John14.htm

<!DOCTYPE html>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<title></title>
<body style="text-align:justify;font-family:Arial">
  <blockquote>
    <p style="text-align: center;font-size: 60pt">14
    <table cellpadding="12">
      <tbody>
        <tr style="align:center">
          <td><b>Lectio</b>
          <td><b>LECTURE I</b>
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td style="font-family:" palatino="">
            <blockquote>
              1 μὴ ταρασσέσθω ὑμῶν ἡ καρδία: πιστεύετε εἰς τὸν θεόν, καὶ εἰς ἐμὲ πιστεύετε. 2 ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ τοῦ πατρός μου μοναὶ πολλαί εἰσιν: εἰ δὲ μή, εἶπον ἂν ὑμῖν ὅτι πορεύομαι ἑτοιμάσαι τόπον ὑμῖν; 3 καὶ ἐὰν πορευθῶ καὶ ἑτοιμάσω τόπον ὑμῖν, πάλιν ἔρχομαι καὶ παραλήμψομαι ὑμᾶς πρὸς ἐμαυτόν, ἵνα ὅπου εἰμὶ ἐγὼ καὶ ὑμεῖς ἦτε.
            </blockquote>
          <td>
            <blockquote>
              1 "Let not your hearts be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in me. 2 In my Father's house are many rooms; if it were not so, would I have told you that I go to prepare a place for you? [If it were not so I would have told you that I am going to prepare a place for you.] 3 And when [if] I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and will take you to myself, that where I am you may be also." <a href="John14.htm#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1" title="" id="_ftnref1">[1]</a>
            </blockquote>
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Supra dominus informavit discipulos suos exemplis, hic confortat eos verbis, et primo ponitur multiplex verborum exhortatio; secundo ipsorum quae dicta sunt explicatio, cap. XVI <i>haec locutus sum vobis, ut non scandalizemini</i>. Circa primum sciendum est, quod duo imminebant discipulis, de quibus conturbari poterant. Unum de praesenti, scilicet recessus Christi imminens; aliud de futuro, scilicet tribulationes quas passuri erant. Primo ergo confortat eos contra primum, scilicet contra eius recessum; secundo contra tribulationes quas passuri erant, XV, cap., <i>ego sum vitis vera</i> et cetera.
          <td>1848 Above (ch 13), our Lord taught his disciples by example, here he consoles them by his words. First, they are encouraged in many ways by what he says; secondly, what he has said is explained (ch 16). Concerning the first, we should note that there were two things which could trouble the disciples. One was near, that Christ would soon be leaving them; the second was in the future, and was the hardships they would undergo. First, Christ consoles them over his leaving; secondly, over their future hardships (ch 15).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Circa primum duo facit. Primo confortat eos ex parte ipsorum remanentium; secundo ex parte sui recedentis, ibi <i>non turbetur cor vestrum, neque formidet</i>. Circa primum tria facit. Primo praemittit suum accessum ad patrem; secundo promittit eis donum spiritus sancti, ibi <i>si diligitis me, mandata mea servate</i>; tertio suam praesentiam, ibi <i>non relinquam vos orphanos</i>. Circa primum duo facit. Primo praemittit suum accessum ad patrem; secundo agit de via per quam accessurus erat, ibi <i>et quo ego vado scitis, et viam scitis</i>. Circa primum tria facit. Primo excludit turbationem; secundo innuit sui potestatem, ibi <i>creditis in Deum, et in me credite</i>; tertio subiungit promissionem, ibi <i>in domo patris mei mansiones multae sunt</i>.
          <td>He does two things concerning the first: first, he consoles them from their own point of view, as those who will be left; secondly, from his own point of view, as the one leaving (v 27). He does three things about the first: first, he says that he is going to the Father; secondly, he promises them the gift of the Holy Spirit (v 15); thirdly, he promises that he will also be with them (v 18). He does two things about the first: first, he mentions that he is going to the Father; secondly, he brings in the way he would go (v 4). He does three things about the first: first, he expels their anxieties; secondly, he refers to his power (v 1b); thirdly, he adds a promise (v 2a).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Circa primum sciendum est, quod discipuli perturbari poterant ex verbis domini supradictis de proditione Iudae, et negatione Petri, et recessu suo. Et vere omnia turbationem et dolorem ingerebant; Ps. LIX, 4: <i>commovisti terram</i>, scilicet cordium discipulorum, <i>et conturbasti eam</i>. Et ideo dominus sanare volens eorum contritionem, dicit <i>non turbetur cor vestrum</i>.
          <td>1849 In regard to the first, note that the disciples could have been disturbed by what our Lord said about the betrayal of Judas, Peter's denial, and his own going away. Indeed, each of these did trouble them and make them sad: "Thou hast made the land to quake," that is, the hearts of the disciples, "thou hast rent it open" (Ps 60:2). Therefore our Lord, wishing to soothe their sorrow, said: <b>Let not your hearts be troubled</b>.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed contra; Act. I, 1: <i>coepit Iesus facere et docere</i>. Sed supra XIII, 21, dicitur: <i>turbatus est Iesus spiritu</i> et cetera. Quomodo ergo docet non turbari qui primo turbatus est? Responsio. Dicendum quod non docuit contrarium eius quod fecit. De eo autem dicitur quod turbatus est spiritu, non quod spiritus eius sit turbatus. Hic autem non prohibet quin turbentur spiritu, sed prohibet quod eorum cor, idest spiritus, non turbetur. Est enim quaedam turbatio ex spiritu, ex ratione procedens, quae laudabilis est, nec prohibetur. II Cor. VII, 10: <i>quae enim secundum Deum tristitia est, poenitentiam in salutem stabilem operatur</i>. Alia est tristitia seu turbatio ipsius rationis; quae non est laudabilis, quia abducit a propria rectitudine; et prohibetur Ps. XXXVI, v. 24: <i>iustus non conturbabitur, quia dominus supponit manum suam</i>. Non enim turbari potest qui Deum semper habet. Et ideo dominus suae divinitatis potestatem subiungit, dicens <i>creditis in Deum, et in me credite</i>: ubi unum supponit, et aliud praecipit.
          <td>1850 In Acts (1:1) we read: "Jesus began to do and teach." Yet above (13:21) it says that Jesus "was troubled in spirit." How can he tell his disciples not to be troubled when he himself was troubled? I answer that he did not teach the opposite of what he did. It was stated above that he was troubled <i>in</i> spirit, not that his spirit was troubled. Here he is not forbidding them to be troubled in spirit, but he is forbidding that their hearts, that is, their spirits, be troubled. For there is a troubled state which arises from reason; this is to be praised and is not forbidden: "For godly grief produces a repentance that leads to salvation" (2 Cor 7:10). Yet there is a different grief or troubled state of the reason itself; this is not laudable because it draws the reason from its proper course; this is forbidden: "The just person will not be troubled for the Lord puts his hand under him" [Ps 37:24]. For one who always possesses God cannot be disturbed.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Supponit quidem eorum fidem in Deum, dicens <i>creditis in Deum</i>: in hoc enim iam instructi erant ab ipso; Hebr. XI, 6: <i>accedentem ad Deum oportet credere</i>. Praecipit autem ut credant in ipsum, dicens <i>et in me credite</i>. Si enim in Deum creditis, ego autem sum Deus: consequens est quod in me credatis. Et tenet haec consequentia, sive ly <i>Deus</i> teneatur essentialiter, cum ipse filius sit Deus, sive ly <i>Deus</i> supponat pro persona patris. Nullus enim potest in patrem credere nisi credat in filium; supra V, 23: <i>qui non honorificat filium, non honorificat patrem</i>.
          <td>1851 Accordingly, our Lord refers to the power of his divinity, saying, <b>you believe in God, believe also in me</b>. Here he presupposes one thing and commands another. He presupposes their faith in God, saying, <b>you believe in God</b>: he had already taught them about this: "For whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists" (Heb 11:6). What he commands is that they believe in him, saying, <b>believe also in me</b>. For if you believe in God, and since I am God, then you should believe in me. And this follows whether the word God stands for the divine essence, since the Son is God, or whether it stands for the person of the Father. For no one can believe in the Father unless he believes in the Son: "He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father" (5:23).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>In hoc autem quod dicit <i>et in me credite</i>, contestatur se verum esse Deum; nam etsi homini vel creaturae credere liceat, in nullum tamen nisi in Deum credere debemus. Est ergo in Christum credendum sicut in Deum. I Io. ult., 20: <i>ut sitis in vero filio eius Christo. Hic est verus Deus et vita aeterna</i>; supra VI, 29: <i>hoc est opus Dei, ut credatis in eum quem misit ille</i>.
          <td>The fact that he says, <b>believe also in me</b>, indicates that he is truly God; for although we are allowed to believe a human being <i>(homini)</i> or a creature, we ought to believe <i>in</i> God alone <i>(in Deum).</i> Therefore, we must believe in Christ as we believe in God. "We are in him who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life" (1 Jn 5:20); "This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent" (6:29). [See the Commentary on 6:28, no. 901.]
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Consequenter cum dicit <i>in domo patris mei mansiones multae sunt</i>, subiungit promissionem quae est ut per Christum accedant, et introducantur ad patrem. Promissio autem de accessu aliorum ad aliquem locum duo includit: unum est praecedens, scilicet loci praeparatio; aliud sequens, scilicet in locum introductio. Et ideo dominus duas hic promissiones facit: unam quae pertinet ad loci praeparationem, aliam ad loci introductionem. Prima autem non est necessaria, cum iam locus sit praeparatus; sed secunda: et ideo circa hoc duo facit. Primo excludit necessitatem primae promissionis; secundo ponit secundam promissionem, ibi <i>et si abiero, et praeparavero vobis locum, iterum veniam, et accipiam vos ad meipsum</i>. Circa primum duo facit. Primo excludit necessitatem praeparationis; secundo ostendit facultatem suam ad praeparandum, si necesse esset, ibi <i>si quo minus, dixissem vobis, quia vado parare vobis locum</i>.
          <td>1852 Then when he says, <b>in my Father's house are many rooms</b>, he adds the promise that it is through Christ that they will approach and be brought to the Father. Now a promise to others that they will gain entrance to some place involves two things: first, the place must be prepared; next, they have to be brought there. Our Lord makes these two promises here: one concerns the preparation of the place, and the other is about their being brought there. Yet the first is not necessary, for the place has already been prepared; but the second is necessary. Thus he does two things: he says the first promise is not necessary; and then he makes his second promise (v 3). In regard to the first he does two things: first, he indicates that it is not necessary to prepare the place; secondly he shows that he could prepare it if it were necessary (v 2b).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Dicit ergo <i>in domo patris mei mansiones multae sunt</i>. Ubi sciendum est, quod cum uniuscuiusque domus sit in qua habitat, illa dicitur domus Dei in qua habitat Deus; Deus autem habitat in sanctis; Ier. XIV, 9: <i>tu in nobis es, domine</i> et cetera. Sed in quibusdam quidem per fidem; II Cor. VI, 16: <i>inhabitabo in illis, et inambulabo inter eos</i>. In quibusdam vero per fruitionem perfectam, I Cor. XV, 28: <i>ut sit Deus omnia in omnibus</i>. Duplex est ergo domus Dei. Una est militans Ecclesia, scilicet congregatio fidelium; I Tim. III, 15: <i>ut scias quomodo oporteat te in domo Dei conversari, inhabitat Deus per fidem</i>; Apoc. XXI, 3: quae est Ecclesia Dei vivi. Et hanc <i>ecce tabernaculum Dei cum hominibus, et habitabo in illis</i>. Alia est triumphans, scilicet sanctorum collectio in gloria patris; Ps. c. LXIV, 5: <i>replebimur in bonis domus tuae. Sanctum est templum tuum, mirabile in aequitate</i>.
          <td>1853 He says, <b>in my Father's house are many rooms</b>. The house of any one is where he dwells, and so the house of God is where God dwells. Now God dwells in his saints: "Yet thou, O Lord, art in the midst of us" (Jer 14:9). In some of them he dwells by faith: "I will live in them and move among them" (2 Cor 6:16); while in others he dwells by perfect happiness: "that God may be everything to every one" (1 Cor 15:28). Accordingly, God has two houses. One is the Church militant, that is, the society of those who believe: "that you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God" (1 Tim 3:15). God dwells in this house by faith. "The dwelling of God is with men. He will dwell with them" (Rev 21:3). The other is the Church triumphant, that is, the society of the saints in the glory of the Father: "We shall be satisfied with the goodness of thy house, thy holy temple" (Ps 65:4).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed domus patris dicitur non solum illa quam ipse inhabitat, sed etiam ipsemet, quia ipse in seipso est. Et in hac domo nos colligit. Quod autem ipse Deus sit domus, habetur II Cor. V, 1: <i>domum habemus a Deo, non manufactam, aeternam in caelis</i>. Et haec domus est gloriae, quae est ipse Deus; Ier. c. XVII, 12: <i>solium altitudinis gloriae tuae a principio, locus sanctificationis nostrae</i>. Manet autem homo in hoc loco, scilicet Deo, quantum ad voluntatem et affectum per fruitionem caritatis I Io. IV, 16: <i>qui manet in caritate, in Deo manet, et Deus in eo</i>: et quantum ad intellectum per notitiam veritatis; infra XVII, 17: <i>sanctifica eos in veritate</i>.
          <td>Yet the house of the Father is not only where he dwells, but he himself is the house, for he exists in himself. It is into this house that he gathers us. We see from 2 Corinthians (5:1) that God himself is the house: "We have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens." This house is the house of glory, which is God himself: "A glorious throne set on high from the beginning is the place of our sanctification" [Jer 17:12]. We remain in this place, in God, with our will and affections by the joys of love: "He who abides in love abides in God, and God abides in him" (1 Jn 4:16). And we remain here with our minds by our knowledge of the truth: "Sanctify them in the truth" (17:17).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>In hac ergo domo, idest in gloria, quae Deus est, <i>mansiones multae sunt</i>, idest diversae participationes beatitudinis ipsius; quia qui plus cognoscit, maiorem locum habebit. Diversae ergo participationes divinae cognitionis et fruitionis, sunt diversae mansiones.
          <td>In this house, then, that is, in glory, which is God, are many rooms, that is, various participations in happiness. This is because one who knows more will have a greater place. Therefore, the different rooms are the various participations in the knowledge and enjoyment of God.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed hic est quaestio utrum unus possit esse beatior alio. Videtur quod non. Beatitudo enim est finis; et perfectum non recipit maius et minus: ergo non potest magis et minus haberi.
          <td>1854 The question arises here whether one person can be happier than another. It seems not. For happiness is the end; and what is perfect, complete, does not have degrees; therefore, there cannot be different degrees of happiness.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Responsio. Dicendum quod aliquid dicitur perfectum dupliciter: absolute, et secundum quid. Perfectio quidem beatitudinis absoluta est solius Dei: quia solus ipse tantum cognoscit se et amat quantum cognoscibilis est et amabilis (infinite enim cognoscit, et amat infinitam veritatem et bonitatem suam). Et quantum ad hoc, ipsum summum bonum, quod est beatitudinis obiectum, et causa, non potest esse maius et minus: non enim est nisi unum summum bonum, quod est Deus.
          <td>I answer that a thing can be perfect in two ways: absolutely and in a qualified sense. The absolute perfection of happiness is found only in God, for only he knows and loves himself to the extent that he is knowable and lovable (since he knows and loves infinitely his own infinite truth and goodness). From this point of view, the supreme good itself, which is the object and cause of happiness, can not be greater or less. This is because there is only one supreme good, which is God.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Secundum quid autem, idest secundum aliquas conditiones temporis, naturae et gratiae; et sic unus potest esse beatior alio secundum adeptionem huius boni, et capacitatem uniuscuiusque hominis. Quia quanto homo magis est eius capax, tanto magis participat ipsam, inquantum scilicet est melius dispositus et ordinatus ad eius fruitionem: ad quod disponitur dupliciter. Consistit enim beatitudo in duobus: scilicet in divina visione, et ad hanc disponitur per munditiam: et ideo quanto quis habet cor magis elevatum a terrenis, tanto magis et perfectius Deum videbit. Item in fruitionis delectatione, et ad hanc disponitur per amorem: et ideo qui habet cor magis fervens amore Dei, magis delectabitur in divina fruitione. De prima dicitur Matth. V, 8: <i>beati mundo corde, quoniam ipsi Deum videbunt</i>.
          <td>
            But in a qualified sense, that is, considering certain conditions of time, of nature and of grace, one person can be happier than another depending on the possession of this good and the capacity of each. The greater the capacity a person has for this good, the more he shares in it, I mean he participates in it more the better disposed and prepared he is to enjoy it. Now one is disposed for this good in two ways. Happiness consists in two things. The first is the vision of God; and one is disposed for this by purity. And so the more one has a heart which is raised above earthly matters, the more he will see God, and the more perfectly. Secondly, happiness consists in the delight of enjoying [God], and one is disposed for this by love. Thus, one who has a more burning love for God will find more delight in the enjoyment of God. We read about the first in Matthew (5:8): "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see." <a href="John14.htm#_ftn2" name="_ftnref2" id="_ftnref2">[2]</a>
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicitur Matth. XX, quod unus denarius datur omnibus laborantibus. Hic autem denarius nihil aliud est quam mansio in domo patris. Non ergo sunt multae mansiones. Responsio. Dicendum quod merces vitae aeternae et una est, et multae. Multae quidem secundum diversam capacitatem participantium, secundum quam sunt diversae mansiones in domo patris;
          <td>1855 Another question arises from what Matthew (20:10) says, that every laborer received one denarius. This denarius is nothing but a room in the house of the Father. Therefore, there are not many rooms. I answer that the reward of eternal life is both one and many. It is many based on the various capacities of those who share in it, and from this point of view there are different rooms in the Father's house.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>una vero tripliciter. Primo quidem propter unitatem obiecti: idem enim est quod omnes beati vident, et quo omnes fruuntur; et ideo unus denarius, sed diversimode videbitur et amabitur; Iob c. XXII, 26: <i>tunc super omnipotentem deliciis afflues</i>; Is. XXVIII, 5: <i>in illo die erit dominus exercituum sceptrum exultationis residuo populi sui, et corona gloriae</i>. Et simile est ac si aliquis praeberet alicui fontem, ut ad libitum omnes biberent; de quo qui maius vas haberet, plus acciperet, et qui minus, minus. Unus ergo fons ex parte sua est, sed non eadem mensura recipientium. Et haec est sententia beati Gregorii, XXII Moral. Secundo propter eamdem aeternitatis mensuram, secundum Augustinum: quia omnes habebunt aeternam beatitudinem, quia ibunt iusti in vitam aeternam, sed diversae sunt propter capacitatem. Tertio propter caritatem, quae omnia unit, gaudia singulorum faciens omnium, et e converso; Rom. XII, 15: <i>gaudere cum gaudentibus</i> et cetera.
          <td>
            Yet this reward is one, and this for three reasons. First, because there is one object; for it is the same object which all the blessed see and enjoy. Thus, there is one denarius. But it is seen and loved in various degrees: "Then you will delight yourself in the Almighty" (Job 22:26); "In that day the Lord of hosts will be a crown of glory, and a diadem of beauty, to the remnant of his people" (Is 28:5). It is like a spring of water, available to all to take as much as they wish. Then, one who has a larger cup will receive more, and one who has a smaller cup will receive less. Therefore, there is one fountain, considering it in itself, but every one does not receive the same portion. This is the opinion of Gregory, in his <i>Morals</i> XXII. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn3" name="_ftnref3" id="_ftnref3">[3]</a> Secondly, this reward is one, according to Augustine, because it is an eternal portion: each one will have an eternal happiness, for the just will go into eternal life; but there are differences in capacity. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn4" name="_ftnref4" id="_ftnref4">[4]</a> Thirdly, this reward is one because of charity, which unites everything, and makes the joy of each the joy of the rest, and conversely: "Rejoice with those who rejoice" (Rom 12:15).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed notandum, quod ex hoc verbo Pelagiani acceperunt occasionem errandi. Dicunt enim, quod pueri non baptizati decedentes, erunt in domo Dei salvati, sed non in regno; quia supra III, 5, dicitur: <i>nisi quis renatus fuerit ex aqua et spiritu sancto, non intrabit in regnum Dei</i>. Sed contra hoc dicit Augustinus quod dominus dicit quod mansiones huiusmodi sunt in domo Dei. Nihil autem magis est in regno quam domus: nam regnum constituitur ex civitatibus, civitates autem ex vicis, vici autem ex domibus. Si ergo mansiones sunt in domo, manifestum est quod sunt in regno.
          <td>
            1856 The Pelagians erred by misunderstanding this passage. They said that children who die without baptism will be saved in the house of God, but not in the kingdom of God, for we read "Unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God" (3:5). Augustine answers this by saying that our Lord said that these rooms are in God's house. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn5" name="_ftnref5" id="_ftnref5">[5]</a> Now in a kingdom there are nothing but houses: for a kingdom is made up of cities, and cities of neighborhoods, and neighborhoods of houses. Thus, if rooms are in a house, it is evident that they are in the kingdom.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Consequenter cum dicit <i>si quo minus, dixissem vobis, quia vado parare vobis locum</i>, ostendit facultatem suam ad praeparandum eis locum, si necesse esset. Posset enim aliquis dicere: verum est quod in domo patris sui mansiones multae paratae sunt: quod si non esset, non posset eas parare. Et ideo dominus hoc excludens dicit, quod <i>si minus</i>, idest mansiones non essent paratae, <i>dixissem vobis, quia vado parare vobis locum</i>.
          <td>1857 Then when he says, <b>if it were not so I would have told you that I am going to prepare a place for you</b>, he shows he has the ability to prepare a place for them if necessary. For one could say: it is true that in his Father's house many rooms have been prepared, but if not, he could not prepare them. Our Lord excludes this by saying, <b>if it were not so</b>, that is, if the rooms were not prepared, <b>I would have told you that I am going to prepare a place for you</b>.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Ubi videndum est quid est hoc quod dixit <i>parare vobis locum</i>. Paratur autem locus dupliciter. Uno modo cum in se disponitur, puta cum purgatur vel ampliatur locus; Is. LIV, 2: <i>dilata locum tentorii tui</i>. Alio modo cum datur alicui facultas intrandi; unde Ps. LXX, 3, petebat: <i>esto mihi in Deum protectorem, et in locum munitum</i>; quasi diceret: semper sit mihi facultas intrandi. Et secundum hoc potest dupliciter intelligi. Si enim locus iste esset tale aliquid quod defectum haberet, aut quodcumque creatum, subiaceret meae potestati ut perficerem illum: nam omnis creatura potestati verbi subiecta est; supra, I, 3: <i>omnia per ipsum facta sunt</i>. Si ergo ita esset, quod haberet defectum, <i>dixissem vobis, quia vado parare vobis locum</i>. Sed locus in se paratus est. Locus enim iste est ipse Deus, ut dictum est, in quo est omnium perfectionum excellentia. Sed forte non est vobis facultas intrandi, et ideo <i>si quo minus</i>, idest si non haberetis facultatem intrandi, et non essetis praedestinati ad locum illum, <i>dixissem vobis, quia vado parare vobis locum</i>. Nam in potestate mea est ut praedestinarem vos ad locum illum. Nam ipse cum patre et spiritu sancto praedestinavit eos ad vitam aeternam; Eph. I, 4: <i>elegit nos in ipso</i>.
          <td>Here we should consider what is meant by the phrase, <b>to prepare a place for you</b>. A place is prepared in two ways. In one way, when something is done to the place itself, as when it is cleaned or enlarged: "Enlarge the place of your tent" (Is 54:2). In another way, when someone is given the means to enter it; and so the Psalmist prays: "Be thou to me a rock of refuge, a strong fortress to save me" (Ps 71:3), which is like saying: May I always have the means to enter here. With this in mind, the text can be understood in two ways. If this place had some defect or was something created, it would be subject to my power to perfect it, for every creature is subject to the power of the Word: "All things were made through him" (1:3). So, if it had some defect, <b>I would have told you that I am going to prepare a place for you</b>. But this place, in itself, is prepared; for this place is God himself, as was said, in whom is the abundance of all perfections. But perhaps you do not have the means to enter it; and so, <b>if it were not so</b>, that is, if it were not so that you had the means to enter here and were not predestined to this place, <b>I would have told you that I am going to prepare a place for you</b>, for it is in my power to predestine you to this place. For he, with the Father and the Holy Spirit has predestined them to eternal life: "He chose us in him" (Eph 1:4).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed quia supra dixerat: <i>quo ego vado, vos non potestis me modo sequi</i>: ne crederent se finaliter ab eo abscissos esse, ideo subiungit <i>et si abiero, et praeparavero vobis locum, iterum veniam, et accipiam vos ad meipsum</i>: ubi ponit secundam promissionem, scilicet inductionem in regnum.
          <td>1858 Our Lord said above: "Where I am going you cannot follow me now" (13:36). And then here, to keep them from believing that they would be absolutely separated from him he adds, <b>and if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and will take you to myself</b>. This is the second promise, that they will be brought into the kingdom.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Ubi videtur esse verborum contrarietas. Dixit enim: <i>si quo minus, dixissem quia vado parare vobis locum</i>: ubi innuit quod non vadit ad parandum locum. Hic autem dicitur <i>si abiero, et praeparavero vobis locum</i>: ubi innuit, quod vadit ad parandum locum.
          <td>This seems to conflict with his earlier statement, for he had said: <b>if it were not so</b>, [if places were not already prepared] <b>I would have told you that I am going to prepare a place for you</b>. This implies that he is not going to prepare a place for them. Yet here we read: <b>if I go and prepare a place for you</b>, which suggests that he is going to prepare a place for them.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed dicendum quod uno modo posset legi coniunctim ut sit sensus: <i>si quo minus</i>, idest si necesse esset, <i>dixissem vobis, quia vado parare vobis locum</i>. Et iterum: <i>si quo minus</i>, idest <i>si abiero et praeparavero vobis locum</i>.
          <td>One reply would be that these two sentences can be understood as connected together. Then the meaning would be this: "if it were not so," that is, if places were not prepared [that is, by predestination] and I had to go to prepare them, "I would have told you that I am going to prepare [such] a place for you." And then again, "if it were not so," [in the sense of the execution of predestination, see below] "I go and prepare a place for you."
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Secundum Augustinum autem legitur distinctim, ut scilicet haec sit alia clausula ab illa. Dominus praeparavit ab aeterno praedestinando, praeparavit exequendo. Praeparavit autem per recessum suum. Unde illud quod primo dixit, quod mansiones paratae erant, hoc intelligitur quantum ad primam praeparationem ab aeterno: quod autem hic dicit <i>si abiero et praeparavero</i> intelligitur quantum ad executionem aeternae praedestinationis.
          <td>
            According to Augustine, however, these are distinct sentences and are not read together. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn6" name="_ftnref6" id="_ftnref6">[6]</a> Our Lord prepared places both by eternal predestination, and by carrying out this predestination. He also prepared these places by his departure. Thus, what our Lord said first, that rooms were prepared, is understood as referring to the first preparation from all eternity. Then when he says, <b>if I go and prepare a place for you</b>, this is understood as referring to the carrying out of the eternal predestination.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Praeparavit autem dominus per recessum suum nobis locum quinque modis. Primo quidem dando locum fidei. Fides enim cum sit eorum quae non videntur, non erat de Christo apud discipulos, quando eum personaliter videbant. Subtraxit ergo se eis, ut quem habebant praesentia corporali, et videbant oculis corporis, haberent praesentia spirituali, et cernerent oculo mentis: quod est habere per fidem. Secundo demonstrando eis viam ad locum eundi; Mich. I, v. 13: <i>ascendit pandens iter ante eos</i>. Tertio pro eis orando; Hebr. VII, 25: <i>accedens per semetipsum ad Deum salvare potest</i>; Deut. XXXIII, 26: <i>ascensor caeli auxiliator tuus</i>. Quarto sursum attrahendo; Cant. I, v. 3: <i>trahe me post te</i>; Coloss. III, 1: <i>si consurrexistis cum Christo, quae sursum sunt quaerite</i>. Quinto spiritum sanctum eis mittendo; supra VII, 39: <i>nondum erat spiritus datus, quia nondum erat Iesus glorificatus</i>.
          <td>1859 Our Lord prepared a place for us by his departure in five ways. First he made room for faith: for since faith concerns things not seen, when the disciples saw Christ in person, they did not need faith for this. Thus he left them, so that the one they had possessed by his bodily presence and saw with their bodily eyes, they could still possess in his spiritual presence and see with the eyes of their mind. This is to possess him by faith. Secondly, his leaving prepared a place by showing them the way to go to that place: "He who opens the breach will go before them" (Mic 2:13). Thirdly, by his prayers for them: "He is able for all time to save those who draw near to God through him" (Heb 7:25); "He rides through the heavens to your help" (Deut 33:26). Fourthly, by attracting them to what is above: "Draw me after you" (Song 1:4); "If then you have been raised with Christ, seek the things that are above" (Col 3:1). Fifthly, by sending them the Holy Spirit: "As yet the Spirit had not been given, because Jesus was not yet glorified" (7:39).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Complementum autem glorificationis Christi fuit in eius ascensione: et ideo statim cum ascendit, spiritum sanctum misit discipulis suis. Sic ergo praedixit eis corporalem recessum, dicens <i>si abiero et praeparavero vobis locum</i>; deinde promittit eis spiritualem reditum, dicens <i>iterum veniam et recipiam</i>. Veniam in fine mundi, Act. I, 11: <i>quemadmodum vidistis eum ascendentem in caelum, sic veniet. Et accipiam vos ad meipsum</i>, glorificatos in anima et corpore; I Thess. IV, 16: <i>similiter rapiemur cum illis in nubibus obviam Christo in aera</i>.
          <td>1860 The glorification of Christ was completed by his ascension. And so as soon as he ascended, he sent the Holy Spirit to his disciples. He told them ahead of time that he would physically leave them, saying, <b>if I go and prepare a place for you</b>. And then he promised them a spiritual return, saying, <b>I will come again</b>. I will come at the end of the world: "Then Jesus... will come in the same way as you saw him go into heaven" (Acts 1:2). <b>And will take you</b>, glorified in soul and body, <b>to myself</b>: "We shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air" (1 Thess 4:17).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed numquid spiritus apostolorum non accipiuntur a Christo usque in finem mundi? Ad quod dicendum est, quod Graecorum opinio est, quod sancti non vadunt ad Paradisum usque ad diem iudicii. Sed si hoc esset, tunc apostolus frustra haberet desiderium esse cum Christo, Phil. c. I, 23. Et ideo dicendum, quod statim dissoluta huius habitationis domo, quantum ad animam sumus cum Christo. Et sic hoc quod dicit <i>iterum veniam, et accipiam vos ad meipsum</i>, potest exponi de adventu spirituali, quo Christus semper visitat Ecclesiam fidelium, et quemlibet sanctorum vivificat in morte. Ut sit sensus: <i>iterum veniam</i>, ad Ecclesiam spiritualiter continue, <i>et accipiam vos ad meipsum</i>: idest firmabo in fide et dilectione mea; Cant. VI, 1: <i>dilectus meus ascendit ad areolam aromatum</i>, idest ad congregationem sanctorum, <i>ut pascatur</i>, idest delectetur in virtutibus, <i>et lilia colligat</i>, idest, animas puras ad se trahat, cum vivificat sanctos in morte.
          <td>
            1861 Will Christ wait until the end of the world before he takes the spirits of the apostles? It is the opinion of the Greeks that the saints will not go to paradise until the day of judgment. But if this were true, the desire of the Apostle (Phil 1:23) to be with Christ would be futile. Therefore, one should say that immediately after the house where we dwell here is overthrown, our souls are with Christ. And so the statement, <b>I will come again and will take you to myself</b>, can be understood as that spiritual coming with which Christ always visits the Church of the faithful and vivifies each of the faithful at death. Then the meaning is: <b>I will come again</b>, to the Church, spiritually and continuously, <b>and will take you to myself</b>, that is, I will strengthen you in faith and love for me: "My beloved has gone down to his garden, to the beds of spices," that is, to the community of the saints, "to feed in the garden," that is, to delight in their virtues, "and to gather lilies," to draw pure souls to himself when he gives life to the saints at death [Song 6:1]. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn7" name="_ftnref7" id="_ftnref7">[7]</a>
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Deinde subdit fructum, dicens <i>ut ubi ego sum et vos sitis</i>, idest, ubi est caput, sint membra; ubi magister, sint discipuli; Matth. XXIV, 28: <i>ubi fuerit corpus, illic congregabuntur et aquilae</i>; supra XII, 26: <i>ubi ego sum, illic et minister meus erit</i>.
          <td>1862 Then he mentions the fruit of this, saying, <b>that where I am you may be also</b>, that is, so that the members may be with their head; so the disciples may be with their Teacher: "Wherever the body is, there the eagles will be gathered together" (Mt 24:28); "Where I am, there shall my servant be also" (12:26).
    </table>
    <hr>
    <table cellpadding="12">
      <tbody>
        <tr style="align:center">
          <td><b>Lectio 2</b>
          <td><b>LECTURE 2</b>
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td style="font-family:" palatino="">
            <blockquote>
              4 καὶ ὅπου [ἐγὼ] ὑπάγω οἴδατε τὴν ὁδόν. 5 λέγει αὐτῷ Θωμᾶς, κύριε, οὐκ οἴδαμεν ποῦ ὑπάγεις: πῶς δυνάμεθα τὴν ὁδὸν εἰδέναι; 6 λέγει αὐτῷ [ὁ] Ἰησοῦς, ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ ὁδὸς καὶ ἡ ἀλήθεια καὶ ἡ ζωή: οὐδεὶς ἔρχεται πρὸς τὸν πατέρα εἰ μὴ δι' ἐμοῦ. 7 εἰ ἐγνώκατέ με, καὶ τὸν πατέρα μου γνώσεσθε: καὶ ἀπ' ἄρτι γινώσκετε αὐτὸν καὶ ἑωράκατε αὐτόν.
            </blockquote>
          <td>
            <blockquote>
              4 "Where I am going you know, and the way you know." 5 Thomas said to him, "Lord, we do not know where you are going; how can we know the way?" 6 Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me. 7 If you had known me, you would [without doubt] have known my Father also; henceforth you [shall] know him and have seen him." <a href="John14.htm#_ftn8" name="_ftnref8" id="_ftnref8">[8]</a>
            </blockquote>
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Supra dominus confortavit discipulos de suo recessu, promittens eis quod accessum haberent ad patrem, hic consequenter agit de via per quam ad patrem accedunt. Via autem non cognoscitur sine termino; et ideo etiam agit de termino, et primo proponit viam et terminum, ut eis nota; secundo quae proposuit manifestat, ibi <i>dicit ei Thomas domine, nescimus quo vadis</i>.
          <td>1863 Above our Lord consoled his disciples because he was leaving, promising them that they could come to the Father. Now he mentions the way by which they are to approach the Father. But one does not know a way unless he also knows his destination; and so he also considers the destination. First, he mentions the way and its destination as known to them; secondly, he explains this (v 5).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Circa primum sciendum, quod dominus dixerat: <i>si abiero et praeparavero vobis locum, iterum veniam ad vos</i>. Quia forte discipuli quaererent ab eo quo iret, sicut supra XIII, 36, quaesivit Petrus: <i>domine, quo vadis?</i> Ideo dominus haec sciens, dixit eis <i>et quo ego vado scitis, et viam scitis</i>. Vado enim ad patrem, quem scitis per me vobis manifestum; infra XVII, 6: <i>manifestavi nomen tuum hominibus quos dedisti mihi</i>. Via autem per quam vado, sum ego, quem scitis; supra I, 14: <i>vidimus gloriam eius</i>. Recte ergo dixit <i>quo ego vado scitis, et viam scitis</i>: quia patrem sciebant per Christum, et Christum per suam conversationem et praesentiam noverant.
          <td>1864 In regard to the first, note that our Lord had said: "If I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again." The disciples could have asked him where he was going, just like Peter did before: "Lord, where are you going?" (13:36). Our Lord knew this and so said to them, <b>Where I am going you know, and the way you know</b>. For I am going to the Father, whom you know, since I have manifested him to you: "I have manifested thy name to the men whom thou gave me" (17:9). And I myself am the way through which I go, and you know me: "We have beheld his glory" (1:14). He spoke truly, therefore, when he said, <b>where I am going you know, and the way you know</b>: because they knew the Father through Christ, and they knew Christ by living with him.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Consequenter cum dicit <i>dicit ei Thomas</i> etc., manifestat dominus quae proposuit, et primo praemittitur manifestationis occasio; secundo subditur propositorum manifestatio, ibi <i>dicit eis Iesus: ego sum via, veritas et vita</i>.
          <td>1865 Next (v 5), our Lord explains what he has just said: first, we see the occasion for this explanation; secondly, the explanation itself (v 6).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Occasio autem manifestationis fuit dubitatio Thomae interrogantis. Unde <i>dicit ei Thomas: domine, nescimus quo vadis</i>, et cetera. Ubi attende, quod Thomas utrumque negat, quod dominus affirmavit: nam dominus dixit, eos et viam et terminum viae scire; Thomas autem negat se scire viam et terminum: tamen utrumque verum est. Verum est enim quod sciebant, tamen nesciebant se scire. Multa enim sciebant de patre et filio, quae a Christo didicerant; sed ignorabant patrem esse ad quem Christus iret, et filium esse viam qua iret. Difficile enim est quod eatur ad patrem. Nec mirum, si ignorabant: quia licet Christum perfecte secundum hominem scirent, eius tamen divinitatem imperfecte cognoscebant; Iob XXVIII, v. 7: <i>semitam eius ignoravit avis</i>.
          <td>1866 The occasion for this explanation was the hesitation expressed in the question of Thomas. <b>Lord, we do not know where you are going; how can we know the way?</b> Here Thomas denies the two things that our Lord affirmed. For our Lord said that they knew both the way and its destination; but Thomas denied that he knew the way and its destination. Yet both statements are true: for it is true that they knew, yet they did not know that they knew. For they knew many things about the Father and the Son which they had learned from Christ; yet they did not know that it was the Father to whom Christ was going, and that the Son was the way by which he was going. For it is difficult to go to the Father. It is not surprising that they did not know this because although they clearly knew that Christ was a human being, they only imperfectly recognized his divinity: "That path no bird of prey knows" (Job 28:7).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Et subdit <i>quomodo possumus viam scire?</i> Cognitio enim viae dependet ex cognitione termini: quia ergo terminus ignotus est nobis, I Tim. VI, 16: <i>lucem habitat inaccessibilem, quem nullus hominum vidit, sed nec videre potest</i>, ideo via eius est nobis investigabilis, secundum illud Rom. XI, 33: <i>investigabiles viae eius</i>.
          <td>Thomas says, <b>how can we know the way?</b> Knowledge of the way depends on knowledge of the destination. And so because we do not know the destination ‑ "He dwells in unapproachable light, whom no man has ever seen or can see" (1 Tim 6:16) ‑ we can not discover the way: "How inscrutable his ways!" (Rom 11:33).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Consequenter cum dicit <i>dicit eis Iesus: ego sum via, veritas et vita</i>, ponitur quaesitorum manifestatio. Duo autem dominus manifestanda proposuerat eis. Primo quidem viam et terminum eius; secundo quod utrumque scirent. Primo ergo manifestat primum; secundo secundum, ibi <i>si cognovissetis me, et patrem meum utique cognovissetis</i>. Circa primum duo facit. Primo manifestat quid sit via; secundo quid sit terminus, ibi <i>nemo venit ad patrem nisi per me</i>.
          <td>1867 Then when he says, <b>Jesus said to him, I am the way, and the truth, and the life</b>, the question is answered. Our Lord was to answer about two things: first, about the way and its destination; secondly, about their knowledge of both (v 7). He does two things about the first: first, he states what the way is; secondly, he gives its destination (v 6b).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Via autem, ut dictum est, est ipse Christus: et ideo dicit <i>ego sum via</i> et cetera. Quod quidem satis habet rationem: nam per ipsum accessum habemus ad patrem, ut dicitur Rom. V, 2. Competit etiam proposito quo intendit declarare dubitationem discipuli dubitantis.
          <td>1868 The way, as has been said, is Christ himself; so he says, <b>I am the way</b>. This is indeed true, for it is through him that we have access to the Father, as stated in Romans (5:2). This answer could also settle the uncertainty of the faltering disciple.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed quia ista via non est distans a termino, sed coniuncta, addit <i>veritas et vita</i>; et sic ipse simul est via, et terminus. Via quidem secundum humanitatem, terminus secundum divinitatem. Sic ergo secundum quod homo, dicit <i>ego sum via</i>; secundum quod Deus, addit <i>veritas et vita</i>. Per quae duo terminus huius viae convenienter designatur. Nam terminus huius viae finis est desiderii humani, homo autem duo praecipue desiderat: primo quidem veritatis cognitionem, quae est sibi propria; secundo sui esse continuationem, quod est commune omnibus rebus. Christus autem est via perveniendi ad veritatis cognitionem, cum tamen ipse sit veritas; Ps. LXXXV, 11: <i>deduc me, domine, in veritate, et ingrediar in via tua</i>. Christus etiam est via perveniendi ad vitam cum tamen ipse sit vita; Ps. XV, 11: <i>notas fecisti vias vitae</i>. Et ideo huius viae terminum per veritatem et vitam designavit: quae duo supra I de Christo dicta sunt. Primo quidem quod ipse sit vita: unde <i>in ipso vita erat</i>, deinde quod sit veritas, quia <i>erat lux hominum</i>; lux autem veritas est.
          <td>Because this way is not separated from its destination but united to it, he adds, <b>and the truth, and the life</b>. So Christ is at once both the way and the destination. He is the way by reason of his human nature, and the destination because of his divinity. Therefore, as human, he says, <b>I am the way</b>; as God, he adds, <b>and the truth, and the life</b>. These last two appropriately indicate the destination of the way. For the destination of this way is the end of human desire. Now human beings especially desire two things: first, a knowledge of the truth, and this is characteristic of them; secondly, that they continue to exist, and this is common to all things. In fact, Christ is the way to arrive at the knowledge of the truth, while still being the truth itself: "Teach me thy way O Lord, that I may walk in thy truth" (Ps 85:11). Christ is also the way to arrive at life, while still being life itself: "Thou couldst show me the path of life" (Ps 16:11). And so he indicated the destination or end of this way as truth and life. These two were already applied to Christ: first, he is life: "In him was life" (1:4); then, he is truth, because "the life is the light of men" (1:45), and light is truth.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed notandum, quod haec duo proprie et per se Christo conveniunt. Veritas enim convenit ei per se quia ipse est verbum. Nihil enim aliud est veritas quam adaequatio rei ad intellectum, quod fit quando intellectus concipit rem prout est. Veritas ergo intellectus nostri pertinet ad verbum nostrum, quod est conceptio eius. Sed tamen licet verbum nostrum sit verum, non tamen est ipsa veritas, cum non sit a seipso, sed ex hoc quod rei conceptae adaequatur. Veritas ergo intellectus divini pertinet ad verbum Dei. Sed quia verbum Dei est verum a seipso, cum non mensuretur a rebus, sed res intantum sint verae inquantum ad similitudinem eius accedunt: inde est quod verbum Dei est ipsa veritas. Et quia nullus potest veritatem cognoscere nisi adhaereat veritati, oportet omnem qui veritatem cognoscere desiderat, huic verbo adhaerere.
          <td>1869 Note that both truth and life belong properly and essentially <i>(per se)</i> to Christ. Truth belongs essentially to him because he is the Word. Now truth is the conformity of a thing to the intellect, and this results when the intellect conceives the thing as it is. Therefore, the truth of our intellect belongs to our word, which is its conception. Yet although our word is true, it is not truth itself, since it is not true of itself but because it is conformed to the thing conceived. And so the truth of the divine intellect belongs to the Word of God. But because the Word of God is true of itself (since it is not measured by things, but things are true in the measure that they are similar to the Word) the Word of God is truth itself. And because no one can know the truth unless he adheres to the truth, it is necessary that anyone who desires to know the truth adhere to this Word.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Vita autem proprie convenit sibi: quia omne quod aliquam operationem ex se habet, dicitur vivens; non viventia autem dicuntur quae ex seipsis motum non habent. Inter operationes vitae praecipuae sunt operationes intellectuales: unde et ipse intellectus dicitur vivens, et actio eius est vita quaedam. In Deo autem idem est intelligere et intellectus: unde manifestum est quod filius, qui est verbum intellectus patris, est vita sua.
          <td>
            Life also belongs properly to Christ: for everything which has some activity from itself is said to be living, while non‑living things do not have motion from themselves. Among the activities of life the chief are the intellectual activities. Thus, the intellect itself is said to be living, and its activities are a certain kind of life. Now in God the activity of understanding and the intellect itself are the same. Thus it is clear that the Son, who is the Word of the intellect of the Father, is his own life. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn9" name="_ftnref9" id="_ftnref9">[9]</a>
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sic ergo Christus seipsum designavit viam, et coniunctam termino: quia ipse est terminus habens in se quidquid desiderari potest, scilicet existens veritas et vita.
          <td>This is the reason why Christ referred to himself as the way, united to its destination: because he is the destination, containing in himself whatever can be desired, that is, existing truth and life.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Si ergo quaeras, qua transeas, accipe Christum, quia ipse est via; Is. XXX, v. 21: <i>haec est via, ambulate in ea</i>. Et Augustinus dicit: <i>ambula per hominem, et pervenies ad Deum. Melius est enim in via claudicare, quam praeter viam fortiter ambulare</i>. Nam qui in via claudicat, etiam si parum proficiscatur, appropinquat ad terminum; qui vero extra viam ambulat, quanto fortius currit, tanto magis a termino elongatur.
          <td>
            1870 If then, you ask which way to go, accept Christ, for he is the way: "This is the way, walk in it" (Is 30:21). And Augustine says: "Walk like this human being and you will come to God. It is better to limp along on the way than to walk briskly off the way." <a href="John14.htm#_ftn10" name="_ftnref10" title="" id="_ftnref10">[10]</a> For one who limps on the way, even though he makes just a little progress, is approaching his destination; but if one walks off the way, the faster he goes the further he gets from his destination.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Si vero quaeras quo vadis, adhaere Christo, quia ipse est veritas, ad quam desideramus pervenire; Prov. VIII, 7: <i>veritatem meditabitur guttur meum</i> et cetera. Si quaeris quo permaneas, adhaere Christo, quia ipse est vita. Prov. VIII, 35: <i>qui me inveniet, inveniet vitam, et hauriet salutem a domino</i>. Adhaere ergo Christo, si vis esse securus: non enim poteris deviare, quia ipse est via. Unde qui ei adhaerent, non ambulant in invio, sed per viam rectam; Prov. IV, v. 11: <i>viam sapientiae monstrabo tibi</i>. E contra dicitur de quibusdam: <i>viam veritatis habitaculi non invenerunt</i>.
          <td>If you ask where to go, cling to Christ, for he is the truth which we desire to reach: "My mouth will utter truth" (Prv 8:7). If you ask where to remain, remain in Christ because he is the life: "He who finds me finds life and shall have salvation from the Lord" [Prv 8:35]. Therefore, cling to Christ if you wish to be secure, for you cannot get off the road because he is the way. And so those who hold on to him are not walking off the road but on the right road: "I have taught you the way of wisdom" (Prv 4:11). But some are just the opposite: "They did not find the way of truth to dwell in" [Ps 107:4].
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Item non potest decipi, quia ipse est veritas, et docet omnem veritatem; infra XVIII, 37: <i>in hoc natus sum, et ad hoc veni, ut testimonium perhibeam veritati</i>. Item non potest perturbari, quia ipse est vita et vitam dans; supra X, 10: <i>ego veni ut vitam habeant, et abundantius habeant</i>.
          <td>Again, those who hold on to Christ cannot be deceived, because he is the truth and teaches all truth: "For this I was born, and for this I have come into the world, to bear witness to the truth" (18:37). Further, they cannot be troubled, because he is the life and the giver of life: "I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly" (10:10).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Nam, ut Augustinus dicit, dominus dicit <i>ego sum via, veritas et vita</i>, tamquam diceret qua vis ire? <i>Ego sum via</i>. Quo vis ire? <i>Ego sum veritas</i>. Ubi vis permanere? <i>Ego sum vita</i>. Non enim, ut Hilarius dicit, in erratica ducit ille qui est via, nec illudit per falsa qui veritas est, neque in mortis relinquit errore qui vita est.
          <td>
            Augustine says that when our Lord said <b>I am the way, and the truth, and the life</b>, he was saying in effect: How do you want to go? <b>I am the way</b>. Where do you want to go? <b>I am the truth</b>. Where do you want to remain? <b>I am the life</b>. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn11" name="_ftnref11" id="_ftnref11">[11]</a> As Hilary says: he who is the way does not lead us off the right path; he who is the truth does not deceive us with falsehoods; and he who is the life does not abandon us to death. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn12" name="_ftnref12" id="_ftnref12">[12]</a>
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Vel aliter. Tria sunt in homine quae ad sanctitatem pertinent, scilicet actio et contemplatio et intentio: et ista perficiuntur a Christo. Nam activam exercentibus Christus est via; in contemplativa vero perseverantibus Christus est veritas: sed activorum et contemplantium intentionem dirigit ad vitam, scilicet aeternam. Docet enim ire, et praedicare pro futuro saeculo. Sic ergo dominus est nobis via qua imus ad ipsum, et per ipsum ad patrem.
          <td>1871 Here is another interpretation. In human beings, holiness involves three things: action, contemplation, and one's intention. These are brought to perfection by Christ. Christ is the way for those in the active life; he is the truth for those who stand firm in the contemplative life. And he directs the intention of both those in the active and contemplative life to life, eternal life. For he teaches us to go and preach for the sake of the age to come. So, the Lord is our way by which we go to him, and through him to the Father.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed cum ipsemet qui via est, vadit ad patrem, numquid ipse est sibi via? Sed, ut Augustinus dicit, ipse est via, et qui vadit per viam, et quo vadit: unde ipse per seipsum ad seipsum vadit. Nam ipse inquantum est homo, via est: unde per carnem venit, manens ubi erat; et per carnem vadit, non relinquens quo venerat;
          <td>
            1872 But when he, who is the way, goes to the Father, is he the way for himself? As Augustine says, he is the way, and the one who goes by the way, and the destination of the way. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn13" name="_ftnref13" title="" id="_ftnref13">[13]</a> Thus he goes to himself through himself. He, as having human nature, is the way. Thus, he came through his flesh, yet remained where he was; and he went through his flesh, without leaving where he had come from.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>per carnem etiam ad se redit veritatem et vitam: nam Deus venerat per carnem ad homines, veritas ad mendaces, vita ad mortales. <i>Est enim Deus verax, omnis autem homo mendax</i>: Rom. III, 4. Cum autem se ab hominibus abstulit, atque illuc ubi nemo mentitur, carnem suam levavit, idem ipse qui verbum caro factum est, per carnem suam ad veritatem, quae est ipse, remeavit. Et simile est si dicerem: et mens mea, dum loquor aliquibus, ad eos exit, nec tamen me relinquit: cum autem tacuero, quodammodo ad me redeo, et cum illis quibus loquor, maneo. Sic ergo Christus, qui nobis est via, etiam sibi ipsi, idest carni, factus est via, ut ad veritatem et vitam iret.
          <td>Also, through the flesh he returned to himself, the truth and the life. For God had come, through his flesh, to us, the truth to liars, the life to mortals: "God is truthful, and every human is a liar" [Rom 3:4]. And when he left us, and took his flesh up to that place where there are no liars, this very Word who was made flesh returned, through his flesh, to the truth, which is himself. For example: when I speak to others, my mind goes out to them, yet it does not leave me; and when I am silent, in a certain sense I return to myself, yet still remain with those to whom I spoke [if they remember what I said]. And so Christ, who is our way, became the way even for himself, this is, for his flesh, to go to the truth and the life.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Consequenter cum dicit <i>nemo venit ad patrem nisi per me</i>, manifestat quod quaesitum fuerat quantum ad terminum viae. Via autem, quae est Christus, ut dictum est, ducit ad patrem. Sed quia pater et filius sunt unum, ideo haec via ducit etiam ad seipsum. Et ideo dicit Christus se esse terminum viae. <i>Nemo</i>, inquit, <i>venit ad patrem nisi per me</i>.
          <td>1873 Then when he says, <b>no one comes to the Father, but by me</b>, he answers what was asked about the destination of the way. The way, which is Christ, leads to the Father. Yet, because the Father and the Son are one, this way leads also to himself. And so Christ says that he is the terminus of the way.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed sciendum quod, sicut apostolus dicit, <i>nemo novit quae sunt hominis, nisi spiritus eius qui in ipso est</i>, quod intelligendum est nisi inquantum homo vult se manifestare. Secretum autem suum manifestat quis per verbum suum: et ideo nullus potest venire ad secretum hominis nisi per verbum hominis. Quia ergo et <i>quae Dei sunt nemo novit nisi spiritus Dei</i>, nullus potest venire ad notitiam patris nisi per verbum suum, quod est filius eius; Matth. XI, 27: <i>neque patrem quis novit nisi filius</i>. Et sicut homo volens revelare se verbo cordis, quod profert ore, induit quodammodo ipsum verbum litteris vel voce, ita Deus, volens se manifestare hominibus, verbum suum conceptum ab aeterno, carne induit in tempore. Et sic nullus ad notitiam patris pervenire potest nisi per filium. Unde supra X, 9, dicit: <i>ego sum ostium. Per me si quis introierit salvabitur</i>.
          <td>1874 Note that the Apostle says: "For what person knows a man's thoughts except the spirit of the man which is in him?" (1 Cor 2:11), that is, provided one does not choose to reveal his own thoughts. A person reveals what is hidden within by his words, and it is only by the words of a person that we can know what is hidden within. Now "no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the spirit of God" (1 Cor 2:11), therefore, no one can acquire a knowledge of the Father except by his Word, which is his Son: "No one knows the Father except the Son" (Mt 11:27). And just like one of us who wants to be known by others by revealing to them the words in his heart, clothes these words with letters or sounds, so God, wanting to be known by us, takes his Word, conceived from eternity, and clothes it with flesh in time. And so no one can arrive at a knowledge of the Father except through the Son. Thus he says: "I am the door; if any one enters by me, he will be saved" (10:9).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed notandum, secundum Chrysostomum, quod supra VI, 44, dominus dicit: <i>nemo potest venire ad me, nisi pater meus traxerit eum</i>, hic autem dicit <i>nemo venit ad patrem nisi per me</i>.
          <td>
            1875 Note, with Chrysostom, that our Lord had said: "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him" (6:44). <a href="John14.htm#_ftn14" name="_ftnref14" id="_ftnref14">[14]</a> But here he says: no one comes to the Father, but by me. This indicates that the Son is equal to the Father.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>In quo ostenditur aequalitas filii ad patrem. Patet ergo quae sit via, quia Christus; quis terminus, quia pater.
          <td>It is now clear what the way is, it is Christ; what the destination is, it is the Father.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Consequenter cum dicit <i>si cognovissetis me, et patrem meum utique cognovissetis</i>, ostendit quod discipuli utrumque cognoscunt, scilicet quo vadit, et viam, et primo proponit manifestationem; secundo excludit emergentem dubitationem, ibi <i>dicit ei Philippus: domine, ostende nobis patrem</i>. Circa primum duo facit. Primo ostendit concomitantiam notitiae habitae de filio ad notitiam habitam de patre; secundo manifestat quomodo discipuli se habeant ad notitiam patris, ibi <i>et amodo cognoscetis eum</i>.
          <td>1876 Then when he says, <b>If you had known me, you would without doubt have known my Father also</b>, he shows that the disciples knew both where he was going and the way. First, he shows this; secondly he resolves a coming difficulty. He does two things about the first: first, he shows that knowledge of the Son is also knowledge of the Father; secondly, he states the disciples' knowledge of the Father (v 7b).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Dicit ergo primo: dixi quod sum via, et quod scitis viam, scilicet me: ergo et quo vado scitis, quia notitia de me non potest haberi sine notitia patris.
          <td>1877 He had said: I have said that I am the way, and that you know the way, that is, me. Therefore, you also know where I am going, because you cannot know me without knowing the Father. This is what he says: <b>If you had known me, you would without doubt have known my Father also</b>.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Et hoc est quod dicit <i>si cognovissetis me, et patrem meum utique cognovissetis</i>. Supra VIII, 19, Iudaeis dicit: <i>si me sciretis, et patrem meum forsitan sciretis</i>. Quid est ergo quod dicit <i>si cognovissetis me, et patrem meum utique cognovissetis</i>: ibi autem dicit forsitan? Videtur quod ibi dubitaverit de eo quod hic asserit.
          <td>1878 Yet he had said to the Jews before: "If you knew me, you would perhaps know my Father also" [8:19]. Why does he say here, "without doubt," while before he said "perhaps"? It seems that before he had some doubts about what he says here.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed dicendum, quod ibi loquebatur Iudaeis quos increpabat; et ideo addit <i>forsitan</i>, non dubitans, sed increpans eos. Hic autem loquitur discipulis quos instruit; et ideo veritatem eis cum assertione proponit, dicens <i>si cognovissetis me, et patrem meum utique cognovissetis</i>; quasi dicat: si sciretis meam gratiam et dignitatem, et eam utique quae patris est sciretis. Per nihil enim aliud res melius scitur quam per verbum et imaginem suam; filius autem est verbum patris; supra I, 1: <i>in principio erat verbum, et verbum erat apud Deum</i>; ibid. 14: <i>verbum caro factum est, et habitavit in nobis; et vidimus gloriam eius, gloriam quasi unigeniti a patre</i>. Filius etiam est imago patris; Col. I, 15: <i>qui est imago invisibilis Dei</i>; Hebr. I, 3: <i>qui cum sit splendor gloriae et figura substantiae eius</i>. In filio ergo cognoscitur pater, ut in verbo et imagine propria.
          <td>We should answer that in the first instance he was speaking to the Jews, whom he was reprimanding. And so he added "perhaps" not because he had any doubts, but as a rebuke to them. But here he is speaking to his disciples, whom he is teaching. Thus, he simply states the truth to them: <b>If you had known me, you would without doubt have known my Father also</b>. This is like saying: If you knew my grace and dignity, you would without doubt also know that of the Father. For there is no better way to know something than through its word or image, and the Son is the Word of the Father: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God" (1:1); "And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth; we have beheld his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father" (1:14). The Son is also the image of the Father: "He is the image of the invisible God" (Col 1:15); "He reflects the glory of God and bears the very stamp of his nature" (Heb 1:3). Therefore, the Father is known in the Son as in his Word and proper image.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed notandum, quod inquantum aliquid accedit ad similitudinem paterni verbi, intantum in ipso cognoscitur pater, et similiter inquantum habet de imagine patris. Cum autem omne verbum creatum sit aliqua similitudo illius verbi, et in qualibet re inveniatur similitudo divinitatis, vel imaginis vel vestigii, sed imperfecta: inde est quod per nullam creaturam et a nulla intelligentia et conceptione intellectus creati potest cognosci perfecte idipsum quod Deus est; sed solum verbum unigenitum quod est perfectum et perfecta imago patris, ipsum quod quid est patris cognoscit et comprehendit.
          <td>1879 Note that to the extent that something approaches to a likeness of the Word of the Father, to that extent the Father is known in it, and to that extent it is in the image of the Father. Now since every created word is some likeness of that Word, and some likeness, though imperfect, of the divinity is found in every thing, either as an image or a trace, it follows that what God is cannot be known perfectly through any creature or by any thought or concept of a created intellect. It is the Word alone, the only‑begotten Word, which is a perfect word and the perfect image of the Father, that knows and comprehends the Father.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Unde, secundum Hilarium, possunt haec verba aliter continuari. Nam cum dominus dicit <i>nemo venit ad patrem nisi per me</i>, interrogatus Arius, quomodo itur ad patrem per filium, respondet, quod per doctrinae admonitionem, inquantum scilicet filius sua doctrina instruit homines de patre, secundum illud infra XVII, 6: <i>pater, manifestavi nomen tuum hominibus</i>. Sed dominus hoc excludens dicit <i>si cognovissetis me, et patrem meum utique cognovissetis</i>; quasi dicat: Arius vel alius quicumque homo annuntiare quidem potest de patre, sed nullus est tantus quod eo cognito, cognoscatur pater, nisi solus filius, qui est eiusdem naturae cum ipso.
          <td>
            Therefore, according to Hilary, this statement can be put in another context. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn15" name="_ftnref15" title="" id="_ftnref15">[15]</a> Our Lord said: "no one comes to the Father, but by me." If you ask Arius how one goes to the Father through the Son, he answers that it is by recalling what the Son taught, because the Son taught us about the Father: "Father... I have manifested thy name to the men whom thou gavest me" (17:6). But our Lord rejected this by saying: <b>If you had known me, you would without doubt have known my Father also</b>. This is like saying: Arius, or anyone else can indeed speak about the Father, but no human being is such that by knowing him the Father is known. This is true of the Son alone, who has the same nature as the Father.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Consequenter cum dicit <i>et amodo cognoscetis eum</i>, ostendit quomodo discipuli se habeant ad cognitionem patris. Dixerat autem dominus supra discipulis, quod patrem cognoscunt, <i>quo</i>, inquiens, <i>vado scitis</i>. Et hoc Thomas negavit, dicens: <i>domine, nescimus quo vadis</i>. Et ideo hic dominus ostendit quod aliquo modo cognoscunt patrem, ut ostendat verbum suum verum esse, et aliquo modo non cognoscunt, ut verbum Thomae sit verum. Et ponit ad hoc duplicem patris cognitionem: unam quae erit in futuro; aliam quae fuit in praeterito.
          <td>1880 Next, our Lord shows the knowledge the disciples had of the Father. Our Lord had already told the disciples that they knew the Father when he said, "Where I am going you know." Yet Thomas denied this: "we do not know where you are going." Thus our Lord shows here that in a certain way they did know the Father, so that his statement was true; and in another sense they did not know the Father, so that what Thomas said was true. To do this, he mentions a twofold knowledge of the Father: one which will be in the future, and the other which was in the past.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Dicit ergo, quod <i>amodo cognoscetis eum</i>. Dicit autem <i>amodo</i>, quia duplex cognitio habetur de patre. Una perfecta, quae est per immediatam eius visionem, quae erit in patria; I Io. III, 2: <i>cum apparuerit, similes ei erimus</i>; alia est imperfecta, quae est per speculum et in aenigmate, quam habemus per fidem; I Cor. XIII, 12: <i>videmus nunc per speculum et in aenigmate</i>. Potest ergo hic intelligi de utraque; ut sit sensus: <i>amodo cognoscetis eum</i>, cognitione perfecta in patria, infra XVI, 25: <i>palam de patre meo annuntiabo vobis</i>, quasi dicat: verum est, quod non cognoscitis eum perfecta cognitione, sed <i>amodo cognoscetis eum</i>, peracto mysterio passionis meae. Vel <i>amodo</i>, idest post resurrectionem meam et ascensionem et missionem spiritus sancti, <i>cognoscetis eum</i>, cognitione fidei perfecta, quia, cum venerit spiritus Paraclitus, <i>ille vos docebit omnia, et suggeret vobis omnia quaecumque dixero vobis</i>: infra XIV, 26. Sic ergo verum dicis, quod nescis eum cognitione perfecta;
          <td>He says, <b>henceforth you shall know him</b>. And he says, <b>henceforth</b>, because knowledge of the Father is of two kinds. One is perfect, and is by an immediate vision of him, and this will be in our homeland: "When he appears we shall be like him" (1 Jn 3:2). The other is imperfect, and is by reflections and is obscure; and we have this by faith: "For now we see in a mirror dimly" (1 Cor 3:2). Thus, this phrase can be understood of each kind of knowledge. <b>Henceforth you shall know him</b>, with perfect knowledge in your homeland: "I shall tell you plainly of the Father" (16:25). This is like saying: It is true that you do not know him with perfect knowledge, but from <b>henceforth you shall know him</b>, after the mystery of my passion has been accomplished. Or, in the other way, <b>henceforth</b>, after my resurrection and ascension and after I have sent the Holy Spirit, <b>you shall know him</b>, with the perfect knowledge of faith, for when the Spirit, the Paraclete, comes, "he will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you" (14:26). So you are speaking the truth when you say that you do not know him with perfect knowledge.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>sed ego verum dico, quia <i>vidistis eum</i>; Baruch III, v. 38: <i>post haec in terris visus est, et cum hominibus conversatus est</i>. Viderunt enim Christum, secundum carnem assumptam, in qua erat verbum, et in verbo pater: unde in ipso viderunt patrem; supra VIII, 29: <i>qui me misit, mecum est</i>.
          <td>And I am speaking the truth, because you have seen him: "Afterward he was seen on earth and conversed with men" [Bar 3:37]. They saw Christ in the flesh he had taken on, in which the Word existed, and in the Word they saw the Father. Thus they saw the Father in him: "He who sent me is with me" (8:29).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed attende, quod pater non erat in carne per unitatem personae, sed erat in verbo incarnato per unitatem naturae, et in Christo incarnato videbatur pater; supra I, v. 14: <i>vidimus gloriam eius, gloriam quasi unigeniti a patre</i>.
          <td>1881 Note that the Father was not in the flesh in such a way that it was joined to him to constitute one person, but he was in the incarnate Word because they had one and the same nature, and the Father was seen in the incarnate Christ: "We have be held his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father" (1:14).
    </table>
    <hr>
    <table cellpadding="12">
      <tbody>
        <tr style="align:center">
          <td><b>Lectio 3</b>
          <td><b>LECTURE 3</b>
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td style="font-family:" palatino="">
            <blockquote>
              8 λέγει αὐτῷ Φίλιππος, κύριε, δεῖξον ἡμῖν τὸν πατέρα, καὶ ἀρκεῖ ἡμῖν. 9 λέγει αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰησοῦς, τοσούτῳ χρόνῳ μεθ' ὑμῶν εἰμι καὶ οὐκ ἔγνωκάς με, Φίλιππε; ὁ ἑωρακὼς ἐμὲ ἑώρακεν τὸν πατέρα: πῶς σὺ λέγεις, δεῖξον ἡμῖν τὸν πατέρα; 10 οὐ πιστεύεις ὅτι ἐγὼ ἐν τῷ πατρὶ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἐν ἐμοί ἐστιν; τὰ ῥήματα ἃ ἐγὼ λέγω ὑμῖν ἀπ' ἐμαυτοῦ οὐ λαλῶ: ὁ δὲ πατὴρ ἐν ἐμοὶ μένων ποιεῖ τὰ ἔργα αὐτοῦ. 11 πιστεύετέ μοι ὅτι ἐγὼ ἐν τῷ πατρὶ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἐν ἐμοί: εἰ δὲ μή, διὰ τὰ ἔργα αὐτὰ πιστεύετε.
              <p style="margin-left:45pt"><b>Father and Son will work what you ask 14:12-14</b> 12 ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ὁ πιστεύων εἰς ἐμὲ τὰ ἔργα ἃ ἐγὼ ποιῶ κἀκεῖνος ποιήσει, καὶ μείζονα τούτων ποιήσει, ὅτι ἐγὼ πρὸς τὸν πατέρα πορεύομαι: 13 καὶ ὅ τι ἂν αἰτήσητε ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί μου τοῦτο ποιήσω, ἵνα δοξασθῇ ὁ πατὴρ ἐν τῷ υἱῷ: 14 ἐάν τι αἰτήσητέ με ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί μου ἐγὼ ποιήσω.
            </blockquote>
          <td>
            <blockquote>
              8 Philip said to him, "Lord, show us the Father, and we shall be satisfied." 9 Jesus said to him, "Have I been with you so long, and yet you do not know me, Philip? [Philip], he who has seen me has seen the Father [also]; how can you say, 'Show us the Father'? 10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority [of myself]; but the Father who dwells in me does his [the] works. 11 Believe me [Do you not believe] that I am in the Father and the Father in me [?]. Or else believe me for the sake of the works themselves. 12 Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I go to the Father. 13 Whatever you ask [the Father] in my name, I will do it, that the Father may be glorified in the Son; 14 if you ask me anything in my name, I will do it." <a href="John14.htm#_ftn16" name="_ftnref16" id="_ftnref16">[16]</a>
            </blockquote>
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Hic dominus solvit emergentem dubitationem discipuli, et primo ponitur ipsius dubitantis positio; secundo dubitationis remotio, ibi <i>dicit ei Iesus</i> et cetera.
          <td>1882 Here our Lord clears up a confusion in one of the disciples: first, we see what the confusion was; secondly, it is resolved (v 9).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Circa primum sciendum, quod dominus supra discipulis promisit quoddam futurum, scilicet perfectam Dei cognitionem, cum dixit: <i>amodo cognoscetis eum</i>: aliud praeteritum, scilicet quod viderunt eum. Quod audiens Philippus, credebat se vidisse patrem; sed petit eius cognitionem, dicens <i>domine, ostende nobis patrem</i>: ut petitio huius ostensionis non referatur ad visionem, sed ad cognitionem, <i>et sufficit nobis</i>. Nec mirum, quia visio patris est finis omnium desideriorum et actionum nostrarum, ita ut nil amplius requiratur; Ps. XV, 11: <i>adimplebis visione vultus tui</i>; Ps. CII, 5: <i>qui replet in me laetitia cum vultu tuo</i>, idest, in bonis desiderium tuum.
          <td>1883 In regard to the first, recall that above our Lord mentioned two things. He promised something for the future, namely, a perfect knowledge of God, when he said: "henceforth you shall know him"; and he mentioned something about the past, namely, that they had seen him (v 7). When Philip heard this he believed that he had seen the Father. But now he asks to know him, saying, <b>Lord, show us the Father</b> (not asking for a vision but for knowledge) <b>and we shall be satisfied</b>. This is not surprising since that vision of the Father [a knowledge] is the end of all our desires and actions, and nothing else is necessary: "You will fill me with joy by your face," that is, by the vision of your face [Ps 16:11]; "He satisfies your desire with good things" [Ps 103:5].
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Hic removetur dubitatio, et primo ponitur dubitationis remotio; secundo subditur dictorum manifestatio, ibi <i>verba quae ego loquor vobis, a meipso non loquor</i>. In prima primo arguit tarditatem; secundo instruit veritatem, ibi <i>Philippe, qui videt me, videt et patrem</i>; tertio reprobat petitionem, ibi <i>quomodo tu dicis: ostende nobis patrem?</i>
          <td>1884 Now the confusion is cleared up. First, we see it resolved; secondly, this is explained further (v 10). As to the first, our Lord chides Philip for his slowness; secondly, he states the truth, <b>Philip, he who has seen me has seen the Father also</b>; thirdly, Christ objects to the very request, <b>how can you say, Show us the Father</b>.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Dicit ergo primo <i>tanto tempore vobiscum sum, et non cognovistis me?</i> Quasi dicat: ex diuturna conversatione qua tanto tempore vobiscum conversatus sum, debuissetis me cognoscere. Et si cognovissetis me, cognosceretis utique et patrem. Ex hoc ergo quod tu non cognoscis patrem, das intelligere quod tu non cognoscis me: in quo arguendus es tarditatis; Matth. XV, 16: <i>adhuc et vos sine intellectu estis?</i> Hebr. V, 12: <i>cum deberetis magistri esse propter tempus, rursum indigetis ut vos doceamini</i>.
          <td>1885 He says, <b>Have I been with you so long, and yet you do not know me, Philip?</b> He is saying in effect: you should know me, considering how long I have been living with you and talking with you. And if you had known me, you would without doubt have known the Father also. Therefore, since you do not know the Father, you indicate that you do not know me. And you can be chided for your slowness: "Are you also still without understanding?" (Mt 15:16); "For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need some one to teach you again" (Heb 5:12)
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed hic incidit dubitatio: quia supra dominus dixit discipulis, quod eum sciebant, cum dixit, <i>viam scitis</i> etc., hic autem videtur dicere contrarium, dicens <i>si cognovissetis me, et patrem meum utique cognovissetis</i>.
          <td>1886 This gives rise to a question, for before, our Lord told the disciples that they knew him, when he said, "and the way you know" (v 4), while here he seems to say the opposite, "If you had known me, you would without doubt have known my Father also" (v 7).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed dicendum, secundum Augustinum, quod inter discipulos aliqui erant qui Christum secundum quod erat verbum Dei, cognoscebant: quorum unus erat Petrus, ubi dixit: <i>tu es Christus filius Dei vivi</i>. Alii erant qui vere eum non cognoscebant, intra quos erat Philippus. Quantum ergo ad primos dicit dominus: <i>quo ego vado scitis</i>; sed quantum ad secundos dicit <i>si cognovissetis me, et patrem meum utique cognovissetis</i>.
          <td>
            Augustine answers this by saying that among the disciples there were some who knew Christ as the Word of God. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn17" name="_ftnref17" id="_ftnref17">[17]</a> One of these was Peter, when he said, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God" (Mt 16:16). There were others who did not truly know him, and Philip was one of these. It is to the first group that our Lord says, "Where I am going you know, and the way you know" (v 4); it is to the second group that he says, "If you had known me, you would without doubt have known the Father also."
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Vel aliter. Christus dupliciter cognosci poterat: scilicet secundum humanam naturam, et sic omnes sciebant; et quantum ad hoc dicit: <i>et quo ego vado, scitis, et viam scitis</i>. Et secundum divinam, et sic eum nondum perfecte cognoverant; et quantum ad hoc dicit <i>si cognovissetis me, et patrem meum utique cognovissetis</i>. Et hoc patet per hoc quod subdit <i>Philippe, qui videt me, videt et patrem</i>; quasi diceret: si cognosceretis me, cognosceretis patrem; et sic non diceres <i>ostende nobis patrem</i>, quia iam vidisses eum, me viso; supra VIII, 19: <i>si me sciretis, forsitan et patrem meum sciretis</i>.
          <td>Here is another explanation. Christ could be known in a twofold way. He could be known in his human nature, and every one knew him this way. With this in mind he says, "Where I am going you know, and the way you know." He could also be known as being of a divine nature, but they did not yet perfectly know him in this way. In reference to this, he says, "If you had known me, you would without doubt have known my Father also." This is clear from the fact that he adds, <b>Philip, he who has seen me has seen the Father also</b>. He is saying in effect: If you knew me, you would know the Father; and then you would not be saying, <b>show us the Father</b>, because you would have already seen him by seeing me: "If you knew me, you would perhaps know my Father also" [8:19].
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed ex hoc Sabellius erroris sui fulcimentum sumit, dicens: quid est hoc quod dixit <i>qui videt me, videt et patrem</i>, nisi quia idem ipse sit pater et filius?
          <td>1887 Sabellius made this statement the basis of his error. He asked what could be the meaning of <b>he who has seen me has seen the Father also</b>, except that the Father and the Son are the same?
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Ad hoc dicit Hilarius: si hoc ita esset, dominus dixisset <i>qui videt me, videt patrem</i>, nulla coniunctione apposita; sed quia coniunctionem addidit, dicens <i>videt et patrem</i>, distinctionem ostendit. Et est similis modus loquendi, secundum Augustinum, sicut quis de duobus similibus loquens dicit: si vidisti istum, vidisti et illum. In filio autem est perfectissima similitudo patris; et ideo dicit <i>qui videt me, videt et patrem</i>. Sed adhuc in filio est maior similitudo quam in hominibus, quia in eis numquam potest esse similitudo secundum eamdem formam vel qualitatem numero, sed solum secundum speciem: in filio autem est eadem natura numero, quae est in patre; et ideo magis in visione filii videtur pater, quam in visione alicuius hominis, quantumcumque simillimi videantur.
          <td>
            Hilary answers this by saying if this were so, our Lord would have said, "he who has seen me has seen the Father," without adding the "also." <a href="John14.htm#_ftn18" name="_ftnref18" id="_ftnref18">[18]</a> But because he adds the "also," saying, <b>has seen the Father also</b>, he shows there is a distinction. Augustine says that we use the same way of speaking when we talk about two people who are alike. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn19" name="_ftnref19" id="_ftnref19">[19]</a> We say that if you saw one you saw the other. Now the most perfect likeness of the Father is in the Son. Therefore he says, <b>he who has seen me has seen the Father also</b>. In fact, there is a greater likeness in the Son than there is among mere human beings, because in them there can never be a likeness based on the very same numerical form or quality, but only a likeness in species. In the Son, however, there is the same numerical nature as in the Father. Thus, when seeing the Son, the Father is better seen than when seeing some mere human another mere human is seen, no matter how much alike they are. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn20" name="_ftnref20" id="_ftnref20">[20]</a>
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed notandum, quod ex verbis quae hic dicuntur, excluditur error Arii quantum ad duo. Primo quantum ad hoc quod negabat consubstantialitatem. Impossibile est enim quod in visione substantiae creatae possit videri substantia increata, sicut per cognitionem substantiae unius generis non potest haberi cognitio substantiae alterius generis. Manifestum est ergo quod filius non est substantia creata, sed est consubstantialis patri: alias qui videt filium, non videret patrem.
          <td>1888 Note that this statement excludes the error of Arius on two points. First, it rejects his denial of consubstantiality. For it is impossible to see the uncreated substance by seeing some created substance, just as by knowing a substance of one genus, one cannot know a substance of another genus. It is evident, therefore, that the Son is not a created substance, but is consubstantial with the Father. Otherwise, one who sees the Son would not see the Father.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Secundo quantum ad hoc quod dicunt super illud I Tim. I, 17: <i>regi saeculorum immortali, invisibili, soli Deo</i>, scilicet quod solus pater est invisibilis, filius vero in sua natura multoties sit visus: quod si esset, sequeretur etiam quod pater visus esset frequenter, quia qui videt filium, videt et patrem. Cum ergo pater invisibilis sit secundum suam naturam, impossibile est quod filius secundum suam naturam sit visus.
          <td>The other error excluded is their interpretation of 1 Timothy (1:17), "To the King of ages, immortal, invisible, the only God," as meaning that only the Father is invisible, but the Son was often seen in his nature. But if this were so, it would follow that the Father was also frequently seen, because one who sees the Son sees the Father also. So since the Father is invisible as to his nature, it is impossible that the Father was seen in his nature.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed obiicit aliquis, cur dominus reprehenderit Philippum, qui videns filium, quaerebat videre patrem, cum non sit reprehendendus quispiam qui videns imaginem, videre velit rem imaginatam?
          <td>1889 Someone might question why our Lord chided Philip for asking to see the Father after he had seen the Son, since when one sees a picture he should not be rebuked for wanting to see the thing pictured.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Ad quod Chrysostomus respondet dicens, quod Philippus audiens de visione patris et cognitione eius, volebat ipsum patrem corporeis oculis videre, sicut et ipsum filium aestimabat vidisse: et ideo hoc dominus improbavit, ostendens ei quod neque ipsum filium in sui natura vidit oculo corporali.
          <td>
            Chrysostom answers this by saying that after hearing about knowing and seeing the Father, Philip wanted to see the Father with his bodily eyes, just as he thought he had seen the Son. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn21" name="_ftnref21" id="_ftnref21">[21]</a> This is what our Lord reproved, pointing out to him that he did not even see the Son in his nature with his bodily eyes.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Augustinus autem dicit, quod dominus non improbavit petitionem, sed petentis animam. Nam Philippus dicit <i>ostende nobis patrem, et sufficit nobis</i>, quasi dicat: nos cognoscimus te, sed hoc non sufficit. Et sic credebat quod in cognitione filii non esset perfecta sufficientia, sed in cognitione patris. Ex quo videbatur sentire filium esse minorem patre. Et hoc dominus increpavit, ostendens quod in cognitione filii sit eadem sufficientia quae est in cognitione patris, dicens <i>qui videt me, videt et patrem</i>.
          <td>
            Augustine says that our Lord did not disapprove of the request, but of the attitude behind it. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn22" name="_ftnref22" id="_ftnref22">[22]</a> Philip said, <b>Show us the Father, and we shall be satisfied</b>. This was like saying: We know you, but that is not enough. Thus he believed that there was complete sufficiency in knowing the Father, but not in knowing the Son. He seemed to think that the Son was inferior to the Father. This is what our Lord reproved, showing that there is the same sufficiency in knowing the Son as there is in knowing the Father, saying, <b>he who has seen me has seen the Father also</b>.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Et ideo consequenter cum dicit <i>quomodo tu dicis: ostende nobis patrem?</i> Improbat primo eius petitionem; secundo radicem petitionis. Petitionem improbat quidem dicens <i>quomodo tu dicis: ostende nobis patrem?</i> Ex quo scilicet pater in filio videtur. Poterat quidem Philippus dicere, quod habetur Iob c. XXXIX, 34: <i>qui leviter locutus sum, respondere quid possum? Manum meam ponam super os meum</i>. Radicem petitionis improbat cum dicit <i>non credis quia ego in patre, et pater in me est?</i> Quasi dicat: tu vis habere patrem, credens in eo habere sufficientiam; sed si ita credis, <i>non credis quia ego in patre et pater in me est</i>. Nam si hoc crederes, sperares quod in me haberes omnem sufficientiam quam in patre.
          <td>1890 Then when he says, <b>How can you say, Show us the Father?</b> he shows his disapproval of the request, and of the basis of the request. He is displeased with the request because the Father is seen in the Son. Philip could have said what we read in Job: "I, who have spoken so unthoughtfully, what can I reply? I will put my hand over my mouth" [39:34]. He disapproves of the root of the request when he says, <b>Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father in me?</b> This is like saying: You want to possess the Father, believing that you will have sufficiency in him. But if you believe that, <b>Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father in me?</b> For if you believed the latter, you would expect to find in me all the sufficiency which is in the Father.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Hoc autem quod dicit <i>ego in patre et pater in me est</i>, dicitur propter essentiae unitatem, de qua dicitur supra X, 30: <i>ego et pater unum sumus</i>.
          <td>1891 He says, <b>I am in the Father and the Father in me</b>, because they are one in essence. This was spoken of before: "I and the Father are one" (10:30).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sciendum est enim, quod essentia aliter se habet in divinis ad personam et aliter in hominibus. Nam in hominibus essentia Socratis non est Socrates, quia Socrates est quid compositum; sed in divinis essentia est idem personae secundum rem, et sic essentia patris est pater, et essentia filii, filius. Ubicumque ergo est essentia patris, est ipse pater; et ubicumque est essentia filii, est ipse filius. Essentia autem patris est in filio, et essentia filii est in patre. Ergo filius est in patre, et pater in filio. Et sic exponit Hilarius.
          <td>
            We should note that in the divinity essence is not related to person as it is in human beings. Among human beings, the essence of Socrates is not Socrates, because Socrates is a composite. But in the divinity, essence is the same with the person in reality, and so the essence of the Father is the Father, and the essence of one Son is the Son. Therefore, wherever the essence of the Father is, there the Father is; and wherever the essence of the Son is, there the Son is. Now the essence of the Father is in the Son, and the essence of the Son is in the Father. Therefore, the Son is in the Father, and the Father in the Son. This is how Hilary explains it. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn23" name="_ftnref23" id="_ftnref23">[23]</a>
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Hic dominus manifestat suam responsionem, et primo per opera quae facit per seipsum; secundo per opera quae facturus erat per discipulos, ibi <i>amen, amen dico vobis: qui credit in me, opera quae ego facio, et ipse faciet</i>. In prima ergo praemittit opera quae ipse facit; secundo concludit fidei conclusionem, ibi <i>non creditis quia ego in patre et patre in me est?</i>
          <td>1892 Now our Lord clarifies his answer: first by the works he does himself; secondly, by the works he will do by the disciples (v 12). So he first mentions the works he does himself; secondly, he infers a tenet of the faith (v 11).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Fides autem de Christo quod esset Deus, poterat ex duobus manifestari: scilicet ex eius doctrina, et ex miraculis. Et haec duo, infra, dominus dicit: <i>si opera non fecissem in eis quae nemo alius fecit, peccatum non haberent</i>: quantum ad primum. <i>Et si non venissem et locutus eis non fuissem, peccatum non haberent</i>, et, supra VII, 46, <i>numquam sic locutus est homo</i>: quantum ad secundum. Supra IX, 32, dixit de eo caecus: <i>a saeculo non est auditum, quod quis aperuit oculos caeci nati</i>. Ex his duobus dominus divinitatem suam ostendit. Quantum ad primum dicit <i>verba quae ego loquor vobis</i>, scilicet organo humanitatis, <i>a meipso non loquor</i>, sed ab eo qui est in me, scilicet a patre; supra VIII, 26: <i>ego quae audivi a patre meo haec loquor in mundo</i>. Pater ergo qui in me loquitur est in me. Sed quia quidquid homo loquitur, necesse est quod a primo verbo hoc habeat: primum autem verbum, scilicet verbum Dei, est a patre; ergo necesse est quod omnia verba quae loquimur sint a Deo. Cum ergo quis loquitur verba quae habet a patre, pater est in eo. Quantum ad secundum dicit <i>pater in me manens ipse facit opera</i>, quia nullus opera quae ego facio posset facere; supra V, 19: <i>non potest filius a se facere quidquam</i>.
          <td>1893 The belief that Christ was God could be known from two things: from his teaching and from his miracles. Our Lord mentions these. "If I had not done among them the works which no one else did, they would not have sin" (15:24). Referring to his teaching he says, "If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have sin" (15:22). We also read: "No man ever spoke like this man!" (7:46). The blind man, referring to his works, said: Never since the world began has it been heard that any one opened the eyes of a man born blind" (9:32). Our Lord shows his divinity by these two things. Referring to his teaching, he says, <b>The words that I say to you</b>, by the instrument of my human nature, <b>I do not speak of myself, but from him who is in me</b>, that is, the Father: "I declare to the world what I have heard from him," the Father (8:26). The Father, therefore, who speaks in me, is in me. Now whatever a human being says must come from the first Word. And this first Word, the Word of God, is from the Father. Therefore, all the words we speak must be from God. So when anyone speaks words he has from the Father, the Father is in him. Referring to his works, he says, <b>the Father who dwells in me does the works</b>, because no one could do the works that I do: "The Son can do nothing of himself" [5:19].
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed quaerit Chrysostomus quomodo Christus a verbis incipiens venit ad opera. Dixit enim: <i>verba quae ego loquor vobis, a meipso non loquor</i>, et postea dicit: <i>ipse facit opera</i>. Sed hoc solvitur dupliciter. Uno modo secundum Chrysostomum, qui dicit, secundum coniunctionis modum praedictum, quod primo loquitur de doctrina, et postea loquitur de miraculis. Secundum Augustinum, dicendum, quod verba quae dominus loquebatur, vocat opera: supra VI, 29: <i>hoc est opus Dei, ut credatis in eum quem misit ille</i>. Ideo cum dicit <i>ipse facit opera</i>, dat intelligere quod verba ipsius sunt quaedam opera.
          <td>
            1894 Chrysostom wonders how Christ can start by referring to his words, and then bring in his works, for Christ says, <b>the words that I say to you... but the Father does the works</b>. There are two answers to this. Chrysostom says that Christ was referring to his teaching the first time, and then referring to his miracles. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn24" name="_ftnref24" id="_ftnref24">[24]</a> For Augustine, our Lord is referring to his words as his works: "This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent" (6:29). <a href="John14.htm#_ftn25" name="_ftnref25" id="_ftnref25">[25]</a> So when the Lord says, <b>the Father does the works</b>, we should understand that these works are words.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed nota, quod ex his duobus distinctim duae haereses fulcimentum suum sumunt: quia quod dicit: <i>ego in patre</i>, sumit pro se Sabellius dicens, eumdem esse patrem et filium; quod autem dicit: <i>a me ipso non loquor</i>, assumit Arius, concludens ex hoc filium esse minorem patre. Sed per ipsa eadem dictae haereses excluduntur. Nam si idem esset pater et filius, ut Sabellius fingit, non diceret filius <i>verba quae ego loquor vobis, a meipso non loquor</i>. Si vero filius esset minor patre, ut blasphemat Arius, non diceret <i>pater in me manens, ipse facit opera</i>.
          <td>1895 Two heresies were based on the above texts. When our Lord said, <b>I am in the Father</b>, Sabellius understood this to mean that the Father and the Son are the same. And from the statement, <b>I do not speak of myself</b>, Arius inferred that the Son is inferior to the Father. Yet these very texts refute these heresies. For if the Father and Son were the same, as Sabellius speculated, the Son would not have said, <b>The words that I say to you I do not speak of myself</b>. And if the Son were inferior to the Father, as Arius blasphemed, he would not have said, <b>the Father who dwells in me does the works</b>.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Quia ergo ex duobus praedictis manifestatur fides Trinitatis, ideo contra concludit fidem ipsam, dicens <i>non creditis quia ego in patre, et pater in me est?</i> Hoc quidem quomodo intelligendum sit, expositum est supra. In Graeco habetur <i>credite</i>, scilicet mihi, <i>quia ego in patre, et pater in me est</i>. Vel mirum, quia non creditis, <i>quia ego in patre, et pater in me est</i>. Sed attende, quod antea locutus est solum Philippo; sed ab eo loco ubi dicit, <i>verba quae ego loquor</i> etc., loquitur omnibus apostolis simul. Quod si non sufficiunt ad ostendendum consubstantialitatem verba quae ego dico, saltem <i>propter opera ipsa credite</i>. Supra V, v. 36: <i>opera quae dedit mihi pater ut faciam ea, ipsa testimonium perhibent de me</i>; et X, 38: <i>si mihi non creditis, operibus credite</i>.
          <td>1896 Since our belief in the Trinity is shown by the above two statements, our Lord concludes to this belief, saying, <b>Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father in me?</b> It was explained above how this is to be understood. In Greek, the text reads: <b>Believe</b>, that is, believe me, <b>that I am in the Father and the Father in me</b>. Or, it is surprising that you do not believe <b>that I am in the Father and the Father in me</b>. Note that before our Lord was speaking only to Philip (v 8‑10a), but from the point where he says, <b>the words that I say to you</b> [v 10b], he is speaking to all the apostles together. But if what I say to you is not enough to show my consubstantiality, then at least believe me for the sake of the works themselves: "The works which the Father has granted me to accomplish, these very works which I am doing, bear me witness" (5:36); "Even though you do not believe me, believe the works" (10:38).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Postquam dominus manifestavit ea quae dixerat, per opera quae faciebat per seipsum, hic manifestat ea per opera quae facturus erat per discipulos, et primo proponit opera discipulorum; secundo insinuat modum operandi, ibi <i>quodcumque petieritis</i>. In prima primo proponit opera discipulorum; secundo assignat rationem dicti, ibi <i>quia ad patrem vado</i>.
          <td>1897 After clarifying what he had said by appealing to the works he did by himself, our Lord now clarifies these things by the works he would do through the disciples. First, he mentions the works of the disciples; secondly, he mentions how they would do them, <b>Whatever you ask the Father in my name, I will do it</b>. As to the first, he first mentions the works of the disciples; secondly, he states the reason for what he said, <b>because I go to the Father</b>.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Dicit ergo primo <i>amen, amen dico vobis</i>, quasi dicat: opera quae ego facio, adeo magna sunt quod praebent sufficienter argumentum divinitatis meae; sed si haec vobis non sufficiant, respiciatis ad opera quae per alios facturus sum. Potissimum enim signum magnae virtutis est ut homo non solum per se, sed etiam per alios eximia operetur; et ideo dicit <i>amen, amen, dico vobis: qui credit in me, opera quae ego facio, et ipse faciet</i>: quae verba non solum monstrant virtutem divinitatis in Christo, sed etiam virtutem fidei, et coniunctionem Christi cum fidelibus. Sicut enim filius operatur propter patrem in se manentem per unitatem naturae, ita et fideles operantur propter Christum in se manentem per fidem; Eph. III, 17: <i>habitare Christum per fidem in cordibus vestris</i>. Opera autem quae Christus fecit et discipuli faciunt virtute Christi sunt opera miraculorum; Mc. ult., 17: <i>signa autem eos qui crediderint, haec sequentur: in nomine meo Daemonia eiicient, linguis loquentur novis, serpentes tollent</i> et cetera.
          <td>1898 He says, <b>Truly, truly, I say to you</b>, and so forth. He is saying in effect: The works that I do are so great that they are a sufficient sign of my divinity; but if these are not enough for you, then look at the works I will do through others. For the strongest sign of great power is when a person does extraordinary things not only by himself but also through others. So he says, <b>he who believes in me will also do the works that I do</b>. These words not only show the power of the divinity in Christ, but also the power of faith, and the union of Christ with those who believe. For just as the Son acts because the Father dwells in him by a unity of nature, so also those who believe act because Christ dwells in them by faith: "that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith" (Eph 3:17). Now the works which Christ accomplished and the disciples do by the power of Christ are the miracles: "And these signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will cast out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up serpents" (Mk 16:17).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed mirabile est quod subdit <i>et maiora horum faciet</i>. Uno modo ut dicamus quod dominus per apostolos plura et maiora facit quam per seipsum. Maximum enim inter miracula Christi fuit quod ad tactum fimbriae eius sanabantur infirmi, ut habetur Matth. IX, 20. Sed de Petro legitur Act. V, 15 quod ad eius umbram sanabantur infirmi. Magis autem est quod sanet umbra quam fimbria. Alio modo, ut dicamus, quod Christus plura fecit per verba discipulorum, quam per sua. Loquitur enim hic dominus de operibus quae facta erant per verba, ut Augustinus dicit, quae opera tunc dicebat ubi verba quae loquebatur, et eorumdem verborum fructus erat fides illorum. Legitur enim de Christo Matth. XIX, 22, quod adolescens non fuit inductus ad vendendum quae habebat, et eum sequendum. Nam cum diceret adolescenti: <i>vade, et vende omnia quae habes, et da pauperibus</i>, subditur: <i>abiit tristis</i>. Sed de Petro et aliis apostolis legitur Act. IV, quod eis praedicantibus vendebant possessiones et omnia quae habebant, et afferebant pretium earum ad pedes apostolorum.
          <td>
            1899 What is remarkable is that he adds, <b>and greater works than these will he do</b>. We could say that in a certain sense our Lord does more things and greater things through his apostles than by himself. Among the miracles of Christ the greatest was when a sick person was healed by touching the fringe of his garment (Mt 9:20). But the sick were healed by the shadow of Peter, as we read in Acts (5:15). And it is greater to heal by one's shadow than by the fringe of one's garment. In another way, we could say that Christ did more by the words of his disciples than by his own. As Augustine says, our Lord is speaking here of works accomplished by words, when the fruit of these words was faith. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn26" name="_ftnref26" id="_ftnref26">[26]</a> We see in Matthew that a young man was not persuaded by Christ to sell his possessions and follow him, for when Christ said to the youth, "Go, sell what you possess and give to the poor," we read that "he went away sorrowful" (Mt 19:21). Yet we read that at the preaching of Peter and the other apostles, people sold their possessions and all that they owned and brought the money and laid it at the feet of the apostles (Acts 4:34).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed obviat aliquis, quod dominus non dicit quod apostoli maiora facient, sed <i>qui credit in me</i>. Numquid ergo qui non fecit maiora quam Christus, non est computandus inter credentes in Christum? Absit. Durum enim esset hoc.
          <td>1900 Someone might find fault with this because our Lord did not say that the apostles would do greater things, but <b>he who believes in me</b>. Should we say, then, that those who do not do greater things than Christ are not to be counted among those who believe in Christ? Of course not! That would be too harsh.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Ideo dicendum est aliter, quod Christus duplex opus facit. Unum sine nobis, videlicet creare caelum et terram, suscitare mortuos, et huiusmodi; aliud operatur in nobis, sed non sine nobis: quod est opus fidei, per quod vivificatur impius. De istis ergo loquitur hic dominus, quae sunt communia credenti. Et hoc est opus quod facit Christus in nobis, sed non sine nobis; quia eadem facit quicumque credit: quia quod fit in me per Deum, fit in me etiam per meipsum, scilicet per liberum arbitrium. Unde dicit apostolus: <i>non autem ego</i>, supple, solus, <i>sed gratia Dei mecum</i>. Et de istis dicit <i>opera quae ego facio, et ipse faciet, et maiora horum faciet</i>: quia maius est iustificare impium quam creare caelum et terram. Nam iustificatio impii, quantum est de se, perseverat in aeternum; Sap. I, 15: <i>iustitia perpetua est et immortalis</i>. Caelum autem et terra transibunt, ut dicitur Lc. XXI, 33. Item, quia opus corporale ordinatur ad spirituale: caelum autem et terra opus corporale est, iustificatio vero impii opus spirituale.
          <td>We should say, rather, that Christ works in two ways. In one way, he works without us, as in creating the heavens and the earth, raising the dead to life, and things like that. In the other way, he works in us but not without us: the result of this is faith, by which the impious are brought to life. Our Lord is speaking here of what is found in all believers: this is the result which Christ produces in us, but not without us. The reason for this is that whoever believes is producing the same result since what is produced in me by God is also produced in me by myself, that is, by my free choice. Thus the Apostle says: "it was not I," that is, I alone, "but the grace of God which is with me" (1 Cor 15:10). Christ is speaking of this result or work when he says that believers <b>will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do</b>, for it is a greater thing to justify the impious than to create the heavens and the earth. For the justification of the impious, considered in itself, continues forever: "Righteousness is immortal" (Wis 1:15). But the heavens and the earth will pass away, as Luke (21:33) says. Further, effects which are physical are directed to what is spiritual. Now the heavens and the earth are physical effects, but the justification of the impious is a spiritual effect.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed hic incidit dubium. Nam in creatione caeli et terrae includitur creatio etiam sanctorum Angelorum. Numquid ergo maiora facit qui cooperatur Christo ad suam iustificationem quam creare Angelum? Quod Augustinus non determinat sed dicit: iudicet qui potest utrum maius sit iustos creare Angelos quam impios homines iustificare: certe si aequalis est utrumque potentiae, haec maioris est misericordiae. Si autem diligenter attendamus de quibus operibus dominus hic loquatur non praeferimus creationem Angelorum iustificationi impii. Non enim per hoc quod dicit <i>et maiora horum faciet</i>, oportet nos intelligere omnia opera Christi; sed illa tantum fortassis quae tunc faciebat. Tunc autem verbo fidei faciebat: et utique minus est verba iustitiae praedicare, quod fecit praeter nos, quam impios iustificare, quod ita facit in nobis ut faciamus et nos.
          <td>
            1901 This gives rise to a question. The creation of the holy angels is included in the creation of the heavens and the earth. Is it then a greater work to cooperate with Christ in one's own justification than to create an angel? Augustine does not settle this, but he does say: "Let him who can judge whether it is greater to create the just angels than to justify impious men. Certainly, if each shows an equal power, the second shows greater mercy." <a href="John14.htm#_ftn27" name="_ftnref27" id="_ftnref27">[27]</a> But if we carefully consider what works our Lord is talking about here, we are not setting the creation of the angels above the justification of the impious. When our Lord said, <b>and greater works than these will he do</b>, we need not understand this to mean all the works of Christ, but perhaps only those which he was then doing. But then he was working by the word of faith, and it is not as great to preach words of righteousness [or of faith] which he did without us, as to justify sinners, which he does in us in such a way that we also do it.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Consequenter assignat rationem dicti, ideo <i>maiora faciet</i>, dicens <i>quia ad patrem vado</i>. Quod potest tripliciter adaptari. Uno modo secundum Chrysostomum. Ego operor quamdiu sum in mundo, sed, me recedente, vos eritis loco mei: et ideo quae ego facio, vos facietis, et etiam maiora <i>quia ego vado ad patrem</i>, et ultra per meipsum nihil operor, scilicet praedicando. Alio modo, ut sit sensus; Iudaei credunt quod me occiso fides mea extinguatur; et hoc non est verum, immo magis approbabitur, et vos maiora facietis <i>quia vado ad patrem</i>; idest, non pereo, sed in propria maneo dignitate, et in caelis ero; supra XIII, 31: <i>nunc clarificatus est filius hominis, et Deus clarificatus est in eo</i>. Tertio modo: maiora facietis, et hoc, <i>quia vado ad patrem</i>; quasi diceret: dum ero magis glorificatus, decet me maiora facere, et etiam dare vobis virtutes maiora faciendi. Unde, antequam Iesus esset glorificatus, spiritus non fuit datus discipulis in ea plenitudine in qua datus est postmodum; supra VII, v. 39: <i>nondum erat spiritus datus, quia Iesus nondum erat glorificatus</i>.
          <td>
            1902 Now he gives the reason why he said they will do greater things, which is <b>because I go to the Father</b>. This can be understood in three ways. First, according to Chrysostom: I will work as long as I am in the world, but when I leave, you will take my place. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn28" name="_ftnref28" id="_ftnref28">[28]</a> And so, the things that I am doing you will do, and even greater things, <b>because I go to the Father</b>, and after that I will do nothing by myself, that is, by preaching. The second interpretation is this: The Jews think that if I am killed faith in me will be eradicated. This is not true. Indeed, it will be approved even more, and you will do greater things <b>because I go to the Father</b>, that is, I will not perish, but continue in my own dignity in heaven: "Now is the Son of man glorified, and in him God is glorified" (13:31). A third interpretation: You will do greater things <b>because I go to the Father</b>. He is saying in effect: Since I will be glorified more, it is appropriate that I do greater things, and also give you the power to do greater things. Thus, before Jesus was glorified, the Spirit was not given to the disciples in that fullness with which it was given after: "As yet the Spirit had not been given, because Jesus was not yet glorified" (7:39).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Hic insinuat modum operandi, et primo ponit intentum; secundo rationem assignat, ibi <i>ut glorificetur pater in filio</i> et cetera.
          <td>1903 Now he mentions how these things will be done: first, the way, <b>whatever you ask</b>; secondly, why they will be done, <b>that the Father may be glorified</b>.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Circa primum sciendum est, quod cum dominus dixerit <i>et maiora horum faciet</i>, ut ex magnitudine operum cognoscatur magnitudo facientis, posset aliquis credere quod qui credit in filium Dei, esset maior ipso futurus: et ideo hoc dominus excludit ex modo faciendi, quia filius facit ipsa opera auctoritate propria, sed qui credit in eum, facit ipsa cum interpellatione: et ideo dicit <i>et quodcumque petieritis patrem in nomine meo, hoc faciam</i>.
          <td>1904 As to the first, since our Lord said, "and greater works than these will he do," in order that the greatness of the worker might be known from the greatness of the works, some might suppose that one who believes in the Son of God would be greater than the Son. Our Lord excludes this by the way the works are done. For the Son does these works by his own authority, while one who believes in him does it by asking. So he says, <b>Whatever you ask the Father in my name, I will do it</b>.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Ubi excluditur aequalitas credentium ad filium tripliciter. Primo quidem quia ipsi, ut dictum est, faciunt interpellando: unde dicit <i>quodcumque petieritis</i>; Matth. VII, 8: <i>omnis qui petit, accipit</i>. Secundo, quia faciunt in virtute filii: unde dicit <i>in nomine meo</i>, idest in virtute nominis mei; Act. IV, 12: <i>non est aliud nomen datum sub caelo hominibus, in quo oporteat nos salvos fieri</i>. Hoc enim nomen est super omne nomen; Ps. CXIII, 9: <i>non nobis, domine, non nobis: sed nomini tuo da gloriam</i> tertio quia ipse filius in eis et per eos omnia opera facit: unde dicit <i>hoc faciam</i>. Et attende, quod pater petitur, et filius facit: quia indivisibilia sunt opera patris et filii; supra V, 19: <i>quaecumque pater facit, haec similiter et filius facit</i>. Omnia enim pater facit per filium; supra c. I, 3: <i>omnia per ipsum facta sunt</i>.
          <td>This eliminates the equality between believers and Christ in three ways. First, because as was said, believers do these works by asking: so he says, <b>Whatever you ask</b>. "Every one who asks receives" (Mt 7:8). Secondly, because believers work by reason of the Son; so he says, <b>in my name</b>, that is, by reason of my name: "There is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved" (Acts 4:12). For this name is above every name: "Not to us, O Lord, not to us, but to thy name give glory" (Ps 115:1). Thirdly, because the Son himself does all these works in them and through them: thus he says, <b>I will do it</b>. Note that the Father is asked and the Son does the work, the reason being that the works of the Father and the Son are inseparable: "Whatever he [the Father] does, that the Son does likewise" (5:19). For the Father does all things through the Son: "All things were made through him" (1:3).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed quid est quod dicit <i>quodcumque petieritis hoc faciam</i>, cum videamus eius fideles petere et non accipere? Sed, secundum Augustinum, considerandum est hic primo, quod dicit <i>in nomine meo</i>, deinde quod subdit <i>hoc faciam</i>. Nomen enim Christi est nomen salutis; Matth. I, 21: <i>vocabis nomen eius Iesum: ipse enim salvum faciet populum suum a peccatis eorum</i>. Qui ergo petit aliquid pertinens ad salutem, petit in nomine Christi. Contingit autem quod aliquis petit non pertinens ad salutem ex duobus. Scilicet ex prava affectione; puta cum petit aliquid ad quod afficitur, quod tamen si haberet, salutem suam impediret. Et ideo qui sic petit, non exauditur, quia male petit; Iac. IV, 3: <i>petitis et non accipitis, eo quod male petatis</i>. Cum enim quis ex pravo affectu male usurus est eo quod vult accipere, domino potius miserante non accipit, quia non exaudivit ad votum, sed ad utilitatem magis. Nam bonus dominus saepe negat quod petimus, ut tribuat quod mallemus.
          <td>
            1905 How could he say, <b>Whatever you ask I will do it</b>, since we see that his faithful ask and do not receive? According to Augustine, we should consider here that he first says, <b>in my name</b>, and then adds, <b>I will do it</b>. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn29" name="_ftnref29" id="_ftnref29">[29]</a> The name of Christ is the name of salvation: "You shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins" (Mt 1:21). Therefore, one who asks for something pertaining to salvation asks in the name of Christ. It does happen that someone asks for something which does not pertain to salvation. This happens for two reasons. First, because one has a corrupt affection: as when one asks for something to which he is attracted, but which if he did have, would be an obstacle to his salvation. One who asks this way is not heard because he asks wrongly: "You ask and do not receive, because you ask wrongly" (Jas 4:3). For when someone, because of his corrupt affection, would badly use what he wants to receive, he does not receive it because of our Lord's compassion. The reason being that our Lord does not just look at one's desire, but rather the helpfulness of what is desired. For the good Lord often denies what we ask in order to give us what we should prefer.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Secundo ex ignorantia, dum quis aliquando petit quod credit sibi expedire, et tamen non expedit. Sed istis potius consulendo. Deus quae petunt non facit. Nam Paulus qui plus omnibus laboravit, ter dominum rogavit ut discederet ab eo stimulus carnis, nec tamen quod rogavit obtinuit, quia non erat sibi expediens. II Cor. XII, 8, et Rom. VIII, 26: <i>nam quid oremus sicut oportet, nescimus, sed ipse spiritus postulat pro nobis gemitibus inenarrabilibus</i>; Matth. XX, 22: <i>nescitis quid petatis</i>. Patet ergo quod cum petimus in nomine eius, scilicet in nomine Iesu Christi, ipse hoc faciet.
          <td>The second reason we may ask for something which does not pertain to our salvation is our ignorance. We sometimes ask for what we think is helpful, but really is not. But God takes care of us, and does not do what we ask. Thus Paul, who labored more than all others, asked our Lord three times to take away a thorn in his flesh, but he did not receive what he asked because it was not useful for him (2 Cor 12:8). "We do not know how to pray as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with sighs too deep for words" (Rom 8:26). "You do not know what you are asking" (Mt 20:22). Thus it is clear that when we truly ask in his name, in the name of Jesus Christ, he will do it.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Dicit autem <i>hoc faciam</i>, in futuro, non autem, hoc facio, in praesenti, quia quandoque differt facere quod petimus, ad augendum desiderium nostrum, et ut tempore congruo fiat; Levit. XXVI, 3: <i>dabo vobis pluviam temporibus suis</i>; Is. XLIX, 8: <i>in die salutis exaudivi te</i>. Contingit etiam aliquando quod petimus pro aliquo, pro quo fortassis non exaudimur, tunc scilicet quando eius merita obstant; Ier. VII, 16: <i>tu ergo noli orare pro populo isto, quia non exaudiam te</i>; et XV, 1: <i>si steterint Moyses et Samuel coram me, non est anima mea ad populum istum</i>.
          <td>He says, <b>I will do it</b>, using the future tense, not the present tense, because he sometimes postpones doing what we ask so that our desire for it will increase and so that he can grant it at the right time: "Rain will fall on you when it should fall" [Lev 26:4]; "In a day of salvation I have helped you" (Is 49:8). Again, it sometimes happens that we pray for people and are perhaps not heard, and this is because they put obstacles in the way. "Do not pray for this people... for I do not hear you" (Jer 7:16); "Though Moses and Samuel stood before me, yet my heart would not turn toward this people" (Jer 15:1).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Consequenter cum dicit <i>ut glorificetur pater in filio</i>, ponit rationem. Et hoc sic legitur ab Augustino: <i>quodcumque petieritis patrem in nomine meo, hoc faciam</i>; ut hic sit punctus. Et resumit <i>ut glorificetur pater in filio, si quid petieritis me in nomine meo, hoc faciam</i>; quasi diceret: ideo, faciam quod petieritis in nomine meo, <i>ut glorificetur pater in filio</i> etc., et omnia quae facit filius, ordinantur ad gloriam patris; supra VIII, 50: <i>non quaero gloriam meam</i>. Sic etiam et nos omnia opera nostra ad gloriam Dei ordinare debemus; I Cor. X, 31: <i>omnia in gloriam Dei facite</i>.
          <td>1906 Then when he says, <b>that the Father may be glorified in the Son</b>, he gives the reason. Augustine punctuates this passage in the following way. "Whatever you ask the Father in my name, I will do it." Then a new sentence begins: "That the Father may be glorified in the Son, if you ask me anything in my name, I will do it." This is like saying: I will do what you ask in my name so <b>that the Father may be glorified in the Son</b>, and everything that the Son does is directed to the glory of the Father: "I do not seek my own glory" (8:50). We also should direct all our works to the glory of God: "Do all to the glory of God" (1 Cor 10:31).
    </table>
    <hr>
    <table cellpadding="12">
      <tbody>
        <tr style="align:center">
          <td><b>Lectio 4</b>
          <td><b>LECTURE 4</b>
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td style="font-family:" palatino="">
            <blockquote>
              15 ἐὰν ἀγαπᾶτέ με, τὰς ἐντολὰς τὰς ἐμὰς τηρήσετε: 16 κἀγὼ ἐρωτήσω τὸν πατέρα καὶ ἄλλον παράκλητον δώσει ὑμῖν ἵνα μεθ' ὑμῶν εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα ᾖ, 17 τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς ἀληθείας, ὃ ὁ κόσμος οὐ δύναται λαβεῖν, ὅτι οὐ θεωρεῖ αὐτὸ οὐδὲ γινώσκει: ὑμεῖς γινώσκετε αὐτό, ὅτι παρ' ὑμῖν μένει καὶ ἐν ὑμῖν ἔσται.
            </blockquote>
          <td>
            <blockquote>
              15 "If you love me, [keep my commandments] you will keep my commandments. 16 And I will pray the Father, and he will give you another [Paraclete] Counselor, to be with you for ever, 17 even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him; you [will] know him, for he [will dwell] dwells with you, and will be in you." <a href="John14.htm#_ftn30" name="_ftnref30" id="_ftnref30">[30]</a>
            </blockquote>
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Supra consolatus est dominus discipulos de suo recessu promittens eis accessum eorum ad patrem sed quia posset videri eis longum quod ad patrem accederent, et interim sine magistro esse dolerent, ideo consolatur eos, promittens eis spiritum sanctum. Et ponitur primo ad receptionem spiritus sancti praeparatio; secundo promittitur spiritus sancti donatio, ibi <i>et alium Paraclitum dabit vobis</i>; tertio exponitur spiritus sancti promissio, ibi <i>ut maneat vobiscum in aeternum</i>. Praeparatio autem ad receptionem spiritus sancti una quidem erat necessaria ex parte discipulorum, alia ex parte Christi.
          <td>1907 Above, our Lord consoled his disciples over his leaving by promising that they would be able to approach the Father. But because it might seem that this was in the distant future, and in the meantime they would still be in sorrow without their Teacher, he here soothes their sorrow by promising them the Holy Spirit. First, we see the preparation needed to receive the Holy Spirit; secondly, the Holy Spirit is promised, <b>he will give you another Paraclete</b>. Thirdly, this promise is clarified, <b>to be with you forever</b>. Preparation for receiving the Holy Spirit was necessary both for the disciples and for Christ.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Ex parte quidem discipulorum necessaria erat duplex praeparatio, scilicet amor cordis, et obedientia operis. Quorum unum dominus supponit eos habere. Et quantum ad hoc dicit <i>si diligitis me</i>; et hoc apparet, quia tristamini de meo recessu; infra XV, 27: <i>vos me amastis, quia ab initio mecum estis</i>. Aliud vero imperat futurum: et quantum ad hoc dicit <i>mandata mea servate</i>, quasi dicat: non ostendatis amorem quem habetis ad me in fletu, sed in obedientia mandatorum meorum: hoc enim est manifestum dilectionis signum; infra XIV, 23: <i>si quis diligit me, sermonem meum servabit</i>.Haec ergo duo praeparant ad receptionem spiritus sancti. Cum enim spiritus sanctus sit amor, non datur nisi amantibus; Prov. VIII, v. 17: <i>ego diligentes me diligo</i>. Item datur obedientibus; Actor. III, 15: <i>nos huius rei testes sumus</i> et cetera. Is. LXVI, 2: <i>super quem requiescit spiritus meus</i> et cetera.
          <td>1908 The disciples needed a twofold preparation: love in their hearts and obedience in their work. Our Lord assumes they have one of these, for he says, <b>If you love me</b>. And it is clear that you do because you are sad over my leaving: "You also are witnesses, because you have been with me from the beginning" (15:27). The other he commands for the future, <b>keep my commandments</b>. This is like saying: You don't express your love for me by tears but by obedience to my commands, for this is a clear sign of love: "If a man love me, he will keep my word" (14:23). Thus, two things prepare one to receive the Holy Spirit. Since the Holy Spirit is love, he is given only to those who love: "I love those who love me" (Prv 8:17). Likewise, he is given to the obedient: "To this we are witnesses" (Acts 3:15); "I have put my Spirit upon him" (Is 42:1).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed numquid obedientia discipulorum et amor eorum ad Christum praeparant ad spiritum sanctum? Videtur quod non: quia dilectio qua diligimus Deum, est per spiritum sanctum; Rom. V, 5: <i>caritas Dei diffusa est in cordibus nostris per spiritum sanctum, qui datus est nobis</i>. Obedientia autem est nobis a spiritu sancto; Rom. c. VIII, 14: <i>qui spiritu Dei aguntur hi filii Dei sunt</i>; et in Ps. CXVIII, 32: <i>viam mandatorum tuorum cucurri, cum dilatasti cor meum</i>.Sed posset aliquis dicere, quod per dilectionem filii promeremur spiritum sanctum; quo habito, amamus patrem. Sed huic repugnat, quia idem est amor patris et filii.
          <td>1909 Yet is it true that it is the obedience of the disciples and their love for Christ that prepare them for the Holy Spirit? It seems not, because the love by which we love God is from the Holy Spirit: "God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit which has been given to us" (Rom 5:5). Further, our obedience is from the Holy Spirit: "For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God" (Rom 8:14); "I have run in the way of your commandments when you enlarged my heart" [Ps 119:32]. One might answer that it is by loving the Son that we deserve to receive the Holy Spirit, and having him, we love the Father. But this is false because our love for the Father and the Son is the same love.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Et ideo aliter dicendum est, quod hoc est in donis Dei, ut qui bene utitur dono sibi concesso, amplioris gratiae et doni acceptionem mereatur; et qui male utitur, hoc ipsum quod accepit, auferatur ab eo. Nam, ut legitur Matth. XXV, 24 ss., servo pigro ablatum est talentum quod acceperat a domino suo, quia non bene usus eo fuit, et datum est ei qui acceperat quinque, cum quibus lucratus fuerat alia quinque. Sic ergo est et de dono spiritus sancti. Nullus enim potest Deum diligere nisi habeat spiritum sanctum; non enim nos praevenimus gratiam Dei, sed ipsa praevenit nos. <i>Ipse enim prior dilexit nos</i>, ut dicitur I Io. IV, 10. Et ideo dicendum, quod apostoli primo quidem receperunt spiritum sanctum, ut diligerent Deum, et obedirent mandatis eius; sed necesse erat ad hoc ut ampliori plenitudine spiritum sanctum reciperent, quod bene uterentur, diligendo et obediendo, dono spiritus sancti prius accepto. Et secundum hoc est sensus <i>si diligitis me</i>, per spiritum sanctum, quem habetis, et obeditis mandatis meis, recipietis spiritum sanctum, quem habebitis in ampliori plenitudine.
          <td>Accordingly, we should say that it is characteristic of the gifts of God that if one makes good use of a gift granted to him, he deserves to receive a greater gift and grace. And one who badly uses a gift, has it taken from him. For we read in Matthew (25:24) that the talent which the lazy servant received from his master was taken from him because he did not use it well, and it was given to the one who had received five talents. It is like this with the gift of the Holy Spirit. No one can love God unless he has the Holy Spirit: because we do not act before we receive God's grace, rather, the grace comes first: "He loved us first" [1 Jn 4:10]. We should say, therefore, that the apostles first received the Holy Spirit so that they could love God and obey his commands. But it was necessary that they make good use, by their love and obedience, of this first gift of the Holy Spirit in order to receive the Spirit more fully. And so the meaning is, <b>If you love me</b>, by means of the Holy Spirit, whom you have, and obey my commandments, you will receive the Holy Spirit with greater fullness.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Alia praeparatio necessaria erat ex parte Christi; et quantum ad hoc dicit <i>ego rogabo patrem</i> et cetera. Ubi sciendum est, quod dominus noster Iesus Christus, inquantum homo, mediator est Dei et hominum, ut dicitur I Tim. II, 5. Unde inquantum est homo, accedens ad Deum, impetrat nobis dona caelestia, et veniens ad nos elevat nos, et reducit ad Deum. Quia ergo iam ad nos venerat, et dando nobis mandata Dei reduxit credentes ad ipsum, restabat ut rediret ad patrem, et impetraret dona spiritualia; Hebr. VII, 25: <i>accedens per semetipsum ad Deum salvare in perpetuum potest</i>. Et hoc facit rogando patrem. Et hoc est quod dicit <i>ego rogabo patrem</i> etc.; Eph. IV, v. 8: <i>ascendens in altum, captivam duxit captivitatem; dedit dona hominibus</i>.
          <td>1910 Another preparation was needed for Christ, and as to this he says, <b>And I will pray the Father</b>, and so forth. Note that our Lord Jesus Christ, as a human being, is the mediator between God and humankind, as we see from 1 Timothy (2:5). And so as a human being he approaches God and asks heavenly gifts for us, and coming to us he lifts us up and leads us to God. And so, because he had already come to us, and by giving us the commandments of God had led believers to God, he still had to return to the Father and ask for spiritual gifts: "Approaching God by himself he is able to save forever" [Heb 7:25]. He does this by asking the Father; and he says this, <b>I will pray the Father</b>: "When he ascended on high he led a host of captives and he gave gifts to men" (Eph 4:8).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed attende, quod idem est qui rogat ut detur, et qui dat Paraclitum. Rogat inquantum homo, dat inquantum Deus. Dicit autem <i>et rogabo</i>, ut eorum repellat tristitiam de suo recessu, quoniam ipse recessus est ratio ut acciperent spiritum sanctum.
          <td>Note that it is the same person who asks that the Paraclete be given and who gives the Paraclete. He asks as a human being, he gives as God. And he says <b>I will pray</b> in order to banish their sorrow over his leaving them, because his very leaving is the reason they can now receive the Holy Spirit.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Hic ponitur spiritus sancti promissio.Sed attende, quod hoc nomen Paraclitus est Graecum, et significat consolatorem; et ideo dixit <i>alium Paraclitum dabit vobis</i>, scilicet pater, non tamen sine filio, idest spiritum sanctum, qui est consolator, cum sit spiritus amoris; amor autem facit spiritualem consolationem et gaudium; Gal. V, v. 22: <i>fructus spiritus est caritas, gaudium</i> et cetera. Ipse est interpellator etc., Rom. VIII, 26: <i>nam quid oremus sicut oportet, nescimus; sed ipse spiritus postulat pro nobis gemitibus inenarrabilibus</i>.
          <td>1911 Now we see the promise of the Holy Spirit. The word Paraclete is Greek, and means "Consoler." He says, <b>he will give you another Paraclete</b>, that is, the Father, although not without the Son, will give the Holy Spirit, who is the Consoler, since he is the spirit of love. It is love that causes spiritual consolation and joy: "The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy" (Gal 5:22). The Holy Spirit is our advocate: "We do not know how to pray as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with sighs too deep for words" (Rom 8:26).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Hoc autem quod dixit <i>alium</i>, designat distinctionem personalem in divinis contra Sabellium.
          <td>The fact that he says, <b>another</b>, indicates a distinction of persons in God, in opposition to Sabellius.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed obiicitur: quia hoc quod dicitur <i>Paraclitus</i>, importat actionem spiritus sancti: ergo in hoc quod dixit <i>alium Paraclitum</i>, videtur designare alietatem naturae: nam alietas operationis designat alietatem naturae: est ergo spiritus sanctus alterius naturae a filio.
          <td>1912 An objection. The word "Paraclete" suggests an action of the Holy Spirit. Therefore, by saying <b>another Paraclete</b>, a difference in nature seems to be indicated, because different actions indicate different natures. Thus the Holy Spirit does not have the same nature as the Son.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Responsio. Dicendum quod spiritus sanctus est consolator et advocatus, et filius similiter. Quod enim filius sit advocatus, dicitur I Io. II, 1: <i>advocatum habemus apud patrem Iesum Christum</i>. Quod consolator, Is. LXI, 1: <i>spiritus domini (...) misit me ut ponerem consolationem lugentibus Sion</i>. Tamen alia et alia ratione est consolator et advocatus, filius et spiritus sanctus, si accipiamus per appropriationem personarum: nam Christus dicitur advocatus inquantum secundum quod homo interpellat pro nobis ad patrem; spiritus autem sanctus inquantum nos postulare facit. Item spiritus sanctus dicitur consolator inquantum est amor formaliter; filius vero inquantum est verbum. Et hoc dupliciter: quia per doctrinam, et inquantum ipse filius dat spiritum sanctum, et incendit amorem in cordibus nostris. Sic ergo ly <i>alium</i> non designat alietatem naturae in filio et spiritu sancto; sed designat alium modum, quo uterque est consolator et advocatus.
          <td>
            I reply that the Holy Spirit is a consoler and advocate, and so is the Son. John says that the Son is an advocate: "We have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteousness" (1 Jn 2:1). In Isaiah we are told he is a consoler: "The Spirit of the Lord has sent me to comfort those who mourn" [Is 61:1]. Yet the Son and the Holy Spirit are not consolers and advocates in the same way, if we consider the appropriation of persons [how and why we attribute certain attributes to the different Persons of the Trinity]. Christ is called an advocate because as a human being he intercedes for us to the Father; the Holy Spirit is an advocate because he makes us ask. Again, the Holy Spirit is called a consoler because he is formally love. But the Son is a consoler because he is the Word. The Son is a consoler in two ways: because of his teaching and because the Son gives the Holy Spirit and incites love in our hearts. Thus the word, <b>another</b>, does not indicate a different nature in the Son and in the Holy Spirit. Rather, it indicates the different way each is an advocate and a consoler. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn31" name="_ftnref31" id="_ftnref31">[31]</a>
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Hic ponitur promissio, et primo quantum ad ipsam dationem; secundo quantum ad ipsum donum; tertio quantum ad recipientes donum.
          <td>1913 Now the promise of the Holy Spirit is given: first, we see how it is given; secondly, what the gift itself is; thirdly, those who receive it (v 17).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed donatio est vera, quia perpetua; unde dicit <i>ut maneat vobiscum in aeternum spiritum veritatis</i>. Alicui enim datur aliquid ad tempus tantum, et haec non est vera donatio; sed tunc est vera quando datur ad semper habendum; et ideo spiritus sanctus vere datur, quia ut maneat cum eis in aeternum: hic quidem illustrans et docens et suggerens, post ad videndam speciem introducens; I Reg. XVI, 13: <i>directus est spiritus domini in David a die illa et deinceps</i>. Iudas autem licet acceperit eum, non tamen semper cum ipso mansit: quia non accepit ut maneret cum ipso in aeternum, sed tantum secundum praesentem iustitiam.
          <td>1914 The Spirit is truly given because it is given forever. Thus he says, <b>to be with you forever, even the Spirit of truth</b>. When something is given to a person only for a time, this is not a true giving; but there is a true giving when something is given to be kept forever. And so the Holy Spirit is truly given because he is to remain with them forever. He is with us for ever: in this life he enlightens and teaches us, bringing things to our mind; and in the next life he brings us to see the very reality: "And the Spirit of the Lord came mightily upon David from that day forward" (1 Sam 16:13). Although Judas had received him, the Spirit did not remain with him forever, because he did not receive him to remain with him forever, but only for a temporary righteousness.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Secundum Chrysostomum autem dici potest, quod dominus haec dicit ad excludendum carnalem quamdam suspicionem discipulorum. Possent enim suspicari quod ille Paraclitus eis datus, postmodum per passionem ab eis recederet, sicut ipse; et hoc excludit dicens <i>ut maneat vobiscum in aeternum</i>; quasi dicat: non patietur mortem ut ego, nec a vobis recedet.
          <td>
            According to Chrysostom, one could say that our Lord said these things to dispel a certain physical interpretation they might have. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn32" name="_ftnref32" id="_ftnref32">[32]</a> They could have imagined that this Paraclete, which was to be given to them, would also leave them after a while by some kind of suffering, like Christ. He rejects this when he says, <b>to be with you for ever</b>. This is like saying: The Spirit will not suffer death as I do, nor will he leave you.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed contra. Supra I, 33, hoc dictum est Ioanni Baptistae: <i>super quem videris spiritum descendere et manere, hic est qui baptizat</i>. Ex quo videtur proprium Christi ut spiritus sanctus semper maneat cum ipso; quod non est verum, si cum discipulis manet in aeternum. Responsio.
          <td>1915 We saw above that it was said to John the Baptist: "He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain, this is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit" (1:33). It seems from this that it is peculiar to Christ that the Holy Spirit remain with him forever. Yet this is not true if he also remains with the disciples forever.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Secundum Chrysostomum dicendum, quod spiritus sanctus dicitur in nobis manere per dona sua. Donorum autem spiritus sancti quaedam sunt necessaria ad salutem: et haec sunt communia omnibus sanctis, et semper in nobis manent, ut est caritas, quae <i>numquam excidit</i>, ut dicitur I Cor. XIII, 8, quia etiam in futuro erit. Quaedam autem non sunt de necessitate salutis, sed dantur fidelibus ad manifestationem spiritus; I Cor. XII, 7: <i>unicuique datur manifestatio spiritus ad utilitatem</i>. Sic ergo quantum ad prima dona. Spiritus sanctus manet cum discipulis et sanctis in aeternum; sed quantum ad secunda dona, sic est proprium Christo ut maneat cum eo semper: quia semper in plenitudine potestatis suae habet ut possit miracula facere et prophetare, et alia huiusmodi. Sed non sic est de aliis; quia, ut dicit Gregorius, spiritus prophetarum non sunt prophetis subiecti.
          <td>According to Chrysostom, the solution is that the Holy Spirit is said to remain in us by his gifts. Certain gifts of the Holy Spirit are necessary for salvation; these are found in all the saints and always remain in us, as charity, which never leaves (1 Cor 13:8), since it will continue into the future. Other gifts are not necessary for salvation, but are given to the faithful so they can manifest the Spirit: "To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good" (1 Cor 12:7). With this in mind, the Holy Spirit is with the disciples and the saints forever by the first type of gift. But it is peculiar to Christ that the Spirit is always with him by the second type of gift, for Christ always has a plenitude of power to work miracles and to prophesy, and so on. This is not true of others, because, as Gregory says, the spirits of the prophets are not under the control of the prophets.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Donum autem est excellentissimum, quia <i>spiritus veritatis</i>. Spiritum quidem dixit, ut ostendat naturae subtilitatem. Spiritus enim dicitur aliquid occultum et invisibile, unde quod invisibile est, spiritus dici consuevit. Sic et spiritus sanctus occultus est et invisibilis: supra III, 8: <i>spiritus ubi vult spirat, et vocem eius audis, sed nescis unde veniat aut quo vadat</i>. Item ut ostendat eius virtutem, quia movet nos ad bene agendum et operandum. Spiritus enim impulsionem quamdam insinuat, unde et ventum spiritum appellamus; Rom. VIII, 14: <i>qui spiritu Dei aguntur, hi filii Dei sunt</i>; Ps. CXLII, 10: <i>spiritus tuus bonus deducet me in terram rectam</i>.
          <td>1916 The Spirit is a most excellent gift because he is the Spirit of truth. He is called the Spirit to show the subtlety or fineness of his nature, for the word "spirit" is used to indicate something which is undiscoverable and invisible. And so what is invisible is usually referred to as a spirit. The Holy Spirit also is undiscoverable and invisible: "The Spirit blows where it wills, and you hear the sound of it, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes" [3:8]. He is also called the Spirit to indicate his power, because he moves us to act and work well. For the word "spirit" indicates a certain impulse, and that is why the word <i>spiritus</i> can also mean the wind: "For all who are impelled by the Spirit of God are sons of God" [Rom 8:14]; "Let thy good spirit lead me on a level path" (Ps 143:10).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Addit autem <i>veritatis</i>, quia a veritate procedit, et veritatem dicit. Spiritus enim sanctus nihil aliud est quam amor. Quando ergo quis impellitur ad amandum terrena et mundum, tunc impellitur a spiritu mundi; I Cor. II, 12: <i>nos autem non spiritum huius mundi accepimus, sed spiritum qui ex Deo est</i>. Quando vero impellitur ad opera carnis, tunc non impellitur a spiritu sancto; Ez. XIII, 3: <i>vae prophetis insipientibus, qui sequuntur spiritum suum</i>.
          <td>He adds, <b>of truth</b>, because this Spirit proceeds from the Truth and speaks the truth, for the Holy Spirit is nothing else than Love. (When a person is impelled to love earthly things and the world, he is impelled by the spirit of the world: "Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is from God" (1 Cor 2:12); and when one is impelled to works of the flesh, he is not impelled by the Holy Spirit, as Ezekiel (13:3) says: "Woe to the foolish prophets who follow their own spirit.")
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed iste spiritus ducit ad cognitionem veritatis, quia procedit a veritate, quae dicit supra eodem: <i>ego sum via, et veritas, et vita</i>. Nam, sicut in nobis ex veritate concepta et considerata sequitur amor ipsius veritatis, ita in Deo concepta veritate, quae est filius, procedit amor. Et sicut ab ipsa procedit, ita in eius cognitionem ducit; infra c. XVI, 14: <i>ille me clarificabit, quia de meo accipiet</i> et cetera. Et ideo dicit Ambrosius, quod omne verum a quocumque dicatur a spiritu sancto est. I Cor. XII, 3: <i>nemo potest dicere, dominus Iesus, nisi in spiritu sancto</i>; infra XV, 26: <i>cum venerit Paraclitus, quem ego mittam vobis spiritum veritatis</i>. Manifestare autem veritatem convenit proprietati spiritus sancti. Est enim amor qui facit secretorum revelationem; infra XV, 15: <i>vos autem dixi amicos, quia omnia quaecumque audivi a patre meo, nota feci vobis</i>: Iob c. XXXVI, 33: <i>annuntiat de ea</i> (scilicet veritate) <i>amico suo</i>.
          <td>
            But the Holy Spirit leads to the knowledge of the truth, because he proceeds from the Truth, who says, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life" (14:6). In us, love of the truth arises when we have conceived and considered truth. So also in God, Love proceeds from conceived Truth, which is the Son. And just as Love proceeds from the Truth, so Love leads to knowledge of the truth: "He [The Holy Spirit] will glorify me because he will receive from me and declare it to you" [16: 14]. And therefore Ambrose says that any truth, no matter who speaks it, is from the Holy Spirit. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn33" name="_ftnref33" id="_ftnref33">[33]</a> "No one can say 'Jesus is Lord' except by the Holy Spirit" (1 Cor 12:3); "When the Paraclete comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth..." [15:26]. It is a characteristic of the Holy Spirit to reveal the truth because it is love which impels one to reveal his secrets: "I have called you friends, for all that I have heard from my Father I have made known to you" (15:15); "He showed it," the truth, "to his friend" [Job 36:33].
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Recipiunt autem spiritum sanctum credentes, et quantum ad hoc dicit <i>quem mundus non potest accipere, et</i> primo ostendit qui sunt quibus non datur; secundo ostendit quibus datur, ibi <i>vos autem cognoscetis</i> et cetera. Primo autem ostendit quod non datur mundo; secundo autem assignat causam quare non detur.
          <td>1917 The ones who receive the Holy Spirit are those who believe; he says, <b>whom the world cannot receive</b>. First, he shows to whom the Spirit is not given; secondly, to whom he is given, <b>you will know him</b>. First, he shows that he is not given to the world; secondly, he mentions why (v 17).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Quantum ad primum dicit <i>quem mundus non potest accipere</i>. Mundum hic mundi dilectores vocat dominus. Hi quidem quamdiu mundum diligunt, spiritum sanctum non possunt accipere, est enim amor Dei: non potest autem quis finali dilectione Deum et mundum diligere: I Io. II, 15: <i>si quis diligit mundum, non est caritas patris in eo</i>. Nam Gregorius dicit, V Moral. 20: <i>spiritus sanctus omne quod repleverit ad desiderandum invisibilia accendit. Et quoniam mundana corda sola visibilia diligunt, hunc mundus non accipit, quia ad diligenda invisibilia non assurgit. Saeculares etenim mentes quanto se foras per desideria dilatant, tanto ad receptionem illius sinum cordis angustant</i>. Sap. I, 5: <i>spiritus sanctus disciplinae effugiet fictum</i>.
          <td>
            1918 As to the first he says, <b>whom the world cannot receive</b>. Our Lord is here calling those who love the world, the "world." As long as they love the world they cannot receive the Holy Spirit, for he is the love of God. And no one can love, as his destination, both God and the world: "If anyone loves the world, love for the Father is not in him" (1 Jn 2:15). As Gregory says: "The Holy Spirit inflames everything he fills with a desire for invisible things. And because worldly hearts love only visible things, the world does not receive him, because it does not rise to the love of what is invisible. For worldly minds, the more they widen themselves with their desires, the more they narrow the core of their hearts to the Spirit" <a href="John14.htm#_ftn34" name="_ftnref34" id="_ftnref34">[34]</a> (<i>Morals V</i>). "The Holy Spirit of discipline will flee from the deceitful" [Wis 1:5].
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Quantum ad secundum dicit <i>quia non videt eum, nec scit eum</i>. Nam dona spiritualia non accipiuntur nisi desiderata, Sap. VI, 14. <i>Praeoccupat</i>, scilicet divina sapientia, <i>eos qui se concupiscunt</i>, nec desiderantur nisi aliqualiter cognita. Quod autem non cognoscantur, ex duobus contingit. Primo quidem ex hoc quod homo non ponit intentionem suam ad eorum cognitionem; secundo vero quia quis non potest esse capax illius cognitionis. Hoc autem mundani non habent. Nam primo non intendunt ad ea desideranda, et quantum ad hoc dicit <i>quia non videt eum</i>; idest, non ponit intentionem suam ad eum cognoscendum; Ps. XVI, 11: <i>oculos suos statuerunt declinare in terram</i>. Item non possunt ea cognoscere, unde dicit <i>nescit eum</i>: nam, ut Augustinus dicit, <i>non habet invisibiles oculos mundana dilectio: per quos videri spiritus sanctus nisi invisibiliter non potest</i>. I Cor. c. II, 14: <i>animalis homo non percipit ea quae sunt spiritus Dei</i>. Sicut lingua infecta non sentit bonum saporem propter corruptionem humoris, sic anima infecta a corruptione mundi, caelestium dulcedinem non gustat.
          <td>
            1919 In regard to the second, why he is not given to the world, he says, <b>because it neither sees him nor knows him</b>. For spiritual gifts are not received unless they are desired: "She," divine Wisdom, "hastens to make herself known to those who desire her." And they are not desired unless they are somehow known. Now there are two reasons why they are not known. First, because one does not want to know them; and secondly, because one is not capable of such knowledge. These two reasons apply to the worldly. In the first place, they do not desire this, and as to this he says, <b>the world neither sees him</b>, that is, does not want to know him: "They have fixed their eyes on the ground" [Ps 16:11]. Further, they are not capable of knowing him, and as to this he says, <b>nor knows him</b>. As Augustine says: "Worldly love does not have invisible eyes which alone can see the invisible Holy Spirit." <a href="John14.htm#_ftn35" name="_ftnref35" id="_ftnref35">[35]</a> "The sensual person does not perceive those things pertaining to the Spirit of God" [1 Cor 2:14]. Just as a tainted tongue does not taste sweet flavors, so a soul tainted by the corruption of the world does not taste the sweetness of heavenly things.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Vel, secundum Chrysostomum, dico, quod <i>alium Paraclitum dabit vobis, spiritum veritatis</i>; sed hoc non assumet carnem, quia <i>mundus non videt eum, nec scit eum</i>, idest, non accipiet eum, sed solum vos.
          <td>
            Here is the interpretation of Chrysostom. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn36" name="_ftnref36" id="_ftnref36">[36]</a> I say that <b>he will give you another Paraclete, the Spirit of truth</b>, but he will not assume flesh, because <b>the world neither sees him nor knows him</b>, that is, it will not receive him, but only you will.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Hic ostendit primo quibus datur spiritus sanctus; secundo rationem assignat. Datur autem fidelibus: unde dicit <i>vos autem</i>, qui movemini a spiritu sancto, <i>cognoscetis eum</i>: I Cor. II, 12: <i>nos autem non spiritum huius mundi accepimus, sed spiritum qui ex Deo est</i>. Et hoc ideo, quia mundum contemnitis; II Cor. IV, 18: <i>non contemplantibus nobis quae videntur, sed quae non videntur</i>.
          <td>1920 Now he mentions, first of all, to whom the Spirit is given; secondly, he gives the reason. The Holy Spirit is given to believers: he says, <b>you</b>, who are moved by the Holy Spirit, <b>will know him</b>: "Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is from God" (1 Cor 2:12). This is because you scorn the world: "We look not to the things that are seen but to the things that are unseen" (2 Cor 4:18).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Ratio autem huius est, <i>quia apud vos manebit</i>. Ubi primo nota spiritus sancti ad apostolos familiaritatem <i>quia apud vos manebit</i>, idest ad utilitatem vestram; Ps. CXLII, v. 10: <i>spiritus tuus bonus deducet me in viam rectam</i>; Sap. XII, 1: <i>o quam bonus spiritus tuus, domine, est in omnibus</i>. Secundo quamdam eius intimam inhabitationem, quia <i>in nobis erit</i>, idest in intimo cordis nostri; Ez. XI, 19: <i>et spiritum novum tribuam in visceribus eorum</i>.
          <td>The reason for this is, <b>for he will dwell with you</b>. Note, first, the familiarity of the Holy Spirit with the apostles, <b>for he will dwell with you</b>, that is, for your benefit: "Let your good spirit lead me on a level path!" (Ps 143:10); "O, how good is your spirit, O Lord, in all things" [Wis 12:1]. Secondly, note how intimate his indwelling is, <b>for he will be in you</b>, that is, in the depths of your heart: "I will put a new Spirit within them" (Ez 11:19).
    </table>
    <hr>
    <table cellpadding="12">
      <tbody>
        <tr style="align:center">
          <td><b>Lectio 5</b>
          <td><b>LECTURE 5</b>
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td style="font-family:" palatino="">
            <blockquote>
              18 οὐκ ἀφήσω ὑμᾶς ὀρφανούς, ἔρχομαι πρὸς ὑμᾶς. 19 ἔτι μικρὸν καὶ ὁ κόσμος με οὐκέτι θεωρεῖ, ὑμεῖς δὲ θεωρεῖτέ με, ὅτι ἐγὼ ζῶ καὶ ὑμεῖς ζήσετε. 20 ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ γνώσεσθε ὑμεῖς ὅτι ἐγὼ ἐν τῷ πατρί μου καὶ ὑμεῖς ἐν ἐμοὶ κἀγὼ ἐν ὑμῖν. 21 ὁ ἔχων τὰς ἐντολάς μου καὶ τηρῶν αὐτὰς ἐκεῖνός ἐστιν ὁ ἀγαπῶν με: ὁ δὲ ἀγαπῶν με ἀγαπηθήσεται ὑπὸ τοῦ πατρός μου, κἀγὼ ἀγαπήσω αὐτὸν καὶ ἐμφανίσω αὐτῷ ἐμαυτόν.
            </blockquote>
          <td>
            <blockquote>
              18 "I will not leave you [orphans] desolate; I will come to you. 19 Yet a little while, and the world will see me no more, but you will see me; because I live, [and] you will live also. 20 In that day you will know that I am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you. 21 He who has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me; and he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself to him." <a href="John14.htm#_ftn37" name="_ftnref37" id="_ftnref37">[37]</a>
            </blockquote>
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Supra dominus promisit spiritum sanctum consolatorem. Sed quia apostoli non multum ad notitiam spiritus sancti conscenderant, et ad Christi praesentiam valde detinebantur, huiusmodi consolatio eis parva videbatur: et ideo in parte ista promittit eis primo reditum suum; secundo dona sua, ibi <i>haec locutus sum vobis apud vos manens</i> et cetera. Circa primum primo promittit eis iteratam visitationem; secundo assignat rationem, ibi <i>qui habet mandata mea et servat ea, ille est qui diligit me</i>; tertio excludit discipuli dubitationem, ibi <i>dicit ei Iudas</i> et cetera. Circa primum primo manifestat eis suum reditum; secundo manifestat redeundi modum, ibi <i>adhuc modicum, et mundus me iam non videt</i>; tertio praedicit reditus fructum, ibi <i>in illa die vos cognoscetis</i> et cetera. Circa primum primo ostendit necessitatem redeundi; secundo promittit reditum.
          <td>1921 Above, our Lord promised that the Holy Spirit would be our Consoler. But because the apostles had not risen very high in their knowledge of the Holy Spirit, and their attention was absorbed by the presence of Christ, this consolation seemed small to them. Thus, in this part, our Lord promises, first, that he will return; secondly, his own gifts (v 25). Concerning the first, he promises then that he will return; and then he gives the reason (v 21); thirdly, he answers a question for one of the disciples (v 22). Concerning the first, he first shows that he will return; secondly, the way he will return (v 19); and thirdly, he foretells the fruit of his return (v 20). Concerning the first, he shows why he needs to return; secondly, he promises to return, <b>I will come to you</b> (v 18).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Necessitas autem redeundi est ut discipuli orphani non remaneant; et hoc est quod dicit <i>non vos relinquam orphanos</i>. Orphani enim in Graeco, pupilli sunt in Latino; et dicuntur hi parvuli patre carentes, secundum illud Thren. ult., 3: <i>pupilli facti sumus absque patre, matres nostrae quasi viduae</i>.
          <td>1922 The reason our Lord has to return is so that the disciples would not remain orphans; he says, <b>I will not leave you orphans</b>. The word "orphans" comes from the Greek, and indicates little children who do not have a father: "We have become orphans, fatherless; our mothers are like widows" (Lam 5:3).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Considerandum est autem, quod homo potest habere triplicem patrem. Scilicet patrem originis, Heb. XII, 9: <i>patres quidem habuimus carnis nostrae</i> et cetera. Item pravae imitationis; supra VIII, 44: <i>vos ex patre Diabolo estis</i>. Item gratuitae adoptionis; Rom. VIII, v. 15: <i>accepistis spiritum adoptionis filiorum</i>. Sed eos qui imitantur patrem Diabolum, Deus non adoptat in filios: quia non est conventio lucis ad tenebras, ut dicitur II Cor. VI, v. 15. Similiter nec illos qui nimium afficiuntur carnaliter ad parentes: quia hoc dicitur Matth. X, 37: <i>qui amat patrem suum aut matrem suam plusquam me, non est me dignus</i>. Qui ergo fuerit orphanus, idest destitutus affectu peccati, et deserens affectum carnalem ad parentes, illum Deus sibi adoptat in filium; Ps. XXVI, 10: <i>quoniam pater meus et mater mea dereliquerunt me; dominus autem assumpsit me</i>. Multo autem magis qui relinquit eos; Ps. XLIV, 11: <i>obliviscere populum tuum et domum patris tui; et concupiscet rex decorem tuum</i>.
          <td>Consider that we can have three fathers. One father gives us existence: "We have had earthly fathers," literally, fathers of our flesh (Heb 12:9). Another father would be one whose evil example we follow: "You are of your father the devil" (8:44). A third father would be one who gratuitously adopts us: "You have received the spirit of adoption of sons" [Rom 8:15]. Now God does not adopt as his children those who imitate their father, the devil, for "What fellowship has light with darkness?" (2 Cor 6:14). And he does not adopt those who are too attached, in a worldly way, to their parents: "He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me" (Mt 10:37). But God does adopt as his children those who have become orphans by being stripped of their affection for sin and by abandoning a worldly love for their parents. "For my father and my mother have forsaken me, but the Lord will take me up" (Ps 27:10); but much more one who has left them: "Forget your people and your father's house; and the king will desire your beauty" (Ps 45:10).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed notandum, quod Christus exhibet se discipulis suis ut patrem: quamvis enim hoc nomen pater personaliter acceptum, sit proprium personae patris, essentialiter tamen acceptum competit toti Trinitati. Unde supra c. XIII, 33, dixit eis: <i>filioli mei, adhuc modicum vobiscum sum</i>.
          <td>Note that Christ presents himself to his disciples as a father. Now although the word "father," if taken to indicate a person, is special to the Father, yet if it is taken to indicate an essence, it is appropriate for the entire Trinity. So our Lord said above (13:33): "Little children, yet a little while I am with you."
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Adventum suum promittit eis dicens <i>veniam ad vos</i>. Venerat iam Christus ad eos, carnem assumendo, I Tim. I, 15: <i>Christus Iesus in hunc mundum venit</i>. Restabat ergo triplex adventus eius, quorum duo sunt corporales: unus scilicet post resurrectionem et ante ascensionem, quando scilicet recedens ab eis per mortem, post resurrectionem venit Iesus, et stetit in medio discipulorum, ut dicitur infra XX. Alius erit in fine mundi, de quo dicitur Act. I, 11: <i>quemadmodum vidistis eum euntem in caelum, ita veniet</i>; Lc. XXI, 27: <i>videbunt filium hominis venientem in nube cum potestate magna et maiestate</i>. Sed tertius est spiritualis et invisibilis; quando scilicet venit ad fideles suos per gratiam in vita vel in morte; Iob IX, 11: <i>si venerit ad me, non videbo eum</i>.
          <td>1923 Christ promises to come when he says, <b>I will come to you</b>. But he had already come to them by taking on flesh: "Christ Jesus came into the world" (1 Tim 1:15). Still, he will come in three more ways. Two of these ways are bodily or physical. One is after the resurrection and before his ascension, when he leaves them by death and comes to them after the resurrection and stands among his disciples, as is stated below (c 20). The other bodily coming will be at the end of the world: "This Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you saw him go into heaven" (Acts 1:11); "And then they will see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory" (Lk 21:27). His third coming is spiritual and invisible, that is, when he comes to his faithful by grace, either in life or in death: "If he comes to me I will not see him" [Job 9:11].
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Dicit ergo <i>veniam ad vos</i>, post resurrectionem quantum ad primum adventum; infra XVI, 22: <i>iterum autem videbo vos</i>. Item in fine mundi; Is. III, 14: <i>dominus ad iudicium veniet</i>. Item in morte ad suscipiendum vos ad me; supra eodem <i>veniam</i> ad vos, et tollam <i>vos ad meipsum</i>. Item, <i>veniam ad vos</i> spiritualiter visitando. Infra eodem <i>ad eum veniemus, et mansionem apud eum faciemus</i>.
          <td>He says, therefore, <b>I will come to you</b>, after the resurrection (and this is the first way of coming mentioned above) and "I will see you again" (16:22). Again, I will come to you at the end of the world: "The Lord will come to judge" [Is 3:14]. And again I will come at your death to take you to myself: "I will come again and will take you to myself" (above v 3). And again, <b>I will come to you</b>, visiting you in a spiritual way: "We will come to him and make our home with him" (14:23).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Hic exponit visitationis modum ostendens hanc visitationem apostolis singulariter exhibendam. Et quia possent credere quod adhuc ad eos rediret mortalis existens, ideo consequenter excludit hoc, dicens <i>adhuc modicum, et mundus me iam non videt</i>. Ut primo exponamus de reditu post resurrectionem; tunc est sensus: <i>adhuc modicum</i>, idest modicum tempus vobiscum sum in hac carne mortali, et tunc crucifigar, sed post <i>mundus iam me non videt</i>. Et hoc quia post resurrectionem non omnibus manifestavit se, sed testibus praeordinatis a Deo, scilicet discipulis suis, Act. I, 8, et ideo dicit <i>vos autem videbitis me</i>, scilicet in corpore glorificato et immortali.
          <td>1924 Here he explains how he will return and shows that his return to the apostles will be in a special way. Since they might think that he would return to them as still subject to death, he excludes this, saying: <b>Yet a little while, and the world will see me no more</b>. If we explain this as referring to his return after the resurrection, the meaning is this: <b>Yet a little while</b>, that is, I will be with you only for a short time in this mortal flesh, and then I will be crucified; but after that, <b>the world will see me no more</b>. This is because after the resurrection he did not show himself to all, but only to witnesses pre‑ordained by God, that is, to his disciples (Acts 1:3). Thus he says, <b>but you will see me</b>, that is, in my glorified and immortal body.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Rationem horum assignat dicens <i>quia ego vivo, et vos vivetis</i>. Ubi removet dubitationem. Possent enim discipuli dicere: quomodo videbimus te, qui morieris, et nos etiam moriemur tecum? Et ideo dicit quod hoc non erit ita, <i>quia ego vivo</i>; idest, vivam post resurrectionem, Apoc. I, 18: <i>fui mortuus, et ecce sum vivens in saecula saeculorum. Et vos vivetis</i>, quia non occidemini modo mecum; infra XVIII, 8: <i>si me quaeritis, sinite hos abire</i>. Vel <i>ego vivo</i>, per resurrectionem, et <i>vos vivetis</i>, idest gaudebitis inde, quia, infra XX, 20: <i>gavisi sunt discipuli viso domino</i>. Hoc modo accipitur vivere Gen. XLV, 27: <i>cum audisset Iacob quod Ioseph regnaret in terra Aegypti, revixit spiritus eius</i>, scilicet propter gaudium.
          <td>He gives the reason for this when he says, <b>because I live and you will live</b>. This clears up a difficulty. The disciples could have wondered how they would see him, since he would be dead, and they with him. So he says that this will not be the case, <b>because I live</b>, that is, I will live after the resurrection: "I died, and behold I am alive for evermore" (Rev 1:18), <b>and you will live</b>, because you will not be killed with me: "If you seek me, let these men go" (18:8). Here is another interpretation: I live, by my resurrection, <b>and you will live</b>, that is, you will rejoice over this, since "The disciples were glad when they saw the Lord" (20:20) Here, to live means to rejoice, and it is used in this sense in Genesis [45:26]: "When Jacob heard that Joseph was ruling in Egypt his spirit began to live again," with joy.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed contra hanc expositionem obiicit Augustinus: quia ex hoc quod dominus dicit <i>adhuc modicum, et mundus me iam non videt</i>, sequitur quod homines mundi numquam sint eum visuri: quod est falsum, quia in iudicio videbunt eum, secundum illud Apoc. I, 7: <i>videbit eum omnis oculus</i>. Ad quod posset dici, quod verum est quod homines mundi: (...) adhuc modicum mundus non videbit eum in ista carne mortali; et propter hoc Augustinus exponit hoc <i>adhuc modicum</i>, referens ad secundum adventum, in quo veniet ad iudicandum. Et dicitur istud tempus modicum usque ad iudicium, in respectu ad aeternitatem. <i>Nam mille anni ante oculos tuos quasi dies hesterna quae praeteriit</i>: Ps. LXXXIX, 4. Et hoc modo apostolus Hebr. XII, 26 s. vocat istud tempus modicum, exponens illud Aggaei II, v. 7: <i>adhuc modicum, et ego movebo caelum et terram</i> et cetera. <i>Et mundus me iam non videt</i>; quia ulterius post iudicium homines mundi amatores et pravi eum non videbunt, euntes in ignem aeternum. Unde Is. c. XXVI, 10, secundum aliam litteram, dicitur: <i>tollatur impius, ne videat gloriam Dei. Vos autem</i>, qui secuti estis me, et permansistis mecum in tentationibus meis, <i>videbitis me</i> in aeternitate perpetua; Is. XXXIII, v. 17: <i>videbunt regem in decore suo</i>; I Thess. c. IV, 16: <i>semper cum domino erimus</i>. Et hoc ideo, <i>quia vivo, et vos vivetis</i>; quasi diceret: sicut ego habeo vitam gloriosam in anima et in corpore, ita et vos; Phil. III, 21: <i>reformabit corpus humilitatis nostrae, configuratum corpori claritatis suae</i>. Et hoc ideo dicit, quia vita nostra gloriosa creatur ex vita gloriosa Christi; I Cor. XV, 22: <i>sicut in Adam omnes moriuntur, ita et in Christo omnes vivificabuntur</i>. Sed de se dicit in praesenti, <i>vivo</i>, quia sua resurrectio differenda non erat post mortem eius, sed statim secutura; secundum illud Ps. CVII, 3: <i>exurgam diluculo</i>, quia, ut dicitur in Ps. XV, 10: <i>non dabis sanctum tuum videre corruptionem</i>. Sed de discipulis dicit <i>vivetis</i>, in futuro, quia resurrectio corporum eorum differenda erat usque in finem mundi, secundum illud Is. XXVI, 19: <i>vivent mortui tui, interfecti mei resurgent</i>.
          <td>1925 Augustine finds fault with this interpretation because our Lord said, <b>Yet a little while, and the world will see me no more. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn38" name="_ftnref38" id="_ftnref38"><b>[38]</b></a></b> This means that the worldly will never see him again. Yet they will see him at the judgment, according to: "Every eye will see him" (Rev 1:7). For this reason Augustine explains this <b>little while</b> as including the second coming, when Christ comes to judge. This time is described as little in comparison to eternity: "For a thousand years in your sight are but as yesterday when it is past" (Ps 90:4). The Apostle, in Hebrews (12:26), also refers to this time as a little while when he is explaining the statement in Haggai: "In a little while, I will shake the heavens and the earth and the sea and the dry land" (2:7). <b>And the world will see me no more</b>, because after the judgment those who love the world and the wicked will not see him, since they are going into eternal fire. As we read in another version of Isaiah [26:10]: "Remove the wicked so they do not see the glory of God." <b>But you</b>, who have followed me and stayed with me in my trials, <b>will see me</b>, in an everlasting eternity: "Your eyes will see the king in his beauty" (Is 33:17); "We shall always be with the Lord" (1 Thess 4:17). You will see me <b>because I live and you will live also</b>. This is like saying: Just as I have a glorified life in my soul and in my body, so will you "Christ will change our lowly body to be like his glorious body" (Phil 3:21). He says this because our glorified life is produced by the glorified life of Christ: "For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive" (1 Cor 15:22). Christ speaks of himself in the present tense, <b>I live</b>, because his resurrection would be immediately after his death, and there would be no delay; according to: "I will rise at dawn" [Ps 108:2], because "You will not let your holy one undergo corruption" [Ps 16:10]. When referring to the disciples he uses the future, <b>you will live</b>, because the resurrection of their bodies was to be postponed till the end of the world: "Your dead shall live, their bodies shall rise" (Is 26:19).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Hic ponitur visitationis fructus, qui est cognitio eorum quae apostoli ignorabant. Ut enim supra dictum est, Petrus ignorabat quo Christus iret; unde dicebat: <i>domine, quo vadis?</i> Etiam Thomas hoc ignorabat, et viam per quam iret; unde dicebat: <i>nescimus quo vadis, et quomodo possumus viam scire?</i> Philippus autem patrem ignorabat; unde petebat dicens: <i>domine, ostende nobis patrem, et sufficit nobis</i>. Quae quidem causabantur ex ignorantia unius rei: ex hoc scilicet quod ignorabant quomodo pater in filio, et filius in patre; unde et Philippo dixit: <i>non credis quia ego in patre, et pater in me est?</i> Huius ergo notitiam promittit eis dominus, dicens hic <i>in illa die vos cognoscetis quia ego in patre meo sum</i> et cetera. Ex quo omnis dubietas a cordibus discipulorum excluditur.
          <td>1926 Now we see the fruit of his return, which is the knowledge of those things which the apostles did not know. For, as we saw, Peter did not know where Christ was going, and so he asked: "Lord, where are you going?" (13:36); and Thomas did not know this, nor the way he would go: "Lord, we do not know where you are going; how can we know the way?" (14:5). Philip did not know the Father, and so he asked: "Lord, show us the Father, and we shall be satisfied" (14:8). All these arose from ignorance of one thing: they did not know how the Father is in the Son and the Son is in the Father. Thus Christ said to Philip: "Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father in me?" (14:10). And so our Lord promises them that they will know this, saying, <b>In that day you will know that I am in my Father</b>, and so forth. This will dispel all confusion from the hearts of the disciples.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Potest autem exponi de adventu tempore resurrectionis, et de adventu ad iudicium. Sed distinguenda est duplex cognitio mysteriorum divinitatis. Una est imperfecta, quae habetur per fidem; alia perfecta, quae habetur per speciem; de quibus dicitur I Cor. c. XIII, 12: <i>videmus nunc per speculum in aenigmate</i>, quantum ad primum, <i>tunc autem facie ad faciem</i>, quantum ad secundum.
          <td>1927 This sentence can be explained as referring to his coming at the time of the resurrection, and his coming at the judgment. We have two kinds of knowledge of the mysteries of the divinity. One is imperfect, and we have this by faith; the other is perfect, and comes by vision. These two kinds of knowledge are mentioned in, "For now we see in a mirror dimly," by the first kind of knowledge, "but then face to face." referring to the second kind of knowledge (1 Cor 13:12).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Dicit ergo <i>in illa die</i>, post resurrectionem meam, <i>cognoscetis quia ego sum in patre</i>: et hoc cognitione fidei, quia tunc videntes eum resurrexisse, et esse cum eis, certissimam fidem de eo habuerunt, praecipue qui acceperunt spiritum sanctum, qui omnia eos docebat. Vel <i>in illa die</i>, ultimae resurrectionis in iudicio, <i>cognoscetis</i>, scilicet manifeste per speciem; I Cor. XIII, 12: <i>tunc cognoscam sicut et cognitus sum</i>.
          <td>He says, <b>In that day</b>, after my resurrection, <b>you will know that I am in my Father</b>: and they will know this by the knowledge of faith, because then having seen that he has arisen and is among them, they will have a most certain faith about him, especially those who would receive the Holy Spirit, who would teach them all things. Or, on the other hand, <b>In that day</b>, of the final resurrection at the judgment, <b>you will know</b>, that is, clearly and by vision: "Then I shall understand fully, even as I have been fully understood" (1 Cor 13:12).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed quid cognoscent? Duo quae dicit supra: unum scilicet quod <i>pater in me manens ipse facit opera</i>; et quantum ad hoc dicit <i>quia ego sum in patre meo</i>, scilicet per consubstantialitatem naturae. Aliud quod dicit se facturum opera per discipulos, dicens: <i>qui credit in me, opera quae ego facio, et ipse faciet</i>: et quantum ad hoc dicit <i>et vos in me, et ego in vobis</i>.
          <td>1928 But what will they know? The two things he mentioned above. First, "the Father who dwells in me does the works" [14:10]. Referring to this he says, <b>that I am in my Father</b>, that is, by a consubstantiality of nature. The other thing they will know is what he said about doing works through the disciples, when he said, "he who believes in me will also do the works that I do" (14:12). And referring to this he says, <b>and you in me, and I in you</b>.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Ubi attendendum est, quod quia hic dominus videtur similem habitudinem ponere sui ad patrem et discipulorum ad ipsum, volebant Ariani, quod sicut discipuli sunt minores Christo, et non consubstantiales ei, ita esset filius minor patre, et alterius substantiae ab ipso. Et ideo dicendum est, quod hoc quod dicit <i>ego sum in patre meo</i>, dicitur per consubstantialitatem naturae; supra X, 30: <i>ego et pater unum sumus</i>; et supra I, 1: <i>verbum erat apud Deum</i>.
          <td>1929 Here our Lord seems to say that the relation between himself and the Father is like the relation of the disciples to himself. For this reason the Arians maintained that just as the disciples are inferior to Christ and not consubstantial with him, so the Son is inferior to the Father and distinct from him in substance. One should answer this by saying that when Christ says, <b>I am in my Father</b>, he means by a consubstantiality of nature: "I and the Father are one" (10:30); "And the Word was with God" (1:1).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Hoc autem quod dicit <i>et vos in me</i> etc., intelligitur, uno modo, quod discipuli sunt in Christo. Nam illud quod protegitur ab aliquo, dicitur esse in eo, sicut contentum in continente: et hoc modo dicitur quod in rege sunt ea quae sunt in regno. Et secundum hoc dicitur Act. XVII, 28: <i>in ipso vivimus, movemur et sumus. Et ego</i> sum <i>in vobis</i>, manendo interius, et operando, et inhabitando interius per gratiam; Eph. III, 17: <i>habitare Christum per fidem in cordibus vestris</i>; et II Cor. XIII, 3: <i>an experimentum eius quaeritis qui in me loquitur Christus?</i>
          <td>1930 The statement, <b>and you in me</b>, means that the disciples are in Christ. For what is protected or shielded by something is said to be in that thing, like something contained in its container. In this way the affairs of a kingdom are said to be in the hands of the king. And with this meaning it is said that "in him we live and move and have our being" (Acts 17:28). <b>And I in you</b>, remaining within you, and acting and indwelling within you by grace: "that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith" (Eph 3:17); "You desire proof that Christ is speaking in me" (2 Cor 113:3).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Alio modo secundum Hilarium. <i>Vos in me</i>, supple: in me eritis per naturam vestram, quam assumpsi: assumendo enim naturam nostram, assumpsit nos omnes; Hebr. c. II, 16: <i>nusquam enim Angelos apprehendit, sed semen Abrahae apprehendit</i>. Et <i>ego</i> sum <i>in vobis</i>, per mei sacramenti sumptionem: quia qui sumit corpus Christi, Christus est in eo; supra cap. VI, 57: <i>qui manducat carnem meam, et bibit meum sanguinem, in me manet, et ego in illo</i>.
          <td>
            Hilary gives another exposition. <b>And you in me</b>, that is, you will be in me through your nature, which I have taken on: for in taking on our nature he took us all on: "He did not take hold of the angels, but he did take hold of the seed of Abraham" [Heb 2:16]. <b>And I in you</b>, that is, I will be in you when you receive my sacrament, for when one receives the body of Christ, Christ is in him: "He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him" (6:56). <a href="John14.htm#_ftn39" name="_ftnref39" title="" id="_ftnref39">[39]</a>
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Alio modo <i>vos in me, et ego in vobis</i>, supple: sumus, per mutuam dilectionem: quia hoc dicitur I Io. IV, 16: <i>Deus caritas est: et qui manet in caritate, in Deo manet, et Deus in eo</i>. Et haec vobis ignota erant, sed tamen in illa die ea cognoscetis.
          <td>Another interpretation: <b>and you in me, and I in you</b>, that is, by our mutual love, for we read: "God is love, and he who abides in love abides in God, and God abides in him" (1 Jn 4:16). And you did not know these things, but you will know them in that day.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Hic assignatur visitationis ratio. Et ponit dominus duplicem rationem quare a fidelibus dominus videatur, et non a mundo. Prima est vera eorum dilectio ad Deum; secunda vero dilectio Dei ad eos, ibi <i>qui autem diligit me, diligetur a patre meo</i>.
          <td>1931 Now the reason for his return is given, and our Lord mentions two reasons why he is seen by the faithful and not by the world. The first is their true love for God; the second is God's love for them (v 21b).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Quantum ad primum dicit <i>qui habet mandata mea, et servat ea, ille est qui diligit me</i>. Ubi notandum est, quod illa est vera dilectio quae se prodit et probat in opere; nam per exhibitionem operis dilectio manifestatur. Cum enim diligere aliquem sit velle ei bonum et desiderare quae ipse vult, non videtur vere diligere qui non facit voluntatem amati, nec exequitur quae scit eum velle. Qui ergo non facit voluntatem Dei, non videtur eum vere diligere; et ideo dicit <i>qui habet mandata mea et servat ea, ille est qui diligit me</i>, idest qui habet veram dilectionem ad me.
          <td>1932 As to the first he says, <b>he who has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me</b>. Note that true love is love which appears and proves itself by actions: for love is revealed by its actions. Since to love someone is to will that person something good and to desire what this person wants, one does not seem to truly love a person if he does not accomplish the will of the beloved or do what he knows this person wants. And so one who does not do the will of God does not seem to truly love him. Thus he says, <b>he who has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me</b>, that is, with a true love for me.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed nota, quod aliquis habet mandata Dei primo quidem in corde per memoriam et iugem meditationem; Ps. CXVIII, v. 11: <i>in corde meo abscondi eloquia tua, ut non peccem tibi</i>. Sed hoc non sufficit, nisi servet in opere; Ps. CX, 10: <i>intellectus bonus omnibus facientibus eum</i>. Quidam vero habent in ore, dicendo et exhortando; Ps. CXVIII, v. 103: <i>quam dulcia faucibus meis eloquia tua</i>. Et hi etiam debent ea servare in opere: quia <i>qui fecerit et docuerit, hic magnus vocabitur in regno caelorum</i>: Matth. V, 19. Unde vituperantur a Deo illi qui dicunt et non faciunt, Matth. XXIII. Quidam autem habent in aure, ea libenter et diligenter audiendo; supra VIII, 47: <i>qui est ex Deo, verba Dei audit</i>. Nec hoc sufficit, nisi servent: quia <i>non auditores legis, sed factores iustificabuntur</i>: Rom. II, 13; supra VI, 27: <i>operamini non cibum qui perit; sed qui permanet in vitam aeternam</i>. Ergo qui sic habet mandata Dei, aliqualiter servat ea, sed adhuc imponitur ei ut servet perseverando. Unde dicit Augustinus: qui habet in memoria et servat in vita, qui habet in sermonibus et servat in moribus, qui habet audiendo et servat faciendo, qui habet faciendo et servat perseverando, ipse est qui diligit me.
          <td>
            1933 Some have these commandments of God in their heart, by remembering them and continually meditating on them: "I have laid up your word in my heart, that I might not sin against you" (Ps 119:11). But this is not enough unless they are kept in one's actions: "A good understanding have all those who practice it" (Ps 111:10). Others have these commandments on their lips, by preaching and exhorting: "How sweet are your words to my taste" (Ps 119:103). They also should follow them in their actions, because "He who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven" (Mt 5:19). Thus in Matthew (c 23), God reprimands those who speak but do not act. Others have them by hearing them, gladly and earnestly listening to them: "He who is of God hears the words of God" (8:47). Yet this is not enough unless they keep them in their actions, "for it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified" (Rom 2:13); "Do not labor for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life" (6:27). Therefore, those who have the commandments [in the above ways] do keep them to a certain extent; but they still have to persist in keeping them. For this reason Augustine says: "The person who keeps the commandments in his memory and keeps them in his life, who has them in his speech and keeps them in his conduct, who has them by hearing them and keeps them by doing them, who has them by doing and persisting in doing them, this is one who loves me." <a href="John14.htm#_ftn40" name="_ftnref40" id="_ftnref40">[40]</a>
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Quantum ad secundum dicit <i>qui autem diligit me, diligetur a patre meo</i>. Sed hoc in primo aspectu videtur absurdum. Numquid enim Deus diligit nos, quia diligimus eum? Absit. Dicitur enim I Io. IV, v. 10: <i>non quasi dilexerimus Deum sed quoniam ipse prior dilexit nos</i>.
          <td>1934 As for the second reason why he will be seen by the faithful, he says, <b>he who loves me will be loved by my Father</b>. At first glance this does not seem to make sense. Does God love us because we love him? Assuredly not; for we read: "not that we loved God, but because he has first loved us" [1 Jn 4:10].
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Et ideo dicendum quod intellectum huius habemus ex his quae dicta sunt supra, scilicet, <i>qui habet mandata mea, et servat ea, ille est qui diliget me</i>. Non enim ibi dicitur quod ideo diligit quia servat mandata; sed quia diligit, ideo mandata implet. Et hoc modo dicendum est hic, quod ideo quis diligit Christum quia diligitur a patre, et non ideo diligitur quia diligit. Diligimus ergo filium, quia pater diligit nos. Habet enim hoc verus amor ut amatos ad amantis dilectionem trahat; Ier. c. XXXI, 3: <i>in caritate perpetua dilexi te, ideo, attraxi te, miserans</i>.
          <td>Therefore, we should understand this statement in the light of what was said before, "He who has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me." This does not mean that one keeps the commandments and as a result of this loves. But rather, one loves, and as a result of this, keeps the commandments. In the same way, we should say here that one is loved by the Father, and as a result he loves Christ, and not that one is loved because he loves. Therefore, we love the Son because the Father loves us. For it is a characteristic of true love that it draws the one loved to love the one who loves him: "I have loved you with an everlasting love, and therefore I have drawn you having compassion on you" [Jer 31:3].
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed quia amor patris non est sine amore filii, cum idem sit amor utriusque, <i>quaecumque enim pater facit, haec et filius similiter facit</i>: supra V, 19, ideo subdit <i>et ego diligam eum</i>. Sed cum pater et filius omnia diligant ab aeterno; quare dicit <i>diligam</i>, in futuro? Dicendum est ergo, quod dilectio considerata prout est in divina voluntate, sic est aeterna; sed considerata secundum quod manifestatur in executione operis et effectus, est temporalis. Et ideo est sensus <i>et ego diligam eum</i>, idest effectum dilectionis ostendam, quia scilicet <i>manifestabo ei meipsum</i>: quia ad hoc diligam ut manifestem.
          <td>1935 Because the Father's love is not without the Son's love, since it is the same love in each, "Whatever the Father does, that the Son does likewise" [5:19], he adds, <b>and I will love him</b>. Why does he say, <b>I will love</b>, using the future, since the Father and the Son love all things from eternity? We should answer that love, considered as being in the divine will, is eternal; but considered as manifested in the accomplishment of some work and effect, is temporal. So the meaning is: <b>and I will love him</b>, that is, I will show the effect of my love, because <b>I will manifest myself to him</b>: for I love in order to manifest myself.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sciendum est autem, quod dilectio alicuius ad aliquem aliquando est secundum quid, aliquando simpliciter. Secundum quid quidem, quando vult ei aliquod bonum particulare; simpliciter autem, quando vult ei omne bonum. Deus autem omnia causata diligit secundum quid, quia omni creaturae vult aliquod bonum, etiam ipsis Daemonibus, ut scilicet vivant et intelligant et sint; quae sunt quaedam bona. Simpliciter autem diligit illos quibus vult omne bonum, scilicet ut habeant ipsum Deum, quem habere est habere veritatem, quia Deus veritas est. Sed veritas tunc habetur quando cognoscitur. Illos ergo vere et simpliciter diligit quibus manifestat seipsum, qui est veritas. Et hoc est quod dicit <i>manifestabo ei meipsum</i>, scilicet in futuro per gloriam, quod est ultimus futurae beatitudinis effectus; Iob XXXVI, v. 33: <i>annuntiat de ea amico suo, quod possessio eius sit</i>. Sap. VI, 14: <i>praeoccupat eos qui se concupiscunt</i>.
          <td>1936 Note that one's love for another is sometimes qualified and sometimes absolute. It is qualified when one wills the other some particular good; but it is absolute when one wills the other all good. Now God loves every created thing in a qualified sense, because he wills some good to every creature, even to the demons, for example, that they live and understand and exist. There are particular goods. But God loves absolutely those to whom he wills all good, that is, that they have God himself. And to have God is to have truth, for God is Truth. But truth is had or possessed when it is known. So God, who is Truth, truly and absolutely loves those to whom he manifests himself. This is what he says, <b>and I will manifest myself to him</b>, that is, in the future, by glory, which is the ultimate effect of future beatitude: "He showed it to his friend" [Job 36:33]; "She hastens to make herself known to those who desire her" (Wis 6:13).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed posset quis dicere: numquid pater non manifestabit se? Immo et pater et filius: nam filius et patrem simul et se manifestat, cum sit verbum eius; Matth. XI, v. 27: <i>neque patrem quis novit nisi filius</i> et cetera. Et tamen si interim filius manifestat se alicui aliquo modo, hoc est signum divinae dilectionis. Unde et haec potest esse ratio quare mundus eum non videbit, quia scilicet non manifestabit ei seipsum; et hoc quia non diligit eum.
          <td>1937 Someone might ask: The Father will manifest himself, will he not? Yes, both the Father and the Son. For the Son manifests himself and the Father at the same time, because the Son is the Word of the Father: "No one knows the Father except the Son" (Mt 11:27). If in the meantime the Son manifests himself to anyone in some way, this is a sign of God's love. And this can be a reason why the world will not see him, because he will not manifest himself to it because it does not love him.
    </table>
    <hr>
    <table cellpadding="12">
      <tbody>
        <tr style="align:center">
          <td><b>Lectio 6</b>
          <td><b>LECTURE 6</b>
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td style="font-family:" palatino="">
            <blockquote>
              22 λέγει αὐτῷ Ἰούδας, οὐχ ὁ Ἰσκαριώτης, κύριε, [καὶ] τί γέγονεν ὅτι ἡμῖν μέλλεις ἐμφανίζειν σεαυτὸν καὶ οὐχὶ τῷ κόσμῳ; 23 ἀπεκρίθη Ἰησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, ἐάν τις ἀγαπᾷ με τὸν λόγον μου τηρήσει, καὶ ὁ πατήρ μου ἀγαπήσει αὐτόν, καὶ πρὸς αὐτὸν ἐλευσόμεθα καὶ μονὴν παρ' αὐτῷ ποιησόμεθα. 24 ὁ μὴ ἀγαπῶν με τοὺς λόγους μου οὐ τηρεῖ: καὶ ὁ λόγος ὃν ἀκούετε οὐκ ἔστιν ἐμὸς ἀλλὰ τοῦ πέμψαντός με πατρός. <b>The Paraclete will teach you 14:25-26</b> 25 ταῦτα λελάληκα ὑμῖν παρ' ὑμῖν μένων: 26 ὁ δὲ παράκλητος, τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον ὃ πέμψει ὁ πατὴρ ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί μου, ἐκεῖνος ὑμᾶς διδάξει πάντα καὶ ὑπομνήσει ὑμᾶς πάντα ἃ εἶπον ὑμῖν [ἐγώ].
            </blockquote>
          <td>
            <blockquote>
              22 Judas (not Iscariot) said to him, "Lord, how is it that you will manifest yourself to us, and not to the world?" 23 Jesus answered him, "If a man love me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him. 24 He who does not love me does not keep my words; and the word which you hear is not mine but the Father's who sent me. 25 These things I have spoken to you, while I am still with you. 26 But the [Paraclete] Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you." <a href="John14.htm#_ftn41" name="_ftnref41" id="_ftnref41">[41]</a>
            </blockquote>
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Supra promisit dominus discipulis suam visitationem hic removet discipuli dubitationem, et primo ponitur discipuli dubitatio; secundo Christi responsio, ibi <i>respondit Iesus</i> et cetera.
          <td>1938 Above, our Lord promised the disciples that he would come to them; here he clears up a perplexity for one of the disciples. First, we see the bewildered disciple; secondly, Christ's answer (v 23).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sciendum est circa primum, quod sanctorum et humilium consuetudo est ut cum magna de se audiunt, stupeant et admirentur. Audierant autem discipuli dominum dicentem <i>adhuc modicum et mundus me iam non videt; vos autem videbitis me</i> etc., ex quo videbatur apostolos toti mundo praeferre: et ideo Iudas frater Iacobi, cuius epistola inter canonicas legitur, in admirationem et stuporem positus, dicit <i>domine, quid factum est, quia manifestaturus es nobis te ipsum?</i> Quasi diceret: quae causa erit? Numquid nos supra totum mundum sumus? Simile dixit David II Reg. VII, v. 18: <i>quis ego sum, aut quae est domus mea?</i> Matth. XXV, 37, dicunt iusti: <i>domine, quando te vidimus esurientem, et pavimus te?</i>
          <td>1939 With respect to the first, when those who are humble and saintly hear great things about themselves, they are usually astonished and bewildered. Now the disciples had just heard our Lord say, "Yet a little while, and the world will see me no more, but you will see me," and so on. So it seemed that he was preferring the apostles to the entire world. Thus Judas, the brother of James, whose letter is part of Holy Scripture, was bewildered and astonished, and said, <b>Lord, how is it that you will manifest yourself to us, and not to the world?</b> It is like saying: Why will you do this? Are we superior to the whole world? David said something like this: "Who am I, O Lord God, and what is my house, that you have brought me thus far?" (2 Sam 7:18). And the righteous also say: "Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you?" (Mt 25:37).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Consequenter cum dicit <i>respondit Iesus</i> etc., ponitur Christi responsio, ubi primo assignat causam suae manifestationis discipulis, et non mundo;secundo manifestat quoddam quod dixit, ibi <i>et sermonem quem audistis non est meus</i>. In primo ostendit quare manifestaturus est se discipulis; secundo ostendit quare non manifestaturus est se mundo, ibi <i>qui non diligit me, sermones meos non servat</i>. Et in prima primo ponitur idoneitas discipulorum ad Christi manifestationem habendam; secundo insinuatur processus manifestationis et ordo, ibi <i>et pater meus diliget eum</i>. Circa primum duo ponit, quae reddunt hominem idoneum ad Dei manifestationem. Primum est caritas; secundum est obedientia.
          <td>1940 Then, Christ's answer is given: first, Christ states the reason why he will manifest himself to the disciples and not to the world; secondly, he explains something he had said (v 24b). He shows, first, why he will manifest himself to his disciples; secondly, why he will not manifest himself to the world, at <b>he who does not love me</b>. As to the first, we see the fitness of the disciples to have Christ manifest himself to them; secondly, we see the manner and order of this manifestation, at <b>and my Father will love him</b> (v 23). In regard to the first, he mentions two things which make a person fit to receive God's manifestation. The first, is charity, the second is obedience.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Quantum ad primum dicit <i>si quis diligit me</i>. Tria enim necessaria sunt homini volenti Deum videre. Primo ut Deo appropinquet; Deut. XXXIII, 3: <i>qui appropinquant pedibus eius, accipient de doctrina illius</i>. Secundo ut ad eum videndum oculos elevet; Is. XL, 26: <i>levate in excelsum oculos vestros, et videte quis creavit haec</i>. Tertio ut visioni vacet: nam spiritualia videri non possunt, nisi quis vacet a terrenis; Ps. XXXIII, 9: <i>vacate, et videte, quoniam suavis est dominus</i>. Et haec tria facit caritas. Nam ipsa animam hominis Deo coniungit; I Io. IV: <i>qui manet in caritate, in Deo manet, et Deus in eo</i>. Ipsa ipsum intuitum ad Deum erigit; Matth. VI, 21: <i>ubi est thesaurus tuus, ibi est cor tuum</i>. Unde dicitur: <i>ubi est amor tuus, ibi oculus</i>. Ipsa enim a mundanis vacare facit; I Io. II, 15: <i>qui diligit saeculum, non est perfecta caritas Dei in illo</i>. Ergo, e contrario, qui perfecte Deum diligit, non est in illo amor saeculi.
          <td>1941 As to charity, he says, <b>If a man loves me</b>. Three things are necessary for a person who wants to see God. First, one must draw near to God: "Those who approach his feet will receive his teaching" [Deut 33:3]. Secondly, one must lift up his eyes in order to see God: "Lift up your eyes on high and see who created these things" [Is 40:26]. And thirdly, one must take time to look, for spiritual things cannot be seen if one is absorbed by earthly things: "Take time and see that the Lord is sweet" [Ps 34:8]. Now it is charity which accomplishes these three things. Charity joins our soul to God: "He who abides in love abides in God, and God abides in him" (1 Jn 4:16). It also makes us look at God: "For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also" (Mt 6:21). As the saying goes: "Where your love is, there your eyes are." Charity also frees us from worldly matters: "If any one loves the world, perfect love for God is not in him" [1 Jn 2:15]. Thus, to turn it about, one who perfectly loves God, does not love the world.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Ex caritate autem sequitur obedientia; unde dicit <i>sermonem meum servabit</i>. Ut dicit Gregorius: <i>probatio dilectionis, exhibitio est operis. Numquam est Dei amor otiosus; operatur enim magna si est, si autem operari renuit, amor non est</i>. Voluntas enim, et maxime quae est de fine, movet alias potentias ad actus suos: non enim quiescit homo nisi faciat ea per quae ad finem intentum perveniat, praecipue si est intensa ad ipsum. Quando ergo voluntas hominis intensa est ad Deum, qui est finis eius, movet omnes vires ad faciendum ea quae ad ipsum ducunt. Intenditur autem in Deum per caritatem; et ideo caritas est quae nos servare mandata facit; II Cor. V, 14: <i>caritas Christi urget nos</i>; Cant. VIII, 7: <i>lampades eius, lampades ignis</i>. Et per obedientiam homo efficitur idoneus ad videndum Deum; Ps. CXVIII, 104: <i>a mandatis tuis</i>, scilicet a me servatis, <i>intellexi</i>. Et iterum: <i>super senes intellexi</i>.
          <td>
            1942 Obedience follows from charity; and so he says, <b>he will keep my word</b>. Gregory says: "The proof of love is one's actions. Love for God is never lazy: if it is present it accomplishes great things; if it refuses to work, it is not love." <a href="John14.htm#_ftn42" name="_ftnref42" id="_ftnref42">[42]</a> For the will, especially when it is concerned with an end, moves the other powers to their actions: for a person does not rest until he does those things which will bring him to his intended end, especially if it is intensely desired. And so, when a person's will is intent on God, who is its end, it moves all powers to do those things which obtain him. Now it is charity which makes one intent on God, and thus it is charity which causes us to keep the commandments: "The love of Christ controls us" (2 Cor 5:14); "Its flashes are flashes of fire" (Song 8:6). And through obedience a person is rendered fit to see God: "Through your precepts," that is, as kept by me, "I get understanding" (Ps 119:104). Again, "I understood more than the aged" (Ps 119:100).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Consequenter cum dicit <i>et pater meus diliget eum</i>, ponitur processus et ordo manifestationis. Tria autem sunt per quae fit homini divina manifestatio. Primum est divina dilectio; et quantum ad hoc dicit <i>pater meus diliget eum</i>. Supra est dictum quare dicit <i>diliget</i> in futuro, quantum videlicet ad effectum dilectionis, qui tamen ab aeterno dilexit quantum ad voluntatem benefaciendi; Mal. I, 2: <i>Iacob dilexi, Esau autem odio habui</i>. Non autem dicit, ego diligam eum, quia hoc iam eis patuit supra. Prov. VIII, 17: <i>ego diligentes me diligo</i>. Restabat ergo ut insinuaret eis quia pater diligeret eos; Deut. IV, 37: <i>dilexit populos: omnes sancti in manu eius sunt</i>.
          <td>1943 Then when he says, <b>and my Father will love him</b>, we see the manner and order of this manifestation. Three things are needed so a divine manifestation can be made to us. The first is divine love; and he refers to this when he says, <b>and my Father will love him</b>. We explained above why the future tense is used, <b>will love</b>, which is that he is referring to the effect of love, although from the point of view of his willing to do good, God loves us from eternity: "Yet I have loved Jacob but I have hated Esau" (Mal 1:2). Jesus does not say here, "I will love him," because he had already made that clear to them before: "I love those who love me" (Prv 8:17). It remained for him to say that the Father would love them: "He loved the people: all the saints are in his hand" [Deut 4:37].
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Secundum est divina visitatio; et quantum ad hoc dicit <i>et ad eum veniemus</i>. Sed contra. Venire mutationem localem significat; sed Deus non mutatur; ergo et cetera. Responsio. Deus dicitur venire ad nos non quod ipse moveatur ad nos, sed quia nos movemur ad ipsum. Dicitur enim aliquid venire in locum in quem prius non fuit: hoc autem Deo non convenit, cum sit ubique; Ier. XXIII, 24: <i>caelum et terram ego impleo</i>. Dicitur etiam venire in aliquem, inquantum est ibi novo modo, secundum quem prius non fuerat ibi, scilicet per effectum gratiae: et per hunc effectum gratiae facit nos ad se accedere.
          <td>1944 The second thing needed is that the divine come to us; referring to this, he says, <b>and we will come to him</b>. An objection to this is that for a thing to come, it has to change its place. But God does not change. Therefore, I answer that God is said to come to us not because he moves to us, but because we move to him. Something comes into a place in which it previously was not: but this does not apply to God since he is everywhere: "Do I not fill heaven and earth?" (Jer 23:24). Rather, God is said to come to someone because he is there in a new way, in a way he had not been there before, that is, by the effect of his grace. It is by this effect of grace that he makes us approach him.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed attendendum, secundum Augustinum, quod tribus modis Deus venit ad nos, et iisdem nos imus ad eum. Primo quidem venit ad nos implendo suis effectibus, et nos imus ad eum capiendo ipsos; Eccli. c. XXIV, 26: <i>transite ad me omnes qui concupiscitis me, et a generationibus meis implemini</i>. Secundo illuminando, et nos imus ad eum considerando; Ps. XXXIII, 6: <i>accedite ad eum, et illuminamini</i>. Tertio vero adiuvando, et nos ad eum obediendo: quia nec obedire possumus nisi adiuti a Christo; Is. II, v. 3: <i>venite, ascendamus ad montem domini</i>.
          <td>
            1945 According to Augustine, God comes to us in three ways and we go to him in the same three ways. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn43" name="_ftnref43" title="" id="_ftnref43">[43]</a> First, he comes to us by filling us with his effects; and we go to him by receiving them: "Come to me, you who desire me, and eat your fill of my produce" (Sir 24:19). Secondly, God comes to us by enlightening us; and we go to him by thinking of him: "Come to him and be enlightened" [Ps 33:6]. Thirdly, he comes to us by helping us; and we go to him by obeying, because we cannot obey unless helped by Christ: "Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord" (Is 2:3).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed quare non fecit mentionem de spiritu sancto? Augustinus dicit, quod non dicitur hoc, quod ipse sit excludendus adveniente patre et filio, quia supra dicitur: <i>ut maneat vobiscum in aeternum</i>. Sed cum in Trinitate sint duo: scilicet personarum distinctio, et essentiae unitas: aliquando quidem fit mentio de tribus personis, ad insinuandum distinctionem personarum: aliquando vero facit mentionem de duabus sine tertia, ad insinuandum essentiae unitatem. Vel dicendum, quod cum spiritus sanctus nihil sit aliud quam amor patris et filii, posito patre et filio intelligitur spiritus sanctus.
          <td>1946 Why does he not mention the Holy Spirit? Augustine says that we do not read here that the Spirit will be excluded when the Father and Son come, because we read above that the Spirit was "to be with you for ever" (v 16). Since in the Trinity there is a distinction of Persons and a unity of essence, sometimes the three persons are mentioned to indicate the distinction of the persons. And sometimes only two of the three persons are mentioned to indicate the unity of essence. Or again, one could say that since the Holy Spirit is nothing other than the love of the Father and the Son, when the Father and Son are mentioned, the Spirit is implied.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Tertio ad Dei manifestationem necessaria est perseverantia utriusque, scilicet in dilectione Dei, et in eius visitatione; et quantum ad hoc dicit <i>et mansionem apud eum faciemus</i>. In quo duo tangit. Primo quidem firmitatem adhaesionis ad Deum cum dicit <i>mansionem</i>. Nam Deus venit ad quosdam per fidem, sed, non manet, <i>quia ad tempus credunt, et in tempore tentationis recedunt</i>: Matth. VIII, 13. Ad quosdam venit per peccati compunctionem, non tamen manet cum eis, quia revertuntur ad peccata; Prov. c. XXVI, 11: <i>sicut canis qui revertitur ad vomitum suum, sic imprudens qui iterat stultitiam suam</i>. Sed in suis praedestinatis permanet semper; Matth. ult., 20: <i>ecce ego vobiscum sum omnibus diebus usque ad consummationem saeculi</i>.Secundo ostendit familiaritatem Christi ad homines: quia <i>apud eum</i>, scilicet diligentem ad obediendum, inquantum scilicet delectatur nobiscum, et facit nos delectari in ipso. Prov. c. VIII, 31: <i>deliciae meae esse cum filiis hominum</i>; Is. VI, 5: <i>gaudebit super te dominus Deus tuus</i>.
          <td>1947 The third thing required for the manifestation of God is the continuation of each of the above, that is, of the love of God and of his coming to us. In regard to these he says, <b>and make our home with him</b>. Two things are indicated here. First, when he says, <b>home</b>, he indicates the stability with which we cling to God. God comes to some by faith, but does not remain because "they believe for a while and in time of temptation fall away" (Lk 8:13). He comes to others through their sorrow for sin; yet he does not stay with them because they return to their sins: "Like a dog that returns to his vomit is a fool that repeats his folly" (Prv 26:11). But he remains forever in his predestined: "I am with you always, to the close of the age" (Mt 28:20). Secondly, these words indicate the intimacy of Christ with us: <b>with him</b>, that is, with the one who loves and obeys him, since he takes pleasure in us, and has us take pleasure in him, "delighting in the sons of men" (Prv 8:31).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Chrysostomus autem referens hoc ad aliam intentionem, dicit, quod Iudas audiens <i>non relinquam vos orphanos</i> etc., <i>vos autem videbitis me</i> etc., existimavit, quod Christus post mortem venturus esset ad eos, sicut mortui veniunt ad nos in somno; unde quaerit: <i>quid est factum quia nobis manifestaturus es teipsum, et non mundo?</i> Quasi diceret: vae nobis, quoniam morieris et ut mortuus debes nobis assistere. Ut ergo hoc excludat, dicit: ego et pater <i>ad eum veniemus</i>, idest, sicut pater manifestat seipsum, ita et ego, <i>et mansionem apud eum faciemus</i>: quod somniorum non est, in quibus nulla mora contrahitur.
          <td>
            1948 Chrysostom gives this a different meaning. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn44" name="_ftnref44" id="_ftnref44">[44]</a> He says that when Judas heard <b>I will not leave you orphans... but you will see me</b>, he thought that after his death Christ would come to them like the dead appear to us in a dream. So he asks, <b>how is it that you will manifest yourself to us, and not to the world?</b> This was like saying: How unfortunate for us! You will die and can only help us as the dead do. To exclude this Christ says, I and the Father <b>will come to him</b> (v 23), that is, as the Father manifests himself, so I do also, <b>and make our home with him</b>, which is not done in dreams.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Hic ponit causam quare non est manifestaturus se mundo: quae quidem causa est remotio eorum per quae dicit se hominibus manifestaturum. Remota enim causa removetur effectus; sed ipsi non habent causam ut divina eis manifestatio fiat: ergo mundo et mundanis Deus non est manifestaturus seipsum.
          <td>1949 Now he gives the reason why he will not manifest himself to the world: this reason is the lack of those things on account of which he says that he will manifest himself. For when the cause is absent, the effect is absent. Now the causes for a divine manifestation to be made to the worldly are not found in them. And so God will not manifest himself to the world and the worldly.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Quod non habeant causam, apparet, quia mundus <i>non diligit me</i>; et quantum ad hoc dicit <i>qui non diligit me</i>. Iterum non obedit mihi: unde dicit <i>sermones meos non servat</i>. Ut enim Gregorius dicit: <i>de dilectione conditoris lingua et mens et vita requiritur</i>. Patet ergo causa quare suis manifestaturus est se, et non alienis; quia hi quidem diligunt: dilectio namque sanctos discernit a mundo; Iob XXXVI, 32: <i>immanibus</i>, scilicet superbis, <i>abscondit lucem; et ita annuntiat de ea amico suo, quod possessio eius sit</i>; ibid. c. XXVIII, 14: <i>abyssus dicit: non est in me; mare</i>, idest turbulentus: <i>non est mecum</i>.
          <td>
            It is clear that they do not have the cause, because the world does not love him. Referring to this he says, <b>he who does not love me</b>. Further, they do not obey him; and so he says, <b>does not keep my words</b>. As Gregory says: "To love God it is necessary to use our words, our minds and our lives." <a href="John14.htm#_ftn45" name="_ftnref45" id="_ftnref45">[45]</a> The reason is obvious why God will manifest himself to his own, and not to the world. It is because his own really have love, and it is love which distinguishes the saints from the world: "He hides the light from the proud. He shows his friend that he owns it" [Job 36:32]; "The deep says 'It is not in me' and the sea," that is, one who is disordered, "says, 'It is not with me.'" (Job 28:14).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Consequenter cum dicit <i>et sermonem quem audistis, non est meus</i>, manifestat hoc quod supra dixit <i>si quis diligit me, sermonem meum servabit. Et pater meus diliget eum</i> et cetera. Posset enim aliquis dicere, quod hoc dictum nullam rationem habet, quin potius rationabilius dixisset: ego diligam eum, et ad eum veniam. Et ideo hoc excludit dicens <i>et sermonem quem audistis, non est meus</i>; idest non est mihi a meipso, sed est mihi ab alio, scilicet a patre, qui me misit. Quasi diceret: non me solum, sed nec patrem amat qui hunc non audit sermonem. Et ideo qui eum diligit et patrem, utriusque manifestationem meretur. Dicit ergo <i>et sermonem</i>, sive sermo, <i>quem audistis</i>, a me homine prolatum, est quidem meus, inquantum ipsum pronuntio, et <i>non est meus</i>, inquantum est mihi ab alio; supra VII, 16: <i>mea doctrina non est mea</i>; supra eodem: <i>verba quae ego loquor vobis, a meipso non loquor</i>.
          <td>1950 Then when he says, <b>and the word which you hear is not mine but the Father's</b>, he clears up what he had just said, "If a man loves me, he will keep my word, and my <i>Father</i> will love him, and <i>we</i> will come to him." For someone could say that there was no reason for this statement (v 23), and it would be more reasonable to have said: "I will love him, and I will come to him." To exclude this idea he says, <b>and the word which you hear is not mine</b>, that is, it is not mine as coming from myself, but it is mine as coming from another, from the Father, who sent me. It is like saying: One who does not hear this word does not love only me, he also does not love the Father. And therefore, one who loves both Christ and the Father deserves a manifestation of each. So he says: <b>and the word which you hear</b>, spoken by me, as a human being, is indeed mine insofar as I speak it, and yet it <b>is not mine</b>, insofar as it is mine from another: "My teaching is not mine" (7:16); "The words that I say to you I do not speak of my self" [14:10].
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed attende, secundum Augustinum, quod cum loquitur dominus de sermonibus suis, pluraliter dicit, <i>sermones meos</i>; ubi autem loquitur de sermone patris, loquitur in singulari, dicens <i>et sermonem quem audistis, non est meus</i>; quia per verbum patris seipsum intelligi voluit, qui est unicum verbum eius. Unde nec suum se esse dicit, sed patris, quia nec sua imago est, nec suus filius, sed patris. Sermones autem omnes in cordibus nostris sunt ab unico verbo patris.
          <td>
            1951 Augustine remarks that when our Lord refers to his own words he uses the plural, "my words" (v 24), but when he speaks of the utterance of the Father, he uses the singular form, "the word which you hear is not mine," because he wants us to understand that the word of the Father is he himself, the unique Word of the Father. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn46" name="_ftnref46" title="" id="_ftnref46">[46]</a> Thus he says he is from the Father, and not from himself, because he is neither his own image nor his own Son, but the Son and image of the Father. Yet all the words in our heart are from this unique Word of the Father.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Hic dominus promittit discipulis suis dona. Promiserat eis spiritum sanctum et seipsum, et ideo hic primo ostendit quid consequentur ex adventu spiritus sancti; secundo quid consequentur ex ipso, ibi <i>pacem relinquo vobis</i>. Ex adventu spiritus sancti magna consequentur, scilicet intellectum omnium verborum Christi. Et ideo circa hoc primo commorat eis sua documenta; secundo promittit eis intellectum eorum, ibi <i>Paraclitus autem spiritus sanctus (...) vos docebit omnia</i>.
          <td>1952 Here our Lord promises gifts to his disciples. He had promised them both the Holy Spirit and himself; and so now he first mentions what they will receive when the Holy Spirit comes; and secondly, what they will receive from him, <b>peace</b>. From the coming of the Holy Spirit they will receive great things, namely an understanding of all the words of Christ. In regard to this he first mentions what he taught them, and secondly he promises they will understand them (v 26).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Dicit ergo quantum ad primum <i>haec</i>, scilicet quae dixi, <i>locutus sum vobis</i>, organo humanitatis, <i>manens apud vos</i>, praesentia corporali. Et hoc quidem maximum beneficium est ut ipse filius nobis loquatur, et nos doceat; Hebr. I, 1: <i>multifarie multisque modis olim Deus loquens patribus in prophetis, novissime locutus est nobis in filio</i>; Deut. V, 26: <i>quae est omnis caro ut audiat dominum suum?</i>
          <td>1953 He says, in regard to the first, <b>these things</b>, what I have said, <b>I have spoken to you</b>, by the instrument of my human nature, <b>while I am still with you</b>, as bodily present. It is indeed a very great favor that the Son himself should speak to us and teach us: "In these last days he has spoken to us by a Son" (Heb 1:1); "What is all flesh that it should hear its Lord?" [Deut 5:26].
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Intellectum autem ipsorum documentorum promittit eis per spiritum sanctum se daturum; unde dicit <i>Paraclitus autem (...) vos docebit omnia</i>. Ubi tria facit circa spiritum sanctum. Primo describit ipsum; secundo eius missionem; tertio eius effectum.
          <td>1954 He promises them that they will understand his teachings through the Holy Spirit, who will give himself to them; he says, <b>the Paraclete... will teach you all things</b>. He does three things concerning the Holy Spirit: he describes him, mentions his mission and his effect.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Ipsum quidem describit multipliciter: quia Paraclitum, spiritum et sanctum. Paraclitus quidem est, quia consolatur nos et quantum ad tristitias de turbationibus huius mundi, de quibus nos consolatur, II Cor. c. VII, 5: <i>foris pugnae, intus timores</i>; II Cor. c. I, 4: <i>qui consolatur nos in omni tribulatione nostra</i>. Et hoc facit inquantum est amor, faciens nos amare Deum, et eum pro magno habere: propter quod cum gaudio contumelias patimur, secundum illud Act. c. VIII, 39: <i>ibant apostoli gaudentes a conspectu Concilii, quoniam digni habiti sunt pro nomine Iesu contumeliam pati</i>; Matth. V, v. 12: <i>gaudete et exultate, quia merces vestra copiosa est in caelis</i>. Item consolatur nos contra tristitias de peccatis praeteritis: de quibus dicitur Matth. V, 5: <i>beati qui lugent</i>. Et hoc facit inquantum dat nobis spem veniae; infra XX, 23: <i>accipite spiritum sanctum; quorum remiseritis peccata, remittuntur eis</i>; Is. LXI, 3: <i>ut ponerem consolationem lugentibus in Sion</i>.
          <td>1955 He describes the Holy Spirit in several ways: as the Paraclete, as Spirit, and as Holy. He is the Paraclete because he consoles us. He consoles us in our sorrows which arise from the troubles of this world: "fighting without and fear within" (2 Cor 7:5); "who comforts us in all our affliction" (2 Cor 1:4). He does this because he is love, and causes us to love God and give him great honor. For this reason we endure insults with joy: "Then they left the presence of the council rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer dishonor for the name" (Acts 5:41); "Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven" (Mt 5:12). He also consoles us in our sadness over past sins; Matthew refers to this in "Blessed are those who mourn for they shall be comforted" (5:4). He does this because he gives us the hope of forgiveness: "Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven" (20:22).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Spiritus quidem est, quia movet corda ad obediendum Deo. Is. LIX, 19: <i>cum venerit quasi fluvius violentus, quem spiritus domini cogit</i>; Rom. VIII, 14: <i>qui spiritu Dei aguntur, hi sunt filii Dei</i>. Sanctus autem est, quia consecrat nos Deo; omnia autem consecrata dicuntur sancta; I Cor. VI, 19: <i>nescitis quoniam corpora nostra templum sunt spiritus sancti?</i> Ps. XLV, v. 5: <i>fluminis impetus laetificat civitatem Dei</i> et cetera.
          <td>He is the Spirit because he moves hearts to obey God: "He will come like a rushing stream, which the Spirit of the Lord drives" [Is 59:19]; "For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God" (Rom 8:14). He is Holy because he consecrates us to God, and all consecrated things are called holy: "Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you" (1 Cor 6:19); "There is a river whose streams make glad the city of God" (Ps 46:4).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Consequenter cum dicit <i>quem mittet pater in nomine meo</i>, agit de eius missione. Non est autem intelligendum quod per motum localem ad nos veniat, sed quia quodam novo modo in eis esse debeat, quo prius non fuerat; Ps. CIII, 30: <i>emitte spiritum tuum, et creabuntur</i>, scilicet in esse spirituali. Sed attende, quod spiritus sanctus a patre et filio mittitur: et ideo ad hoc ostendendum, quandoque dicit quod pater mittit eum, sicut hic; quandoque quod ipse, infra c. XVI, 7: <i>quem ego mittam vobis</i> et cetera. Sed numquam dicit eum a patre mitti, quin faciat commemorationem de seipso; unde dicit <i>quem mittet pater in nomine meo</i>. Nec dicit eum mitti a se filio, quin commemoret patrem; unde dicit <i>quem ego mittam vobis a patre</i>.
          <td>1956 Then when he says, <b>whom the Father will send in my name</b>, he refers to the mission of the Spirit. We should not think the Spirit comes by a local motion, but rather by being in them in a new way in which he was not before: "When you send forth your Spirit, they are created," that is, with a spiritual existence (Ps 104:30). Notice that the Holy Spirit is sent by the Father and the Son. To show this Christ sometimes says that the Father sends him, as he does here; and he sometimes says that he himself sends him, "I will send him to you" (16:7). Yet Christ never says that the Spirit is sent by the Father without mentioning himself. So he says here, <b>whom the Father will send in my name</b>. Nor does Christ say that the Spirit is sent by himself, the Son, without mentioning the Father: "the Paraclete, whom I shall send to you from the Father" (15:26).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed quid est hoc quod dicit <i>in nomine meo?</i> Numquid spiritus sanctus nominabitur filius? Posset dici, quod hoc dicitur pro tanto, quia spiritus sanctus dabatur fidelibus ad invocationem nominis Christi. Sed melius est ut dicamus, quod sicut filius venit in nomine patris, supra V, 44: <i>ego veni in nomine patris mei</i>, ita et spiritus sanctus venit in nomine filii. Filius autem in nomine patris venit, non quod esset pater, sed quod esset filius patris: similiter spiritus sanctus venit in nomine filii, non quod diceretur filius, sed quod esset spiritus filii; Rom. VIII, 9: <i>si quis spiritum Christi non habet, hic non est eius</i>; Gal. IV, 6: <i>misit Deus spiritum filii sui in corda vestra</i>: non quod diceretur filius, sed quod esset spiritus filii; Rom. c. VIII, 29: <i>praedestinavit conformes fieri imaginis filii sui</i>: et hoc quidem propter consubstantialitatem filii ad patrem, et spiritus sancti ad filium.
          <td>1957 Why does he say, <b>in my name</b> ? Will the Holy Spirit be called the Son? One could answer that this was said for the reason that the Holy Spirit was given to the faithful when they invoked the name of Christ. But it is better to say that just as the Son comes in the name of the Father ‑ "I have come in my Father's name" ‑ so the Holy Spirit comes in the name of the Son. Now the Son comes in the name of the Father not because he is the Father, but because he is the Son of the Father. In a similar way, the Holy Spirit comes in the name of the Son not because he was to be called the Son, but because he is the Spirit of the Son: "Any one who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him" (Rom 8:9); "God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts" (Gal 4:6), because he is the Spirit of his Son, and not because he was to be called the Son: "he predestined [them] to be conformed to the image of his Son" (Rom 8:29). The basis for this is the consubstantiality of the Son with the Father and of the Holy Spirit with the Son.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Item sicut filius veniens in nomine patris, fideles suos patri subiecit: Apoc. V, 10: <i>fecisti nos Deo nostro regnum</i> etc.: ita spiritus sanctus configuravit nos filio, inquantum adoptat nos in filios Dei; Rom. VIII, 15: <i>accepistis spiritum adoptionis filiorum, in quo clamamus, abba, pater</i>.
          <td>
            Further, just as the Son, coming in the name of the Father, subjects his faithful to the Father ‑ "and has made them a kingdom and priests to our God" (Rev 5:10) ‑ so the Holy Spirit conforms us to the Son because he adopts us as children of God: You have received the spirit of adoption, by which we cry out 'Abba!' Father" [Rom 8:15]. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn47" name="_ftnref47" id="_ftnref47">[47]</a>
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Consequenter agit de effectu spiritus sancti: dicens <i>ille vos docebit omnia</i>. Nam, sicut effectus missionis filii fuit ducere ad patrem, ita effectus missionis spiritus sancti est ducere fideles ad filium. Filius autem, cum sit ipsa sapientia genita, est ipsa veritas; supra XIV, 6: <i>ego sum via, veritas et vita</i>. Et ideo effectus missionis huiusmodi est ut faciat homines participes divinae sapientiae, et cognitores veritatis. Filius ergo tradit nobis doctrinam, cum sit verbum; sed spiritus sanctus doctrinae eius nos capaces facit.
          <td>1958 Next he mentions the effect of the Holy Spirit, saying, <b>he will teach you all things</b>. Just as the effect of the mission of the Son was to lead us to the Father, so the effect of the mission of the Holy Spirit is to lead the faithful to the Son. Now the Son, once he is begotten Wisdom, is Truth itself: "I am the way, and the truth, and the life" (14:6). And so the effect of this kind of mission [of the Spirit] is to make us sharers in the divine wisdom and knowers of the truth. The Son, since he is the Word, gives teaching to us; but the Holy Spirit enables us to grasp it.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Dicit ergo <i>ille vos docebit omnia</i>, quia quaecumque homo doceat extra, nisi spiritus sanctus interius det intelligentiam, frustra laborat: quia nisi spiritus adsit cordi audientis, otiosus erit sermo doctoris, Iob XXXII, 8: <i>inspiratio omnipotentis dat intelligentiam</i>; et intantum, quod etiam ipse filius organo humanitatis loquens, non valet, nisi ipsemet interius operetur per spiritum sanctum.
          <td>He says, <b>he will teach you all things</b>, because no matter what a person may teach by his exterior actions, he will have no effect unless the Holy Spirit gives an understanding from within. For unless the Spirit is present to the heart of the listener, the words of the teacher will be useless: "The breath of the Almighty makes him understand" (Job 32:8). This is true even to the extent that the Son himself, speaking by means of his human nature, is not successful unless he works from within by the Holy Spirit.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed attende, quod supra VI, 43, dicit: <i>omnis qui audivit a patre, et didicit, venit ad me</i>. Hic expendit quid sit, quia non discit non docente spiritu sancto, quasi: ille qui recipit spiritum sanctum a patre et filio, ille patrem cognoscit, et filium, et ad eos venit. Facit autem nos scire omnia interius inspirando, dirigendo, et ad spiritualia elevando. Sicut enim qui habet gustum infectum non habet veram cognitionem de saporibus, ita et qui infectus est amore mundi, non potest gustare divina: secundum illud I Cor. II, 14: <i>animalis autem homo non percipit ea quae sunt spiritus Dei</i>.
          <td>1959 We read before that "Every one who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me" (6:45). Here he is expanding on this, because one does not learn without the Holy Spirit teaching. He is saying in effect: one who receives the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son knows the Father and the Son and comes to them. The Spirit makes us know all things by inspiring us from within, by directing us and lifting us up to spiritual things. Just as one whose sense of taste is tainted does not have a true knowledge of flavors, so one who is tainted by love of the world cannot taste divine things: "The sensual man does not perceive those things of the Spirit of God" [1 Cor 2:14].
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed cum suggerere sit minorum, puta officialium in divinis, numquid spiritus sanctus, qui suggerit nobis, est nobis minor? Ideo dicendum, secundum Gregorium, quod spiritus sanctus suggerere dicitur, non quod nobis scientiam ab imo inferat; sed ab occulto subministrat vires ad cognoscendum. Vel docet, inquantum nos facit participare sapientiam filii. Suggerit, inquantum nos impellit prout est amor. Vel <i>suggeret vobis omnia</i>; idest ad memoriam reducet; Ps. XXI, v. 28: <i>reminiscentur et convertentur ad dominum universi fines terrae</i>.
          <td>
            1960 Since to remind a person of something is the task of an inferior, like an agent in divine affairs, shall we say that the Holy Spirit, who brings things to our mind, is inferior to us? According to Gregory, we should say that the Holy Spirit is said to bring things to our remembrance not as though he brought us knowledge from below, but because in a hidden way he aids our ability to know. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn48" name="_ftnref48" id="_ftnref48">[48]</a> Or, one could say the Spirit teaches because he makes us share in the wisdom of the Son; and he brings things to our remembrance because, being love, he incites us. Or, the Spirit <b>will bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you</b>, that is, he will recall them to your memory: "All the ends of the earth shall remember and turn to the Lord" (Ps 22:27).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sciendum est enim, quod eorum quae Christus dixit discipulis, quaedam non intellexerunt, quorumdam autem memoriam non habebant. Dicit ergo dominus <i>ille vos docebit omnia</i>, quae intelligere nunc non potestis, <i>et suggeret vobis omnia</i>, quae non potestis memoriae commendare. Quomodo enim Evangelista Ioannes post quadraginta annos potuisset omnium verborum Christi, quae in Evangelio scripsit, habere memoriam, nisi ei spiritus sanctus suggessisset?
          <td>We should notice that of all the things Christ said to his disciples, some were not understood, and others were not remembered. Thus our Lord says, <b>he will teach you all things</b>, which you cannot now understand, and <b>bring to your remembrance all</b> that you cannot remember. How could John the Evangelist after forty years have remembered all the sayings of Christ he wrote in his Gospel unless the Holy Spirit had brought them to his mind?
    </table>
    <hr>
    <table cellpadding="12">
      <tbody>
        <tr style="align:center">
          <td><b>Lectio 7</b>
          <td><b>LECTURE 7</b>
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td style="font-family:" palatino="">
            <blockquote>
              27 εἰρήνην ἀφίημι ὑμῖν, εἰρήνην τὴν ἐμὴν δίδωμι ὑμῖν: οὐ καθὼς ὁ κόσμος δίδωσιν ἐγὼ δίδωμι ὑμῖν.
            </blockquote>
          <td>
            <blockquote>
              27a "Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you; not as the world gives do I give to you."
            </blockquote>
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Supra promisit dominus discipulis suis quid consecuturi erant ex praesentia spiritus sancti, hic promittit donum quod consecuturi erant ex adventu et praesentia sua.
          <td>1961 Above, our Lord promised his disciples what they would gain from the presence of the Holy Spirit. Here he promises them a gift they will obtain from his own coming and presence.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sciendum tamen, quod si consideretur proprietas personarum, scilicet filii et spiritus sancti, videtur dominus alternare dona. Cum enim filius sit verbum, ad eum appropriate pertinere videtur sapientiae et cognitionis donum. Spiritui vero sancto, cum sit amor, qui est causa pacis, pax appropriatur. Verumtamen quia spiritus sanctus est filii, et hoc quod dat spiritus sanctus, habet a filio; ideo spiritui sancto attribuit hoc donum cognitionis, ubi dicit <i>ille vos docebit omnia</i> etc., quod tamen appropriatur filio. Quia vero spiritus sanctus a filio procedit, ideo quod spiritus sanctus appropriate facit, attribuitur filio. Et secundum hunc modum Christus attribuit sibi pacem, dicens <i>pacem relinquo vobis</i>: ubi primo promittit donum pacis, quam relinquit; secundo distinguit pacem istam a pace mundi, ibi <i>non quomodo mundus dat, ego do vobis</i>.
          <td>Note that if we consider the characteristic feature of the persons of the Son and the Holy Spirit, our Lord seems to interchange their gifts. Since the Son is the Word, it seems that the gifts of wisdom and knowledge are appropriate to him. But peace is appropriate, appropriated, to the Holy Spirit, since he is love, which the cause of peace. Nevertheless, because the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of the Son, and what the Holy Spirit gives he has from the Son, our Lord here attributes this gift of knowledge to the Holy Spirit, saying, <b>he will teach you all things</b>. Yet, this gift is still appropriate to the Son. And because the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son, actions which are appropriate to the Holy Spirit are attributed to the Son. This is the reason why Christ attributes peace to himself, saying, <b>Peace I leave with you</b>. First, he promises his gift of peace, which he is leaving; secondly, he distinguishes this peace from the peace of the world.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Dicit ergo <i>pacem relinquo</i>. Sciendum est, quod pax nihil aliud est quam tranquillitas ordinis: tunc enim aliqua dicuntur pacem habere quando eorum ordo inturbatus manet. In homine autem est triplex ordo: scilicet hominis ad seipsum, hominis ad Deum, et hominis ad proximum: et sic est triplex pax in homine. Quaedam intrinseca secundum quam pacificatur sibi ipsi, absque perturbatione virium; Ps. CXVIII, v. 165: <i>pax multa diligentibus legem tuam</i>. Alia est per quam homo pacificatur Deo, totaliter eius ordinationi subiectus; Rom. V, 1: <i>iustificati igitur ex fide, pacem habeamus ad Deum</i>. Tertia pax est ad proximum; Hebr. c. XII, 14: <i>pacem sequimini cum omnibus sanctis et sanctimoniam</i>.
          <td>1962 He says, <b>Peace I leave with you</b>. Peace is nothing else than the tranquillity arising from order, for things are said to have peace when their order remains undisturbed. In a human being there is a threefold order: that of a person to himself; of a person to God; and of a person to his neighbor. Thus, the human person can enjoy a threefold peace. One peace is interior, when he is at peace with himself, and his faculties are not unsettled: Great peace have those who love your law" (Ps 119:165). Another peace is peace with God, when one is entirely conformed to his direction: "Since we are justified by faith, let us have peace with God" (Rom 5:1). The third peace is with our neighbor: "Strive for peace with all men" (Heb 12:14).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed notandum, quod in nobis tria ordinari debent: scilicet intellectus, voluntas et appetitus sensitivus: ut videlicet voluntas dirigatur secundum mentem, seu rationem; appetitus vero sensitivus secundum intellectum et voluntatem. Et ideo Augustinus in Lib. de verbis domini, pacem sanctorum definiens dicit: pax est serenitas mentis, tranquillitas animae, simplicitas cordis, amoris vinculum, consortium caritatis: ut serenitas mentis referatur ad rationem, quae debet esse libera, non ligata, nec absorpta aliqua inordinata affectione; tranquillitas animi referatur ad sensitivam, quae debet a molestatione passionum quiescere; simplicitas cordis referatur ad voluntatem, quae debet in Deum obiectum suum totaliter ferri; amoris vinculum referatur ad proximum; consortium caritatis ad Deum. Hanc autem pacem hic sancti habent et habebunt in futuro; sed hic quidem imperfecte, quia nec ad nos nec ad Deum nec ad proximum pacem sine perturbatione aliqua possumus habere; sed in futuro habebimus eam perfecte, quando sine hoste regnabimus: ubi numquam poterimus dissentire.
          <td>
            There are three things which have to be put in order within us: the intellect, the will and sense appetency. The will should be directed by the mind or reason, and sense appetency should be directed by the intellect and will. Accordingly, Augustine, in his <i>The Words of our Lord,</i> describes the peace of the saints by saying: "Peace is a calmness of mind, a tranquillity of soul, a simplicity of heart, a bond of love and a fellowship of charity." <a href="John14.htm#_ftn49" name="_ftnref49" id="_ftnref49">[49]</a> Calmness of mind refers to our reason, which should be free, not tied down, nor absorbed by disordered affections; tranquillity of soul refers to our sense appetency, which should not be harassed by our emotional states; simplicity of heart refers to our will, which should be entirely set toward God, its object; the bond of love refers to our neighbor; and the fellowship of charity to God. The saints have this peace now, and will have it in the future. But here it is imperfect because we cannot have an undisturbed peace either with ourselves, or with God, or with our neighbor. We will enjoy it perfectly in the future, when we reign without an enemy and there can never be conflicts.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Et utramque hic dominus nobis promittit. Primam cum dicit <i>pacem relinquo vobis</i>, in hoc scilicet saeculo, ut hostem vincatis, et ut invicem diligatis; quod est quasi testamentum servandum nobis statutum a Christo; Eccli. XLV, 30: <i>statuit illi testamentum pacis, et principem fecit eum</i>. Sicut Augustinus dicit, non poterit ad haereditatem domini pervenire, qui testamentum eius noluerit observare: nec potest concordiam habere cum Christo qui discors esse voluerit cum Christiano. Secundam vero, cum dicit <i>pacem meam do vobis</i>, scilicet in futuro; Is. ult., v. 12: <i>declinabo super eam</i>, scilicet Ierusalem caelestem, <i>quasi flumen pacis</i>.
          <td>
            Our Lord here promises us each kind of peace. The first kind when he says, <b>Peace I leave with you</b>, that is, in this world, so that you can conquer the enemy and love each other. This is a kind of covenant established by Christ which we should keep: "A covenant of peace was established with him" (Si 45:24). As Augustine says, one can not gain the inheritance of the Lord who is unwilling to observe his covenant, nor can he have a union with Christ if he lives in strife with a Christian. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn50" name="_ftnref50" id="_ftnref50">[50]</a> He promises the second kind of peace when he says, <b>my peace I give to you</b>, that is, in the future: "I will bring her," the heavenly Jerusalem, "a river of peace" [Is 66:12].
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed cum sive in mundo, sive in patria, tota pax sanctorum perveniat eis per Christum; infra XVI, 33: <i>in me pacem habebitis</i>, quare dominus loquens de pace sanctorum in via, non dicit, <i>pacem meam do vobis</i>: sed tantum cum loquitur de pace sanctorum in patria? Ad quod dicendum, quod utraque pax, scilicet praesens et futura, est Christi; sed praesens ut auctoris tantum; futura autem est eius ut auctoris et possessoris: nam ipsam semper habuit, quia semper fuit absque contradictione. Pax autem praesens, ut dictum est, est cum contradictione aliqua: et ideo licet eam faciat, non tamen eam possidet. Et, secundum praedicta, expositio procedit de pace temporis et pace aeternitatis. Sed, secundum Augustinum, potest utrumque exponi de pace temporis: et dicit <i>pacem relinquo vobis</i>, exemplo, sed <i>do pacem meam</i>, potestate et virtute.
          <td>1963 Since whether in this world or in our native land, all the peace possessed by the saints comes to them through Christ - "in me you shall have peace" [16:33] ‑ why does our Lord, when speaking of the peace of the saints in this life not say, "my peace I give to you," instead of reserving this for the peace of our native land? We should say that each peace, of the present and of the future, is a peace of Christ. But our present peace is the peace of Christ because he is only its author. The future peace is the peace of Christ both because he is its author and because it is a peace such as he possesses it. He always had this second kind of peace, because he was always without [interior] conflict. Our present peace, as was said, is not without conflict, and although Christ is its author, he does not possess it this way. This explanation makes use of the distinction between the peace of this time and the peace of eternity. According to Augustine, both statements can refer to the peace of this time. Then Christ is saying, <b>Peace I leave with you</b>, by my example, but <b>my peace I give to you</b>, by my power and strength.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Consequenter cum dicit <i>non quomodo mundus dat, ego do vobis</i>, ipsam pacem a pace mundi distinguit. Distinguitur autem pax sanctorum a pace mundi quantum ad tria. Primo quantum ad intentionem: nam pax mundi ordinatur ad quietam et pacificam fruitionem temporalium, quo fit ut quandoque cooperetur hominibus ad peccandum; Sap. XIV, 22: <i>in magno viventes inscientiae bello tot et tam magna mala pacem appellant</i>. Sed pax sanctorum ordinatur ad bona aeterna. Est ergo sensus: <i>non quomodo mundus dat, ego do</i>; idest non ad eumdem finem: quia mundus dat quantum ad exteriora quiete possidenda, ego vero do quantum ad aeterna adipiscenda.
          <td>1964 Then when he says, <b>not as the world gives do I give to you</b>, he distinguishes this peace from the peace of the world. The peace of the saints is different from the peace of the world in three ways. First, the purpose of each is different. Temporal peace is directed to the quiet and calm enjoyment of temporal things, with the result that it sometimes helps a person to sin: "They live in strife due to ignorance, and they call such great evils peace" (Wis 14:22). But the peace of the saints is directed to eternal goods. The meaning, therefore is: <b>not as the world gives do I give to you</b>, that is, not for the same end. The world gives peace so exterior goods can be possessed undisturbed; but I give peace so that you can obtain eternal things.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Secundo vero quantum ad simulationem et veritatem: quia pax mundi est simulata, quia tantum exterius: Ps. XXVII, 3: <i>loquuntur pacem cum proximo suo, mala autem in cordibus eorum</i>; pax vero Christi est vera, quia est interius et exterius. Et sic est sensus: <i>non quomodo mundus dat</i>, idest non simulatam pacem do; sicut mundus, sed veram.Tertio quantum ad perfectionem: quia pax mundi est imperfecta, cum sit tantum quantum ad quietem exterioris hominis et non interioris; Is. LVII, 21: <i>non est pax impiis, dicit dominus</i>: sed pax Christi quietat interius et exterius; Ps. CXVIII, 165: <i>pax multa diligentibus legem tuam</i>. Et est sensus: <i>non quomodo mundus dat</i> idest, non ita imperfectam.
          <td>They also differ as the pretended or deceitful from the true, because the peace of the world is a pretended peace since it is only on the outside: "The wicked... who speak peace with their neighbors, while mischief is in their hearts" (Ps 27:3). But the peace of Christ is true, because it is both on the outside and the inside. So the meaning is, <b>not as the world gives do I give to you</b>, that is, I do not give a pretended peace, as the world does, but true peace. Thirdly, they differ in perfection, because the peace of the world is imperfect since it is not concerned with the interior tranquillity of a person but only with externals. "There is no peace, says my God, for the wicked" (Is 57:21). But the peace of Christ brings tranquillity both within and without. "Great peace have those who love your law" (Ps 119:165). So the meaning is: <b>not as the world gives</b>, that is, not such an imperfect peace.
    </table>
    <hr>
    <table cellpadding="12">
      <tbody>
        <tr style="align:center">
          <td><b>Lectio 8</b>
          <td><b>LECTURE 8</b>
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td style="font-family:" palatino="">
            <blockquote>
              27b μὴ ταρασσέσθω ὑμῶν ἡ καρδία μηδὲ δειλιάτω. 28 ἠκούσατε ὅτι ἐγὼ εἶπον ὑμῖν, ὑπάγω καὶ ἔρχομαι πρὸς ὑμᾶς. εἰ ἠγαπᾶτέ με ἐχάρητε ἄν, ὅτι πορεύομαι πρὸς τὸν πατέρα, ὅτι ὁ πατὴρ μείζων μού ἐστιν.<br>
              <b>[Conclusion 14:29-31]</b> 29 καὶ νῦν εἴρηκα ὑμῖν πρὶν γενέσθαι, ἵνα ὅταν γένηται πιστεύσητε. 30 οὐκέτι πολλὰ λαλήσω μεθ' ὑμῶν, ἔρχεται γὰρ ὁ τοῦ κόσμου ἄρχων: καὶ ἐν ἐμοὶ οὐκ ἔχει οὐδέν, 31 ἀλλ' ἵνα γνῷ ὁ κόσμος ὅτι ἀγαπῶ τὸν πατέρα, καὶ καθὼς ἐνετείλατο μοι ὁ πατήρ, οὕτως ποιῶ. ἐγείρεσθε, ἄγωμεν ἐντεῦθεν.
            </blockquote>
          <td>
            <blockquote>
              27b "Let not your hearts be troubled, neither let them be afraid. 28 You heard me say to you, 'I go away, and I will come to you.' If you loved me, you would have rejoiced, because I go to the Father, [who is greater than I]: for the Father is greater than I. 29 And now I have told you before it takes place, so that when it does take place, you may believe. 30 I will no longer talk much with you, for the ruler of this world is coming. He has no power over me; 31 but I do as the Father has commanded me, so that the world may know that I love the Father. Rise, let us go hence." <a href="John14.htm#_ftn51" name="_ftnref51" id="_ftnref51">[51]</a>
            </blockquote>
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Supra dominus consolatus est discipulos suos rationibus acceptis ex parte ipsorum discipulorum, promittendo eis accessum ad patrem, adventum spiritus sancti, et suum reditum; hic vero consolatur eos rationibus acceptis ex parte sui ipsius, ex quo poterat eis esse duplex causa consolationis. Una, ex utilitate fructus, qui sequebatur ex recessu Christi; alia ex causa mortis. Et ideo primo ponit primam; secundo secundam, ibi <i>iam non multa loquar vobiscum</i>.
          <td>1965 Above, our Lord consoled his disciples by mentioning what directly affected them: he promised them that they could approach the Father, that the Holy Spirit would come, and that he himself would return. Here he consoles them by mentioning what directly concerns himself. These give them two reasons for being consoled: one is from the fruit which will follow Christ's leaving; the other is from the reason for his death (v 30).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Fructus autem qui sequebatur ex recessu Christi, erat exaltatio sua etc., unde discipuli poterant consolari. Mos enim amicorum est ut cum amicus ad suam exaltationem vadit, de eius recessu minus desolentur: et ideo dominus hanc causam ponit ad eorum consolationem. Et primo excludit cordis dubitationem; secundo commemorat quoddam quod eos in parte consolabatur, et in parte turbabat; tertio subdit causam totaliter consolantem; quarto respondet cuidam tacitae quaestioni.
          <td>1966 Now the fruit which would follow from Christ's leaving would be such things as his exaltation, which would console them. For it is usual among friends that when one departs to go to his exaltation, the others feel less desolate. And so our Lord mentions this reason for their consolation. First, he casts a certain uneasiness from their hearts; secondly, he recalls something which somewhat consoled them, yet partly troubled them; thirdly, he gives a reason which will completely console them; fourthly, he answers an unspoken question.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Turbationem quidem cordis excludit dicens <i>non turbetur cor vestrum</i> et cetera. Turbatio ad tristitiam refertur; formido ad timorem. Tristitia autem et timor in aliquo quidem conveniunt, in hoc scilicet quod utrumque est de malo; sed differunt, quia tristitia est de malo praesenti, formido autem de malo futuro. Dicit autem dominus <i>non turbetur cor vestrum</i>, de malo praesenti, Ps. CXI, 6: <i>iustus non commovebitur: neque formidet</i>, scilicet de futuro; Is. LI, 12: <i>quis tu ut timeas ab homine mortali?</i> Quod intelligendum est de timore humano: nam timorem divinum non excludit.
          <td>1967 He casts out uneasiness from their hearts when he says, <b>Let not your hearts be troubled, neither let them be afraid</b>. Here, trouble means sadness, and being afraid refers to fear. Sadness and fear are similar in that both are concerned with an evil. Yet they are different because sadness is over an evil which is present, while fear is over an evil which is to come. Our Lord said, <b>Let not your hearts be troubled</b>, about evil which is present: "For the righteous will never be moved" (Ps 112:6). <b>Neither let them be afraid</b>, of what is future: "Who are you that you are afraid of man who dies?" (Is 51:12), which refers to human fear, for he does not reject divine fear.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Consequenter cum dicit <i>audistis quia ego dixi vobis: vado, et venio ad vos</i>; turbantur enim ex recessu Christi sed in parte consolabantur, quod subdit <i>et venio ad vos</i>; supra: <i>vado, et venio ad vos</i>. Non tamen ex hoc consolabantur totaliter, timentes ne forsitan gregem lupus hoc intervallo invaderet in pastoris absentia: secundum illud Zach. XIII, 7: <i>percute pastorem, et dispergentur oves</i>. Dicit ergo <i>non turbetur, quia vado</i>, sed nec formidet, <i>quia venio ad vos</i>.
          <td>1968 Then when he says, <b>You heard me say to you, I go away</b>, they were troubled because he was leaving them. But they were somewhat consoled because he added, <b>and I will come to you</b>. This did not completely console them because they were afraid that perhaps in the meantime, when the shepherd was gone, the wolf would attack the flock, according to "Strike the shepherd, that the sheep may be scattered" (Zech 13:7). Thus he said to them, <b>Let not your hearts be troubled</b> because <b>I go away, neither let them be afraid</b> because <b>I will come to you</b>.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Vadit quidem sua potestate moriendo, et venit resurgendo; Matth. XX, 18: <i>filius hominis tradetur principibus sacerdotum et Scribis, et condemnabunt eum morte (...) et tertia die resurget</i>. Ivit ascendendo; Is. LXIII, 1: <i>iste formosus in stola sua, gradiens in multitudine fortitudinis suae</i>. Veniet ad iudicandum; Lc. XXI, 27: <i>videbunt filium hominis venientem in nube cum potestate magna et maiestate</i>.
          <td>He goes by his own power, by dying; and he comes by arising: "The Son of man will be delivered to the chief priests and scribes, and they will condemn him to death... and he will rise on the third day" [Mt 20:18]. Again, he went by his ascension: "The beautiful one in his robe, walking in the greatness of his strength" [Is 63:1]; and he will come to judge: "They will see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory" (Lk 21:27).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Totaliter autem consolatur eos cum dicit <i>si diligeretis me, gauderetis utique</i>; quasi dicat: si diligitis me, non debetis contristari, sed potius debetis gaudere de recessu meo, quia vado ad exaltationem meam, <i>quia</i> scilicet, <i>vado ad patrem, qui maior me est</i>.
          <td>1969 He completely consoles them when he says, <b>If you loved me, you would have rejoiced</b>. It is like saying: If you love me, you should not be sad, but rather rejoice that I am leaving, because I am leaving to be exalted, <b>because I go to the Father, who is greater than I</b>.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed ex hoc Arius insultat dicens patrem maiorem esse filio. Cuius error ex ipsis verbis domini excluditur. Nam ex intellectu eius, quomodo intelligitur <i>vado ad patrem</i>, ex eodem intelligitur <i>pater maior me est</i>. Filius autem non vadit ad patrem nec venit ad nos inquantum est filius Dei, secundum quod cum patre fuit ab aeterno; supra I: <i>in principio erat verbum, et verbum erat apud Deum</i>. Sed dicitur ire ad patrem, secundum humanam naturam. Sic ergo hoc quod dicit <i>maior me est</i>, non dicit inquantum filius Dei, sed inquantum filius hominis, secundum quod non solum est minor patre et spiritu sancto, sed etiam ipsis Angelis; Hebr. II, 9: <i>eum autem qui modico quam Angeli minoratus est, videmus Iesum propter passionem mortis, gloria et honore coronatum</i>. Item quibusdam hominibus, scilicet parentibus, subditus erat quantum ad aliquid, ut legitur Lc. II, 51. Sic ergo minor est patre secundum humanitatem, aequalis secundum divinitatem; Phil. II, 6: <i>non rapinam arbitratus est esse se aequalem Deo: sed semetipsum exinanivit, formam servi accipiens</i>.
          <td>1970 This passage led Arius to the disparaging statement that the Father is greater than the Son. Yet our Lord's own words repel this error. One should understand <b>the Father is greater than I</b>, based on the meaning of <b>I go to the Father</b>. Now the Son does not go to the Father insofar as he is the Son of God, for as the Son of God he was with the Father from eternity: "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God" (1:1). Rather, he is said to go to the Father because of his human nature. Thus when he says, <b>the Father is greater than I</b>, he does not mean I, as Son of God, but as Son of man, for in this way he is not only inferior to the Father and the Holy Spirit, but even to the angels: "We see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels" [Heb 2:9]. Again, in some things he was subject to human beings, as his parents (Lk 2:51). Consequently, he is inferior to the Father because of his human nature, but equal because of his divine nature: "He did not think it robbery to be equal to God, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant" [Phil 2:6].
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Potest etiam dici, secundum Hilarium, quod pater etiam secundum divinitatem maior est filio, sed tamen filius non est minor, sed aequalis. Est enim pater maior filio non potestate, aeternitate et magnitudine: sed donantis seu principii auctoritate. Nam pater nihil ab alio accipit, filius autem naturam, ut ita dicam, a patre accipit per aeternam generationem. Est ergo pater maior, quia dat; sed filius non est minor, sed aequalis, quia totum quod pater habet, accipit; Phil. II, 9: <i>dedit ei nomen quod est super omne nomen</i>. Minor enim iam non est donante, cui unum esse donatur.
          <td>
            1971 One could also say, as Hilary does, that even according to the divine nature the Father is greater than the Son, yet the Son is not inferior to the Father, but equal. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn52" name="_ftnref52" id="_ftnref52">[52]</a> For the Father is not greater than the Son in power, eternity and greatness, but by the dignity of a grantor or source. For the Father receives nothing from another, but the Son, if I can put it this way, receives his nature from the Father by an eternal generation. So, the Father is greater because he gives; but the Son is not inferior, but equal, because he receives all that the Father has: "God has bestowed on him the name which is above every name" (Phil 2:9). For the one to whom a single act of existence <i>(esse) is</i> given, is not inferior to the giver.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Chrysostomus autem ita exponit dicens, quod dominus loquitur secundum suspicionem apostolorum, qui nondum noverant quid sit resurrectio, nec eum aequalem patri existimabant. Et ideo dicit eis: et si non creditis mihi quod non possum mihi assistere, nec confiditis quod post crucem rursus vos videbo; tamen credatis mihi, <i>quia vado ad patrem, qui maior me est</i>.
          <td>
            1972 Chrysostom explains this by saying that our Lord is saying this by taking into account the opinions of the apostles, who did not yet know of the resurrection or think that he was equal to the Father. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn53" name="_ftnref53" id="_ftnref53">[53]</a> And so he said to them: even if you do not believe me on the ground that I cannot help myself, or expect that I will see you again after my cross, yet believe me <b>because I go to the Father, who is greater than I</b>.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Respondet autem tacitae quaestioni, dicens <i>et nunc dixi vobis priusquam fiat, ut cum factum fuerit credatis</i>. Possent enim quaerere quare ista diceret et ideo praeveniens dicit <i>nunc dixi vobis</i> et cetera.
          <td>1973 He now answers an unspoken question when he says, <b>And now I have told you before it takes place, so that when it does take place, you may believe</b>. For they could have asked why he was telling them these things, and so he anticipates them by saying this.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Sed quaerit Augustinus: cum fides sit de his quae non videntur, non debet homo credere postquam factum est, sed ante. Sed dicendum, quod aliud videbant, et aliud credebant. Viderunt ante mortem Christi et eius resurrectionem, quo viso, crediderunt quod ipse esset Christus filius Dei. Unde cum factum fuit, non crediderunt fide nova, sed aucta; aut certe cum mortuus esset, defecta; cum surrexisset, refecta, ut Augustinus dicit.
          <td>
            Augustine brought up a problem: since faith is concerned with things which are not seen, a person should not believe after the event, but before it. One should say to this that the apostles saw one thing and believed another. They saw the death and resurrection of Christ, and having seen, they believed that he was the Christ, the Son of God. But after these events they did not believe with a new faith, but with an increased faith. Or, indeed, they believed with a failing faith when he had died, and a renewed faith when he arose, as Augustine says. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn54" name="_ftnref54" id="_ftnref54">[54]</a>
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Consequenter cum dicit <i>iam non multa loquar vobiscum</i>, ponit aliam causam consolationis ex parte recessus sui, quae sumitur ex causa mortis. Sciendum est autem, quod causa mortis quaedam est inducens dolorem, cum quis pro culpa occiditur; quaedam est inducens consolationem, cum quis scilicet moritur pro bono virtutis; I Petr. IV, 15: <i>nemo vestrum patiatur ut fur aut homicida (...). Si autem ut Christianus, non erubescat</i>. Circa hoc ergo primo ostendit dominus quod peccatum non fuit causa suae mortis; secundo quod eius causa fuit virtus obedientiae et caritatis, ibi <i>sed ut cognoscat mundus quia diligo patrem</i>.
          <td>1974 Then when he says, <b>I will no longer talk much with you</b>, he mentions another source of their consolation, based on the reason for his death. Sometimes the reason for a person's death is a cause for sorrow, as when one is killed because he is guilty; other reasons are consoling, as when someone dies for that good we call virtue: "Let none of you suffer as a murderer or a thief... yet if one suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed" (1 Pet 4:15). With respect to this, our Lord first shows that a sin was not the reason for his death; secondly, that it was caused by the virtues of obedience and love, <b>so that the world may know that I love the Father</b>.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Dicit ergo <i>iam non multa loquar vobiscum</i>, propter temporis brevitatem; supra XIII, 33: <i>filioli, adhuc modicum vobiscum, sum</i>. Vel quia nondum capaces estis; infra XVI, 12: <i>adhuc multa habeo vobis loqui, sed non potestis portare modo</i>. Vel ideo <i>non multa loquar vobiscum</i>, quia in uno brevi sermone explicabo vobis quod non moriar ex culpa mea. Et hoc facit consequenter cum dicit <i>venit enim princeps mundi huius, et in me non habet quidquam</i>, scilicet Diabolus, qui dicitur princeps, non ratione creationis, neque per naturalem potestatem, ut Manichaei blasphemant, sed ratione culpae huius, idest amatorum mundi: unde dicitur princeps mundi et peccati. Eph. ult., v. 12: <i>non est nobis colluctatio adversus carnem et sanguinem; sed adversus rectores et principes tenebrarum harum</i>. Non ergo est princeps creaturarum, sed peccatorum et tenebrarum; Iob XLI, 25: <i>ille est rex super omnes filios superbiae</i>.
          <td>1975 He says, <b>I will no longer talk much with you</b>, because the time is short: "Little children, yet a little while I am with you" (13:33). Or, because you are not yet ready for it: "I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now" (16:12). Or, <b>I will no longer talk much with you</b>, because I will briefly explain to you that I will not die because of my own guilt. And he does this when he says, <b>for the ruler of this world is coming. He has no power over me</b>. This ruler is the devil, and he is called a ruler of this world not because he is its creator, or because of his natural power, as the Manicheans blasphemed, but because of guilt, that is, because of the lovers of this world. For this reason he is called the ruler of the world and of sin: "For we are not contending against flesh and blood, but against... the world rulers this present darkness" (Eph 6:12). Therefore, he is not the ruler of creatures, but of sinners and of darkness: "He is king over all the children of pride" (Job 41:34).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Hic ergo princeps venit ad persequendum: intravit enim in cor Iudae ut proderet, Iudaeorum vero ut occiderent; sed <i>in me non habet quidquam</i>: nam in nobis non habet potestatem nisi propter peccatum; supra VIII, v. 34: <i>qui facit peccatum, servus est peccati</i>. In Christo autem nullum peccatum erat, neque secundum animam: I Petr. II, 22: <i>qui peccatum non fecit</i> etc. neque secundum carnem, quia ex virgine absque originali peccato de spiritu sancto conceptus; Lc. I, 35: <i>quod enim ex te nascetur sanctum, vocabitur filius Dei</i>. Quia ergo Diabolus Christum, in quo nullum ius habuit, etiam invasit, perdere meruit quod iuste possidebat; Mc. V, 7: <i>quid nobis et tibi, Iesu fili Dei altissimi?</i> Sic ergo patet quod causa mortis suae non fuit culpa; sed nec erat cur moreretur, si non habet peccatum.
          <td>So this ruler comes to afflict: he entered into the heart of Judas to incite his betrayal, and into the hearts of the Jews to incite them to kill. But <b>he has no power over me</b>, for he has no power over us except because of sin: "Every one who commits sin is a slave to sin" (8:34). Now in Christ there was no sin: not in his soul, "He committed no sin" (1 Pet 2:22), nor in his flesh, because he was conceived of the Virgin without original sin through the Holy Spirit: "the child to be born of you will be called holy, the Son of God" (Lk 1:35). Because the devil even attacked Christ, over whom he had no right, he deserved to lose what he justly held: "What have I do to with you, Jesus, Son of the Most High God?" [Mk 5:7]. So it is clear that the cause of Christ's death wasArial'&gt; not his own guilt; and there was no reason for him to die if he had no sin.
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Consequenter veram causam adiungit, quae est bonum virtutis; et ideo dicit <i>sed ut cognoscat mundus quia diligo patrem</i>: quod, secundum Augustinum sic punctatur: <i>sed ut cognoscat mundus quia diligo patrem, et sicut mandatum dedit mihi pater, sic facio</i>, suspensive, <i>surgite, eamus hinc</i>.
          <td>
            1976 Then he mentions the true reason for his death, which is that good which is virtue. He says, <b>so that the world may know that I love the Father</b>. Augustine relates this sentence to what follows, <b>Rise, let us go hence</b>. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn55" name="_ftnref55" id="_ftnref55">[55]</a>
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Ubi sciendum est, quod duo moverunt Christum ad mortem sustinendam, scilicet amor Dei et dilectio proximi; Eph. V, 2: <i>ambulate in dilectione</i>. Et hoc probat per indicium, quia mandata sua implet; supra: <i>si diligitis me, mandata mea servate</i>. Et quantum ad hoc dicit <i>sed ut cognoscat mundus quia diligo patrem</i> etc.; et hoc efficaciter, quia scilicet morior; unde subdit <i>et sicut mandatum dedit mihi pater, sic facio</i>: quod est secundum quod pater movit eum ad mortem suscipiendam, scilicet obedientia, quae ex amore causatur. Mandatum autem hoc dedit pater non filio Dei, qui cum sit verbum, est etiam mandatum patris; sed dedit filio hominis, inquantum animae eius inspiravit necessarium esse saluti humanae ut Christus in humana natura moreretur. Ut ergo hoc mundus cognoscat, <i>surgite</i>, de loco ubi coenaverant, <i>et eamus</i>, ad locum ubi ego sum tradendus, ut videatis quod non ex necessitate, sed ex caritate et obedientia morior; Iob XXXIX, 21: <i>audacter in occursum pergit armatis</i>.
          <td>Two things led Christ to undergo death: love for God and love for neighbor; "Walk in love" (Eph 5:2). He shows this love by the sign that he accomplishes what God commands: "If you love me keep my commandments" [14:15]. Referring to this he says, <b>that the world may know that I love the Father</b>, with an active love, because I go to die. Thus he adds, <b>I do as the Father has commanded me</b>. This is obedience, which is produced by love; and it is the second thing by which the Father moved him to undergo death. The Father did not give this commandment to the Son of God, who since he is the Word, is also the command of the Father. He gave this commandment to the Son of man, insofar as he infused into his soul that it was necessary for the salvation of humankind that the Christ die in his human nature. And so, that the world may know these things, <b>Rise</b>, from the place where they had eaten, <b>let us go hence</b>, to the place where I am to be betrayed, so that you can see that I am not dying by necessity, but from love and obedience: "He goes out to meet the weapons" (Job 39:21).
        <tr style="text-align:justify" valign="top">
          <td>Secundum Chrysostomum autem aliter legitur: ut in hoc scilicet quod dicit <i>sic facio</i>, sit finis sententiae; et in hoc quod resumit: <i>surgite, eamus hinc</i>, sit principium alterius: ut sit sensus: non morior, quasi princeps mundi huius habeat in me quidquam, sed <i>quia diligo patrem</i>, ideo hoc facio. Vos autem <i>surgite et eamus hinc</i>. Videbat enim eos formidare et propter tempus, quia nox profunda erat, et propter locum, quia in villa manifeste sistebant, ita ut semper circumvolverent ad ostium oculos, quasi expectando hostes eos invadentes, et propter hoc non attendentes his quae dicebantur. Et ideo ut melius verba quae dicturus erat intelligerent, ducit eos in locum alium secretum, ut aestimantes se securos esse, attentius audiant quae diceret eis; Oseae II, 14: <i>ducam eam in solitudinem, et loquar ad cor eius</i>.
          <td>
            1977 Chrysostom understands this differently, since he does not relate <b>Rise, let us go hence</b>, to what came before it in the same way. <a href="John14.htm#_ftn56" name="_ftnref56" id="_ftnref56">[56]</a> The meaning now is: I am not dying because the ruler of this world has power over me; I am doing this because I love the Father. But as for you, <b>Rise, let us go hence</b>. He said this because he saw they were afraid, both because of the time, as it was deep into the night, and due to the place, for they were obviously at some house and constantly watching the entrance as if expecting to be set upon by their enemies. Consequently they were not paying attention to what he was saying. So Christ led them to another hidden place, so that feeling more secure they could listen with more attention to what he would say to them and understand it better: "I will bring her into the wilderness, and speak tenderly to her" (Hos 2:14).
    </table>
    <hr>
    <div id="ftn1">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref1" name="_ftn1" id="_ftn1">[1]</a> St. Thomas refers to Jn 14:1 in the <i>Summa Theologiae:</i> II-II, q. 1, a. 9, obj. 5; q. 16, a. 1, obj. 2; q. 174, a. 6; Jn 14: 2: <i>ST</i> I-II, q. 5, a. 2, s. c.; III, q. 57, a. 6; q. 75, a. 1; Jn 14:3: <i>ST</i> III, q. 57, a. 1, ad 3; q. 57, a. 6.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn2">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref2" name="_ftn2" id="_ftn2">[2]</a> Summa-different degrees of happiness in heaven.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn3">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref3" name="_ftn3" id="_ftn3">[3]</a> <i>Moralia</i>, 22, ch. 24; PL 76; cf. <i>Catena Aurea,</i> 14:1-4.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn4">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref4" name="_ftn4" id="_ftn4">[4]</a> <i>Tract. in Io</i>., 67, ch.2, col. 1812; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 14:1-4.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn5">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref5" name="_ftn5" id="_ftn5">[5]</a> Ibid., 3, col. 1813; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 14:1-4.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn6">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref6" name="_ftn6" id="_ftn6">[6]</a> <i>Tract. in Io</i>., 68, ch. 1, col. 1814; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 14:1-4.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn7">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref7" name="_ftn7" id="_ftn7">[7]</a> Summa-the saints will be with Christ immediately after death.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn8">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref8" name="_ftn8" id="_ftn8">[8]</a> St. Thomas refers to Jn 14:5 in the <i>Summa Theologiae:</i> III, q. 45, a. 1; Jn 14:6 <i>: ST</i> I, q. 2, a. 1, obj. 3; I. q. 3, a. 3, s. c.; I, q. 16, a. 5, s. c.; I, q. 39, a. 8, obj 5; II-II, q. 34, a. 1, obj. 2; III, q. 78, a. 5, s. c.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn9">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref9" name="_ftn9" id="_ftn9">[9]</a> Summa-Christ is essentially truth and life and thus the object of man's desire.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn10">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref10" name="_ftn10" id="_ftn10">[10]</a> <i>Sermones de Verbis Domini</i> 142, ch. 1; PL 38, col. 778; cf. <i>Catena Aurea,</i> 14:5-7.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn11">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref11" name="_ftn11" id="_ftn11">[11]</a> Ibid.; cf. <i>Catena Aurea,</i> 14:15-7.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn12">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref12" name="_ftn12" id="_ftn12">[12]</a> <i>De Trin</i>., 7, ch. 33; PL 10, col. 228A; cf. <i>Catena Aurea,</i> 14:5-7.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn13">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref13" name="_ftn13" id="_ftn13">[13]</a> <i>Tract. in Io</i>., 69, ch. 2, col. 1816; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 14:5-7.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn14">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref14" name="_ftn14" id="_ftn14">[14]</a> <i>In Ioannem hom</i>., 73, ch. 2; PG 59, col. 398; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 14:5-7.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn15">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref15" name="_ftn15" id="_ftn15">[15]</a> <i>De Trin</i>., 7, ch. 33; PL 10, col. 228A; cf. <i>Catena Aurea,</i> 14:5-7.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn16">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref16" name="_ftn16" id="_ftn16">[16]</a> St. Thomas quotes Jn 14: 9 in the Summa Theologiae: I, q. 19, a. 4, arg. 1; q. 88, a. 3, arg 2; Jn 14: 11: <i>ST</i> I, q. 42, a. 5, s. c; II-II, q. 1, a. 8, obj. 3; Jn 14:10: <i>ST</i> III, q. 43, a. 2, s. c.; Jn 14:12: <i>ST</i> I- q. 105, a. 8, s. c.; I-II, q. 111, a. 2, obj. 2; q. 113, a. 9, s. c.; III, q. 43, a. 4, obj. 2; q. 64, a. 4, obj. 2; q. 69, a. 6, obj. 2.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn17">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref17" name="_ftn17" id="_ftn17">[17]</a> <i>Tract. in Io</i>., 70, ch. 1, col. 1818; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 14:8-11.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn18">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref18" name="_ftn18" id="_ftn18">[18]</a> <i>De Trin</i>., 7, ch. 34; PL 10, col. 228D; cf. <i>Catena Aurea,</i> 14:8-11.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn19">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref19" name="_ftn19" id="_ftn19">[19]</a> <i>Tract. in Io</i>., 70, ch. 2, col. 1819; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 14:8-11.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn20">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref20" name="_ftn20" id="_ftn20">[20]</a> Summa--
    </div>
    <div id="ftn21">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref21" name="_ftn21" id="_ftn21">[21]</a> <i>In Ioannem hom</i>., 74, ch. 1; PG 59, col. 401; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 14:8-11.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn22">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref22" name="_ftn22" id="_ftn22">[22]</a> <i>Tract. in Io</i>., 70, ch. 3, col. 1820; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 14:8-11.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn23">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref23" name="_ftn23" id="_ftn23">[23]</a> <i>De Trin</i>., 7; PL 10; cf. <i>Catena Aurea,</i> 14:8-11.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn24">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref24" name="_ftn24" id="_ftn24">[24]</a> Chrysostom, <i>In Ioannem hom</i>., 74, ch. 2; PG 59, col. 401; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 14:8-11.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn25">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref25" name="_ftn25" id="_ftn25">[25]</a> <i>Tract. in Io</i>., 71, ch. 1, 2, col. 1820-1; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 14:8-11.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn26">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref26" name="_ftn26" id="_ftn26">[26]</a> <i>Tract. in Io</i>., 71, ch. 2, col. 1821; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 14:12-14.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn27">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref27" name="_ftn27" id="_ftn27">[27]</a> <i>Tract. in Io</i>., 71, ch. 3, col. 1821-2; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 14:12-14.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn28">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref28" name="_ftn28" id="_ftn28">[28]</a> <i>In Ioannem hom</i>., 74, ch. 2; PG 59, col. 402; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 14:12-14.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn29">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref29" name="_ftn29" id="_ftn29">[29]</a> <i>Tract. in Io</i>., 72, ch. 2, col. 1823; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 14:12-14.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn30">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref30" name="_ftn30" id="_ftn30">[30]</a> St. Thomas quotes Jn 14:16 in the <i>Summa Theologiae:</i> I, q. 27, a. 3, s. c.; II-II, q. 83, a. 10, obj. 1; Jn 14:17: <i>ST</i> I-II, q. 68, a. 3, s. c.; q. 106, a. 1, ad 1.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn31">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref31" name="_ftn31" id="_ftn31">[31]</a> summa-appropriation of persons in the trinity
    </div>
    <div id="ftn32">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref32" name="_ftn32" id="_ftn32">[32]</a> <i>In Ioannem hom</i>., 75, ch. 1; PG 59, col. 405; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 14:15-17.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn33">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref33" name="_ftn33" id="_ftn33">[33]</a> Ambrose.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn34">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref34" name="_ftn34" id="_ftn34">[34]</a> <i>Moralia</i>, V, ch. 28, no. 50; PL 75, col. 706A; cf. <i>Catena Aurea,</i> 14:15-17.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn35">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref35" name="_ftn35" id="_ftn35">[35]</a> <i>Tract. in Io</i>., 74, ch. 4; col 1828; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 14:15-17.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn36">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref36" name="_ftn36" id="_ftn36">[36]</a> Chrysostom, <i>In Ioannem hom</i>., 75, ch. 1; PG 59, col. 405; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 14:15-17.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn37">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref37" name="_ftn37" id="_ftn37">[37]</a> St. Thomas quotes Jn 14: 18 in <i>Summa Theologiae:</i> I, q. 88, a. 3, s. c.; Jn 14:21: <i>ST</i> I-II, q. 114, a. 4, s. c.; II-II, q. 24, a. 12, s. c.; III, q. 58, a. 3, obj. 4.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn38">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref38" name="_ftn38" id="_ftn38">[38]</a> <i>Tract. in Io</i>., 75, ch. 2, col. 1829; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 14:18-21.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn39">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref39" name="_ftn39" id="_ftn39">[39]</a> <i>De Trin</i>., 8; PL 10; cf. <i>Catena Aurea,</i> 14:18-21.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn40">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref40" name="_ftn40" id="_ftn40">[40]</a> <i>Tract. in Io</i>., 75, ch. 5, col. 1830; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 14:18-21.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn41">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref41" name="_ftn41" id="_ftn41">[41]</a> St. Thomas quotes Jn 14:23 in the <i>Summa Theologiae</i>: II-II, q. 184, a. 3, obj. 3; Jn 14:28: <i>ST</i> I, q. 42, a. 4, obj. 1; Jn 14:23: <i>ST</i> I, q. 43, a. 4 obj. 2 and a. 5.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn42">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref42" name="_ftn42" id="_ftn42">[42]</a> <i>H</i> <i>omiliae in Evangelista XXX</i>, ch.1; PL 76, col. 1220C; cf. <i>Catena Aurea,</i> 14:22-27.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn43">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref43" name="_ftn43" id="_ftn43">[43]</a> <i>Tract. in Io</i>., 76, ch. 2, col. 1831; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 14:22-27.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn44">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref44" name="_ftn44" id="_ftn44">[44]</a> <i>In Ioannem hom</i>., 75, ch. 3; PG 59, col. 406; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 14:22-27.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn45">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref45" name="_ftn45" id="_ftn45">[45]</a> <i>Homiliae in Evangelista XXX</i>, ch. 2; PL 76, col. 1221B; cf. <i>Catena Aurea,</i> 14:22-27.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn46">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref46" name="_ftn46" id="_ftn46">[46]</a> <i>Tract. in Io</i>., 76, ch. 5, col. 1832; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 14:22-27.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn47">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref47" name="_ftn47" id="_ftn47">[47]</a> Summa-this whole section of the chapter on the nature of the Holy Spirit and his relationship to the Father and the Son.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn48">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref48" name="_ftn48" id="_ftn48">[48]</a> <i>Homiliae in Evangelista XXX</i>, ch. 3; PL 76, col 1222B; cf. <i>Catena Aurea,</i> 14:22-27.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn49">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref49" name="_ftn49" id="_ftn49">[49]</a> <i>Sermones de Verbis Domini</i> <i>97</i>; PL 39, col. 1931; cf. <i>Catena Aurea,</i> 14:22-27.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn50">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref50" name="_ftn50" id="_ftn50">[50]</a> Ibid.; cf. <i>Catena Aurea,</i> 14:22-27.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn51">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref51" name="_ftn51" id="_ftn51">[51]</a> St. Thomas quotes Jn 14:28 in the <i>Summa Theologiae:</i> III, q. 3, a. 8, obj. 1; q. 20, a. 1. s. c.; q. 57, a. 2, obj. 3; q. 58, a. 3 obj. 3; Jn 14:31: <i>ST</i> I, q. 42, a. 6, obj. 2; III, q. 47, a. 2, ad 1.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn52">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref52" name="_ftn52" id="_ftn52">[52]</a> <i>De Trin</i>., 9, ch. 54; PL 10, col. 324B; cf. <i>Catena Aurea,</i> 14:27-31.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn53">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref53" name="_ftn53" id="_ftn53">[53]</a> <i>In Ioannem hom</i>., 75, ch. 4; PG 59, col. 407; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 14:27-31.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn54">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref54" name="_ftn54" id="_ftn54">[54]</a> <i>Tract. in Io</i>., 79, ch. 1, col. 1838; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 14:27-31.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn55">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref55" name="_ftn55" id="_ftn55">[55]</a> <i>Tract. in Io</i>., 79, ch. 2, col. 1838; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 14:27-31.
    </div>
    <div id="ftn56">
      <p><a href="John14.htm#_ftnref56" name="_ftn56" id="_ftn56">[56]</a> <i>In Ioannem hom</i>., 76, ch. 1; PG 59, col. 409-411; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 14:27-31.
      <hr>
      <hr>
    </div>
  </blockquote>
  <script type="text/javascript" src="/navbar.js"></script>