the Edomites who sprang from Esau were subject to the people of Israel. This signified that the younger people, i.e., the Gentiles, by faith were to supplant the older people, namely, the Jews: ‘Many shall come from the east and the west and shall sit down with Abraham and Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven’ (Mt. 8:11). But that blessing which concerned the coming faith of the Gentiles was made by faith, because it looked to something in the future.

608. – Then when he says, by faith Jacob dying blessed each of the sons, he continues with Jacob’s faith and mentions what he did in blessing the two sons of Joseph, as in recorded in Genesis (48), where it is stated that when Joseph was informed of his father’s illness, he called his two sons whom Jacob blessed, crossing his hands. With this gesture he chose Ephraim over Manasseh as to dignity, because the royal dignity came from Ephraim, namely, Jeroboam. But this blessing was by faith, because it was revealed to him that it would be thus in the future. This blessing referred to the people who came out of them and not to their persons. Likewise, by faith he adored the top of his rod. This is recorded in Genesis (49), where it is stated that he made Joseph swear that he would bury him in the tomb of his fathers; and after the oath, he adored the top of the coffin, as our version has, or at the top of his rod, as the Septuagint says, or at the top, as is had in the Greek. And all this can stand, because he was old and carried a rod; or he took Joseph’s scepter until he vowed, and after returning it he adored not the rod nor Joseph, as some wickedly thought, but God Himself. This he did, leaning on the top of his rod. He did this, moved by the consideration of Christ’s power, which Joseph’s power prefigured. For being the prefect in Egypt, he carried a scepter as a sign of his power: ‘You that rule them with a rod of iron’ (Ps. 2:9). Or if he adored the top, the sense is the same, because he adored Christ signified by that rod, just as we adore the Crucified and the Cross by reason of Christ, Who suffered on it. Hence, properly speaking, we do not adore the Cross, but Christ crucified on it.

609. – Then (v. 22) he continues with the example of Joseph’s faith and mentions two things which are stated in the last chapter of Genesis, where he said to his brothers (v. 24):: ‘God will visit you,’ and commanded them to carry his bones out of that place. Hence, his faith bore on two things: first, because he believed that the promise He made would be fulfilled by the return of the children of Israel to the promised land; secondly, because he believed that Christ would be born and would rise from the dead in it, and many with him. Hence, he desired to have a part in that resurrection. He says, therefore, By faith Joseph, at the end of his life, made mention of the exodus of the Israelites; and this in regard to the first: and gave commandment regarding his bones, as to the second.

610. – But why did he not cause himself to be carried at once like his father. I answer that he was not able, because he did not then have the power he had at his father’s death. Secondly, because he knew that the children of Israel were to suffer many afflictions after his death. Therefore, to assure them of their deliverance and return to the promised land, he willed his body to remain with them as a consolation. Hence, Moses took it with him, just as each tribe took the body of its father, as Jerome says.

611. – Then when he says, By faith Moses, when he was born, was hid three months by his parents, he continues with the fathers that were under the Law. For this period begins with Moses: ‘Moses commanded a law in the precepts of justice’ (Sir. 24:33); ‘The law was given by Moses’ (Jn. 1:33). But that period is divided into three parts, namely, before the departure from Egypt, during the departure, and after the departure. Therefore, he does three things: first, he shows what happened before the departure; secondly, during the departure (v. 27); thirdly, what happened in the promised land (v. 32). In regard to the first he does two things: first, he shows what occurred at Moses’ birth; secondly, what he did (v. 24).

612. – Here he touches on the history given in Exodus (chap. 1), namely, that the Pharaoh commanded the male children to be killed, lest they be multiplied. Secondly, it is recorded that Moses’ parents, seeing that he was a comely child, hid him for three months: which the Apostle attributes to their faith. For they believed that someone would be born to free them from their slavery. Hence, from the child’s comeliness they believed that some power of God was in him. For they were rude country people, who sweated, working with clay and bricks: ‘A man is known by his look’ (Sir. 19:26). From this we see that although faith is about invisible things, yet through certain visible signs we can rest in it. ‘Confirming the word with signs that followed’ (Mk 16:20). But the fact that they did this from faith and not from carnal affection is evident, because they were not afraid of the king’s edict. Hence, they exposed themselves to danger, which they would not have done, unless they had believed that something great was in store for the child: ‘Do not fear them that kill the body’ (Mt. 10:28).

613. – But on the other hand, they later exposed him; therefore, it was not by faith that they preserved him. I answer that they exposed him, not to destroy him but to keep him from being stolen; hence, they placed him in a small basket, committing him to divine providence. For they believed that he would probably be killed, if he were found among them.

614. – Then (v. 24) he shows what Moses did by faith; first what he did; secondly, that what he did pertained to faith (v. 26b).

615. – Here he touches on the history recorded in Exodus (2), where it is stated that Pharaoh’s daughter had him nursed by his mother and adopted him as a son. But he denied himself to be her son, not in word, but in deed; because against Pharaoh’s will he killed an Egyptian who had harmed a Hebrew. Therefore, he says, by faith, when he was grown up, he denied himself to be the son of Pharaoh’s daughter. With what feelings he did this he shows when he says, rather choosing to be afflicted with the people of God, than to have the pleasure of sin for a time. This indicates his marvelous virtue. For there are two things which men desire most, namely, pleasure and delight in external things; and they flee most from their opposites, namely, pain and affliction, which are opposed to the first, and poverty and abjection, which are opposed to the second. But Moses chose those two, because he preferred pain and affliction to temporal sin’s pleasure, which is always associated with sin. He also chose poverty because of Christ: ‘It is better to be humbled with the meek, then to divide spoils with the proud’ (Pr. 16:19); ‘I have chosen to be an abject in the house of my God, rather than to dwell in the tabernacles of sinners’ (Ps. 83:11). As to the first he says, rather choosing to be afflicted with the people of God, whom Pharaoh afflicted, than to have the pleasure of sin for a time; which he would have had, if he had afflicted the children of Israel with the Egyptians. As to the second, namely, that he chose poverty, he says: esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches, i.e., for the faith of Christ, for which he endured a reproach from his brothers, as is stated in Exodus (2:14): ‘Will you kill me, as you did yesterday kill the Egyptian?’ This reproach was a figure that Christ would have to endure reproaches from the Jews: ‘My heart has expected reproach and misery’ (Ps. 68:21). But he esteemed those two things greater riches than the treasures of the Egyptians: ‘The riches of salvation, wisdom and knowledge’ (Is. 33:6).

616. – Then when he says, for he looked unto the reward, he shows that those actions of Moses pertained to faith in Christ. But it should be noted that some things are good and delightful to themselves, and other things sad and evil. But no one may prefer evil things for their own sake, but for an end, as a sick person chooses a bitter potion, and sad things to delightful things by reason of some greater good which he can obtain by them. And so the saints, by hope of the ultimate end of eternal happiness, chose affliction and poverty over riches and pleasures, because by them they would have been hindered from attaining the end they hoped: ‘Blessed are you when they shall revile you, and persecute you, and speak all that is evil against you,’ and he continues: ‘Be glad and rejoice, for your reward is very great in heaven’ (Mt. 5:11); I am your protector and your reward exceedingly great’ (Gen. 15:1). Therefore, he says that he did this because he looked with the eyes of faith to the reward, which he hoped therefrom. Hence, ‘faith is the substance of things to be hoped for; the evidence of things that appear not’, as was stated above.

 

11-6

            Heb. 11:27-31

27 By faith he left Egypt, not being afraid of the anger of the king; for he endured as seeing him who is invisible. 28 By faith he kept the Passover and sprinkled the blood, so that the Destroyer of the first-born might not touch them. 29 By faith the people crossed the Red Sea as if on dry land; but the Egyptians, when they attempted to do the same, were drowned. 30 By faith the walls of Jericho fell down after they had been encircled for seven days. 31 By faith Rahab the harlot did not perish with those who were disobedient, because she had given friendly welcome to the spies.

617. – After describing Moses’ faith in regard to what he did in Egypt, the Apostle now shows what he did in regard to what he did during the departure from Egypt. In regard to this he does three things: first, he shows what he did during the departure from Egypt; secondly, the manner of their departure (v. 28); thirdly, what was done by faith with the unbelieving people (v. 31).

618. – He says, therefore, that by faith Moses left Egypt. But, as recorded in Exodus (chap. 2), he first left Egypt after killing an Egyptian; but he left it a second time, when he led all the sons of Israel out of Egypt. But a Gloss explains about the second departure, because he continues, not fearing the anger, i.e., the indignation, of the king. For at his first departure it is recorded in Exodus (chap. 2) that he feared him: ‘He that is good for nothing shall feel the king’s anger’ (Pr. 14:35). But at the second he did not fear him: ‘The just, bold as a lion, shall be without dread’ (Pr. 28:1). But it can be referred to the first.

619. – But didn’t he fear then? I answer that there are two things to be considered in fear: one is that it can be blameworthy, namely, when through fear a person does what should not be done, or neglects to do what should be done. This is not the way Moses feared, because fear did not cause him to neglect helping his brothers. The other can be praiseworthy, namely, when keeping the faith a person flees from danger because of a present fear: ‘When they shall persecute you in one city, flee to another’ (Mt. 10:23). For if a person, while preserving his honor could avoid danger and does not, he would be foolish and tempting God which is diabolical. This is the way Jesus hid from those who would stone Him, and refused the devil’s suggestion to cast Himself down. So, too, Moses, trusting in God’s help, fled for a time, because he feared the king. He proves that he did this by faith, because faith is about invisible things. And he endured, i.e., awaited, the invisible God and his Help as seeing him: Let you heart take courage and wait for the Lord’ (Ps. 26:14). For Moses awaited God’s help at both departures; hence, at the first one he said: ‘The God of my father is my helper’ (Ex. 2:22); and at the second: ‘The Lord will fight for you, and you shall hold your peace’ (Ex. 14:14).

620. – Then (v. 28) he shows what he did as to the way he departed: first, he states what was done in preparing for the departure; secondly, as to the departure itself (v. 29); thirdly, as to shat was done by faith in entering the promised land (v. 30).

621. – In regard to the first, he alludes to the history recorded in Exodus (12), where the Lord commanded them before the departure of the children of Israel, namely, that same night, to immolate a lamb and put its blood on both the side posts and on the upper door posts of the houses: then they were to eat the flesh roasted at the fire, and unleavened bread with wild lettuce, and to do many other things that were to be observed. And this is called the Pasch, i.e., the eating of the lamb and the shedding of blood, these two things occurring at that passage which they were to accomplish the next day. It is called the Pasch from ‘paschin’ in Greek, and ‘passic’ in Latin, or from the word ‘phrase,’ which in Hebrew is the same as ‘passage.’ But this prefigured that Christ would pass out of this world by His passion: ‘That he would pass out of this world’ (Jn. 13:1). It also instructs us that by the merit of His death we have passed from earthly things to heavenly, and from hell to heaven: ‘Come over to me, all ye that desire me’ (Sir. 24:26). This, of course, is accomplished in virtue of Christ’s blood: ‘Having, therefore, a confidence in the entering into of the holies by the blood of Christ’ (supra 10:19). But two passings occurred during that Pasch: one, in which the Lord passed, striking the Egyptians; the other in which the people passed. So, too, with the blood of Christ, Who is the lamb without blemish, the posts of the faithful should be besmeared, namely, their intellect and affections. He says, by faith he celebrated the Pasch, i.e., the eating of the lamb, and the shedding of the blood to be smeared upon the posts of their house. Why did they do this? That he who destroyed the first born of the Egyptians might not touch them: ‘He killed all the firstborn in the land of Egypt’ (Ps. 77:51).

622. – But by whose ministry was this done? Was it done by good angels or the wicked? For it seems to have been the wicked angels: ‘Which he sent by evil angels’ (Ps. 77:49). I answer that it could have been both. Hence, it should be noted that the infliction of punishments is sometimes performed by good angels. For as Dionysius says in The Divine Names (ch. 4), to punish the evil is not evil, but to do evil is evil. For punishment is a work of justice, as is shown by the angel who struck the camp of the Assyrians, because he is believed to have been a good angel (Is. 57). Hence, such punishment is visited indifferently by the good and by the bad; but by the good in a manner different from the bad, because the good does not punish save by exercising divine justice upon the evil (and in Scripture such a work of the devil or of a good angel is attributed to God). But the evil angel, even though he obeys divine justice, does not do this from a love of justice; rather from the perversity of his will he afflicts the good and the bad, and preferably the good, if he is permitted, as in the case of Job. Therefore, the angel who said to Moses (Ex. 12:23): ‘The Lord will pass through, striking the Egyptians’ was a good angel, since he sometimes speaks in his own person. But sometimes evil spirits serve a good angel; hence, he used the services of their evil and perverse wills in the slaughter. Therefore, he says: ‘Indignation and wrath and trouble, which he sent by evil angels’ (Ps. 77:49). Therefore, the evil angel did not touch those who were sealed with blood, being restrained by terror and fear of God; but the good were deterred, wondering at God’s power.

623. – Then (v. 29) he shows what he did in the very passing: first, he shows this; secondly, he shows that his pertained to faith (v. 30b). He says, therefore, by faith they passed through the Red Sea, as by dry land. Two things were done there by faith: one was what the men did, namely, they committed themselves to cross over; and this was done only by faith. The other was on God’s part, namely, that the waters acted as a wall for them. But this was by faith, for the working of miracles is attributed to faith: ‘If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed, you shall say to this mountain, Remove from hence, thither, and it shall remove’ (Mt. 17:19). Then he shows that this pertains to faith, because the Egyptians attempting this, i.e., willing to try it, were swallowed up, because they did not have faith: ‘You stretch forth your hand, and the earth swallowed them’ (Ex. 15:12).

624. – Then when he says, By faith the walls of Jericho fell down, by the going round them seven days, he describes what happened when they entered the promised land. This is mentioned in Jos. (6), where it is stated that at God’s command the priests for seven days should go around the first city beyond the Jordan, namely, Jericho, with the ark of the covenant, and on the seventh day the walls fell down. Here was something on the part of men, namely, that at the Lord’s command they went round, believing that God’s command would be fulfilled, and something on God’s part, namely, the walls fell down by their going round.

625. – Morally, Jericho is interpreted moon or defect, and signifies this world. Its walls are the obstacles by which some are held fast in the world. By the trumpets, which the Levites and priests sounded, the voice of preachers is signified. By the going round for seven days is designated the course of the present time, which is completed in seven days. By this we are given to understand that all the obstacles of the world fall at the continuous sound of preaching: ‘The weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty to God unto pulling down of fortifications, destroying counsels and every height that exalts itself against the knowledge of God’ (2 Cor. 10:4).

626. – Then when he says, by faith Rahab the harlot perished not with the unbelievers, he shows what was done by faith by one of the unbelievers, namely, by Rahab, as recorded in Joshua (chaps, 2 & 6). For when Joshua had sent spies to explore Jericho, they escaped with the aid of that woman who is called a harlot, i.e., an idolater. Or she was literally a harlot, with whom they stayed, not to sin but to hide. For the houses of such persons are visible especially at night. But they had come at night. Furthermore, her house was adjacent to the wall. But harlots take everyone without exception; therefore, it was easier for them to hide with her. Therefore, she was freed by faith, hence, he says, by faith Rahab the harlot did not perish with those who were disobedient [unbelievers], because she had given friendly welcome to the spies. She did not perish with the unbelievers, who perished corporally, because the spies had sworn to free her and everyone of her father’s house; which they did. But why had they turned to her? Possibly because she would be less guilty, receiving all indiscriminately. Furthermore, it was not fitting that their safety be the occasion of death for the one harboring them. But by the fact that she was freed by receiving them is designated that those who receives the preachers of the gospel are delivered from eternal death: ‘He that receives a prophet in the name of a prophet shall receive the reward of a prophet’ (Mt. 10:11).

 

11-7

            Heb. 11:32-35a

32 And what more shall I say? For time would fail me to tell of Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, of David and Samuel and the prophets—33 who through faith conquered kingdoms, enforced justice, received promises, stopped the mouths of lions, 34 quenched raging fire, escaped the edge of the sword, won strength out of weakness, became mighty in war, put foreign armies to flight. 35 Women received their dead by resurrection.

627. – Having described the things done through faith by the fathers before and during the very entry into the promised land, the Apostle now begins to give examples of those who were in the promised land. But because there were so many, he recites their deeds in a general way and, after giving the names of the fathers, he tells why he must be brief. In regard to this he does three things: first, he gives the names of the fathers and the reason why he passes over their deeds quickly; secondly, he shows what they did by faith (v. 34); thirdly, what they received by faith (v. 33b).

628. – He says, therefore: And what more shall I say? As if to say: I have come to the time they entered the promised land, regarding which a few things remain to be said. For so many things remain to be said that they cannot be explained: For time would fail me to tell of them, i.e., if I wanted to tell of them, there would be insufficient time to do so in a letter, which should be brief. Hence, Jerome writes to Paulinus: ‘The space of an epistle does not allow me to say more.’ Or it can mean the time of life. This is the way John speaks (19.25): ‘But there are also many other signs which Jesus did; which if they were written every one, the world itself, I think, would not be able to contain the books that should be written.’ Where a Gloss says that he is using hyperbole. This is not false, but a figure of speech. In Ps. 39 (v. 6) where we have: ‘I have declared and I have spoken; they are multiplied above number,’ Jerome’s letter says: If I wanted to describe them, there are more than can be described.’

629. – Yet it should be noted that some of them did some good things, and some evil things. Hence, they are listed here only as to the good things they did or received. Yet it is probable that all of them finally were saints. For this reason the Apostle lists them in the catalogue of saints. First, therefore, he mentions Gideon, whose story appears in Judges (chaps. 6-8). He is mentioned first, both because he did nothing evil and because he did something very important; and probably because he received the greatest sign of the incarnation in the fleece and dew, concerning which it says in Ps. 71 (v. 6): ‘He shall come down like rain upon the fleece.’ Secondly, he mentions Barak in Judges (chaps. 4-5), who was not as famous as Gideon, to whom that victory was not credited, but to the woman. Perhaps this is why he passes him by. Thirdly, he mentions Samson Jg (chaps. 13-16), who particularly deserves not to be mentioned here, because he sinned by killing himself. But Augustine in The City of God excuses this, because it is believed that he did this at God’s command. The sign of this is that he could not have destroyed such a house by his own power, but by God’s power, which does not cooperate with evil. Fourthly, he mentions Jephthah in Judges (chaps. 11-12), whom he lists after Samson, because he did not do the great things the latter did.

630. – But there is a question about Jephthah, whether he sinned by immolating his daughter as he vowed. For it seems not, because Judges (11:29) says: ‘The spirit of the Lord came upon Jephthah’ and then mentions the vow and the victory. But Jerome says the contrary, namely, that he was indiscreet in vowing and guilty in paying. I answer that something from the Holy Spirit was there, namely, an impulse to vow in general that he would immolate whatever he came upon that could be immolated; but there was also something from his own spirit, namely, that he immolated what he should not. In this he sinned, but later he repented. Similarly, Gideon sinned by making an ephod and tempting God, when he asked for a sign on the fleece. But he also repented later, as did David, whom he mentions next, saying, David and Samuel, who are discussed in the Books of Samuel, and the prophets, concerning whom time would fail me, if I wished to discuss them.

631. – But the next question is whether all the ones listed were prophets. I answer that the Holy Spirit can move to three things: namely, to know, to speak and to do; and to each of them in two ways. Sometimes He moves to know by making him understand what is seen, as in the case of Isaiah and the other prophets; hence, they are called seers: ‘He that is now called a prophet, in time past was called a seer’ (1 Sam 9:9); but sometimes without an understanding of what is seen, as in Pharaoh’s dream and in Belshazzar’s vision. He also moves one to speak in two ways: sometimes to know what he says, as David, sometimes without knowing, as Caiaphas and perhaps Balaam. Similarly, He sometimes moves one to do something and to know what he is doing, as Jeremiah, who hid his girdle by the Euphrates (Jer. 13:5); and sometimes without knowing, as Augustine On John says of the soldiers who divided Christ’s garments among themselves without knowing the mystery to which that division was ordained. Therefore, it pertains to the notion of a prophet that he know what he sees or says or does. This is the way John says that Caiaphas prophesied, because he had something characteristic of prophecy. But the movement of the Holy Spirit is called an instinct by Augustine.

632. – Then (v. 33) he shows what the saints mentioned did: first, he shows this in general; secondly, by getting down to details (v. 33c). In regard to the first he does two things: first, he mentions the merits of their deeds; secondly, the reward (v. 33b).

633. – In regard to the first it should be noted that of all the outward acts of the moral virtues, the acts of courage and justice seem the most important, because they pertain most to the common good. For the republic is defended against its enemies by courage, and is preserved by justice. Hence, the Apostle commends the holy fathers on both: on courage, when he says, by faith they conquered kingdoms, i.e., kings, or even their kingdoms, as David and Joshua. Nevertheless, the saints spiritually overcame kingdoms, namely the kingdom of the devil, of whom Job (41:25) says: ‘He is king over all the children of pride,’ and the kingdom of the flesh: ‘Let not sin reign in your mortal body’ (Rom. 6:12); also the kingdom of the world: ‘My kingdom is not of this world’ (Jn. 18:36). But they conquered by faith: ‘This is the victory which overcomes the world, our faith’ (1 Jn. 5:4). For no one can despise present things except for the sake of goods to come, because it is mainly by contempt that the world is overcome, therefore, because faith shows us the invisible things for which the world is despised, our faith overcomes the world.

634. – He comes then to the acts of justice when he says, wrought justice. For justice is sometimes a general virtue, namely, when it obeys the divine law: ‘The Lord is just and has loved justice’ (Ps. 10:8); ‘It is just to be subject to God’ (2 Macc 9:12); ‘He that does justice is just’ (1 Jn. 3:7). But sometimes it is a special virtue and consists in human actions and exchanges, namely, when a person renders to everyone his due. But the saints had both: ‘This is the inheritance of the servants of the Lord, and their justice with me, says the Lord’ (Is. 54:17); ‘If you desire wisdom, keep justice’ (Sir. 1:33), namely, by obeying the commandments, and also by exercising it toward the people: ‘I have done justice and judgment’ (Ps. 118:121).

635. – Then when he says, they received, he shows what they obtained, because they received the promises. For God’s promise is efficacious, because God never fails to keep His promise: ‘Whatever he has promised he is able to perform’ (Rom. 4:21); ‘The Lord is faithful in all his words’ (Ps. 1 44:13). But on the contrary he says above (11:13): ‘These dies according to faith, not having received the promises.’ I answer that what is said here can be understood in three ways: in one way, that God’s promise is the special one by which He promises the saints eternal life, which no one received before the coming of Christ: ‘To confirm the promises made to the fathers’ (Rom. 15:8); secondly, for the promise to inherit the promised land. This the earlier fathers, namely, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, did not receive, but the later ones did, as Joshua and the other saints. Thirdly, for a particular promise made to individuals, as to David a kingdom and to Hezekiah health; and these are the promises they obtained.

636. – Then (v. 33b) he mentions particular benefits conferred on them: first, those which pertain to the removal of evil; secondly, to the performing of good (v. 34b). But the evils harmful to man are of two kinds: one is external and the other internal. He mentions the second when he says, they won strength out of weakness. But external evils are of two kinds, because they are caused either by an irrational creature or a rational. The second of these is mentioned when he says, they escaped the edge of the sword. From irrational sources in two ways: living or non-living. He touches on harm inflicted by inanimate things when he says, quenched raging fire; by animate when he says, they stopped the mouths of lions.

637. – He speaks in the plural, although there was only, namely, Daniel, as it is also said in Matthew (2:20): ‘They are dead that sought the life of the child,’ for Herod was the only one who sought to kill the Child. The reason he does this is that he is speaking of all the saints generally, as of one college of saints; therefore, what one does he imputes to others and even to all, because it was done by the power of the Holy Spirit, which is common to all. Hence, even in that text he speaks as though of all. But it can also be said that this was completed in David who, as he says in 1 Sam (17:34). By the lion is spiritually understood the devil: ‘Your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, goes about seeking whom he may devour’ (1 Pt 5:8). Therefore, one who represses his attacks stops the mouths of lions: ‘I broke the jaws of the wicked man; and out of his mouth I took away the prey’ (Jb. 29:17).

638. – He mentions removal of harm from inanimate things when he says, they quenched raging fire, as in the case of the three boys in Dan (chap. 3). Likewise, at the prayer of Moses and Aaron the fire was extinguished which had been sent by the Lord to devour the murmurers, as it says in Numbers (chap. 16). That fire is the internal impulse to concupiscence and anger. Therefore, one who restrains this impulse quenches the violence of fire: ‘Fire has fallen on them and they shall not see the sun’ (Ps. 57:9).

639. – The removal of evil from a rational creature is touched when he says, they escaped the edge of the sword, i.e., the attack of the enemy with sharp swords. But this happened to them very frequently, as is clear in the cases of Joshua, Gideon and David. But by the sword is understood an evil persuasion: ‘Their tongues a sharp sword’ (Ps. 56:7). One escapes those swords, when he puts an evil tongue to silenced: ‘Hedge in your ears with thorns, hear not a wicked tongue’ (Sir. 28:28); ‘The north wind drives away rain, as does a sad countenance a backbiting tongue’ (Pr. 25:23).

640. – Internal harm is infirmity, concerning whose removal he says, they won strength out of weakness, as appears particular in Hezekiah (2 Kg. 20:17). But that infirmity is sin: ‘Have mercy on me, O Lord, for I am weak’ (Ps. 6:3). Therefore, one who rises has recovered.

641. – Then when he says, they became valiant, he mentions the benefits as to the attainment of good; and he mentions three. The first pertains to the fact that acted valiantly; hence, he says, they became valiant in battle, as Joshua: ‘Valiant in war was Jesus, the son of Nun, who was successor of Moses’ (Sir. 46:1). The same is true of many others. The second pertains to the effect of that courage; hence, he says, they put foreign armies to flight, as in the cases of David and of the Maccabees: ‘If armies in camp should stand together against me, my heart shall not fear’ (Ps. 26:3). But the third pertains to the effect of divine courage; hence, he says, Women received their dead raised to life again, i.e., by the resurrection. Some who misunderstood this, explained their dead, i.e., their husbands, and argued that death does not dissolve the bond of marriage. This is false even if they should rise again. It is also against the Apostle in Romans (7:3): ‘If her husband be dead, she is delivered from the law of the husband.’ Hence, it should be noted that even in the effects of the sacraments there is a difference. For some sacraments imprint a character, as baptism, confirmation and Orders. And because a character remains in the soul forever, a baptized or confirmed or ordained person should not repeat any of those sacraments, if he rises again. But the other sacraments do not imprint a character, as penance, extreme unction, and the others. Therefore, because they cure something repeatable, they can be repeated: and among these is matrimony. Therefore, he does not say, ‘husbands,’ but their dead, because through the resurrection mothers received their dead sons, whose resurrection was a presage of the coming resurrection begun by Christ.

642. – An account of their resurrection or rather of their revival is found in 1 Kg. (chap. 17) and 2 Kg. (chap. 4). Yet thus revived, they died again: ‘But Christ rising from the dead dies now no more’ (Rom. 6:0); ‘Christ is risen from the dead the first fruits of them that sleep’ (1 Cor. 15:20). But just as those temporal benefits were given to them as to sick persons for sustenance by the merit of their faith, so they were the figures of coming good things, which will be given to us by the merit of faith: ‘And these signs shall follow them that believe. In my name they shall cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues. They shall take up serpents; and if they shall drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt him: they shall lay their hands upon the sick, and they shall recover’ (Mk 16:17). All of these Gregory explains of spiritual goods.

 

11-8

            Heb. 11:35b - 40

35b Some were tortured, refusing to accept release, that they might rise again to a better life. 36 Others suffered mocking and scourging, and even chains and imprisonment. 37 They were stoned, they were sawn in two, they were killed with the sword; they went about in skins of sheep and goats, destitute, afflicted, ill-treated—38 of whom the world was not worthy—wandering over deserts and mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth. 39 And all these, though well attested by their faith, did not receive what was promised, 40 since God had foreseen something better for us, that apart from us they should not be made perfect.

643. – Having given examples of the holy fathers of old who did many great things for the faith, the Apostle now gives examples or those who suffered for the faith. In regard to this he does two things: first, he shows how they suffered for the faith; secondly, he shows how the promises made to them were deferred (v. 39). In regard to the first he does two things: first, he mentions the evils inflicted on them by others; secondly, evils voluntarily assumes (v. 37b). Evils were inflicted upon them by others in two ways, namely, sometimes during life, and sometimes in death; these he mentions when he says, they were stoned. During life, evils were inflicted upon them in three ways: some by bodily affliction; some by mockery; and some by imprisonment.

644. – As to the first he says, others were racked. As if to say: So we have said that some have received many good things because of the faith, either by having evils removed, or in the performing of temporal good. In these was prefigured the Old Testament, which conferred temporal goods. But others suffered many things for the faith: of these some were racked by horses as in 1 Maccabees (chap. 2); and in 2 Maccabees (chap. 6) the case of the two children suspended from their mothers’ necks, and in 2 Maccabees (chap. 7) the case of the seven brothers. In those saints, first of all, the New Testament was prefigured; hence, he says, refusing to accept release. For a person subject to punishment is somehow a slave to punishment; therefore, to be delivered from punishment is called a redemption: ‘He redeemed them from the hand of him that afflicted’ (Ps. 77:42).

645. – But he shows why they refused release. It was not because God exercised no providence over them, but that they might obtain eternal life, which is better than release from any present punishment or any resurrection of the present life; hence, he says, that they might rise again to a better life: ‘I will rise again on the last day’ (Jb. 19:25); ‘Your dead men shall live, my slain shall rise again’ (Is. 26:19). Or he says, better, because, by the fact that they suffered greater things for Christ, they earned a greater reward: ‘Star differs from star in glory; so also is the resurrection of the dead’ (1 Cor. 15:41); for those with greater merit shall receive a greater reward; but the merits of martyrs are very great: ‘Greater love than this no man has, that a man lay down his life for his friends’ (Jn. 15:15). However, not every martyr is greater than every confessor, but some martyr can be greater than some confessor; and conversely, some confessor than some martyr, although not universally. For one can be compared to another as to the type of work or as to the degree of charity. But no art of itself is as meritorious as dying for Christ, because a man is giving what is most dear, namely, his own life: ‘Blessed are they that suffer persecution for justices’ sake’ (Mt. 5:10). But if considers the root of all merit, which is charity (1 Cor. 13), then a work proceeding from greater charity is more meritorious. Consequently, one simple confessor could have greater merit before God. But the Apostle is speaking of the type of work, saying, that they might rise again to a better, i.e., a greater and more glorious, life. Hence, better implies a comparison between the state of the present life and the future resurrection, or a comparison between the glory of the resurrection of one person and the glory of another.

646. – Then (v. 36) he mentions the evils inflicted on them in regard to derision by words, saying, others suffered mocking, as Samson in Judges (chap. 16), Tobias, Job and Isaiah: ‘I have turned away my face from them that rebuked me and spit upon me’ (Is. 50:6); and Jeremiah (20:8) says: ‘The word of the Lord is made a reproach to me, and a derision all the day.’ In regard to deeds he says, and scourging, as Micah, of whom it is written in 1 Kg. (22:24) that Zedekiah struck him on the cheek. In all of this the sufferings of the New Testament are prefigured: ‘We have been made a spectacle to the world, and to angels and to men’ (1 Cor. 4:9).

647. – Then when he says, and even chains, he mentions the evils inflicted on the saints by imprisonment, as Jeremiah, of whom it is written in 20 (v. 2) that he was put in the stocks. But not only chains, but imprisonment, as Jeremiah (chaps. 37 & 38) and Micah (1 Kg 22:27).

648. – Then he shows the evil they endured unto death when he says, they were stoned. This was a type of death then in vogue among all Jews: ‘Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you that kill the prophets, and stone them that are sent unto you’ (Mt. 23:37). Thus Naboth was stoned (1 Kg. 21:13) and Jeremiah, of whom we read that the Jews stoned him in Egypt with stones they had concealed under the brick wall of Pharaoh’s house. And although Epiphanius says that he was drawn, it was generally said that he was stoned. Zechariah, the son of Jehoiada, was also stoned (2 Chr. 24:21). He mentions an unusually cruel death when he says, they were sawn in two. This is because of Isaiah, whom Manasseh caused to be cut with a saw. He speaks in the plural according to the custom of the Scriptures, even though there was only one case. He mentions the third type when he says, they were tempted to consent. He says this because of Mattathias and his sons in 1 Macc. (chap. 2) and Eleazar in 2 Maccabees (chap. 6) and the story of the seven brothers in 2 Maccabees (chap. 7), and yet they were killed: ‘It was better with them that were slain by the sword, than with those that died of hunger’ (Lam. 4:9). In particular Uriah was killed by David (2 Sam. 11:15) and so was Josiah (2 Kg. 23:29).

649. – Then (v. 37b) he mentions the evils voluntarily undertaken. These are reduced to three, namely, external apparel; the state of the person; and dwelling place.

650. – In regard to external apparel he says, they went about in skins of sheep and goats. The former, ‘melota’ in Latin, is a garment made of camel hair, as some say. A goatskin, in addition to being hairy, is vile. These are said of Elijah (2 Kg 1:8), namely, that he was a hairy man with a girdle of leather about his loins. Augustine, in the book, The Lord’s Words, says that such clothing can be worn with an evil intention, as when they are worn from vainglory; but good, if they are worn out of contempt for the world and to chastise the flesh. But especially those who profess a state of repentance should show the signs of their profession; hence, it is lawful for them to use such clothing, as the prophets did: but not for display.

651. – As to the state of the person he says, destitute, because they lacked riches. This prefigured the state of the New Testament, of which it says in Matthew (19:21): ‘If you would be perfect, go sell what you have.’ And this was especially true of Elijah, because he was fed by a raven and by a widow woman (1 Kg. 17); ‘I am poor and in labors from my youth’ (Ps. 87:16); ‘I am needy and poor’ (Ps. 69:6). Afflicted, as Elijah, who fled from the face of Jezebel (1 Kg. 19), and David, who fled from Absalom (2 Sam. 15); and ill-treated with bodily labor, as Elijah who was weary and slept under a juniper tree. He adds, of whom the world was not worthy. As Dionysius says in an epistle to John the Evangelist: wicked men by what they sometimes do, show the indications of their damnation; hence, he says that when wicked men separated the blessed John from them, God was showing that they were unworthy of being associated with him. Therefore, the Apostle says, the world was not worthy of them. As if to say: Worldly men were not worthy to associate with the just: ‘I have chosen you out of the world; therefore, the world hates you’ (Jn. 15:19).

652. – Then when he says, wandering over deserts, he shows this in regard to their place, because they had no dwelling of their own, but roamed about in deserts, in mountains and in dens and caves of the earth, which are places suited to contemplation and penance. It is called a den, if it is made by art; but a cave, it if is from nature or by some accident, as water corrosion. These are plain in the cased of David (1 Kg. 22:1) and Elijah (1 Kg. 19:9).

653. – Then when he says, and all these being approved by the testimony of faith, received not the promise. But that no one might believe that this was due to lack of merit, he gives the reason for that delay: Since God had foreseen something better for us.

654. – He says, therefore: that all these, though well attested by their faith, i.e., by faith they have testimony that they were approved by God: ‘For not he that commends himself is approved, but he whom God commends’ (2 Cor. 10:18); ‘As gold in the furnace he has proved them’ (Wis. 3:6). And yet they did not receive what was promised, i.e., of glory, or the promised land, until Christ: ‘You have been angry with your anointed’ (Ps. 88:39). For they received temporal things, but not spiritual: ‘They died, not having received the promises’ (Heb. 11:13).

655. – Then when he says, Since God has foreseen something better for us, he shows the reason for the postponement. But some took the cause or occasion of their error from this and said that no one will enter paradise until the final consummation at the final resurrection. But this is contrary to the Apostle: ‘We know, if our earthly house of this habitation be dissolved, that we have a building of God, eternal in heaven’ (2 Cor. 5:1). Therefore, the consummation of which the Apostle speaks can refer to the essential reward, namely, to happiness, which is obtained through Christ: ‘For he shall go up that shall open the way before them’ (Mic 2:13), which the saints will not be given generally until after the general resurrection, although some perhaps already have it by a special privilege. Therefore, they are not consummated without us, but are perfected with a double stole, so that, as a Gloss says, the joy of each will become greater in the common joy of all. Hence, God provides for us in this matter. Therefore, he says, Since God has foreseen something better for us: ‘Behold how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity’ (Ps. 132:1). For man rejoices with many rejoicing: ‘If they kept the faith who waited so long, much more should we who receive right away’ (Gloss); ‘This day you shall be with me in paradise: (Lk. 23:43).