(1) Now we have examined Matthew's continuous narrative, comparing it with the other three through to the end, and have found that none of them contains anything inconsistent with his own narrative or those of the others. Let us now examine Mark in a similar way. We shall set aside those things he has in common with Matthew, for we have already investigated those and it seems we are done with them; now we will inspect and compare the other parts, and show there is no inconsistency there, up to the Lord's supper. For we have already treated everything from that point to the end in all four gospels, showing how they agreed.
(2) Thus begins Mark: "The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. As it is written in Isaiah the prophet," etc., on down to where it says, "And they went into Capernaum; and immediately on the Sabbath he entered the synagogue and taught them."(1) Everything in this context has already been examined above in Matthew. Mark's statement, that he entered the synagogue in Capernaum and taught them on the Sabbath, is also stated by Luke,(2) though it raises no problems.
(3) Mark continues: "And they were astonished at his teaching, for he taught them as one with authority, and not as the scribes. And there was in their synagogue a man with an unclean spirit, and he cried out, saying, 'What have you to do with us, Jesus of Nazareth? Have you come to destroy us?'" etc., and down to where it says, "And he was preaching in their synagogues throughout all Galilee, and casting out demons."(3) Although there are some things here unique to Mark and Luke, we have nonetheless discussed everything in this section when we treated Matthew's continuous narrative, for these things occurred in the order in such a way that I did not think they could be overlooked. But Luke says that the unclean spirit came out of the man in such a way that it did not hurt him,(4) but Mark says, "And the unclean spirit, tearing him and crying out in a loud voice, came out of him."(5) This may seem to be a contradiction. For how can it have "torn" him, or, as some codices have, "tormented" him, when Luke says that it "did him no harm." But Luke's full statement is this: And when the demon had thrown him down in the midst, it came out of him, and did him no harm.(6) So it should be understood that when Mark says that it "tormented him," this is the same as when Luke says that it "had thrown him down in the midst." And when Luke adds that it "did him no harm," it means that the throwing down of his limbs and the tormenting did not injure him, which often happens when demons leave someone, even to the point of breaking the limbs as the torment is being removed.
(4) Mark continues: "And a leper came to him, beseeching him, and kneeling said, 'If you will, you can make me clean,'" etc., on down to where it says, "and they cried out, saying, 'You are the Son of God.' And he strictly charged them not to make him known."(7) Luke says something similar to the last part of this passage,(8) though without any question of inconsistency. Mark continues: "And he went up on the mountain, and called to him those he wished; and they came to him. And he appointed twelve to be with him, and to be sent out to preach. And he gave to them the power to cure illnesses and cast out demons.(9) Simon, whom he renamed Peter," etc., on down to where it says, "And he went away and began to proclaim in the Decapolis how much Jesus had done for him; and everyone marveled."(10) I know that I have already spoken of the names of the disciples, when following Matthew's order.(11) But I repeat the caution again, that one need not suppose that Simon received the name Peter now for the first time, nor that there is any disagreement here with John, who reports that he was called this a long time before: "You will be called Cephas" (which means Peter).(12) For John has recorded the Lord's exact words, by which he renamed him, but Mark has only recorded a recapitulation here, when he mentions "Simon, whom he renamed Peter." Mark wished to give a list of the twelve apostles' names, so he therefore had to mention Peter; but he wished to note briefly that he had not always been called by that name, but the Lord had given it to him. It was not given to him at that time, but at the time that John has placed it, giving the Lord's exact words. Everything else here is not inconsistent in any way, and it has already been treated before.
(5) Mark continues: "And when Jesus had crossed over again in the boat to the other side, a great crowd gathered to him; and he was by the sea," etc., on down to where it says, "And the apostles returned to Jesus, and told him everything they had done and taught."(13) This last part is also given by Luke without any disagreement, and the rest has already been discussed. Mark continues: "And he said to them, 'Come away by yourselves to a deserted place and rest a little,'" etc., on down to where it says, "but the more he charged them, the more rather they announced it. And they were more astonished, saying, 'He has done all things well; he even makes the deaf hear and the mute speak.'"(14) Here there seems to be no inconsistency between Luke and Mark, and we have already considered all of these things when we were comparing Matthew with the others. But there should be this caution: one should not suppose that this last statement from Mark's gospel is inconsistent with all the places in the gospels that show that, in most of his other deeds and words, he knew what was going on inside of people, they could not hide their thoughts and desires from him. John says this most clearly: But Jesus did not trust himself to them, because he knew everyone and he did not need anyone to testify for him before people; for he himself knew what was in people.(15) But it is not remarkable, if he could see the present desires of people. For he predicted to Peter what he would wish in the future, which he did not at that time, when he was presumptuously saying that he would die for him or with him. Since this is so, it seems that such knowledge or foreknowledge is contradicted when Mark says that "He charged them to tell no one; but the more he charged them, the more rather they announced it."(16) For if he had knowledge of people's present and future desires, then he would have known that the more he charged them not to announce it, the more they would announce it, so why would he charge them not to? Perhaps he wished to show to the idle how much more zealously and fervently they ought to preach, if he commands them to, since the ones whom he prohibits from preaching cannot keep silent.
(6) Mark continues: "In those days, when again a great crowd was there, and they had nothing to eat," etc., on down to where it says, "John answered, saying to him, 'Teacher, we saw someone, who does not follow us, casting out demons in your name, and we forbade him.' But Jesus said, 'Do not forbid him; for there is no one who does a mighty deed in my name who can then speak evil of me. For he who is not against you is for you.'"(17) Luke gives this similarly, though he does not say that "there is no one who does a mighty deed in my name who can then speak evil of me." So there is nothing to raise any question of inconsistency between these. But we must see whether this can be supposed to be contradictory to another of the Lord's statements: "He who is not with me is against me; and he who does not gather with me scatters."(18) How was this man not against him, for he was not with him, and John says that he did not follow them, and whoever is not with him is against him? Or if he was against him, how does he say to the disciples, "Do not forbid him. For he who is not against you is for you"? Anyone will note the important difference that here he says to the disciples that "he who is not against you is for you," but in the other place, "he who is not with me is against me." Is it possible in some way not to be with him, but to be associated with his disciples, who are his very limbs? But then how can these sayings be true: "He who receives you receives me";(19) and, "What you have done to one of the least of mine, you have done to me"(20)? Or is it possible for someone not to be against him, although he or she is against his disciples? What then will we do with these sayings: "He who rejects you rejects me"(21); and, "What you have not done to one of the least of mine, you have not done to me"(22); and, "Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?"(23) But Saul was persecuting his disciples. But certainly, this is what he wished this to mean: so far as someone is not with him, to that extent he or she is against him; and so far as someone is not against him, to that extent he or she is with him. Take for example, this man who was doing mighty works in Christ's name, but was not in the community of Christ's disciples. In so far as he performed mighty works in his name, to that extent he was with them and was not against them. But in so far as he was not a member of their community, to that extent he was not with them and was against them. But because they had forbibben him from doing the thing in which he was with them, for that the Lord said to them, "Do not forbid him." For they ought to have forbidden his being outside their community, so that they could bring him into the unity of the church, and not the very thing on which he was one with them, raising up the name of their teacher and Lord in the expulsion of demons. The Catholic church follows this practice, not condemning those sacraments of heretics that are held in common; for in these they are with us and not against us. But the church condemns and forbids division and separation, or any thought opposed to peace and truth; for in this they are against us, for they are not with us in this, and they do not gather, but scatters.
(7) Mark continues and says this: "'For whoever gives you a cup of water to drink in my name, because you are Christ's, truly I say to you, will not lose his reward. And whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to stumble, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were cast into the sea. And if your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go to hell, to the unquenchable fire, where their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched,(24)'" etc., on down to where it says, "'Have salt in yourselves, and have peace amongst yourselves.'"(25) Mark presents the Lord as saying this right after he made them stop prohibiting the man from casting out demons in his name, because he did not follow him with the disciples. In this section he also records some things that are not in any of the other evangelists, and some that are also in Matthew, and some that are also in Matthew and Luke. But these things are in the other gospels in different connections and in another order, and not at the point where he is told of the man who cast out demons in his name, though he did not follow him with Christ's disciples. Therefore it seems to me that the Lord said this at this point, as Mark faithfully reports, and also on other occasions, in so far as they were related to his meaning here, that he forbade them from stopping someone from performing mighty deeds in his name, even if that person did not follow him with his disciples. For Mark connects the two passages: For he who is not against you is for you. For whoever gives you a cup of water to drink in my name, because you are Christ's, truly I say to you, will not lose his reward.(26) This shows that even this man, whom John mentions, thereby beginning the Lord's speech, had not separated himself from the community of the disciples, condemning it like a heretic. People often do something similar, not daring to take Christ's sacraments, but nonetheless favoring the Christian name, so that they even accept and are favorable towards Christians, just because they are Christians, and not for any other reason.(27) It is of such people that he says that they will not lose their reward. But they ought not think themselves safe and secure because of their benevolence towards Christians, even though they are not washed in Christ's baptism, nor incorporated into his unity. Rather, the point is that they are being guided by God's mercy, so that they may achieve these things, and so leave this world safely. Even before they join the ranks of Christians, these people really are more profitable servants than those who, though they are called Christians and they take the Christian sacraments, recommend to others the kinds of things that, if they are persuaded to follow them, will drag them both into eternal punishment. These are those whom he refers to as members of the body, such as the hand or eye, that lead astray, and which he commands to be cut off from the body, off from the unity of the community, so that without them it can enter into life, rather than with them go into hell. Also, they are separated from those from whom they separate themselves: these are the people who refuse their evil recommendations, their attempts to lead them astray. And if any good people who know them detect their real perversity, then they are completely cut off from any community and even from participation in the divine sacraments. But if only some people know them, while the majority is ignorant of their perversity, then they must be tolerated, as chaff is tolerated on the threshing floor before the winnowing.(28) One must not agree with them in the fellowship of iniquity, nor leave the community of the good on account of them. This is what is done by those have salt in themselves, and have peace among themselves.
(8) Mark Continues: "and he got up from there, and came to the edge of Judea beyond the Jordan. And again crowds came to him; and, as was his custom, he again taught them," etc., on down to where it says, "For they all gave out of their abundance; but she out of her poverty gave everything she had, her whole living."(29) Every part of this section has already been examined above, to remove the appearance of any disagreement, when we were comparing Matthew in order with the others. This story of the poor widow, who put two mites into the treasury, is only told by two evangelists, Mark and Luke, but without any question as to their agreement. From here to the Lord's supper, from which point we considered everything in all the gospels together, Mark says nothing that would force us to compare or inquire, in order to remove the appearance of disagreement.
(9) Now let us deal with Luke's gospel in order, setting aside those parts that he has in common with Matthew and Mark, for all of these have already been treated. Luke begins this way: Inasmuch as many have attempted to set in order a narrative of the things which have been fulfilled among us, just as they were delivered to us by those who from the beginning saw and were ministers, it seemed good to me also, having carefully followed everything from the very beginning, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the truth of those words you have been told.(30) This beginning does not apply only to the narrative of the gospel, but alerts us to the fact that Luke also wrote that book which is called the Acts of the Apostles. It is not just the presence of the name of Theophilus there that leads to this conclusion: for there could have been someone else named Theophilus, and even if it were the same one, someone else could have written something to him, just as the gospel was written to him from Luke. It is because Acts begins this way: I made the first book, O Theophilus, about everything that Jesus began to do and teach, until the day when he, through the Holy Spirit, chose the apostles and gave them the command to preach the gospel.(31) From this we are to understnad that he had written one of those four books of the gospel, which are held in the highest authority by the church. But just because he says that he made his book out of everything that Jesus began to do and teach, until that day when he commanded the apostles, one should not suppose that he wrote in his gospel everything that Jesus did and said while he was with the apostles on earth. This would contradict John's statement that Jesus did many other things, which, if they were all written down, the whole world could not contain that many books.(32) There are in fact not a few things that the other evangelists narrate, upon which Luke himself has not touched. So what he means is that he made his book of all things, by selecting from among all the things to make his book, judging what was fitting and appropriate to fulfill his devoted responsibility. And when he refers to the "many have attempted to set in order a narrative of the things which have been fulfilled among us," he seems to mean those who were not able to finish the job they had taken upon themselves. He also says that it seemed good to him also, "to write carefully an orderly narrative, inasmuch as many have attempted." But we ought to suppose that this refers to those who have no authority in the church, because they were in no way capable of finishing what they attempted. Also, Luke has not taken his narrative only up to the Lord's resurrection and assumption, so that, based on his work, he would have an honored place among the four authors of the gospel writings. Instead, he has continued with what was done by the apostles, writing down those things that he believed were necessary for the edifying faith of readers or hearers. Only his book is faithful enough to be deemed by the church as the book of the Acts of the Apostles. All the others who wrote of the apostles' deeds and words have been rejected because they are not faithful accounts, as they should have been. Also, Mark and Luke wrote at a time when it would have been possible for both the church of Christ and the apostles themselves, who were still alive in the flesh, to judge the accuracy of their writings.
(10) Luke then begins his gospel in this way: "In the days of Herod, king of Judea, there was a priest named Zechariah, or the division of Abijah; and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth," etc., on down to where it says, "And when he had ceased speaking, he said to Simon, 'Go out into the deep and let down your nets for a catch.'"(33) There is nothing in this section to raise any question of inconsistency. John seems to tell a similar story, but the story of what happened at the sea of Tiberias after the Lord's resurrection is really quite different.(34) It is not just that the time is totally different, but the events themselves are quite distinct. In John, the nets were cast off the right side, and one hundred fifty-three fish were caught, and they were large ones. It even seemed relevant to the evangelist to say that "although there were so many, the net was not torn."(35) He must have had in mind the event that Luke records, in which the nets were broken by the huge number of fish. For everything else, Luke does not report the same things as John does, except those things concerning the Lord's passion and resurrection. The whole section from the Lord's supper to the end has been treated by us, with a comparison of all the testimonies revealing no inconsistency.
(11) John is the last, and there remains nothing to compare between him and the others. For although each evangelist may have individually reported things that the others do not, it is difficult to raise a question of inconsistency from this. It is clearly the case that these three - Matthew, Mark, and Luke - are mostly concerned with the humanity of our Lord Jesus Christ, according to which he is both king and priest. Mark seems to be shown as the figure of a human being in that mystery of the four animals.(36) He also seems to have been Matthew's companion, for he has more in common with him than with the others; this would suit the kingly character, already commented on in the first book, of not usually being unaccompanied.(37) Or it may be understood as more probable, that he goes together with both Matthew and Luke. For although Mark agrees with Matthew in more places, nonetheless, in other places he agrees rather with Luke. This shows that Mark relates both to the lion and the ox, that is, to the royal character emphasized by Matthew, and to the priestly character emphasized by Luke. Christ is human in both these ways, for Mark's depiction relates to both of these. But John takes up some points for special emphasis: Christ's divinity, his equality with the Father, according to which he is the word, God with God, and the fact that the word was made flesh in order to dwell among us,(38) according to which he and the Father are one.(39) Like an eagle, John dwells on Christ's higher sayings, only rarely descending to earth. For example, though he clearly shows that he knows Christ's mother, John nonetheless says nothing of Christ's nativity, unlike Matthew or Luke. Nor does he record his baptism, unlike the other three; instead, he only gives John's testimony in a lofty and elevated way, then he departs from the others and goes on to the wedding at Cana of Galilee. Although the evangelist himself records that it was his mother there, Jesus nonetheless says, "Woman, what have I to do with you?"(40) It is not that he is driving away the one who gave him flesh, but rather that he is specially indicating his divinity now, when he turns the water into wine, and this divinity made that woman, it was not made in her.
(12) After those few days spent in Capernaum, he returned to the temple, where John records that he spoke of the temple of his body: "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up."(41) This shows most definitely that God was there in the temple in the form of the word made flesh. But it also shows that he himself raised that flesh, by the oneness that he has with the Father, not doing anything separately from him. In other places in scripture (perhaps in all), it says that God raised him; nor does it say anywhere that when God raised Christ, Christ raised himself, because he is one God with the Father. That is why it says here, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up."
(13) So how great and how divine are the words spoken to Nicodemus!(42) From these the evangelist returns again to John's testimony, noting that the bridegroom's friend cannot help but rejoice at the bridegroom's voice.(43) This warns us that the human soul has no light in and of itself, nor can it be blessed, unless it participates in the unchangeable wisdom. Then he goes on to the Samaritan woman, mentioning the water which, if one drinks of it, one will never thirst again.(44) Then he returns to Cana of Galilee,(45) where he had made water into wine. There John reports what Jesus said to the official whose son was sick: "Unless you see signs and wonders, you will not believe."(46) By saying this, he wished to lift the believer's mind far above all changeable things, for he did not wish the faithful to seek after the miracles themselves, for although they are signs of divinity, they nonetheless occur in the changeability of bodies.
(14) Then John returns to Jerusalem, to the story of the man who was sick for thrity-eight years.(47) What things are said on this occasion! And how many things are said! Here it is said that "the Jews sought to kill him, because not only did he break the Sabbath, but he also called God his Father, making himself equal with God."(48) Here it is clearly shown that he did not call God his Father in the way that holy people often do so, but that he meant he was equal to him. For right before that, he said to those who were slandering him on account of the Sabbath, "My Father works too, and I work."(49) Then they were enraged, not because he said God was his Father, but because he wanted it to be understood that he was equal with God, when he said, "My Father works too, and I work." This also shows that as the Father works, so should the Son work also, for the Father does not work without the Son. Indeed, this is right before he says to those who were angry with him, "For whatever he does, the Son does this likewise."(50)
(15) Then John descends to where the other three are walking with the same Lord on the earth, recording the feeding of the five thousand with the five loaves.(51) But only he reports that when they wanted to make him king, he went off alone to a mountain.(52) It seems to me that here John wishes to remind the rational soul that Christ rules our minds and reason, things in which he is so far above us that he has no natural connection with humans, but is by himself alone, because he is the only one from the Father. This mystery escapes those carnal people who creep in lower parts, because it is too lofty. So Christ himself escapes to a mountain, away from those who long for his kingdom with an earthly mind, as he says elsewhere, "My kingdom is not of this world."(53) This also is reported only by John, who soars heavenwards over the earth, rejoicing in the light of the sun of righteousness. Then passing on from this mountain after the miracle of the five loaves, John stays with the other three a little longer, until the crossing of the sea, when he walked on the water.(54) But then he rises again to the Lord's words, so great, so extensive, so lofty and elevated for such a long time, given on the occasion of the loaves, when he said to the crowds, "Truly, truly, I say to you, you seek me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate and were filled from the loaves. Do not work for the food that perishes, but for that which endures to eternal life."(55) After this he speaks most excellently, and for a very long time. Then some fell away from this most lofty height, those who did not walk with him afterwards.(56) But some really did cling to him, those who were able to understand his saying, "It is the spirit that gives life, but the flesh is of no use."(57) The spirit is of use even through flesh, and only the spirit is of use, but flesh without spirit if of no use.
(16) Then his brothers, (that is, those related to his flesh,) suggest that he go up to the feast day, so that he might make himself known to the multitudes, to which he makes this most lofty response: "My time has not yet come, but your time is always ready. The world cannot hate you, but it hates me, because I give testimony of it, that its works are evil."(58) "Your time is always ready," must mean that they long for that day, of which the prophet says, "But I have not labored, following you, O Lord, and you know that I have not desired the human day."(59) The right kind of desire is to fly to the light of the word, and to long for that day, which Abraham longed to see, and "he saw it and was glad."(60) And when he went up to the temple on the day of the feast, John reports what he said, and it was so amazing, so divine, so lofty! He said that they would be unable to come to where he was.(61) He said that they knew him, and knew where he was from, and that he who had sent him was true, whom they did not know.(62) This is the same as saying, "You both know and do not know from where I am." What could he have meant to be understood by this, except that they could know him according to the flesh, both his ancestry and country, but be ignorant as to his divinity? By speaking of the gift of the Holy Spirit, he also showed them who he was, since it was his office to give that highest gift.
(17) Again, how great are the things John reports that Jesus said after he returned from the Mount of Olives. Here he forgave the adulteress, whom his tempters had presented to him as one worthy of stoning.(63) Here he wrote with his finger on the ground, as if to show that people such as these accusers would be written on the earth and not in heaven. He had similarly reminded the disciples, when he told them to rejoice that their names were written in heaven.(64) Or perhaps he was showing that it was by humbling himself (which he indicated by lowering his head), that he made signs on the earth.(65) Or perhaps he was showing that it was time for his law to be written on earth that would yield fruit, and no longer on sterile stone, as before. After this, he said that he was the light of the world, and that whoever followed him would not walk in darkness, but have the light of life.(66) He even said that he was the beginning, who had spoken to them.(67) By applying this name to himself, he distinguished himself from the light which he made, and showed that he was the light, by which all things were made. So when he said that he was the light of the world, we should not suppose that this is in the same way as the disciples are, when he said, "You are the light of the world."(68) They are only compared to a lamp, which is not put under a bushel, but on a stand.(69) John the baptist is also compared to this: "He was a burning and shining lamp."(70) But he himself is the beginning, of whom it is said, "From his fulness have we all received."(71) Here he says that he, the Son, is the truth, which makes free, and without which no one will be free.(72)
(18) Then, after the story of the giving of sight to the man who was blind from birth,(73) John lingers over the long sermon given on that occasion.(74) This sermon concerned the sheep, and the shepherd, and the door, and his power to lay down his life and take it back up again: all this showed the highest power of his divinity. Then John reports how, at the feast of the dedication in Jerusalem, the Jews said to him, "How long will you keep our minds in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly."(75) Then John tells of those lofty words he spoke when he had an opportunity to give a sermon, when he said, "I and the Father are one."(76) Then he tells of the raising of Lazarus,(77) when the Lord said, "I am the resurrection and the life; whoever believes in me, although he were dead, yet will live. And all who live and believe in me will never die."(78) What do we recognize in these words, except the loftiness of his divinity, by sharing in which, we will live forever? Then John rejoins Matthew and Mark, relating what occurs in Bethany, about the costly ointment, which Mary poured out on his feet and head.(79) From then on to the Lord's passion and resurrection, John follows together with the other three evangelists, at least in so far as they speak of the same situations.
(19) But regarding the Lord's sermons from this point on, John does not cease to raise up the higher and more lengthy things said by him. He has a lofty speech, which none of the other evangelists includes, given when the gentiles say through Philip and Andrew that they want to see him.(80) There he again reports the striking things he said about the light that enlightens and makes people into children of light. Although none of the evangelists fails to mention the supper, how many and how great are the words that only John records, which the others omit! There was not only the model of humility given by his washing of the disciples' feet;(81) but also, after the betrayer had been indicated with a morsel, and had gone out, there was Jesus' wonderfully amazing and most lengthy speech given to the eleven who remained with him.(82) John dwells on this speech, in which Jesus says, "He who has seen me has seen the Father."(83) Here he also says many things about the Holy Spirit, the Paraclete, whom he was to send to them, and about his own glory, which he had with the Father before the world was. He also speaks about making us one in himself, as he and the Father are one: this does not mean that he and the Father and we should be one, but that we should be one as they are one. And he said many other marvelously lofty things. But if we were to examine these things as they deserve, even if we were fit to do so, it would not relate to what we are attempting to do in the present work. Although this would perhaps be a worthy work of interpretation at another time, it certainly is not what is required here. For we wish to show those who are lovers of the word of God, and students of the holy truth, that John was an announcer and preacher of Christ, the true and truthful one. The same was done by the other three who wrote gospels, and also by the other apostles. Even if they themselves did not attempt to write narratives, they nonetheless fulfilled the official duty of preaching of him. But John was carried up higher in Christ, right from the beginning of his book, and only rarely was he at the same level as the others. This happened first by the Jordan, concerning the testimony of John the baptist;(84) then on the other side of the Sea of Tiberias, when he fed the crowds with the five loaves and then walked on the water;(85) and then, in Bethany, when the costly ointment was poured over him by the devotion of a woman's faith.(86) Thus he goes on, up to the time of the passion, where his narrative necessarily runs parallel to theirs. But nonetheless, at the Lord's supper, which none of them fail to mention, John gives a much fuller version, drawn from the storehouse of the Lord's breast, on which he used to recline. In John, Jesus strikes Pilate with much loftier words, saying that his kingdom is not of this earth, and he was born to be a king, and that he came into this world in order to give witness to the truth.(87) It is also in John that Jesus comes to Mary after the resurrection, and with some lofty mystery says, "Do not touch me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father."(88) It is also in John that he gives the Holy Spirit to the disciples by breathing on them,(89) so that we might know that the Spirit, which is consubstantial and coeternal with the Trinity, is not just the Spirit of the Father, but also the Spirit of the Son.
(20) Finally, after committing his sheep to Peter, who loves him and who confesses this love three times, Jesus then says that he wishes John to remain until he comes.(90) It seems to me that here he teaches a lofty mystery. John's evangelical commission carries him up into the clearest light of the Word, where one can see the equality and unchangeability of the Trinity. By this commission, John also shows most especially how different from other people's was the humanity taken on by the Word made flesh. This commission cannot be distinguished or known clearly until the Lord himself comes. Therefore, it will remain until he comes. Now it remains in the faith of believers, but then it will be contemplated face to face,(91) when he, our life, will appear, and we will appear with him in glory.(92) But perhaps someone might suppose that in this mortal life someone could reach it in such a way that he or she could cast off and scatter every cloud of corporeal and carnal phantasms, thereby obtaining the serenest light of unchangeable truth, to which one would cling constantly and unchangeably, having thoroughly severed the mind from the habits of this life: whoever supposes this understands neither what he is seeking, nor who it is who is doing the seeking. Let him believe rather that lofty authority which has no falsehood, who says that as long as we are in the body, we are away from the Lord, and we walk by faith, and not by sight.(93) So one must with perseverance hold on to and guard faith, hope, and charity, striving towards the sight, the promise of which we have received from the Holy Spirit, who will teach us all truth;(94) this will happen when God, who raised Jesus Christ from the dead, makes alive our mortal bodies by his Spirit that lives in us.(95) But before the body, which is mortal because of sin, is made alive, it is surely corruptible and weighs down the soul.(96) And if someone is helped to go beyond this cloud that covers the whole earth,(97) which is the carnal darkness that covers all earthly life, it is only a quick movement, and one returns to one's weakness, for the desire remains to be excited again, and the purity is not sufficient to make one withstand it. But the more one can do this, the greater one is; and the less one can do this, the less one is. But if a person's mind has had no experience of this, but Christ nonetheless lives in that person through faith, then that person ought to strive to minimize and eliminate these worldly lusts by the practice of moral virtue, in this way walking in the company of these three evangelists with Christ the mediator. He who is always the Son of God, became for our sake the Son of Man, so that his eternal power and divinity might be joined with our weakness and mortality, using what is ours to make a way for us in him and to him: with the joy of great hope let us faithfully hold this. One who is ruled by Christ the king does not sin. If one does happen to sin, then one has atonement from Christ as priest.(98) Thus, one is nourished by the practice of good conversation and good living, and one is carried away from the earth by a double love, as if one had two strong wings: this is when one is enlightened by Christ the Word, the Word that was in the beginning, the Word that was with God, and the Word that was God.(99) Although this will still be in a mirror dimly,(100) it will nonetheless be superior to any bodily imitation. So in the first three, the active virtues shine forth, while in John it is the gift of contemplation, which is able to recognize these higher things.(101) But even John, which is also only partial, will remain until that which is perfect comes.(102) The ability to speak wisdom is given through the Spirit to one person, and through the same Spirit the ability to speak knowledge is given to another.(103) One person draws sustenance from the Lord's day, another drinks the purer nourishment from the Lord's breast.(104) Another is even taken up to the third heaven and hears unutterable words.(105) But all of these, as long as they are in the body, are away from the Lord.(106) And all who are faithful in good hope are written in the book of life.(107) Even so, there is still something more in store for them: "And I will love him and manifest myself to him."(108) Nonetheless, even during our absence from the Lord, one should make progress in the understanding and knowledge of these things, and be all the more on guard against the diabolical vices of pride and envy. One should keep in mind that even this Gospel of John, which above all encourages one to contemplate the truth, also commands above all the sweetness of love. And one of the truest and most beneficial command is this: The greater you are, the more you should humble yourself in all things.(109) The evangelist who presents Christ as much loftier than the others do, is also the only one who reports that he washed the disciples' feet.(110)
1. Mk 1:1-2, 21.
2. Lk 4:31.
3. Mk 1:22-24, 39.
4. Cf. Lk 4:35.
5. Mk 1:26.
6. Lk 4:35.
7. Mk 1:40; 3:11-12.
8. Cf. Lk 4:41.
9. "To cure illnesses" is not in the Greek original.
10. Mk 3:13-16; 5:20.
11. Cf. above, Book 2, paragraphs 34-41, 108-09.
12. Jn 1:42.
13. Mk 5:21; 6:30.
14. Mk 6:31; 7:36-37.
15. Jn 2:24-25.
16. Mk 7:36.
17. Mk 8:1; 9:38-40. The Greek has "us" instead of "you."
18. Lk 11:23; Mt 12:30.
19. Mt 10:40.
20. Mt 25:40.
21. Lk 10:16.
22. Mt 25:45.
23. Acts 9:4.
24. The last two clauses are Mk 9:44, not in the best Greek manuscripts.
25. Mk 9:41-44, 50.
26. Mk 9:40-41.
27. Cf. the case of Victorinus, Conf. 8.2.3-5.
28. Cf. the similar point of the parable of the weeds growing among the wheat, Mt 13:24-30.
29. Mk 10:1; 12:44.
30. Lk 1:1-4.
31. Acts 1:1-2; Augustine departs from both the Vulgate and the Greek original by omitting "when he was taken up" (adsumptus est) and adding "to preach the gospel" (praedicare evangelium).
32. Jn 21:25.
33. Lk 1:5; 5:4.
34. Cf. Jn 21:1-11.
35. Jn 21:11.
36. Cf. Rev 4:6-7.
37. See above, Book 1, paragraph 6.
38. Cf. Jn 1:1, 14.
39. Jn 10:30.
40. Jn 2:4.
41. Jn 2:19.
42. Cf. Jn 3:1-21.
43. Cf. Jn 3:22-36.
44. Cf. Jn 4:1-42.
45. Cf. Jn 4:43-54.
46. Jn 4:48.
47. Cf. Jn 5:1-47.
48. Jn 5:18.
49. Jn 5:17.
50. Jn 5:19.
51. Cf. Jn 6:1-15; Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:32-44; Lk 9:10-17.
52. Cf. Jn 6:15.
53. Jn 18:36.
54. Cf. Jn 6:16-21.
55. Jn 6:26-27.
56. Cf. Jn 6:66.
57. Jn 6:63.
58. Jn 7:6-7.
59. Cf. Jer 17:16.
60. Jn 8:56.
61. Cf. Jn 7:34.
62. Cf. Jn 7:28.
63. Cf. Jn 8:1-11.
64. Cf. Lk 10:20.
65. A double entendre: Jesus was making "signs" on the "earth," by writing in the dirt to show what he meant; but he also had performed miracles while on earth, and these were considered signs of who he was and what he intended.
66. Cf. Jn 8:12.
67. Cf. Jn 8:25.
68. Mt 5:14.
69. Cf. Mt 5:15.
70. Jn 5:35.
71. Jn 1:16.
72. Cf. Jn 8:36.
73. Cf. Jn 9:1-41.
74. Cf. Jn 10:1-21.
75. Jn 10:24.
76. Jn 10:30.
77. Cf. Jn 11:1-44.
78. Jn 10:25-26.
79. Cf. Jn 12:1-8; Mt 26:6-13; Mk 14:3-9.
80. Cf. Jn 12:20-50.
81. Cf. Jn 13:1-20.
82. Cf. Jn 14:1-17:26.
83. Jn 14:9.
84. Cf. Jn 1:19-34.
85. Cf. Jn 6:1-21.
86. Cf. Jn 12:1-8.
87. Cf. Jn 18:36-37.
88. Jn 20:17.
89. Cf. Jn 20:22.
90. Cf. Jn 21:15-23.
91. Cf. 1 Cor 13:12.
92. Cf. Col 3:4.
93. Cf. 2 Cor 5:6-7.
94. Cf. Jn 16:13.
95. Cf. Rom 8:10-11.
96. Cf. Wisd of Sol 9:15.
97. Cf. Ecclesiasticus 24:3.
98. Cf. 1 Jn 2:1-2.
99. Cf. Jn 1:1.
100. Cf. 1 Cor 13:12.
101. Augustine frequently discusses the relation between the active and contemplative lives, and the superiority of the latter: see above, Book 1, paragraph 8. See also Sermon 104.4; Sermon 169.17; Tract. in Ioan. 124.5; contra Faustum 22.52. See also the discussion of D. C. Butler, Western Mysticism: The Teaching of Augustine, Gregory and Bernard on Contemplation and the Contemplative Life (2nd ed. New York: Harper & Row, 1966).
102. Cf. Jn 21:22-23; 1 Cor 13:9-10.
103. Cf. 1 Cor 12:8.
104. Cf. Rom 8:5.
105. Cf. 2 Cor 12:2-4.
106. Cf. 2 Cor 5:6.
107. Cf. Rev 21:27.
108. Jn 14:21.
109. Ecclesiasticus 3:18.
110. Cf. Jn 13:5-11.