More of the excellence of the priesthood of Christ and of the New Testament.
Out of the same Psalme 109 he vrgeth this also, Sit thou on my right hand, shevving that the Leuitical tabernacle on earth, vvas but a shadovv of his true Tabernacle in heauen: vvithout vvhich he should not be a Priest at all: 6 Vvhereas he is of a better Priesthod the• they, as also he proueth by the excellencie of the nevv Testament aboue the old.
1Now of the things which we have spoken, this is the sum: We have such an high priest who is set on the right hand of the throne of majesty in the heavens,La somma delle cose dette (si è): Abbiamo tal pontefice, che siede alla destra del trono della grandezza ne' cieli,BVT the summe concerning those things vvhich be said, is: Vve haue such an high priest, vvho is sette on the right hand of the seate of maiestie in the heauens,Capitulum autem super ea quæ dicuntur: Talem habemus pontificem, qui consedit in dextera sedis magnitudinis in cælis, 2A minister of the holies and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord hath pitched, and not man.Ministro delle cose sante, e del vero tabernacolo eretto da Dio, e non dall'uomo.a minister of the holies, and of the true tabernacle, vvhich our Lord pight & not man.sanctorum minister, et tabernaculi veri, quod fixit Dominus, et non homo. 3For every high priest is appointed to offer gifts and sacrifices: wherefore it is necessary that he also should have some thing to offer.Imperocché ogni pontefice è destinato ad offerire doni, e vittime: onde fa di mestieri, che questi ancora abbia qualche cosa da offerire:For euery high priest is appointed to offer giftes and hostes, vvherfore it is necessarie that he also haue some thing that he may offer:Omnis enim pontifex ad offerendum munera, et hostias constituitur: unde necesse est et hunc habere aliquid, quod offerat. 4If then he were on earth, he would not be a priest: seeing that there would be others to offer gifts according to the law.Se adunque egli fosse sopra la terra, neppur sarebbe sacerdote: rimanendovi quegli, i quali offerissero doni secondo la legge,if then he vvere vpon the earth, neither vvere he a priest: vvhereas there vvere that did offer giftes according to the Lavv,Si ergo esset super terram, nec esset sacerdos: cum essent qui offerent secundum legem munera, 5Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things. As it was answered to Moses, when he was to finish the tabernacle: See (saith he) that thou make all things according to the pattern which was shewn thee on the mount.I quali al modello servono, ed all'ombra delle cose celesti; come fu detto (da Dio) a Mosè, quando stava per compire il tabernacolo: bada (disse) fa' il tutto giusta il modello, che ti è stato fatto vedere sul monte.that serue the exampler & shadow of heauenly things. As it vvas ansvvered Moyses, vvhen he finished the tabernacle, See (quod he) that thou make al things according to the exampler vvhich vvas shevved thee in the mount.qui exemplari, et umbræ deserviunt cælestium. Sicut responsum est Moysi, cum consummaret tabernaculum: Vide (inquit) omnia facito secundum exemplar, quod tibi ostensum est in monte.
6But now he hath obtained a better ministry, by how much also he is a mediator of a better testament which is established on better promises.Ma (questi) miglior ministero ha avuto in sorte, quanto di miglior alleanza è mediatore, la quale su migliori promesse fu stabilita.But novv he hath obtained a better ministerie, by so much as he is mediatour of a better testament, vvhich is established in better promises.Nunc autem melius sortitus est ministerium, quanto et melioris testamenti mediator est, quod in melioribus repromissionibus sancitum est. 7For if that former had been faultless, there should not indeed a place have been sought for a second.Imperocché se quella prima non fosse stata manchevole, non si cercherebbe luogo ad una seconda.For if that former had been void of fault, there should not certes a place of a secōd been sought.Nam si illud prius culpa vacasset, non utique secundi locus inquireretur. 8For, finding fault with them, he saith: Behold the days shall come, saith the Lord: and I will perfect, unto the house of Israel and unto the house of Juda, a new testament:Imperocché lagnandosi di loro, dice: ecco verranno i giorni, dice il Signore, quando io contrarrò colla casa d'Israele, e colla casa di Giuda una nuova alleanza,For blaming them, he saith: Behold the daies shal come, saith our Lord: and I vvil consummate vpon the house of Israel, and vpon the house of Iuda a nevv Testament:Vituperans enim eos dicit: Ecce dies venient, dicit Dominus: et consummabo super domum Israël, et super domum Juda, testamentum novum, 9Not according to the testament which I made to their fathers, on the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt: because they continued not in my testament: and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.Non secondo l'alleanza, che feci co' padri loro nel giorno, in cui gli presi per mano per cavargli dalla terra d'Egitto: ed eglino non perseverarono nella mia alleanza, ed io gli ho disprezzati, dice il Signore.not according to the testament vvhich I made to their fathers in the day that I tooke their hand to bring them out of the land of Aegypt: because they did not continue in my testament: and I neglected them, saith our Lord.non secundum testamentum quod feci patribus eorum in die qua apprehendi manum eorum ut educerem illos de terra Ægypti: quoniam ipsi non permanserunt in testamento meo: et ego neglexi eos, dicit Dominus. 10For this is the testament which I will make to the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord: I will give my laws into their mind: and in their heart will I write them. And I will be their God: and they shall be my people.Imperocché questa è l'alleanza, che stabilirò colla casa d'Israele dopo que' giorni, dice il Signore: porrò le mie leggi nella loro mente, e le scriverò sopra de' loro cuori: e sarò loro Dio, ed eglino saran mio popolo:For this is the testament vvhich I vvil dispose to the house of Israel after those daies, saith our Lord: Giuing my lavves into their minde, & in their hart vvil I superscribe them: and I vvil be their God, and they shal be my people:Quia hoc est testamentum quod disponam domui Israël post dies illos, dicit Dominus: dando leges meas in mentem eorum, et in corde eorum superscribam eas: et ero eis in Deum, et ipsi erunt mihi in populum:
11And they shall not teach every man his neighbour and every man his brother, saying: Know the Lord. For all shall know me, from the least to the greatest of them.Nè farà d'uopo, che insegni ciascuno di loro al suo prossimo, e ciascuno al loro al proprio fratello, dicendogli: riconosci il Signore: imperocché dal più piccolo di essi fino al più grande tutti mi conosceranno:and eueryone shall not teach his neighbour, and euery one his brother, saying, Knovv our Lord: because al shal knovv me from the lesser to the greater of them:et non docebit unusquisque proximum suum, et unusquisque fratrem suum, dicens: Cognosce Dominum: quoniam omnes scient me a minore usque ad majorem eorum: 12Because I will be merciful to their iniquities: and their sins I will remember no more.Perché io sarò propizio alle loro iniquità, e de' peccati loro non avrò più memoria.because I wil be merciful to their iniquities, & their sinnes I wil not now remember.quia propitius ero iniquitatibus eorum, et peccatorum eorum jam non memorabor. 13Now in saying a new, he hath made the former old. And that which decayeth and groweth old is near its end.Or col dire nuova, antiquò la prima. E quello, che è antiquato, ed invecchia, è vicino a finire.And in saying a nevv, the former he hath made old. And that vvhich grovveth auncient and vvaxeth old, is nigh to vtter decay.Dicendo autem novum: veteravit prius. Quod autem antiquatur, et senescit, prope interitum est.
8:1
Witham
Of the things spoken[Ver. 1. Capitulum super ea quae dicuntur, kephalaion epi tois legomenois. Beza and others reprehend here the ancient Latin interpreter. They have as much reason to blame the Greek original. St. Augustine observes that the Latin interpreter was more solicitous to follow exactly the sense than to write proper Latin.] the sum is. This word sum, many expound, as if St. Paul said: I will sum up, and give you an abridgment or recapitulation of what I have said. But St. Chrysostom and others, by the Greek would rather understand the chief, or greatest thing of all, when he adds, that Christ is our high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of majesty in the heavens. (Witham)
8:2
A minister of the holies. Literally, of the holy places, and of the true tabernacle: he adds true, to signify that though he speaks with an allusion to the sanctuary, and the priests of the former law, yet that Christ hath now entered into the true holy of holies; that is, into heaven, of which the Jewish sanctuary was only a type or figure.
Witham
Which the Lord hath pitched, and not man; that is all the parts of the Jewish sanctuary was the work of men's hands; but heaven, the habitation prepared for the saints, is the work of God. (Witham)
The Old Testament was a figure of the New; but the tabernacle of Moses, and the temple of Solomon, were in particular an image and figure of the Christian Church, ver. 5. The Church triumphant in heaven is the true sanctuary; the Church militant on earth is the true tabernacle; and Jesus Christ is the sovereign priest of both the one and the other, and exercises his priesthood both in heaven and upon earth.
8:3
Witham
For every high priest, etc. That is, as all priests are ordained to offer up to God some gifts and sacrifices; so Christ, a priest for ever, has now in heaven something to offer to his eternal Father; to wit, the infinite merits and satisfactions of his death and passion. This he doth in heaven, and also by the ministry of his priests on earth, who offer the same in his name. (Witham)
This is the daily sacrifice of Christians, foretold plainly by Malachias, Hebrews 1:10. 11. This is also clearly mentioned in St. Justin Martyr, Dial. cum Tryphone.; Tertullian, co. M.[contra Marcion?] lib. 3:chap. 21.; St. Irenaeus, lib. 4:chap. 32.; St. Cyprian, lib. I. adv. Jud.; Eusebius, lib. 1:Dem. Evan.; St. Chrysostom, in Psalm xcv.; St. Augustine, lib. xviii. de civ. Dei. Hebrews 35, etc. etc. For authorities see annotations on chapter 10. of this epistle. The apostate Courayer, who pretending to remain a Catholic, ended by becoming a Socinian or Unitarian, taught that persons were at liberty to deny the real presence, and admit with Catholics a commemorative or representative sacrifice, which applies to us the merits of Christ's death. But this system was condemned by the Gallican church, as contrary to the doctrine of the Council of Trent, which has defined the mass to be not merely a commemorative and representive sacrifice, but a true and real offering of a victim, really present, and actually offered to God by the priest. "By his last sentiments, (published by Dr. Bell) it appears, says the New Gen. Biogr. Dict. edited by Chalmers, an. 1814[A.D. 1814], vol. lxxx. art. Courayer, that although he professed to die a member of the Roman Catholic Church, he could not well be accounted a member of that, or of any other established Church. In rejecting the doctrine of the Trinity, he became nearly, if not quite, a Socinian, or modern Unitarian; he denied also the inspiration of the holy Scriptures, as to matters of fact; and as to baptism, seems to wish to confine it to adults. In 1811 a more full exposure of his sentiments was published by Dr. Bell, in a posthumous work of Courayer, on the Divinity of Jesus Christ, 8vo. a publication we have little hesitation in saying ought never to have appeared. It could not be wanting to illustrate the wavering, unsettled character of the author. The creed of innovators is never fixed; and when once they cast off the authority of the Church, they are carried about, like children, with every wind of doctrine."
8:4
Witham
If then he were on earth, he would not be a priest. He speaks of a priest according to the custom of the Jews, where none were priests but of the tribe of Levi, and Jesus Christ was of the tribe of Juda: and if the law of Moses was to continue, there would not be wanting priests to offer sacrifices according to their worship, though such priests were only employed about things that were types[Ver. 4. Exemplari et umbrae deserviunt, upodeigmati, kai skia latreuousi. It signifies, that they served God by those things that were types and figures of more perfect and heavenly things.] and shadows of heavenly things in the new law after Christ's coming, and of the sacrifice by which he offered himself on the cross. And this God doubtless revealed to Moses, when he said to him: take heed "thou make all things according to the pattern which was shewn thee on the mount." (Witham)
Challoner
Earth, etc. That is, if he were not of a higher condition than the Levitical order of earthly priests, and had not another kind of sacrifice to offer, he should be excluded by them from the priesthood, and its functions, which by the law were appropriated to their tribe. (Challoner)
8:5
Challoner
Who serve unto, etc. The priesthood of the law and its functions were a kind of an example, and shadow of what is done by Christ in his Church militant [on earth] and triumphant [in heaven], of which the tabernacle was a pattern. (Challoner)
8:6
Witham
But now Christ, the Messias, being come, hath ordained a more excellent ministry and priesthood, being the great Mediator betwixt God and man of a better and more excellent testament, accompanied with greater graces and blessings, and established with better and more ample promises, not of temporal blessings, as the former, but of eternal happiness. (Witham)
8:7
Witham
For if that first testament had been faultless: if it had not been imperfect, and all those sacrifices and ceremonies insufficient for the justification, salvation, and redemption of mankind, there would have been no need of a second. (Witham)
8:8
Witham
For finding fault with them. It is not said here, blaming the law, says St. Chrysostom, which in itself was good, just, and holy, (see Romans 7:12.) but blaming the breakers and transgressors of it; not but that men were saved in the time of the law, who by God's grace believed in their Redeemer that was to come, and lived well. And the mercies of God were so great, even towards sinners, that he made them a solemn promise, clearly expressed in the prophet Jeremias, (Chap. 31:31. etc.) The days shall come, saith the Lord, and I will make a new covenant,...not according to the covenant (or not such a one) as I made to their fathers, at the time when I took them as it were by the hand to lead them out of....Egypt, etc. with signs and prodigies: I then made choice of them to be my people, but they were always transgressing against this testament, this covenant, which I had made with them: and for their transgressions I neglected them, punished them from time to time, and, what was the greatest punishment of all, permitted such ungrateful and obstinate offenders to run on in their own sinful ways to their own ruin. (Witham)
8:10
Witham
For this is the testament which I will make with the house of Israel, and with all nations, as I promised to Abraham, I will give (literally, by giving) my laws into their mind, and I will write this new law, not as the former, in tables of stone, but in their hearts, and to them I will be a merciful God, and they shall be my elect people. (Witham)
The Jews were like slaves, and God ruled them as a master; Christians are his children, and God rules them as a father: and so great is the efficacy of this divine teacher, that by means of a short and easy catechism, children are now taught to know God more perfectly than the first sages of antiquity by their abstruse and erudite disquisitions. We moreover observe under the new law the grace and spirit of love, engrafted in the hearts of the faithful by the Holy Ghost working in the sacraments and sacrifice of the new law to that effect....This covenant was made at the last supper, and ratified the next day by the death of the Testator on the cross, when he exclaimed, "consummatum est," all is consummated. [John 19:30.]
8:11
Challoner
They shall not teach, etc. So great shall be the light and grace of the new testament, that it shall not be necessary to inculcate to the faithful the belief and knowledge of the true God, for they shall all know him. (Challoner)
Witham
All shall know me, etc. This seems to signify that by the truths which Christ preached, and which the apostles published to all nations, the faithful in the new law should have a greater knowledge of God, of the true manner of worshipping him, and of heavenly things, and also greater and more abundant graces than they had before Christ's coming. They shall also serve God with greater fidelity, by considering his mercy in sending them a Redeemer to free them from the slavery of sin and damnation, of which they stood guilty. (Witham)
8:13
Witham
In calling this testament a new one, he hath made the former old. This is to put the Hebrews in mind that the former law, as to its ceremonies and sacrifices, is now to be laid aside, and the new law or testament to be received and complied with. (Witham)
Bible de Vence
Thus the first alliance was to end according to the testimony of Scripture itself, and make place for the second, which is infinitely more perfect. To be fully satisfied of this, it is merely necessary to compare the one with the other. (Bible de Vence.)
8:2
The holies.... That is, the sanctuary.
8:4
If then he were on earth, etc.... That is, if he were not of a higher condition than the Levitical order of earthly priests, and had not another kind of sacrifice to offer, he should be excluded by them from the priesthood, and its functions, which by the law were appropriated to their tribe.
8:5
8:11
They shall not teach, etc.... So great shall be light and grace of the new testament, that it shall not be necessary to inculcate to the faithful the belief and knowledge of the true God, for they shall all know him.
8:13
A new.... Supply ‘covenant’.
8:2
Christ liuing and reigning in heauē, continueth his priestly functiō stil, and is minister not of Moyses Sancta & tabernacle, but of his ovvne body & bloud, vvhich be the true holies, and tabernacle, not formed by mā, but by Gods ovvne hand.
8:3
3. Necessarie that he also.] Christs priesthod & sacrifice is external, not spiritual only. Euen now being in heauen, because he is a Bishop and Priest, he must needes haue somewhat to offer, and vvherein to do sacrifice: and that not in spiritual sort onely, for that could not make him a Priest of any certaine order. And it is most false and vvicked, to hold vvith the Caluinistes, Beza in schol. Test. Gracolat. in c. 7 Heb. num. 8. that Melchisedecks Priesthod vvas vvholy spiritual. For then Christs death vvas not a corporal, external, visible, and truely named sacrifice: neither could Christ or Melchisedec be any otherwise a Priest, then euery faithful man is: vvhich to hold (as the Caluinists folowing their owne doctrine must needes do) is directly against the Scriptures, and no lesse against Christes one oblation of his body vpon the Crosse, then it is against the daily sacrifice of his body vpon the altar. Therfore he hath a certaine host in external and proper maner, to make perpetual oblation thereby in the Church: for, visible and external act of sacrificing in heauen he doth not exercise.
8:4
4. If vpon the earth.] How Christes body is made fit to be sacrificed and eaten perpetually. It is by his death, and resurrection to life againe, that his body is become apt and fitte in such diuine sort to be sacrificed perpetually. For if he had liued in mortal sort still, that vvay of mystical representation of breaking his body and separating the bloud from the same, could not haue been agreable, and so the Church and Christian people should haue lacked a priesthod and sacrifice, & Christ him self should not haue been a Priest of a peculiar order, but either must haue offered in the things that Aarons Priests did, or els haue been no Priest at all. For, to haue offered onely spiritually, as all faithful men do, that could not be ynough for his vocation, and our redemption, and state of the new Testament. How his flesh vvas made fit to be offered and eaten in the B. Sacrament, by his death, see Isychius li. 1 in leuit. cap. 2.
8:5
5. Heauenly things.] As the Church or state of the new Testament is commonly called Regnum coelorum & Dei, Kingdom of heauen, and heauēly things, spokē of the Church. in the Scriptures, so these heauenly things be probably taken by learned men, for the mysteries of the new Testament. And it seemeth that the paterne giuen to Moyses to frame his tabernacle by, vvas the Church, rather then the heauens them selues: al S. Paules discourse tending to shew the difference betwixt the new Testament and the old, and not to make comparison betwene the state of heauen and the old law. Though incidently, because the condition of the new Testament more neerely resembleth the same, then the old state doth, he sometime may speake somewhat therof also.
〈Greek〉.
Concordance Exo, 25, 9. 40.
8:7
The promises and effectes of the Law were temporal, but the promises and effectes of Christes Sacraments in the Church be eternal.
Concordance Hier. 31, 31.
8:10
10. Into their minde.] Grace, the effect of the new Testament. This also and the rest folowing is fulfilled in the Church, and is the proper effect of the new Testament, vvhich is the grace and spirit of loue, graffed in the hartes of the faithful by the holy Ghost, vvorking in the Sacraments and sacrifice of the new law to that effecte.
10. Their God.] The new Testamēt or couenant betwene God & man. This mutual couenant made betwixt God and the faithful, is that vvhich vvas dedicated and established, Luc. 〈◊〉. first in the chalice of his bloud, called therfore the nevv Testament in his bloud: and vvhich vvas straight after ratified by the death of the •• stator, vpon the Crosse.
8:11
11. Shal not teach.] So it vvas in the primitiue Church, in such specially as vvere the first founders of our new state in Christ. And that vvhich vvas verified in the Apostles and other principal men, Scriptures abused for phā tastical inspirations. the Apostle speaketh generally as though it vvere so in the vvhole. as S. Peter applieth the like out of Ioël, and our Sauiour so speaketh, Act. 2. vvhen he saith that such as beleeue in him, Io. 14. •. 12. shal vvorke miracles of diuers sortes. Christian men then must not abuse this place to make chalenge of new inspirations and so great knowledge that they neede no Scriptures or teaching in this life, as some Heretikes doe: vvith much like reason and shew of Scriptures as the Protestants haue to refuse external, sacrifice. And it is no lesse phantastical madnesse to deny external sacrifice, sacraments, or Priesthod, then it is to abolish teaching and preaching.
8:1
St Basil the Great † AD 379 De Spiritu Sancto 6
… when Paul testified in the spirit concerning Christ “that he is at the right hand of God;” when the Father says, “Sit thou on my right hand;” when the Holy Spirit bears witness that he has sat down on “the right hand of the majesty”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies on the Statues to the People of Antioch 12.4
… not permitting it to be all immoveable, nor commanding it to be all in a state of motion. The heaven, for instance, hath remained immoveable, according as the prophet says, “He placed the heaven as a vault, and stretched it out as a tent over the earth.” But, on the other hand, the sun with the rest of the stars, runs on his course through every day.
8:2
St Gregory of Nazianzus † AD 389 Select Orations of Saint Gregory Nazianzen 43.72
… Aaron was Moses’ brother, both naturally and spiritually, and offered sacrifices and prayers for the people, as the hierophant of the great and holy tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.
8:3
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Festal and Personal Letters of Athanasius 61
… For if this were so, the commemoration of Mary would be superfluous. For neither does Nature know of a Virgin bearing apart from a man. Whence by the good pleasure of the Father, being true God, and Word and Wisdom of the Father by nature, He became man in the body for our salvation, in order that having somewhat to offer
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 13
“For this He did,” he says. “This”; what? “For” (he says) “it is of necessity that this [Man] have somewhat also to offer” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 14
[2.] In the next place that thou mayest understand that he used the word “minister” of the manhood, observe how he again indicates it: “For” (
8:5
Origen † AD 254 Origen De Principiis 2.6.7
… of the word “shadow,” as that well-known one in the Gospel according to Luke, where Gabriel says to Mary, “The Spirit of the Lord shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee.” And the apostle says with reference to the law, that they who have circumcision in the flesh, “serve for the similitude and shadow of heavenly things.”
Origen † AD 254 Origen De Principiis 3.6.8
… In which land I believe there exist the true and living forms of that worship which Moses handed down under the shadow of the law; of which it is said, that “they serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things”
Origen † AD 254 Origen De Principiis iv.1.13
… “Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of holy days, or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath, which are a shadow of things to come.” Writing to the Hebrews also, and treating of those who belong to the circumcision, he says: “Those who serve to the example and shadow of heavenly things.”
Origen † AD 254 Origen De Principiis iv.1-2.13
… “Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a festival, or of a new moon, or of Sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come.” Moreover, in the Epistle to the Hebrews, discoursing of those who belong to the circumcision, he writes: “who serve for an ensample and shadow of heavenly things.”
Origen † AD 254 Origen De Principiis iv.section24
… of the building of the tabernacle by means of contributions from all the people, or of the wearing of the priestly robes, or of the vessels of the public service, because, as it is written, they truly contain within them the “shadow and form of heavenly things.” For Paul openly says of them, that “they serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things.”
Origen † AD 254 Origen's Commentary on the Gospel of John 6.32
… Now that the principle of the sacrifice must be apprehended with reference to certain heavenly mysteries, appears from the words of the Apostle, who somewhere
8:6
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 14
… Therefore he says what especially cheered them: “Which was established upon better promises.” Having raised them up by speaking of the place, and the priest, and the sacrifice, he then sets forth also the wide difference of the covenant, having also said before that it was “weak and unprofitable.” (See Heb. vii. 18 .)
8:7
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 3
… How? By saying in effect, Both these and those are of God, but not in a like manner. And this he shows us afterwards: but for the present he treats it somewhat superficially, but afterwards more clearly, saying “For if that first covenant had been faultless” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 14
… In that this the one was cast out, and the other introduced in its place: for it is therefore of force because it is better. For as he says, “If perfection were by” it, “what further need was there, that another priest should rise, after the order of Melchisedec?” ( Heb. vii. 11 ); so also here he used the same syllogism, saying (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 15
… “In which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience.” Thou seest now what is [the meaning of] “The Law made nothing perfect,” ( Heb. vii. 19 ,) and “If that first [covenant] had been faultless.” (
8:8
Tertullian † AD 220 An Answer to the Jews 3
… be circumcised to God, and circumcise the foreskin of your heart:” and in another place he says, “Behold, days shall come, saith the Lord, and I will draw up, for the house of Judah and for the house of Jacob, a new testament; not such as I once gave their fathers in the day wherein I led them out from the land of Egypt.”
St Gregory of Nazianzus † AD 389 Select Orations of Saint Gregory Nazianzen 2.24
24. This is why the new was substituted for the old,
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 14
… vii. 11 ); so also here he used the same syllogism, saying ( ver. 7 ) “For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second”; that is, if it made men “faultless.” For it is because he is speaking of this that he did not say, “But finding fault with” it, but (
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 17.3
… because they continued not in my testament, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. For this is the testament that I will make for the house of Israel: after those days, saith the Lord, I will give my laws in their mind, and will write them upon their hearts, and I will see to them; and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people;”
8:10
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 13
… This is for those who say, What need was there of a new Covenant? For he could indeed have alleged a testimony from prophecy also. “This is the covenant which I made with your fathers” [&c.]. (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 14
… I will put My laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts, and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to Me a people.” Thus He says this concerning the New [covenant] because His words are “not according to the covenant which I covenanted.”
8:11
Tertullian † AD 220 On the Apparel of Women 1.1
If there dwelt upon earth a faith as great as is the reward of faith which is expected in the heavens, no one of you at all, best beloved sisters, from the time that she had first “known the Lord,”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 26
… And wherever a man may go, he might easily lay hold of his own salvation, if he were minded, that is, to be heedful, and not to look on this as a by-work. For were the doings shut up into Palestine, or in a little corner of the world? Hast thou not heard the prophet say, “All shall know Me from the least even to the greatest?” ( Jer. xxxi. 34 ;
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 14
… “From the least even to the greatest of them” (he says) “they shall know Me, and they shall not say, Know the Lord.” When hath this been fulfilled save now? For our [religion] is manifest: but theirs [i.e. the Jews’] was not manifest, but had been shut up in a corner.
8:13
Archelaus † fl. AD 278 The Acts of the Disputation with the Heresiarch Manes 13
… It is a thing not without peril, therefore, for any one of you to teach the New Testament along with the law and the prophets, as if they were of one and the same origin; for the knowledge of our Saviour renews the one from day to day, while the other grows old and infirm, and passes almost into utter destruction.
St Gregory of Nyssa † AD 395 Against Eunomius 2.8
The mighty Paul, knowing that the Only-begotten God, Who has the pre-eminence in all things , is the author and cause of all good, bears witness to Him that not only was the creation of all existent things wrought by Him, but that when the original creation of man had decayed and vanished away
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 10
… But we go back to our former vomit, thus after the youth of grace building up the old age of sins. For either the love of money, or the slavery to desires not convenient, or any other sin whatsoever, useth to make the worker thereof old. “Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on First Corinthians 15
[10.] But why does he call it “old?” Either because our former life was of this sort, or because that which is old is “ready to vanish away,” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 3
… And this he shows us afterwards: but for the present he treats it somewhat superficially, but afterwards more clearly, saying “For if that first covenant had been faultless” ( c. viii. 7 ), and many other such things: “for that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 19
… vii. 16 .) And “Thou art a Priest for ever.” ( c. v. 6 .) Behold the continuance of the Priest. And concerning the Covenant, That (he says) is old (for “that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away”—
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 34
Let our sails then be in good order, not grown old (for everything “that is decayed and waxen old is nigh to vanishing away” ) (
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 39.9
… whilst, I say, we fix our eyes on these things, let us see here “the old man,” the “day that is waxing old;” the Song that is out of date; the Old Testament;
Pope St Gregory I the Great † AD 604 The Book of Pastoral Rule 3.6
… i. 14 ), when he was admonishing some of the Hebrews that were wise, but some also that were somewhat slow, speaking to them of the fulfilment of the Old Testament, overcame the wisdom of the former by argument, saying, That which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away (
8:1
That is to say, the head, sum and compendium of those things which I have said and say concerning the excellence of the priesthood of Christ, is that which follows. Thus the Syriac; or, as Chrysostom says, "a chapter" or head, that is, the principal and greatest thing, to which as to a mark the other things which I have said concerning Christ the priest are referred, is that which I shall now explain. But the former sense is clearer, both because in Greek it is not kephale, that is head, but diminutively kephalaion, that is a chapter, namely because it is brief and as it were a compendium of what has been said; and because Paul in truth in this chapter makes an anacephalaeosis, and those things which the whole epistle disputes concerning the excellence of the new priest Christ and the weakness of the old priests, and concerning their abrogation, in this chapter he comprehends summarily and confirms forcefully. Note the Hebraism, "upon them," that is "of them." For thus the Hebrews sometimes explain the government of the genitive through ב bet, that is in, or through על al, that is upon. Such a high priest we have, who sitteth on the right hand of the throne of majesty in the heavens. — This is the chapter, the sum and compendium of what has been said, namely that Christ far excels not only the Aaronic priests, but also the angels, and is such and so great that he sitteth above all at the right hand of God. Note: "The throne of majesty," that is the throne of majesty, in which namely sitteth the majesty of God the Father, so that God the Father is called "majesty" or "majesty"; just as we are accustomed to call kings "Royal Majesty," and we call princes "Highness." Or secondly, "the throne of majesty," or of majesty, is the greatest throne and most august, of supreme majesty and glory. Both senses are Theophylact's, and both are from the Hebrew phrase. Furthermore Christ sitteth at the right hand of the Father not only as God, but also as man: for as man he is priest. Hear St. Cyril in the Council of Ephesus, in his letter to Anastasius, etc.: "That the incarnate Word sitteth with God, and is equal in glory with God and the Father, even in the flesh, as being one Son, even when he became man, the most wise Paul manifests writing: Such a high priest we have, who sitteth on the right hand of the throne of majesty in the heavens." For in Christ the same is this man and this God, on account of the same hypostasis. Whence Cyril adds: "Therefore also the incarnate Son the choir of holy Prophets beheld in the throne of divinity." In the heavens. — In Greek en hypselois, that is, in the heavens.
8:2
Minister of the Saints. — Because Christ makes saints and is the author of true holiness, says Chrysostom and others, and because passing among the saints in heaven he will minister to them. But the word "saints" here is not of the masculine gender, but of the neuter; nor does it signify men, but the sanctuary. "Of the saints," therefore, that is, of the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies, the public minister of sacred things (for this is what leitourgos means), namely the priest and pontiff, is Christ. This is evident from what follows; for explaining "of the saints," he adds, "and (that is) of the tabernacle (sanctuary) which the Lord fixed, and not man," as if to say, Christ is the pontiff not of the old sanctuary made by man, namely by Moses, which consisted of the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies; but of the new, namely of the Church foreshadowed by the old Holy Place and Holy of Holies, which was built not by Moses, but by God; for the Holy Place signified the Church of Christ walking on earth and tending toward the Holy of Holies, that is, toward heaven, to the Church triumphant, as Paul says: Christ is the priest both of the Church militant and triumphant, because in the militant Church through priests he daily offers the sacrifice of the Eucharist, which he himself first offered in it and instituted while he lived; but in the triumphant Church he is pontiff, because he himself first opened the way to heaven, when he entered into the Holy Places through his own blood, having found eternal redemption, as the Apostle says, chapter IX, and there he intercedes for us. Which fixed. — Therefore heaven neither moves, nor is round, but fixed, and fixed in its quadrature, says St. Chrysostom. The former is true, namely that the empyrean heaven, in which the Blessed are, does not move, but is fixed and immobile. The latter, namely that it is square, not spherical, at least as to its convex surface, is also taught by Louis Molina, in his treatise On the Work of Six Days, and the Conimbricenses, book II On the Heavens, chapter V, Question I, article 2. St. John also hints at this in the Apocalypse XXI, where speaking of heaven: "The city," he says, "is set in a square"; which can be taken literally, as it sounds. But it is better that this square, as also the stones, streets, walls and other ornaments of that heavenly city, which St. John describes in that chapter, you understand not literally, but symbolically: namely partly for ornament, partly for firmness, partly and especially for amplitude and convenience, by which it is turned toward all quarters of the world, it is called and presented as square: for cities that are square are most firm, most ornate and most convenient for those entering and leaving, inasmuch as by the four sides of their square they face the four quarters of the world, so that through the gates of each side men can directly enter and leave it from any quarter. And this is what John wishes to signify by this squareness of heaven, namely that it faces the four quarters of the world from four parts, and in each of these has three, that is, many and abundant gates, by which the Saints and elect enter heaven from all quarters of the world. For it respects and explains that which he had said in verse 13, that this city has three gates on the East, three on the North, as many on the South and on the West. Wherefore there is nothing that compels us to say that the empyrean heaven is deformed unlike other heavens, and is square: and so what Aristotle and the Philosophers teach, book II On the Heavens, chapter IV, that heaven is spherical, because the spherical figure is most perfect and most capacious, can also be attributed to the empyrean heaven.
8:3
"Sacrifices" are bloody victims; "gifts," unbloody, as I said chapter V, verse 1. The Apostle proves that which he said in verse 2, namely that Christ, although he sits at the right hand of God in heaven, is nevertheless there "of the saints," that is of the sanctuary, a minister and priest, who namely by sacrificing and offering sacred victims and gifts to God, ministers to God; he proves it thus: Christ, although he sits in heaven, is nevertheless a pontiff; but every pontiff offers gifts and sacrifices: therefore Christ also in heaven offers his sacrifices and gifts, namely his sacrifice on the cross, which he once offered on Mount Calvary, now also the same through continual commemoration he offers to the Father in heaven, chapter IX, verse 12. Secondly and properly, Christ in heaven offers the sacrifices of the Mass, which are celebrated throughout the whole world daily; for in these the first and primary priest who consecrates, offers and performs the transubstantiation, is Christ.
8:4
That is to say, If such were the priesthood of Christ as you, O Jews, require, namely that your Messiah should dwell always among you in the temple of Solomon, and there should sacrifice and do those things which the Levitical and Aaronic priests did: "nor would he be a priest," in Greek oud' an en hiereus, that is, neither would Christ be a priest and pontiff: both because for this earthly priesthood, and for procuring and obtaining its earthly goods, the legal and Levitical priests would suffice, nor would there be need of another priest according to the order of Melchisedech, namely Christ; and because Christ, if he were only an earthly priest, would not have offered a victim to Christ, that is to the Redeemer and Saviour, worthy, which namely would suffice for our salvation. For no victim was worthy and sufficient to open heaven, and to bring us heavenly goods and salvation, except Christ himself immolated on the cross, slain and departed from earthly life. Thus Oecumenius. From these things the Apostle gathers that Christ is not only on earth, but also in heaven a pontiff and minister of the Saints, as was shown before. From this place misunderstood, recently a certain Faustus Socinus of Siena fabricated an impious dogma, and scattered it in Poland and Holland, namely that Christ was not a priest on earth, but only in heaven, and therefore on the cross offered no sacrifice or ransom of our redemption; and consequently that Christ was not a Redeemer and Saviour, but only a Teacher of men, who by his holy life merited that after death he should become a priest and pontiff in heaven. Whence before the cross and resurrection he was indeed a Prophet, but only a man, who therefore should not be called otherwise than Jesus of Nazareth; but after the resurrection he became Christ, and therefore should now be called so. Which blasphemous dogma not only renews and surpasses the old Arianism, Nestorianism and Pelagianism, but also overturns Christ and all Christianity. But the foundation of it itself is sought from this place, and from chapter IX, verses 11 and 24, where the Apostle says that "Christ standing a priest of future goods entered into heaven, that he may appear in the sight of God for us," is nothing: for by these and similar places the Apostle teaches only that Christ is not only on earth, as Aaron was, but also in heaven, our pontiff, and therefore an eternal pontiff, as David had promised, Psalm CIX, in that sense in which I explained chapter VII, verses 3 and 21. For that the Apostle wills and teaches that Christ on earth, and on the cross was a pontiff, and that he properly offered his expiatory sacrifice for the sins of the whole world on earth, not in heaven, where there is no place for sacrifice, but for reward, is evident both from other things, and from the fact that in chapter IX, verse 14, he says: "The blood of Christ, who by the Holy Ghost offered himself unspotted unto God, shall cleanse our conscience"; and therefore he adds that by the blood of Christ the new testament and covenant was sanctified, by which God remits sins to us through the merits of Christ and the sacrifice accomplished on the cross, confers grace and promises the heavenly kingdom. And verses 26 and 28: "Christ," he says, "was once offered (where, if not on the cross?) to exhaust the sins of many." Again, chapter X, verse 14: "By one," he says, "oblation (of the cross) hath he perfected (Christ) for ever them that are sanctified." And throughout Romans, Galatians, Corinthians and others the Apostle cries out, that Christ died for our sins, and that we cannot be justified by them through the works of the law, but only through faith and the merits of Christ: and therefore the whole of it is, that he teaches there is no other way or hope of justice and salvation, except through the blood and death of Christ, and Christ immolated on the cross, "who was made unto us justice, and sanctification, and redemption."
8:5
That is to say, the Levitical priests "serve" (in Greek latreuousin, that is, they serve with latria and great reverence) the tabernacle, that is, the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies; which is merely an example, in Greek hypodeigma, that is a showing forth beneath, an obscure picture, a representation, a type and shadow of heavenly things, which are accomplished in the Church both earthly and militant, and especially in the heavenly and triumphant Church by Christ. For first, the sacrifices and victims, which the Levitical priests offered daily on the altar of holocausts, signified the sacrifice of the Mass, which Christ offers daily through his priests in the Church. Whence beautifully and truly Chrysostom and Theophylactus note that the Levitical priesthood was merely a hypodeigma, that is an obscure and thin representation of our priesthood, and that ours is called here by the Apostle "heavenly," because it has a heavenly victim, namely the body of Christ, and therefore has angels present; and because it obtains heavenly goods, and opens heaven to us, and consequently because it requires a heavenly life from its ministers. "Here," they say, "in our mysteries there is nothing earthly, but all things are heavenly and spiritual; where are the hymns of angels, where are the keys of the kingdom of heaven, where is the remission of sins, and again the binding and loosing, where our conversation is in heaven, how are not the things that are with us heavenly?" Second, that the high priest, after immolating the victims with blood, entered once a year into the Holy of Holies, signified Christ, through the immolation of his blood and life, about to enter into heaven, so that there he might be our high priest with God, interceding for us and opening heaven to us, of which it will be said in chapter IX, where he calls these same heavenly things heaven itself, of which the Jewish and earthly Holy of Holies were examples. Note this passage for the veneration of holy images. For the Apostle here says that the Jews rendered latria, the highest worship of that age, to the tabernacle, as to a hypodeigma, that is an image and picture of heavenly, invisible and divine things: for this is what the word latreuousin signifies. The Jews, adoring the mercy seat of the ark, adored God represented by it, and dwelling in it as on his throne. For just as the Saints are honored in their image, so also is God. As it was answered (kechrematistai, that is, it was said by divine oracle) to Moses, when he was about to complete the tabernacle.—"Complete," that is, when he wished to complete, or was thinking of completing, for in Greek it is mellein epitelein, that is, when he was about to complete the tabernacle. See, he says, that thou make all things according to the pattern which was shewn thee in the mount.—He cites Exodus chapter XXV, last verse, whose literal sense here is: See, O Moses, that thou make the tabernacle, the candlestick, the ark and other things which pertain to the tabernacle, according to the pattern which I have described to thee by word of mouth during these forty days in which thou hast been with me in Sinai, and which I have proposed to thee to behold in some sensible manner. That this is the literal sense is evident from what precedes, especially chapter IX, where God promises this idea of the tabernacle to Moses. Second, allegorically, this idea of the tabernacle, as also the tabernacle itself, was an idea of Christ and the Church: and so the Apostle signifies in this place that the idea, or allegorical and anagogical pattern, was also shown to Moses, namely heavenly things, to wit the spiritual tabernacle, that is Christ's Church both militant and triumphant, which was signified by this material Mosaic tabernacle; so that according to this pattern of the Church, Moses was commanded to make his material tabernacle, in such manner and form, that it might correspond to the Church as to its type and pattern, and might aptly represent and depict it: so that Moses might see, at least in general and confusedly, that the tabernacle which he was about to construct, and its altars, vestments, victims and other vessels, were types, shadows and pictures, by which the Messias with the Church, and its heavenly goods, and especially the priesthood and sacrifice of Christ, were depicted. Thus teach Anselm here, and Bede, in chapter XXV of Exodus. See the tropological sense in Exodus XXV, last verse.
8:6
That is to say, Christ has obtained a priesthood better and more excellent than the Levitical and legal priests: more excellent, I say, by so much as the new testament, of which Christ is the mediator, excels the old, and promises greater goods to his people: for the old testament promises earthly, but the new promises heavenly goods, and bestows and grants them.
8:7
For "had been free from fault" the Greek is en amempton, that is, "would have been blameless": therefore he calls "fault" the law, not sin, as though that old law contained something evil, as the Manichaeans wished. For that law was holy, as the Apostle says, Rom. VII, verse 12; but by way of emphasis and amplification, he calls "fault" the weakness and defect of the law, because namely it could not justify and save men: and in this respect the law was as it were blameworthy and in need of correction. For the law of Christ tacitly reproves the old law, and convicts it of weakness, when it abolished and annulled it, as if to say: If the old law and testament could have taken away faults and sins, if there had been no defect in it to be supplied and corrected, there would not be sought a place for a second, that is, there would not have been introduced and substituted in its place a second, namely new, testament. Note the hypallage: "place of a second," that is, a second in place, or placed and positioned in place of the first. Others explain it thus: "had been free from fault," that is, if the law had not been an occasion of fault: for thus to the Romans cap. VII, verse 5 and 11, the Apostle says that the law works death. Thus cold is called sluggish by metonymy, because it makes men torpid and sluggish. But this sense seems to be beside the mind and purpose of the Apostle. For the Apostle does not press this occasion of sin here, but only the weakness and impotence of the law to justify. Yet this sense follows from the former; because the law commanded sins to be avoided, and yet did not give grace to avoid them, hence it was an occasion of greater sin: for without grace the law cannot be fulfilled and sins cannot be avoided. Others again refer "had been free from fault" not to the old testament, but to the men who lived under it, who by virtue of it could not be free from fault. But that Paul speaks here not of men, but of the testament, is clear from the very words themselves, and from the particle for. Therefore the first sense is the genuine one.
8:8
He proves that the old testament and law had not been free from fault, and therefore another was introduced by God, namely the new testament, from the fact that Jeremiah reproves the Jews, saying cap. XXXI: "Because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord." Note: The Apostle says circumspectly, "reproving them," namely the Jews; but not reproving it, namely the law or testament; for this would have been odious to the Jews, to whom the old law was held in wonderful veneration: yet tacitly when he reproves the Jews, he reproves their law, as it were weak and feeble, which namely could not make the Jews obedient to it and good; thus the faults of disciples are wont to be ascribed to their teachers: for the law of the Jews was a pedagogue. Whence immediately Jeremiah adds, and from him Paul, that God will introduce in place of the old a new testament, which will confer abundant grace on Christians, so that they willingly keep the law of Christ, and become good and holy, as if to say: Paul: Jeremiah reproves the Jews, who were under the old testament, because they sinned against the law, and because this their testament and law could not guard against, take away and remove these sins, therefore he promises a new testament and law of grace, which will take away and remove sins, and in place of rebellious Jews will introduce Christians obedient in all things to the law and will of God. Thus Chrysostom and Theophylactus. Behold, days shall come, saith the Lord: and I will perfect upon the house of Israel, and upon the house of Juda a new testament. — For "I will perfect" in Hebrew it is karati, that is, I will strike and make a testament, that is, a new covenant. See what is said of this phrase I Cor. XI, 25. Secondly, he calls "house of Israel" the ten tribes which under Jeroboam made a schism from the house of Juda, that is, from the two tribes of Juda and Benjamin, as if to say: Christ by his new covenant and testament will join together again the twelve tribes now divided and separated into one people, into one kingdom, into one Church of his. Note: Symbolically the Apostle, as also the Prophet, understands by house of Juda any Jews whatsoever, but by house of Israel the Gentiles; because just as the house of Juda alone retained the true temple and worship of God, so the house of Israel turned aside to golden calves, and then to the rites and idolatry of the Gentile Assyrians, IV. Reg. XVII, verse 22 and following. Therefore the Israelites became as it were Gentiles. The Prophet and Apostle therefore signify both Gentiles and Jews, and thus all the faithful, and all peoples who shall be partakers of this new testament and grace of Christ.
8:9
That is to say, This new testament shall not be such as was made with the fathers; but far more excellent than that which I made with Moses. Most excellently St. Augustine, sentence 384: "As the art," he says, "of medicine, when it itself remains and is in no way changed, nevertheless changes its precepts for the sick, because our health is changeable: so divine providence, although it is itself altogether unchangeable, yet comes to the aid of the changeable creature in various ways, and according to the diversity of diseases commands or forbids different things to different ones, so that from the vice whence death begins, and from death itself to their nature and essence, those things which fail, that is, which tend to nothingness, it may restore and strengthen." In the day wherein I took thee by the hand to lead thee out of the land of Egypt. — "In the day," that is, in the time: for not on the same day on which God led the Hebrews out of Egypt, but on the fiftieth day after their departure did He give them the law on Sinai. Note the word "took thee by the hand," that is to say, I God so loved the people of Israel, that as a father, not as a master, but as my son and child, I took him by the hand and led him out of Egypt, and on the fiftieth day thereafter I gave him the law, and made a covenant with him, so that he, mindful of so great a deliverance, might keep it exactly; which nevertheless he himself did not perform. Because they continued not in my covenant, and I disregarded them, saith the Lord. — For "disregarded" the Hebrew is בָּעַלְתִּי בָם baalti bam, that is, I ruled over them, or over them, I ruled, I say, not as a spouse or husband, as Vatablus and the moderns translate, but as an enemy, casting them off from me and my Church, disregarding, rejecting and destroying them. Whence the Septuagint, whom Paul follows here, openly translate, "emelesa auton," that is, I disregarded, despised, rejected them. So also R. Joseph Kimchi translates, I loathed, abominated them, that is to say, as Jeremiah: Because the Jews did not keep the conditions of my covenant, namely my laws, therefore I rejected them, and annulled the covenant, and determined to establish for myself a new people, and to make a new covenant with them. By this meaning both the old people, and the old law, and the old testament are cast off: the people, because it did not persevere in the pact: the law moreover, because it did not make its people obedient; the testament truly and the pact, because the people broke the conditions of the pact, and consequently the pact itself. And therefore in turn God broke and rescinded this pact of his.
8:10
The word "because" is not here causal, but expletive, or rather adversative, after the Hebrew manner, as if to say: This moreover is the testament and covenant, namely the new one, which I shall bring in and establish in place of the old. After those days. — That is, after I shall have neglected and rejected from myself and my Church the unbelieving Jews. Note: Just as God entered into the old pact and covenant with the Hebrews on Sinai, Exodus XIX and XXIV, by which He bound Himself to be the God and protector of the Hebrews, and to give them the land of Chanaan, under this condition, if the people would obey Him and keep His laws, and that covenant was confirmed, Exodus cap. XXIV, by the blood of victims, and by a common feast of those making the pact. For Moses and Aaron in the role of God's fecial with the people ate from the federal victim: for Moses was here as it were the fecial and mediator of God and the people. In like manner and mode God entered into the new covenant with Christians, whose fecial and pater patratus is Christ, by which covenant God throughout the Gospel binds Himself to give Christians His grace, remission of sins, friendship, adoption as sons, all help and protection for acting and living well, and finally the very inheritance of eternal life, under this condition, if they obey Him, if they receive and observe the faith of Christ, the law, which is brief and easy, namely of faith and sacraments: hence it is called new, because it brings new promises, precepts, Sacraments, new grace, new life, a new man. Note secondly: Christ confirmed this new covenant by His blood, making Himself a victim on the cross; secondly, by the feast of the Eucharist, which He communicates to all until the end of the world. Not therefore on the mountain alone, in that long discourse, which is in Matthew cap. V, VI, VII, as Theodoret wishes, but throughout His whole life, throughout the whole Gospel did Christ institute this covenant, where those making the pact are God and the Apostles, and other Christians, and Christ is the fecial. Note thirdly: Just as the old covenant on Mount Sinai at Pentecost, so the new one on Sion at Pentecost was promulgated; and just as in the old the law was given on tablets of stone, as it were the condition of the covenant, so in the new the law was given, but on the tablets of the heart: that written with a stylus, this written by the Spirit of the living God, because through Christ grace and charity have been poured forth in our hearts, that is, in our free will, through prevenient, accompanying and sanctifying grace. Therefore free will is not taken away here, as Calvin wishes, but is altogether presupposed in the word "free," and because, as I have said, this covenant, like any other whatsoever, requires a condition on our part, namely that we obey God calling and cooperate with His grace, pursue justice, and persevere in it, if we wish to attain the heavenly inheritance. Just as therefore Moses descended from Sinai to the people bearing the tablets of the law, so the Apostles descended from Sion bearing in mind the Holy Spirit, and its dogmas and gifts, and proposed and communicated them to all nations. Giving my laws into their mind, and in their heart will I write them. — For "giving" in Hebrew it is natatti, that is, I will give, and this is clearer: for these are the words of the new testament and covenant. The Septuagint, however, whom Paul follows here, translate didous, that is, giving, or by giving. Which comes to the same thing. I will give. — Note: The thing which God promised to us in His new covenant and testament is the Holy Spirit, or the law of grace and charity breathed into and inscribed in the mind. Whence St. Augustine in the book On the Spirit and the Letter, cap. XXI: "What," he says, "are the other laws written by God in hearts, except the very presence of the Holy Spirit?" On the contrary in the old covenant, the law written on tablets was not the thing promised, but the condition of the covenant. Where however note: God does not write the Holy Spirit in the heart and mind by Himself alone, as He alone wrote the old law on tablets of stone; but He requires the consent and cooperation of free will: and this is the condition of both the new and the old covenant. God therefore now inscribes His law and counsels, not in books, or tablets, or fringes, as formerly among the Jews, but in the very mind and intellect of Christians, when He impresses faith and prudence of actions upon them, and frequent illuminations and illustrations, by which He shows to the mind how beautiful is the law of Christ, how useful, divine, sweet; how shameful is sin, how easy penance, how delightful is a pious and Christian life. Secondly, He inscribes these things upon memory, when He imprints their memory upon man, and then renews and refreshes it. Thirdly, He inscribes these things upon the heart and will, when He infuses into it pious affections toward the law of God, complacencies, impulses, promptitude, and finally charity, so that one may say: "Lord, give what Thou commandest, and command what Thou wilt." Thus St. Augustine, in the book On the Spirit and the Letter, chapter XVII and following. And I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people. — This is a Hebraism, that is to say, I will be to them God, and they shall be to me a people, namely a chosen, singular and peculiar one: for although I am the God of all men, and all are my people, yet I will hold Christians who love me as my peculium, as my Church, as my people, so that with respect to them I may seem to neglect the rest, nor to hold them as my people. Note the emphasis in the word "God": "I will be to them a God," that is, I will be to them a most merciful father, provider, protector, giver of grace, glory, blessedness and all goods; conversely they shall be to me a people, because they will acknowledge me, believe in me, serve me, worship me and obey me, hope in me and love me as God, lord and most loving father. He alludes to that passage in Exodus XIX, 5: "You shall be to me a peculiar people among all nations, and a kingly priesthood, and a holy nation."
8:11
First, St. Augustine, in the book On the Spirit and the Letter, chapter XXIV, Anselm and Cajetan, think this is said of the Blessed, that is to say, When through the new testament we escape into heaven, and are blessed, then no one shall teach another any longer, because the new law, the clear and blessed vision of God, shall teach all sufficiently and more than sufficiently. But this is contrary to the mind both of Jeremiah and of Paul. For each of them speaks of the knowledge and grace which the new testament brings to the faithful in this life, whereas the old testament brought little light, wisdom and grace to the Jews. Secondly, St. Thomas and Ambrose think this is said of the Apostles who were taught by the Holy Spirit, and needed no other teacher. But this too is too narrow: for both the Prophet and the Apostle speak of any whatsoever of the children of the new testament, and promise them this light and this grace. Thirdly, St. Jerome in Jeremiah XXXI explains it thus, that is to say, In the time of the new Testament, the faithful shall not seek Jews or philosophers as teachers, as they did before, shall not seek Jewish traditions, nor philosophical reasonings, in order to arrive at the faith and knowledge of the true God. But neither does this explain the mind of the Prophet, who seems here to exclude not only Jews or Gentiles, but also Christian teachers. Fourthly and better, Theodoret, Theophylactus, Oecumenius and St. Augustine, in the book On the Grace of Christ, chapter XII, explain it thus, that is to say, In the new law, Christians shall not need great labor in learning things necessary for salvation; but they shall do it easily, so that even children (as we see happen) immediately learn and grasp these things, both because the precepts of the new law are few, namely the Decalogue, faith and the Sacraments; and because God gives them great illuminations, so that with God teaching inwardly they immediately perceive these things. But neither does this sense exhaust the mind and foundation of the Prophet, as shall presently appear. I say therefore that this is the genuine sense of this passage, that is to say, All who have been made Christians through catechesis and baptism (for He speaks of the faithful, not of the unfaithful), both in the primitive Church and thereafter, shall have knowledge, love, worship and fear of the one true God, and shall utterly despise their former idolatry: for God shall so illuminate their mind inwardly with His grace, and shall so kindle their heart and will, that of their own accord, having cast aside idols and all superstition, they shall acknowledge, worship and love the true God. Here note first: This knowledge of the Lord, of which Jeremiah speaks here, is not bare and speculative, but affectionate and practical, that is to say, "Know the Lord," and worship Him whom you know, fear Him and love Him in return. It is a metalepsis. Whence Jonathan the Chaldean thus translates, a man shall not teach his neighbor any longer, saying: Know to fear the Lord, because all shall learn to know the fear of me. The same Jonathan, in Hosea IV, for that which our translator renders, "there is no knowledge of God in the land," thus has it, there is no one who walks in the fear of the Lord in the land. Therefore Jeremiah and Paul do not speak of knowledge of all mysteries and articles of faith, but only of knowledge and worship of the true God: for this is "know the Lord." This is evident from the reason which he subjoins: "For I will be merciful to their iniquities, and I will remember their sins no more," that is to say, When Christians shall see themselves rescued by God through Christ from the most wretched state of sin and eternal damnation, they shall immediately acknowledge God as their liberator, shall give Him thanks, and shall be wholly rapt into His love and obedience, so that they shall strive to obey God's laws and will in all things. Hence note secondly: Jeremiah does not here exclude the ministry and teaching of the Apostles and other doctors and preachers of the Gospel; for these, as the Apostle says in Ephesians IV, 11, God placed in the Church to teach it, build it up, perfect it. But he presupposes them here. For he speaks to Christians who have been catechized and baptized by the Apostles and other teachers. He wishes therefore to teach only that in the new law the knowledge, worship, love and obedience of God will be so easy, once the preaching of the Gospel is heard, that men will pursue it of their own accord: whereas the Jews in the Old Testament could scarcely be compelled by threats and punishments to abandon idols and to know, worship, love and obey the true God; and this will come about because God will not inscribe this knowledge of himself, his worship and his law on tablets of stone, as he did for the Jews, but on the mind and heart of Christians: namely, by illuminating the mind with such great light and impelling the will with such efficacy and sweetness, that men are drawn to his knowledge and love. Yet this does not exclude that, in order to begin, increase and promote these things, and to add other things which pertain to the instruction and knowledge of particular mysteries of faith and the laws of Christ, one should teach, exhort and stir up another: for to this end, as I have said, God placed Apostles, doctors and Pastors in the Church. Therefore the Anabaptists and other Novationists wrongly attempt to prove from this that the private spirit of each man is the judge of controversies of faith and the interpreter of Holy Scripture, and is the rule both of what is to be believed and what is to be done. For that private and secret spirit is one which cannot be seen or known by others, indeed by him who has it, whether it be black or white: and each will say he has this spirit, as we experience these private spirits among themselves to be most contrary and conflicting, whence there will be the greatest confusion and dissension in the Church. For Jeremiah and the Apostle here speak not of this private spirit, but of the public and common spirit of all Christians; and they say it does not interpret Scriptures but teaches each one inwardly and stirs him up to the knowledge and love of the true God, and that this is necessary; so much so that, "unless this spirit be present to the heart of the hearer, the word of the teacher is idle," as St. Gregory says, homily 30 on the Gospel. Thus St. John, in his first epistle, chapter II, verse 27, says: "His unction teacheth you of all things," that is to say, It is not necessary that false apostles teach you the faith (for it is clear from verse 22 that they are being discussed), for you have already learned it and learn it through me and the Apostles, with the cooperation of the unction of the Holy Spirit, which you received then at other times, and especially in the sacrament of Confirmation. For it is necessary that what the Apostles teach outwardly, the Holy Spirit teach you inwardly. "For unless he teach you inwardly, all the noise of human voice is vain," as St. Augustine says on that passage. Thus from Isaiah, chapter LIV, St. John says in the Gospel, chapter VI, verse 45: "And they shall all be taught of God." In Hebrew limmude, in Greek didaktoi, that is, taught by God, who will be the chief teacher of Christians, so as to teach their mind inwardly, illuminate it, inflame it to the voice of Christ and his disciples uttered outwardly: whereas formerly through the Prophets, through priests, through Scripture and law in the Old Testament he taught the Jews more outwardly than inwardly, who for this reason remained untaught, rude, cold and sluggish in the love and worship of God. Note: The more anyone purifies his heart and joins himself to God through prayer, the more he is taught inwardly by God. Hence St. Antony, as St. Athanasius testifies, being frequent and almost continuous in prayer, had received this gift from God, that if he were sitting on a mountain ignorant of something and inquired about its knowledge with himself, it would be immediately revealed to him by God as he prayed. Similar to him in being taught by God were St. John the Evangelist, Simeon Stylites, St. Paul the first Hermit, St. Dominic, St. Francis and others.
8:13
For "made old" the Greek is pepalaioke, that is, made ancient, declared to be ancient and old, as if to say: When God through Jeremiah says, "I will consummate a new testament," he openly signifies that the former Mosaic testament, at that very time of Jeremiah, gradually becomes antiquated, grows old and falls away, and therefore will not last, but gradually becomes more and more aged and perishes, until shortly after it collapses entirely and is abolished by the new testament to be brought in by Christ. Paul says all this in order to draw the Hebrews from Moses to Christ, and to teach them that they ought not to wonder that God abrogated the old testament given by him (as being weak and insufficient for justice and salvation) through the new testament of the new Messiah Savior, since this was promised and foretold so many ages before by Jeremiah.
Machine translation from the Latin, not reviewed.
8:1
Supra probavit apostolus excellentiam sacerdotii Christi ad sacerdotium leviticum ex parte personae, hic probat idem ex parte ipsius sacerdotii, et circa hoc facit duo. Primo enim ostendit sacerdotium Christi esse excellentius sacerdotio veteris legis, et primo hoc in generali; secundo in speciali, ibi habuit quidem et prius, scilicet IX cap. Prima in duas. Primo enim ponit intentum; secundo manifestat propositum suum, ibi omnis enim pontifex. Circa primum duo facit quia primo ponit modum tradendi; secundo praemittit quae debent dicere, ibi talem habemus pontificem, et cetera. Dicit ergo capitulum, et cetera. Capitulum est brevis complexio continens multa, et dicitur a capite; quia, sicut in capite virtute et quasi summarie continentur omnia quae sunt in corpore, sic in capitulo illa quae dicenda sunt. Ergo dicemus in quodam capitulo, et quasi in quadam summa, super ea quae dicuntur. Ly super, potest dicere appositum, et tunc erit sensus: quae summarie dicenda sunt superapponentur praemissis. Vel potest designare excessum, et tunc est sensus: ea quae dicenda sunt in summa et capitulo sunt maiora. Deinde cum dicit talem habemus pontificem, etc., praemittit quae debet dicere. Et primo dignitatem huius sacerdotii; secundo officium eius, ibi sanctorum minister. Dignitas eius est, quia talem habemus pontificem, qui consedit ad dexteram sedis magnitudinis in excelsis. Sedes est iudiciaria potestas, quae aliquibus convenit tamquam ministris Dei, sicut omnibus regibus, quia adorabunt eum omnes reges terrae, ut dicitur in Ps. LXXI, 11, et omnibus praelatis, I Cor. IV, 1: sic nos existimet homo ut ministros Christi. Sedes ergo magnitudinis est excellentissima potestas iudicandi. Item pars dextera est potentior in animali, et significat bona spiritualia. Quia ergo Christus habet iudiciariam potestatem, dicitur sedere. Pater enim omne iudicium dedit filio, Io. V, 22. Quia vero post Deum habet hoc, excellentissime, sedet in dextera magnitudinis in excelsis, id est, in potioribus bonis. Supra I, 3: sedet ad dexteram maiestatis in excelsis. Hoc autem quod dicitur consedere, vel consedet, potest referri ad Christum, secundum quod est Deus; et sic consedet quia habet eamdem auctoritatem iudicandi, quam habet pater, sed distinctus est in persona. Et sic ly magnitudinis accipitur pro persona patris. Vel secundum quod homo, et hoc magis proprie ad intentionem apostoli, quia loquitur de pontificatu Christi, qui est pontifex inquantum homo. Et sic consedet, quia humanitas assumpta habet quamdam associationem ad deitatem, et consedet ad iudicandum. Ps. VIII, 1: elevata est magnificentia tua super caelos. Io. V, 27: potestatem dedit ei iudicium facere, quia filius hominis est. Et sic apparet dignitas sacerdotis.
8:2
Consequenter cum dicit sanctorum minister, ostendit dignitatem officii eius. Dicitur autem minister sanctorum, id est, sanctarum aedium, scilicet sanctuariorum. Ministri enim antiqui accipiebant ministerium, ut custodirent sacra, et servirent tabernaculo. Hoc autem excellentius habet Christus, qui est minister, non quidem inquantum Deus, quia sic est auctor, sed inquantum homo. Lc. XII, 37: transiens ministrabit illis. Humanitas enim Christi est sicut organum divinitatis. Est ergo minister sanctorum, quia ministrat sacramenta gratiae in praesenti, et gloriae in futuro. Item est minister tabernaculi veri, quod est, vel eius Ecclesia militans. Ps.: quam dilecta tabernacula tua, domine virtutum. Vel triumphans. Is. XXXIII, 20: tabernaculum, quod nequaquam transferri poterit. Ps. XIV, 1: domine, quis habitabit in tabernaculo tuo, et cetera. Homo autem Christus minister est, quia omnia bona gloriae per ipsum dispensantur. Dicit autem veri, propter duo. Primo propter differentiam ad vetus, quod erat figurale istius. I Cor. X, 11: omnia in figura illis contingebant. Istud autem est veritas istius. Est ergo verum, id est, veritatem continens respectu figurae. Secundo quia illud factum est per hominem: istud autem, scilicet vel gratiae, vel gloriae est a solo Deo. Ps. LXXXIII, 12: gratiam et gloriam dabit dominus. Rom. VI, 23: gratia Dei, vita aeterna. Et ideo dicit quod fixit Deus, et non homo. II Cor. V, 1: scimus quoniam si terrestris domus nostra huius habitationis dissolvatur, quia ex Deo habemus domum non manufactam aeternam in caelis.
8:3
Deinde cum dicit omnis enim pontifex, etc., explicat in speciali. Et circa hoc facit tria. Primo enim ostendit Christum esse ministrum aliquorum sanctorum; secundo quod non veteris legis, ibi si ergo esset; tertio quod aliquorum maiorum, ibi nunc autem melius. Facit autem primo talem rationem: omnis pontifex ad hoc constituitur, ut offerat munera et hostias, et secundum hoc dicitur minister sanctorum. Christus autem est pontifex, ut supra probatum est. Ergo necesse est ipsum habere aliqua, quae offerat. Supra V, 1: omnis pontifex ex hominibus assumptus, et cetera. Hostia est de animalibus, munera de quocumque alio. Lev. XXI, 6: incensum et panes Dei sui offerunt. Quia vero necesse fuit Christum habere quod offerret, ipse seipsum obtulit. Fuit autem talis oblatio munda, quia caro eius nullam maculam peccati habuit. Ex. XII, v. 5: erit agnus sine macula, masculus, anniculus. Item fuit congrua, quia congruum est, quod homo pro homine satisfaciat. Infra IX, v. 14: obtulit semetipsum immaculatum Deo. Item apta ad immolandum, quia caro eius mortalis erat. Rom. VIII, 3: mittens Deus filium suum in similitudinem carnis peccati. Item est idem ei cui offertur. Io. X, 30: ego et pater unum sumus. Item unit Deo illos pro quibus offertur. Io. XVII, 21: ut omnes unum sint, sicut tu, pater, in me, et ego in te, ut et ipsi in nobis unum sint. Deinde cum dicit si ergo esset, ostendit quod Christus non est minister legalium. Et circa hoc facit tria quia primo inducit quamdam consequentiam; secundo ostendit ipsam rationem, ibi cum essent; tertio probat eam per auctoritatem, ibi sicut responsum est Moysi. Consequentia vero talis est: ergo si esset super terram, hoc est antecedens, nec esset sacerdos, et hoc est consequens. Unde consequentia est una conditionalis. Et legitur multis modis. Primo sic, et est secundum Glossam, nec ponitur hic nominativus; et ideo sic intelligitur: si enim illud quod offertur esset super terram, etc.; quod dupliciter intelligitur. Uno modo, ut sit sensus: si illud quod offertur esset aliquod terrenum, Christus non esset sacerdos, quasi dicat: nulla necessitas esset sacerdotii eius, quia multi essent qui talia offerrent. Sed numquid caro Christi terrena non erat? Respondeo. Dicendum est quod materialiter est terrena. Iob IX, 24: terra data est in manus impii. Sed dicitur non esse terrena: primo ratione unionis, Io. III, 31: qui de caelo venit, super omnes est, id est, filius Dei qui illam sibi univit. Item ratione virtutis activae, scilicet spiritus sancti, qui eam formavit. Item ratione fructus; quia oblatio eius non ordinatur ad consequendum aliquid terrenum, sed caeleste. Io. VIII, 23: vos de mundo hoc estis, ego non sum de hoc mundo. Haec est prima expositio et melior. Secunda talis est etsi, id est, quamvis illud quod offertur, esset super terram, quia necessarium est aliquid offerri, non esset sacerdos, seu alius idoneus: quia nullus posset idoneus inveniri ad offerendum istud. Tres sunt aliae lecturae, in quibus subintelligitur offerens: et primo in generali, ut sensus sit: si esset aliquis sacerdos terrenus, qui posset offerre pro caelestibus, Christus non esset sacerdos. Alia est de Christo specialiter, sic: si Christus esset sacerdos terrenus, non competeret ei ius sacerdotii, cum essent qui secundum legem offerrent munera.
8:4
Aliter sic: si Christus adhuc esset super terram, ita scilicet quod nondum ascendisset, non esset sacerdos, quia non complevisset sacerdotium suum. Sed secundum primam expositionem continuatur littera sic et probat, quia multi essent, qui secundum legem offerrent talia munera, scilicet illi, qui deserviunt exemplari et umbrae caelestium. Sacramenta legalia fuerunt figura aliorum, quantum ad duo, scilicet quantum ad cognitionem, et quantum ad rerum expletionem. Quantum ad cognitionem, cum dicit exemplari, quia in veteri lege, quasi in quodam exemplari poterat legi id ad quod nostra cognitio debet ferri. Sed videtur, quod loquatur improprie. Exemplar enim prius est exemplato, quod proprie dicitur exemplum. Sed caelestia sunt priora, nec facta sunt ad similitudinem veteris legis, sed magis e converso. Respondeo. Dicendum est, quod prius dicitur dupliciter: uno modo simpliciter, et sic procedit obiectio. Vel quo ad nos, et sic verum est quod illa non sunt priora. Quantum ad secundum dicit umbrae, quia sicut umbra repraesentat corpus, nec tamen illud attingit: ita et illa repraesentabant novum testamentum. Infra X, 1: umbram habens lex futurorum, et cetera.
8:5
Consequenter probat per auctoritatem rationabilitatem consequentiae, cum dicit sicut responsum est Moysi, scilicet a domino, Ex. XXV, 40: vide, scilicet diligenter considerando, et facito omnia secundum exemplar, et cetera. Quia naturaliter inferiora tendunt in similitudine superiorum. Dominus enim per sensibilia voluit nos ad intelligibilia et spiritualia manuduci. Iob XXXVIII, 33: numquid nosti ordinem caeli, et pones rationem eius in terra, et cetera.
8:6
Supra apostolus probavit Christum esse pontificem, et per consequens ministrum sacramentorum, non tamen secundum veterem legem, hic ostendit ipsum esse ministrum maiorum et meliorum, quam illa fuerint. Et circa hoc facit tria. Primo enim praemittit intentum; secundo assignat causam eius; tertio probat. Secundum, ibi quanto et melioris. Tertium, ibi nam si illud. Dicit ergo: dico quod non habet aliquid terrenum offerre, sed nunc, id est tempore gratiae, sortitus est, id est sorte accepit, melius ministerium, id est dignius sacerdotium. Dicitur sacerdotium Christi ministerium, quia non competit nisi inquantum homo fuit minister. Rom. XV, 8: dico enim Christum Iesum ministrum fuisse, et cetera. Dicit autem sortitus est, id est, sorte accepit, quia illud quod habetur per sortem expectatur a domino. Ps. XXX, 15: in manibus tuis sortes meae. Et ideo omnia quae fiunt secundum distributionem divini arbitrii, dicuntur sorte dari, et talia sunt effectus gratiae. Eph. I, 11: sorte vocati sumus, id est, divina electione, quia quando contingit deficere iudicium humanum, solent se homines conferre ad electionem et dispositionem divinam, mittentes sortem, sicut patet Act. I, 26, de electione Matthiae. Unde Prov. XVI, 33: sortes mittuntur in sinum, sed a domino temperantur. Christus quidem istud ministerium sorte, id est, dispositione divina, consecutus est. Deinde cum dicit quanto et melioris, etc. assignat causam quare ministerium hoc maius est. Omnis enim sacerdos mediator est. Iste autem mediator est melioris foederis, scilicet hominis ad Deum. Mediatoris enim est extrema conciliare. Iste vero ad nos divina attulit, quia per ipsum facti sumus divinae consortes naturae, ut dicitur II Pet. I, 4. Ipse etiam nostra offert Deo. Et ideo dicit apostolus I Tim. II, 5: mediator Dei et hominum homo Christus Iesus. Ibi promittebantur temporalia. Is. I, 19: si volueritis et audieritis me, bona terrae comedetis. Hic autem caelestia, sicut supra dictum est. Sic ergo istud melius est quantum ad id, quod dominus hominibus promittit. Item in illo dicuntur quaedam, quae pertinent ad cultum Dei, et ista sunt caeremonialia: quaedam vero, quae ad rectitudinem vitae, et ista sunt praecepta moralia, quae manent: alia vero, non. In novo autem adduntur consilia illis praeceptis, quae dantur perfectis, qui sunt capaces spiritualium. Et sic manent praecepta eadem, sed promissa diversa. Item sacramenta sunt diversa; quia ibi erat figura tantum, hic autem figurae veritas expressa. Per omnia ergo testamentum illud est melius. Deinde cum dicit num si illud, etc., probat quod illud testamentum, cuius Christus mediator est, melius est. Et facit talem rationem: si primum testamentum non habuisset culpam, non quaereretur aliud ad corrigendum defectum ipsius; sed quaeritur, ergo, et cetera. Antecedens ponitur, et patet in littera. Sed contra Rom. VII, 7: lex ergo peccatum est? Absit. Ergo male dicit, quod non vacabat a culpa. Respondeo. Dicendum est quod aliquid potest convenire legi dupliciter: vel secundum se, et sic erat bona, vel ratione illorum quibus data est, et sic dicitur habere culpam propter duo. Primo quia non dabat virtutem ad purgandum commissa. Infra X, 4: impossibile est sanguine taurorum aut hircorum auferri peccata. Secundo, quia non dabat gratiam adiutricem ad vitandum peccata, sed ad cognoscendum tantum: et sic erat occasio peccati. Rom. VII, 7: concupiscentiam nesciebam, nisi lex diceret: non concupisces. Et sic dicitur non vacasse a culpa, quia homines in ipsa relinquebantur in culpa. Sed dicit non inquireretur locus. Sicut enim corpus numquam perfecte quiescit, sed semper movetur, quousque pertingat ad locum suum, sic quamdiu habetur aliquid imperfecte, non quiescit desiderium, sed semper tendit ultra, usque dum veniet ad perfectum. Inquirebatur ergo locus istius ab homine qui desiderabat; sed magis a Deo, qui propter nostrae salutis desiderium dicitur inquirere. Deinde cum dicit vituperans enim, etc., probat veritatem consequentis, scilicet quod inquiritur locus testamenti, et hoc per auctoritatem Ier. XXXI, 31: ecce venient dies, et cetera. Et circa hoc facit duo. Primo enim praemittit auctoritatem; secundo arguit ex ipsa, ibi dicendo autem novum. Prima in duas. Primo enim praemittit prophetiam de novi testamenti datione; secundo describit ipsum, ibi non secundum testamentum, et cetera. Iterum prima in tres. Primo enim ostendit temporis dationis opportunitatem; secundo novi testamenti perfectionem, ibi consummabo testamentum novum; tertio quibus datum fuit, ibi super domum Iuda.
8:8
Dicit ergo vituperans enim dominus, non quidem legem, sed eos, qui scilicet erant sub lege, dicit: ecce dies veniunt, et cetera. Haec est auctoritas, quae est Ier. XXXI, v. 31; et non habetur omnino sub istis verbis, sed mutantur pauca. Ibi enim dicitur sic: ecce dies veniunt, dicit dominus, et feriam domui Israel, et domui Iuda foedus novum, non secundum pactum, quod pepigi cum patribus vestris in die qua extendi manum meam ut educerem eos de terra Aegypti, pactum quod irritum fecerunt, et ego dominatus sum eorum. Sic ergo patet quod pacta mutantur. Dicit ergo quantum ad temporis opportunitatem ecce dies veniunt, id est tempus gratiae, quod comparatur diei, quod illuminatum est a sole iustitiae. Rom. XIII, 12: nox praecessit, dies autem appropinquavit. Quantum ad perfectionem novi testamenti dicit consummabo novum testamentum. Et dicit consummabo, quod sonat ad perfectionem. Apoc. XXI, 5: ecce nova facio omnia. Istud autem verbum consummabo, non habetur ibi, sed utitur eo apostolus ad designandum perfectionem novi testamenti. Is. c. X, 23: consummationem et abbreviationem faciet dominus super terram. Fuit enim novum testamentum perfectum quantum ad eruditionem vitae, quae non extenditur tantum ad generalem iustitiae eruditionem, sed ad perfectam. Matth. V, 20: nisi abundaverit iustitia vestra, et cetera. Item in veteri testamento erant tantum figuralia: in novo vero, veritas figurarum: et ita novum consummat et perficit vetus. Quantum ad tertium dicit super domum Israel, et Iuda. Sed numquid datur tantum Iudaeis? Non. Rom. IX, 6: non omnes, qui sunt ex Israel, hi sunt Israelitae, et sequitur: non qui filii carnis, hi sunt filii Dei, sed qui filii sunt promissionis, aestimantur in semine. Illi ergo qui sortiti sunt gratiam Dei, sunt Israel per fidem, et Iuda per confessionem. Rom. X, 10: corde creditur ad iustitiam, et cetera. Dicitur autem super domum, etc., triplici ratione. Una, quia Christus in propria persona praedicavit Iudaeis, non gentibus. Matth. XV, 24: non sum missus nisi ad oves, quae perierunt domus Israel. Secunda, quia gentiles facti sunt participes novi testamenti, sicut oleaster insertus in bonam olivam participat pinguedinem eius, Rom. XI, 24. Alia, quia tempore Roboam et Ieroboam divisus fuit regnum Iuda a regno decem tribuum, quae quidem remanserunt in idololatria, sed regnum Iuda magis adhaesit Deo, licet non ex toto. Et ideo utrosque tetigit. Deinde cum dicit non secundum testamentum, describit novum testamentum et primo per differentiam ad vetus; secundo per proprias conditiones, ibi quia hoc est testamentum. Iterum prima in duas. Primo ostendit distinctionem novi et veteris testamenti; secundo infirmitatem veteris, ibi in die in qua. Posset enim aliquis dicere: numquid istud novum est isti simile? Ideo quasi respondens dicit: non. Quia non secundum id quod feci cum patribus eorum, in quo ostendit quod non est servandum vetus cum novo. Gal. V, 1: state et nolite iterum iugo servitutis contineri. Matth. IX, 17: neque mittunt vinum novum in utres veteres, et cetera. Et Rom. VII, 6: serviamus in novitate spiritus, et non in vetustate litterae. Quia si aliquid inveniatur in veteri, quod gentibus indicatur ad servandum, referendum est ad intellectum spiritualem, sicut dicitur Is. XIX, 21: colent eum in hostiis et muneribus: quod totum est spiritualiter intelligendum. Deinde cum dicit in die qua apprehendi, etc., ostendit defectum veteris testamenti et primo ex eius traditione; secundo ex eventu, ibi quoniam ipsi. Vetus enim testamentum traditum est servis et infirmis. Servis quidem, quia quandoque exierunt de servitute Aegypti. Et quantum ad hoc dicit ut educerem illos, et cetera. Gal. IV, 24: unum quidem in servitutem generans, et cetera. Item quia erat lex timoris servilis. Rom. VIII, 15: non accepistis spiritum servitutis iterum in timore, et cetera. Augustinus: brevis differentia veteris et novi testamenti, timor et amor. Item infirmis, quia per se non poterant se iuvare. Et quantum ad hoc dicit apprehendi manum eorum, quod est infirmorum. Ps. LXXII, 23: tenuisti manum dexteram meam. Rom. VIII, 3: quod impossibile erat legi in quo infirmabatur. Dicit autem patribus eorum, scilicet Abraham, Isaac et Iacob, cum quibus iniit foedus speciale. Ps. CIV, 8 s.: memor fuit in saeculum testamenti sui verbi quod mandavit in mille generationes, quod disposuit ad Abraham, et cetera. Sed istis in exitu de Aegypto promisit carnalia.
8:9
Deinde cum dicit quoniam ipsi non, etc., ostendit defectum veteris testamenti ex eventu; et primo quantum ad culpam, et ideo dicit quoniam ipsi non permanserunt in testamento meo, quia scilicet non erat scriptum in cordibus ipsorum. Unde statim post legem datam fecerunt vitulum conflatilem. Ex. XXXII, 8 et Ps. CV, 20: fecerunt vitulum in Oreb, et adoraverunt sculptile. Et quantum ad poenam. Ideo dicit et ego neglexi eos. Illud enim aliquis dicitur negligere, quod permittit perire. Et sic neglexit eos, quia permisit eos perire ab exterminatore, ut dicitur I Cor. X, 10; et Ps. CXVIII, v. 118: sprevisti omnes discedentes a iudiciis tuis. Alia littera: et ego dominatus sum eorum, id est, puniendo ostendi me esse dominum ipsorum. Deinde cum dicit quia hoc est testamentum, etc., describit conditiones novi testamenti. Et circa hoc facit duo. Primo ponit modum editionis eius; secundo effectum ipsius, ibi et ero eis in Deum. Dicit ergo quia hoc est, id est tale est, testamentum quod disponam domui Israel, etc.; dispositio importat congruitatem ordinis. Et ideo dicit post dies illos, id est, post legem datam. Debuit enim post legem veterem dari nova lex, sicut primo datur paedagogus, postea magister, ut prius homo recognoscat infirmitatem suam. In hoc ergo patet congruitas temporis dandi novum testamentum. Modus autem tradendi duplex est. Unus per exteriora, sicut proponendo verba ad cognitionem alicuius. Et hoc potest homo facere, et sic traditum fuit vetus testamentum. Alio modo interius operando. Et hoc proprium est Dei. Iob XXXII, 8: inspiratio omnipotentis dat intelligentiam. Et hoc modo datum est novum testamentum, quia consistit in infusione spiritus sancti, qui interius instruit. Non autem sufficit tantum cognoscere, sed requiritur operari. Et ideo primo illuminat intellectum ad cognoscendum. Et ideo dicit dabo leges meas, et cetera. Et dicit in plurali, propter diversa praecepta et consilia. Et hoc facit spiritus sanctus. I Io. II, 27: unctio eius docet vos. Io. XIV, 26: ille vos docebit omnia, et cetera. Item ad bene operandum inclinat affectum, unde imprimitur cordi.
8:10
Et quantum ad hoc dicit in corde eorum superscribam eas, id est, super cognitionem scribam charitatem. Super omnia autem charitatem habete, etc., Col. III, 14, et Rom. V, 5: charitas Dei diffusa est in cordibus nostris, et cetera. Et haec est epistola, de qua subdit, II Cor. III, 3: non atramento, sed spiritu Dei vivi; non in tabulis lapideis, sed in tabulis cordis carnalibus.
Supra posuit apostolus conditiones novi testamenti ex editione ipsius nunc ponit tres effectus ipsius. Primus est hominis ad Deum perfecta coniunctio; secundus est Dei perfecta cognitio, ibi et non docebit; tertius est peccatorum remissio, ibi quia propitius ero. Circa primum sciendum est, quod ad hoc quod homo iungatur Deo, requiritur auxilium divinae gratiae, quia ad hoc non potest propria virtute. Ier. XXXI, 3: in charitate perpetua dilexi te, ideo attraxi te miserans. Primo ergo tangitur illa coniunctio ex parte Dei; secundo ex parte hominis, ibi et ipsi erunt. Dicit ergo ero illis in Deum. Nomen Dei significat universalem providentiam. Tunc ergo est nobis in Deum, quando habet curam de nobis, et corda nostra ad se trahit, et hoc est respectu iustorum specialiter. Ex hoc ergo quod ero eis in Deum, sequitur secundum, scilicet quod ipsi erunt mihi in populum, id est, exhibebunt se mihi in populum. Sicut enim dicit Augustinus, II de Civit. Dei, c. 21: populus est coetus multitudinis, iuris consensu et utilitatis communione sociatus. Quando ergo consentiunt in ius divinae legis, ut sint adinvicem utiles et tendant in Deum, tunc est populus Dei. Apoc. XXI, 3: ipsi populus eius erunt, et ipse Deus cum eis erit eorum Deus. Deinde cum dicit et non docebit, etc., ponit secundum effectum novi testamenti. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo enim ponit signum effectus illius; secundo effectum ipsum, ibi quia omnes, et cetera. Signum perfectae cognitionis est, quando quis non indiget doceri, quia doctrina est via ad acquisitionem scientiae, et ideo cessat doctrina, acquisita perfecte scientia. Sed numquid in novo testamento unus non docet alium? Et videtur quod non, per litteram istam. Sed contra, quia apostolus vocat se doctorem gentium, I Tim. II, 7, et Eph. IV, 11: alios pastores, et doctores; Rom. XII, 7: sive qui docet in doctrina. Respondeo. Dicendum est quod hoc quod dicitur hic, potest dupliciter intelligi. Uno modo de praesenti statu, et sic non verificatur universaliter de omnibus, sed tantum de primis fundatoribus novi testamenti, scilicet apostolis, qui immediate fuerunt instructi a Deo, quando aperuit illis sensum, ut intelligerent Scripturas. Lc. ult. Apostoli ergo facti sunt perfecte cognoscentes, et non ab aliis instructi, sed simul a Christo acceperunt sapientiam infusam. Alio modo, quod referatur ad statum patriae futurum, ad quam per novum testamentum introducimur, non per vetus. Et sic universaliter verum est quod dicitur hic. Sed contra: homines beati sunt aequales Angelis, non maiores, sed secundum Dionysium unus Angelus docet alium illuminando ipsum: ergo et homo beatus alium docebit. Respondeo. Dicendum est quod duplex est cognitio in beatis Angelis. Una quae beatos facit, scilicet cognitio divinitatis, quae sola beatos facit; sicut dicit Augustinus in libro Confess.: beatus qui te novit, et cetera. Alia est quae est omnium quae sunt aliud a Deo, cuiusmodi sunt effectus Dei, et ista non beatificant. Quantum ergo ad primam unus non docet alium; quia unus non beatificatur mediante alio, sed a Deo immediate. Ps. XXXV, 9: in lumine tuo videbimus lumen. Sed quantum ad aliam, quae est aliquorum mysteriorum, unus docet alium. Et hoc forte usque ad finem mundi, quamdiu durat executio effectuum Dei.
8:11
Et ideo addit dicens: cognosce dominum, quasi dicat: non accipit Dei cognitionem. Et dicit proximum suum et fratrem suum, quia, etsi secundum Augustinum omnes homines sint ex charitate diligendi, si tamen non possis omnibus prodesse, tamen illis specialiter debes prodesse, qui tibi coniunguntur, vel naturaliter, sicut sunt consanguinei, quos hic vocat fratres, vel alia coniunctione, et sic proximus est. Omnes enim scient me a minimo usque ad maiorem eorum. Haec est causa quare unus non docebit alium, quia omnes noscent dominum. I Io. III, 2: videbimus eum sicuti est. In hac vero visione consistit beatitudo. Io. XVII, 3: haec est vita aeterna ut cognoscant te solum verum Deum, et cetera. Ier. IX, 24: in hoc glorietur qui gloriatur, scire et nosse me. Et hanc doctrinam habent beati non ab aliquo alio, sed a solo Deo tantum. Is. LIV, 13: ponam universos filios tuos doctos a domino. Illud autem, quod dicit a minimo potest dupliciter intelligi. Uno modo quod dicantur maiores sancti antiquiores. Et sic maior et minor dicuntur secundum ordinem temporis. Omnes ergo cognoscent, quia singuli accipient singulos denarios, Matth. XX, 9 ss. Vel hoc dicit ad ostendendum differentiam praemiorum, quia licet omnes cognoscant, tamen unus magis alio cognoscet. Matth. V, 19: qui fecerit et docuerit, hic magnus vocabitur in regno caelorum. Praemium enim correspondet merito; et hoc contra illos, qui dicunt poenas et omnia merita esse aequalia, et per consequens praemia aequalia. Contra quos dicitur I Cor. XV, v. 41: stella differt a stella in claritate. Deinde cum dicit quia propitius, etc., ponit tertium effectum, qui est culpae remissio, quod non poterat vetus testamentum. Infra X, 4: impossibile est sanguine taurorum et hircorum auferri peccata. Dicit ergo propitius ero. Differunt autem iniquitas et peccatum, quia iniquitas opponitur iustitiae, quae quidem proprie semper est ad alium. Ideo iniquitas dicitur, qua quis nocet alteri. Iob XXXV, 8: homini qui similis tui est, nocebit iniquitas tua. Peccatum autem dicitur omnis defectus actionis, quia importat deordinationem. Et sic iniquitas proprie est in proximum, sed peccatum est in seipsum: et hoc proprie loquendo, large tamen idem est iniquitas et peccatum.
8:12
Et quantum ad hoc dicit quia propitius ero iniquitatibus eorum, scilicet in praesenti poenam relaxando, nec memorabor peccatorum eorum, scilicet in futuro peccata puniendo. Ez. XVIII, 22: omnium iniquitatum eius quas operatus est non recordabor. Ps. LXXVIII, 9: propitius esto peccatis nostris, etc., item v. 8: ne memineris iniquitatum nostrarum, et cetera. Rom. XI, 29: sine poenitentia enim sunt dona et vocatio Dei, etc.; id est, Deus non poenitet, quod hic peccata remiserit, quasi iterum puniendo.
8:13
Deinde cum dicit dicendo autem novum, etc., quasi posita auctoritate arguit ex ipsa, et facit talem rationem: novum non dicitur nisi in comparatione ad vetus, sed omne quod dicitur vetus significat quasi sit prope cessationem; ergo dicendo novum, veteravit prius, id est, dedit intelligere quod prius sit vetus. Quod autem antiquatur et senescit, prope interitum est. Si ergo illud est vetus, abiiciendum est. Lev. c. XXVI, 10: novis supervenientibus, vetera proiicietis. Dicendo ergo novum, designat cessationem veteris. Proprie autem nihil antiquatur, nisi quod subiacet tempori, quae autem subiacent tempori cessant in tempore. Oportet ergo illud vetus cessare. Dicit autem antiquatur, propter res inanimatas, sed senescit, propter animatas. Sciendum tamen est, quod ubi habemus peccatorum, alia littera habet peccati; et tunc refertur ad peccatum originale quod omnibus est commune.
8:1
1. Capitulum autem super ea, quae dicuntur. Giaeca vox xscpaXaiov, quam interpres capitulum vertit, ex usu Graecae linguae magis significatid, quod Latine caput et summam rei vocamus. Unde verbum xs^aXatouv, in summam colligere, multa paucis dicere. Quo verbo usus est Graecus auctor Ecclesiast. 32., ubi nos Latine habemus: Ilabeat caput respon" sum tuum. Nam Graece est: x£<pocXatw- Qov Xoyov, quasi dicat, capitula sermonem, id est in caput et summam collige. Unde sequitur: In paucis multa, id est multa paucis comprehende. Hujus quoque verbi compositum est dvaxs^aXatoDv, id est recapitulare, multa, quae dixeris, summatim repetere; item multa ac diversa ad unum caput revocare. Tn qua significatione usus est eo verbo Paulus Ephes. 1., ubi nos legimus: instaurare; sicut ibi declaratum est. Sensus: Haec summa est eorum, quae fusius a nobis hactenus dicta sunt de praecellentia sacerdotii Christi supra Leviticum, videlicet a capite quinto. Chrysostomus, et post eum Theophylactus, makiut, sigoificari id, quod praecipuum est, et cardo rei; nam et ea significatio est Graeci vocabuli. Sed hoc eodem recidit. Qui enim orationem colligit in summam, ea solum repetit, quae praecipua sunt. Ad utrumque sensum patet, quod Erasmus vertit: Caeterum eorum, quae dicimus, illud est caput; nempe quod sequitur:
Talem habemus pontificem, qui con' sedit in dextera sedis magnitudinis in coelis. Caput et summa dictorum est, inquit, quod talem, id est tantae dignitatis et excellentiae pontificem habemus, qui sedeat ad dexteram solii majestatis divinae in coelo. Haec enim longe sunt supra dignitatem pontificis Levitici, ministrantis in tabemaculo. Respicit Apostolus ad Psalmum Davidicum; in quo ad unum et eundem haec dicuntur: Sede a dextris meis, et: Tu es sacerdos in aeternum. Quid sit ad dexteram Dei sedere, satis explicatum est ad illud cap. 1.: Sedet ad dexteram majestatis in excelsis. Ubi etiam admonuimus, interpretem variasse vocabula: sedet, consedit; majestatis, magnitudinis; cum in Graeco sint eadem.
8:2
2. Sanctorum minister, et tabernaculi veri. Tam Graecis, quam Latinis, ambiguus est genitivus sanctorum ad sanctos et ad sancta, Unde refert Theophylactus, nonnuDos interpretari Christum ministrum sanctorum, id est hominum ab ipso sanctificatorum. Quam expositionem Oecumenius et Cajetanus postea secuti sunt. Sed absque dubio melius est ac germanius, ut neutrum genus accipiatur, id est sancta, vel geminato nomine, Sancta sanctorum, de quibus in sequentibus cap. 9. et 10. frequens est mentio. Syrus interpres domum mnctam vocat. Liquet id ipsum ex adjuncto vocabulo tabernaculi. Vult enim Apostolus per tabernaculum et sancta rem eandem intelligi, quemadmodum ex iis, quae sequenti capite dicentur, amplius patebit. Nimirum allegorice respicit ad tabernaculum secundum, non ad primum. De quibus cap. seq. Jam quod addit: veri, non minus ad sancta, quam ad tabernaculum referri debet. Intelligit autem sancta vera, et tabernaculum verum, non quae falsis opponuntur, sed quae figurativis et umbraticis; secundum quod veritas opponitur figurae. Umbram enim habebat lex futurorum bonorum, non ipsam imaginem rerum; ut dicitur infra cap. 10. Sed quaeritur, quae sint haec sancta vera, seu tabernaculum verum, quorum minister est Christus. Quidam intolligunt Ecclesiam militantem in terris; eo quod non appareat, quomodo Christus nunc sit minister salutis eorum, qui perducti sunt ad salutem, et regnant in coelo. Sunt etiam, qui tabernaculum verum interpretentur corpus Christi, propter id, quod sequenti cap. dicitur Christus per tabernaculum non manufactum introiisse semel in sancta, et quod cap. 10. citatur ex Psalmo: Corpus autem aptasti mihi. Sed de horum testimoniorum iutellectn videbimus suo loco. IUud nunc dicimus, ex Apostoli sententia per tabernaculum et scincta coelum significari. Primum quia proxime dixerat: in coelis. Igitur addendo: sanctorum minister etc, ad coehim respicit, quasi dicat: Pontifex noster Christus consedit in coelis, utpote sanctorum coelestium minister. Deinde postulat hoc auctoris disputatio de primo et secundo tabernaculo in capite sequenti. Probant item ea verba, quibus dicit, Christum per proprium sanguinem introivisse semel in sancta, id est in coelum. Sic enim postea exponit, dicens: No?i in manufacta sancta Jesum introivisse, exemplaria verorum, sed in ipsum coelum. Quo pertinet etiam illud cap. 10.: Nos habere fiduciam in introitu sanctorum in sanguine Christi. Quo loco etiam Christum vocat sacerdotem magnum constitutum super domum Dei, videlicet coelestem. Horum igitur sanctorum, et hujus tabernaculi micister est Christus; non quod illis ministret, sed quod in illis; quomodo pontifex Aaronicus minister erat sanctorum et tabernaculi veteris, quia ministrabat in illis, et quomodo miaistros templi vocamus, qui ministrant in templo. Restat explicandum, quo pacto is, qui consedit ad dexteram divinae majestatis in coelis, minister vocetur, cum utique ministri non sit sedere, sed adstare. Pro minister Graece est Actxoupyo';, qua voce saepe significatur is, qui sacris operatur, id est sacrificus, sacrorum minister, sive administrator, ut Erasmus vertit. Unde XsLroopyia, vocabulum Patribus usitatissimum pro sacrificio Missae, et AstTOUpysTv, sacris operari, Act. 13. Sentit igitur Apostolus, Christum non ita sedere et regnare cum Patre in coelo, quin adhuc pontificem se nostrum memineri^., et ut pontifex in coelo tamquam in sanctis locis et in tabernaculo ministret, id est pontificis officium agat pro nobis apud Deum, videlicet interpellando, et humanitatem, in qua passus est, illi repraesentando, atque etiam verum per ministros et vicarios suos sacerdotes offerendo sacrificium.
Quod fixit Dominus j et non homo. In quibusdam codicibus legitur: Deus, sed vera lectio est: Dominus, quam et Graeca habent, et comprobat editio Clementina. Sensus est: Quod tabernaculum £xit ille, cui nomen est Dominus, Hebraice Jehovah, quod LXX. semper vertunt xuptov, Dominum. In verbo fixit allusio est ad morem figendi tabernacula. Nam tabernaculum Mosaicum, in quo Aaron et filii ejus ministrabant, more aliorum tabernaculorum opera hominum clavis in terra figebatur, ut loco firmiter consisteret. Qua de re vide Josephum lib. 3. Ant. cap. 5. Sed non ita tabernaculum illud, in quo Christus pontifex ministrat, id est, coelum. Hoc enim non humana manu fixum ac firmatum est, sed jussione divina, dicente Psalmista: Verbo Domini cotli firmati sunt, Psalm. 32. Locum hunc Chrjsostomus ita intellexit, tamquam significatum sit, coelum esse prorsus et omnino immobile. Unde ex eo subverti putat eorum philosophiam, qui coelum dicant moveri, et esse sphaericae figurae. Quod et Theophylactus ex Chrysostomo monet observandum. Verum id nequaquam est consequens. Nam coelum quidem ita fixum est a Deo, ut e loco suo numquam moveatur; at nihil repugnat, quo minus orbiculariter, ut habet recepta philosophia, moveatur in loco. QuaiTiquam nec hujusmodi motum extremo coelo, quod empyreum vocatur, et iu quo Christus residet, Theologia attribuit. Hic postremo notandum, totam hane partem: Sanctorum minister etc., non minus, quam praecedentem, pertinere ad declarandam excellentiam Christi pontificis supra pontificem legalem. Ille enim ty pici tabernaculi minister fuit, atque ejus, quod manibus hominum figebatur in terra, et subinde refigebaturalio transferendum, ut significaretur mobilitas illius sacerdotii; Christus autem veri tabernaculi minister est, quod fixit manus Dei, id est, perpetuum atque immobile fecit. Quo simul innuitur, sacerdotium Christi perpetuum et immobile permanere.
8:3
3. Omnis enim pontifex ad offerendum munera et hostias constituitur. Qaid hac parte probet xipostolus, aut qr.id intendat, a paucis explicatur. Re perpensa, nobis cum S. Thoma videtur illud probari, quod proxime dictum erat, Christum, quamvis consederit ad dexteram Dei in coelis, adhuc esse sanctorum ministrum, id est, in ipso coelo, tamquam sanctuario, ministerium pontificis exercere. Vim argumenti mox exponemus. Interim hujus sententiae intellectum repete ex cap. 5., cujus initio similia verba leguntur. Quo etiam loco dictum est, quid intersit inter munera et hostias, pro quibus interpres illic dona et sacrificia vertit.
Unde necesse est, et hunc habere ali' quidj quod offerat. Argumentatio talis est: Omnis pontifex constitukur, ut aliquid offerat, v. g. munera et hostias; atqui Christus etiamnum pontifex est; ergo necesse est, ut et ipse (quamvis in c.qqlum receptus, et sedens ad dexteram Patris) habeat aliquid, quod offerat; ac proinde recte jam dixi, eum in coelo sedentem esse sanctorum ministrum, videlicet non sohim interpellando pro nobis, veram etiam aliquid offerendo. Quaeres, quid offerat? Id quidem hoc loco non dicit Apostolus, sed aperit in sequentibus, ac nominatim eo loco cap. 9., ubi dicit: Jesum introiisse in ipsum coelum, ut ap~ pareat nunc vultui Dei pro nobis, hoc est, ut se ipsum hominem, quem semel in ara crucis obtulit hostiam Patri, deinceps atque continuo in coelis, tamquam eandem hostiam, Patri sistat ac rt^.praesentet, donec completusfueritelectorum numerus. Sed nec m.inus verum est, Christum, etsi in coelo regnantem, offerte quolidie se ipsum adhuc in terris per ministros ac vicarios suos sacerdotes. Quod tamen utrum hoc loco significatum sit, disputant interpretes. Probabile est, quod diximus, Apostohim loqui de ea oblatione, qua se ipsum, quondam in cruce passum et oblatum, continuo nunc repraesentat Patri in coelis. Nam de altera Apostohis prorsus tacet, quia mysterium est, quod intelligendum relinquit fidelibus mysteriorum consciis. Veruntamen quia propositionem assumpsit universalem, scilicet, omnem pontificem ad offerendum munera et hostias constitui, consentaneum utique est, ut et de Christo, tam olim mortali, quam nunc immortali, totam eam interpretemur. Munera erant incruenta sacrificia, hostiae cruenta; sicut ex sententia veterum interpretum haec duo superius a nobis exposita sunt cap. 5. Christus igitur, mortalis quidem, obtulit munus, id est, Eucharistiam in coena novissima; obtulit et hostiam, se ipsum in cruce. Nunc vero immortalis offert idem munus eucharisticum ab ortu soHs usque ad occasum per vicarios suos sacerdotes; offert et hostiam, quia se ipsum, olim in cruce suspensum, vulneratum et occisum, adhuc pro nobis in coelo sistit ac repraesentat Patri. Propter quam causam ipsa etiam passionis suae vulnera patentia suo in corpore reservavit, docente beato Ambrosio libro 10. super Lacam.
8:4
4. Si ergo esset super terram, nec esset sacerdos. In Graeco non illatio est, sed probatio: Si enim. Porro eam partem: esset super terram, Cajetanus interpretatur de re oblata, non de Christo offerente; quasi sensus sit: Si id, quod Christus pontifex offert, esset aliquod animal aut terrae fructus, cujusmodi sunt ea, quae legales sacerdotes offerunt. Meminit hujus expositionis etiam Aquinas. Verum magis convenit textui, ut ad personam referatur. Potest auteiu sensus hoc modo explicari: Evidente ratione conchisi, Christum pontificem nostrum habere aliquid, quod offerat in coeli^, residens ad dexteram Patris. Nam si super terram esset, ne sacerdos quidem esset, quanto minus pontifex? Hoc est: Si futurus erat ex illo genere sacerdotum, qui super terram offerunt victimas, ut sunt sacerdotes Levitici, jam locus omnino non esir-et ei inter sacerdotes. Quidam sic exponunt: Si esset super terram, id est si non moreretur, sed vivens super terram remaneret, non esset sacerdos, quia, cum sit alienus a Levitico sacerdotio, neque tamen in cruce offerret se ipsum hostiam cruentam, utpote non moriturus, noque in coena hostiam incruentam, cum haec sit commemoratio hostiae cruentae, et in ea fundetur. Attamen prior sensus simplicior est, et ad eum proprie respicit ratio subjuncta.
Cum essent, qui offerrent secundum legem munera. Graece ad verbum: Exsistentihus sacerdotibus offerentibus secundum legem dona. Sani enim casus absolute positi, quos Erasmus ita reddit: TJbi sunt sacerdotes, qui offerunt etc. Alii sic: Quamdiu essent sacerdotes, qui offerrent. Rectius interpres noster causaliter, hoc sensu: Quandoquidem sacerdotes, qui secundum legem hostias offerrent, jam erant a lege constituti, ut ad eas offerendas alio sacerdote opus non esset, eo praesertim, quem lex ipsa ab altari repelleret, utpote extraneum a genere sacerdotali. Nam sicut dictum est capite superiore: Ex Juda ortus est Dominus noster, in qua tribu nihil de sacerdotibus Moses locutus est. Ex hoc plano sensu Apostoli liquet, quam futile sit argumentum, quod ex isto loco faciunt haeretici, quo Christum auferant de terra, et consequenter ex altari. Dicit Apostolus, inquiunt: Si Christus esset super terram, non esset sacerdos; atqui Christus haud dubie sacerdos est; ergo non est super terram, ac proinde nec super altare. Sed jam clare explicatum est, qua sensu neget Apostolus, Christum esse super terram. Alioqui pari ratione Christus de cruce tolletur, ubi vel maxime sacerdotis officio functus est. Nam si in cruce pependit, super terram erat non minus, quam si dicatur esse in altari. Si super terram erat, secundum istos non erat sacerdos. Obiter admoneo, Paulum, sola munera nominantem hoc loco, non confundere discrimen alibi datum a nobis inter munera et hostias; sed altero nominato, alterum intelligendum relinquere.
8:5
5. Qui exemplari et umbrae deserviunt coelestium. Significatur servitus, quae fitDeo; Graece: AaTpsuoDat. Nonnulli vertunt: Qui quidem in exemplari et umbra ministrant coelestium; ut in Graeco subaudiatur praepositio Iv vel £7rl, ne significari videatur, sacerdotes legales ipsis typis et umbris Aaxpsiav exhibuisae. Sed hujusmodi subauditio Graecis insolita est, et hoc loco non necessaria. Dicuntur enim illi sacerdotes deserviisse exemplari et umbrae coelestium, improprio sermone, quia, cum talibus caeremoniis, quae erant coelestium figurae et umbrae, Deo serviebant. Ac si diceret: Versantur in cultu typico et umbratico. Pro exemplari Graece est uTrodeiyiia, quasi dicas: subostensionem, id est obscuram deliaeationem, ut exponit Theophylactus. Ejusmodi erant veteres caeremoniae respectu rerum per ippas significatarum. Sed magis adhuc eas extenuat adjunctum umbrae vocabulum. Ubi tamen dubium, an metaphora desumpta sit a pictoribus, qui imaginem, quam facere volunt, prius adumbrant, rudibus ductis lineamentis; an vero respiciatur ad umbram, quam corpus in sole positum de so projicit, ut videlicet umbra corpori opponatur. Nam priori modo opponiturimagini expressae. Atque hoc spectasse Apostolum in vocabulo umbrae, quidam ex eo convincere se putant, quia cap. 10. sic loquitur: Umbram habens lex futurorum bonorum, non ipsam imaginem rerum. At idem Apostolus ad Coloss. 2., de Mosaicis observationibus agens, easque vocans umbram rerum in Christo iraplendarum, diserte urabrara corpori opposuit. Quae sunt, inquit, umbra futurorum, corpus autem Christi. Quare ct hic eam umbrae acceptionem magis probamus. Nam et magis facit ad obscnrilatem repraesentationis significandam. An autem umbrae diversa sit metaphora cap. 10., illic expendetur. Superest videndum, quae vocet Apostolus coelestia. Chrysostomus extendit ad totam Ecclesiam. Qaae enim per sacerdotes Leviticos agebantur, typum praeferebant eorum, quae aguntur in Ecclesia, tam mi'itante, quam triumphanfe; queraadmodura pulchre declarat idem Chrysostomus. Quamquam non inde consequens est, nomen coelestium ex Apostoli m3nte ad ea omnia extendi, cum ex superioribus, ubi dictum est, Christum sedere in dextera sedis magnitudinis in coeliSj sanctorum ministrum etc, ad quae hoc loco respicitur, apparere cuipiam merito queat, coelestia dici, quae in coelis aguntur; id quod videatur postulare latens antithesis inter terram et coelum. Itaque sensus foret: Sacerdotes, qal super terram sunt, id est Leviticos, esse constitutos, ut suo ministerio, quo serviunt in tabernaculo, nobis exhibeant obscuram quandam et umbraticam repraesentationem eorum, quae Christus pontifex agit in coelesti sanctuario. Nam quod pontifex Aaronicus, caesa victima, semel introibat in Sancta Sanctorum, victimae sanguinem illuc inferens, typice significabat, Christum, verum pontificem, hostia suae carnis iu cruce semel oblata, per proprium sanguinem ingressurum in coelum, ut appareret vultui Dei pro nobis. Hanc signifiicationem ipse Apostolus cap. 9. et 10. pluribus explicat et commendat. Et nihilominus, quod nomine coelestium hoc loco comprehendantur illa quoque, quae geruntur et divinitus sunt instituta in Ecclesia Christi militante, probant illa verba cap. 9.: Ne^ cesse est exemplaria quidem coelestium his mundari; ipsa autem coelestia me~ lioribus hostiis, quam istis. Possunt etiam ea, quae per inferiores sacerdotes agebantur, applicari ad Christum; sed praecipuum Apostoli institutum est, pontificem conferre cum pontihce, legalem cum Christo, atque ex ea collatione Christi pontificis excellentiam ostendere.
Sicut responsum est Mosi. IIoc, quod dixit, omnia, quae per sacerdotes in tabernaculo gerebantur, figuras et umbras fuisse coelestium, probat Scripturae testimonio. Graecum verbum xP^^l^aT^tCstv non significat simpliciter: respondere, sed quomodo Deus respondet aut loquitur hominibus, id est, oracuhim reddere seu dare, etiamsi interrogatus non fuerit, et XpTQfxaxiCsodat, oraculum accipere. Idem infra cap. 11.: Fide Noe, responso accepto etc. Et activo genere cap. 12.: qui super terram loquebatur, id est oracula reddebat. Usus est eodem verbo Matthaeus cap. 2. sui Evangelii semel et iterum, et Lucas cap. 12. et Act. 10. Hinc alii vertunt: Sicut oraculum accepit Moses; vel: Sicut oraculo responsum est Mosi.
Cum consummaret tabernaculum. Graece: Cum esset consummaturus tabernaculum, id est facturus. Nam verba, quae citare vult Apostolus, dicta sunt Mosi, priusquam tabernaculum facere coepisset, utpote quibus forma tabernaculi faciendi praescribebalur.
Vide, inquitj omnia facito secundum exemplar, quod tibi ostensum est in monte. Graece: Vide enim, inquit, facias omnia secundum exemplar etc. Locus est Exod. 25., tibi quidem non additur: omnia, nec in Hebraeo, nec apud LXX.; sed tantum dicitur: Inspice et fac secundum exemplar, quod tibi in monte monstratum est. Verum sensus universalis est. Quod patet ex praecedentibus ejusdem capitis, ubi dicitur: Facientque mihi aanctuarium juxta omnem similitudinem tabernaculi, quod ostendam tibi, et omnium vasorum in cultum ejus. Quod autem interpres vertit exemplar, Graece est tutcoc, vocabulum diversum ab eo, quod modo praecessit, nec ejusdem prorsus significationis, hoc praesertim loco. Significat enim hic exemplar, non umbraticum aut praefigurativum, sed propositum ad imitandum. Quae etiam magis propria est exemplaris significatio. Igitur hac allegatione divini responsi docere vult Apostolas, illam veteris tabernaculi formam non fuisso ab humano ingenio excogitatam, aut fortuito obhitam, sed factam ad exemplar a Deo Mosi revelatum ac propositum, quum esset in monte Sina, legem in tabulis accepturus. A quo exemplari ne artifices etiam ipsi vel minimum aberrarent, eos quoque legitur Dominus implevisse spiritu suo ad universum opus tabernaculi faciendum, Exod. 81. Cum enim per illud tabernaculum, et quae in eo gerebantur, vellet Deus praefigurare ea, quae pertinent ad sacerdotium Christi, formam ejus construendi praescripsit ad haec significanda convcnientissimam. Jam simile quid eliam de Davide legimus, scilicet ostensaDi ac praescriptam ei fuisse divinitus ideam exstruendi templi et vasorum ejus. Ait enim, cum de iis loqueretur, Paralipomen. 28.: Omnia venerunt scripta manu Domini ad me, ut intelligerem universa opera exemplaris. Ex his ergo primum patet, vetus illud sacerdotium per omnia figurativum fuisse. Debent enim figurae coaptari suo exemplari, non contra. Deinde significatur, illas fuisse figuras rerum coelestium; id enim vult exemplar in monte monstratum. Mons quippe coeli signlficatiouem habet, ut Psalm. 3.: Et exaudivit me de monte sancto suo, et 14.: Quis requiescet in monte sancto tuo? et 23.: Quis ascendet in montem Domini?
8:6
6. Nunc autem melius sortitus est ministerium. MeJiuSj Graece: differentius, hoc est, excellentius. Sic cap. 1.: Quanto differentius prae illis nomen haereditavit. Sortitus autem, id est nactus est, obtinuit, Graece: t£t6xi^Xc, contigit ei. Ne quis hic imaginetur aliquid de sortibus, quale nihil est in Graeco. Docte quidem B. 1 homas annotat, electionem divinam in Scripturis vocari sortem, ut Ephes. 1.: Sorte vocati sumus, eo quod, ubi deficit humanum judicium, £oleant homines se conferre ad electionem et dispositionem divinam; sicut Apostoli fecerunt in eligendo Coapostolo, Act. 1. Sed ea annotatio praesenti loco non congruit. Quod attinet ad contextum, respondet haec pars illi superiori: Si ergo esset super terram, nec esset sacerdos; quasi diceret hic: Atqui sacerdos est juxta testimonium Davidis; sed longe meliore ac praestantiore potius sacerdotio. Id enim vocat ministeriwn, videlicet sacrum, Graece XstTOupytav. Hanc etiam sacerdotii praestantiam poterat ex jam dictis ostendere, quia erat exemplar in monte monstratum, id est coeleste; sed amplioris doctrinae causa transire voluit ad mentionem testamenti, atque ex eo nova argumentatione probare, quod instituit. Hoc est, quod sequitur:
Quanto et melioris testamenti me~ diator est. Melioris, Graece xpsiTTOVog, vox diversa a praecedente. Tanto excellentius est, inquit, sacerdotium Christi, quanto melius est testamentum, cujus ipse mediator est et intercessor. Sacerdotis enim officium est, intercedere inter Deum et homines, et pacta inter eos conventa oblati sacrificii ceremonia confirmare; tum operam dare, ut divinis promissis homines potiantar. Quare quanto pacta meliora fuerint et praestantiora, tanto sacerdotium ipsum majoris censeri dignitatis, consentaneum est. Testamentum vocat foedus seu pactum, quod in proposito est lex cum promissis, Graece dKX^rfKr]. De qua voce plura dicemus infra in capite sequente. Christum igitur vocat melioris, hoc est, novi testamenti mediatorem, quia Christus velut Dei ad nos interpres novum foedus, quod Deus nobiscum inire dignatus est, ad nos attulit, ac nobis, velut legislator a Deo datus, promulgavit. Quod quidem praestitit multo perfectius, quam Moses in veteri testamento, cujus ipse m.ediator fuit. Nam Christus novum testamentum suo ipsius sanguine sanxit et confirmavit, atque ejusdem testumenti promissa per obedientiam et humilitatem passionis ac mortis suae nobis efficaciter promeruit. At Moses vetus testamentum dedicavit in sanguine alieno, scilicet occisorum animalium; idemq^ue in terram Chanaan, quae illic praecipue promittebatur, nec populum introduxit, nec ipse ingredi potuit. Porro, quod dixit: melioris testamenti, declarat:
Quod in melioribus repromissionibus sancitum est. Tanto videlicet melioribus, quanto potiora sunt coelestia terrenis, aeterna caducis, spiritualia carnalibus. Hae namque differentiae sunt promissorum novi testamenti ac veteris. Adde, quod ipsam legis observationem, qua pervenitur ad illa meliora promissa, nobis praestat gratia novi testamenti. Siquidem et ipsa continetur sub promissione, sicuti mox docebit ex Jeremia. Nihil autem tale praestitit aut praestare potuit testamentum vetus, quoniam, etsi fuerint aliqui tempore legis Mosaicae, qui praecepta legis, sicut oportet, observarent, non tamen ex lege, sed ex fide Christi mediatoris; quos proinde non tam veteris, quam novi testamenti filios convenit appellari. Notandus est Hebraismus in praepositione in; sensus enim est: Quod testamentum cum melioribus promissis datum est; quae lex meliora promissa habet adjuncta. Nam Graecum verbum VcVO/jioB^SIr^Tat ^ quod interpretes vertunt: sancitum est, proprie significat: lege latum est. Sed hoc ipsum est sancire legem, si pactis interpositis et caesis hostiis confirmetur.
8:7
7. Nani si illud prius culpa vacasset, non utique secundi locus inquireretur. Adhuc probat, novum testamentum melius esse priore. Culpa vacasset, Graece: irreprehensibile erat seu fuisset. Irreprehensibile autem negatur vetus testamentum, id est tale, in quo nihil posset reprehendi; non quod juxta Manichaeorum haeresim mali aliquid in se haberet (etenim lex Domini immaculata, tam vetus, quam nova); sed quoniam imperfectum erat, utpote quod subditos suos sanctificare non posset; itaque non sic irreprehensibile, ut nihil ei deessetj aut nihil in eo desideraretur, quemadmodum existimabant Judaei, quaerentes ex lege justitiam. Idem ergo hio dicitur, quod capite superiore: Reprobatio quidem fit praecedentis mandati propter infirmitatem ejus et inutilitatem; nihil enim ad perfectum adduxit lex; introductio vero melioris spei, per quam proximamus ad Deum. Nonnulli sic exponunt: Si culpa vacasset, id est, a culpa liberasset. Sed hoc non est tam Apoetolum exponere, quam interpretem. Est igitur haec Apostoli ratiocinatio: Quod subrogatur alteri defectum habenti, melius esse oportet; atqui secundo testamento locus promittitur, rejecto veteri propter ejus defectum (nisi enim aliquid ei deesset, secundi locus non quaereretur); ergo hoc illo melius est. Assumptionem probat testimonio Prophetae versu sequenti:
8:8
8. Vituperans enim eos, dicit Graece /jisfjL^poiuievoc^ id est reprehendens, incusans eos, scilicet, quibas datum est testamentum prius. Dicit, Propheta. Quaeritur, qualis sit probatio: Reprehenduntur a Propheta, quibus datum est testamentum; ergo testamentum ipsum reprehensione non caret. Neque enim justum videtur, ut, si quid vitii sit in populo, cui lex data est, ejus culpa in legem conferatur. Quidam, ut hanc difficultatem effugiant, dicunt, ex Graeco potius vertendum fuisse: Vituperans enim, eis dicit. Est enim in Graeco dativus auToTg, qui ad utrumlibet verbum referri potest. Ac nonnulla suspicio est, interpretem nostrum hoc casu, quem in Graeco legit, vertisse; ut nimirum sensus sit: Vituperans testamentum prius, dicit eis, scilicet sacerdotibus (de quibus paulo ante loquebatur), ac per eos omni populo, cui datum est illud testamentum. Qui sensus post Stapulensem etiam Cajetano placuit. Verum Graeci interpretes Chrysostomus, Theophylactus et Oecumenius dativum auToTg palam referunt ad participium praecedens. Non dicit, inquiunt, accusans ipsum, videlicet testamentum; sed accusans eos, id est Judaeos. Adstipulatur et Syra versio: Reprehendit enim eos, et dicit. Ac sane testimonium subjunctum non docet, testamentum reprehendi, sed populum, cui datum fuerat testamentum, addita etiam causa reprehensionis. Sic enim habet: Quoniam ipsi non permanserunt in testamento meo, et ego neglexi eos, dicit Dominus. Sed quomodo jam hinc sequitur id, quod probandum sumpserat, vetus testamentum culpa seu reprehensione non carere? Necte sequitur juxta sensum superius datum. Nam etsi crimen violati foederis populo sit imputandum, non testamento, inde tamen arguitur ipsius testamenti seu foederis infirmitas et imperfectio, quia legis obedientiam praestare non potuit, ut proinde novo testamento, quod id possit, locus sit quaerendus. Unde et ad Romanos scribens idem Apostolus cap. 8.: Quod impossibile erat legi, in quo infirmabatur per carnem, dicit Deum misso Filio contulisse, scilicet ut justificatio legis impleretur in nobis.
Ecce, dies venient, dicit Dominus. Testimonium hoc, desumptum ex Jerem. 31., paene totum citat juxta versionem LXX.; tametsi ab Hebraeo permodica discrepantia est, quam nos subindicabimus. Est autem illustris prophetia de novo Testamento, quam totam in primo Christi Salvatoris adventu completam esse, ex sententia omnium scriptorum ecclosiasticorum Hieronymus affirmat in commentariis super Jeremiam. Hebraeorum quidem nonnulli referunt ad tempus, quo lcx ab Esdra fuit renovata; cujus sententiae meminit Theophylactus; sed ea renovatio facta est in membranis, non in cordibus; neque novum tunc institutum testamentum, sed vetus quodammodo redintegratum. Igitur et Hebraecrum plerique nobiscum sentiunt, scilicet implendum fuisse totum, quod hic dicitur, tempore Messiae. Sed in eo vehementer a nobis dissident, quoJ alium sibi Messiam fingunt, eundemque frustra tot saeculis exspectant. Dicunt autem, Messiam suum proprie non daturum novam legem, id est aliam ac diversam a lege Mosi; sed eo sensu novam, quia futurum sit ejus tempore, ut melius observetur, quam ab ipsis et eorum patribus observata fuit; quandoquidem, inquiunt, Messias, quum venerit, imprimet legem menti, hoc epi, memoriae Judaeorum, ut ejus numquam obliviscantur. Sed hi, sicut aberrant a Christo, ita beneficiurum ejus magnitudinem non assequuntur, et nominatim, quid sit, legem Dei inscribi mentibus. Nam si id non aliud esset, quam imprimi memoriae, nequaquam hoc satis esset ad implendam legem. Quam multi enim sunt, in quos competat illud: Video meliora, proboque; deteriora sequor! Pro futuro venient, in Graeco est spxovTGi^ praesentis temporis verbum. Hieronymus quoque vertit ex Hebraeo: veniunt, ut in textu commentariid ejusinserto videreest. Idem tempus reddit hoc loco Syrus interpres. Quamquam verbum hoc Graecum saepo etiam futuri significationem habet, praesertim in sacris literis; ut quum Christus vocatur £pxo|i£Vog, qui venturus est, Matth. 11. et alibi. Sic Joan. 4.: Messias venit, messis venit, id est exspectatur, ut veniat. Ita accipiendum, quod hic dicitur, ut sensus sit, tempus illud omnino venturum. In Hebraeo participium est: venientes, ut vel sunt^ vel erunt, possit intelligi.
Et consummabo super domum Israel et super domum Juda testamentum novum. Hebraismus est pro eo, quod nos diceremus: quando consummabo. Graece: auvTSAsaco, perficiam. Pro quo in Hebraeo est: excidani aut feriam, sicut vertit Hieronymus. Apud LXX. dia- ^Tj^o/xat, id est disponam. Quo verbo post paululum etiam Apostolus utitur, secutus LXX., cum dicit: Quia hoc est testamentum, quod disponam etc. Atque ab eo descendit nomen verbale Sia^T^XT), dispositio, testamentum. Quod ipsum hic reddiderunt iidem LXX. loco ejus, quod in Hebraeo est foedus seu pactum. Sed haec omnia concurrunt in eundem sensum, quo significatur, Deum initurum cum populo novum foedus. Verum ideo forsitan hoc loco substituit Apostolus verbum, quod perficere significat, ut innueret, novum testamentum minime frustrandum esse, sicut vetus; sed effectum plenissimum in omnibus filiis promissionis habiturum. Hoc certe verbum urget Augustinus in libro de spiritu et litera cap. 19. Sciendum est autem, interpretes LXX. non tantum in isto prophetae testimonio, sed et alibi passim, ac more quodam perpetuo, pro eo, quod in Hebraeo est n''"!^ (berithj, foedus, posuisse Sta^TJxrjV, quod Graecis testamentum significat, non aliud tamen volentes intelligi, quaro pactum seu foedus in genere, ut Gen. 9.: Ecce, statuo testamtntum meum vobis, id est pactum; Psalm. 82.: Adversum te testamentum disposuerunt, id est foedus pepigerunt, conspiraverunt, tabernacula Idumaeorum et Ismaelitae. Ita etiam 1 Mach. 1.: Eamus et disponamus testamentum, hoc est, ineamus foedus, cum gentibus y quae circa nos sunt; et aliis locis innumeris. Recte vero pactum appellari testamentum, docet Hieronymus in Jeremiam scribens, quia voluntas in eo atque testatio eorum, qui pactum ineunt, continetur. Addo, Graece quoque Stoc^igxYjv, quasi dispositio7iem, recte vocari, quia pactis inter se homines de rebus ordinant atque disponunt. Jam quod ait: Super domum Isrc" et super domum Juda^ non uno modo a tractatoribus exponitur. Notum quidem est, in Scripturis, ubi distinguuntur domus Israel et domus Juda, per domum Israel intelligi decem tribus, quae auctore Jeroboam a vero Dei cultu recesserunt; et per domum Juda duas tribus, quae cum Levitis in cultu Dei legitimo permanserunt. Sed quoniam hi populi rerum etiam ad Ecclesiam pertinentium figuram gesserunt {omnia namque in figura contingebant illis 1 Cor. 10.), idcirco quidam domum Israel hic interpretantur Ecclesiam coUigendam ex gentibus, et domum Juda reliquias colligendas ex Judaeis; eo quod gentilis populus olim, Deo relicto, ad idola defluxit, apud Judaeos autem Dei cultus permansit. Haec Augustini expositio est lib. 22. contra Faustum, cap. 89., et lib. 18. de civit. Dei, cap. 28. Alii vero ab eo, quod litera sonat, non putant recedendum. Itaque domum Israel intelligunt eos, qui sunt ex decem tribubus Israelitici populi; domum Juda eos, qui ex duabus; non omnes quidem, sed qui erant in Christum credituri. Nam Israelitae, Christo et Apostolis ejus praedicantibus, ex omni tribu vocati sunt ad fidem, et venerunt. Unde Act. 2.: Judaei viri religiosi, ex omni natione, quae sub coelo est, prima Petri praedicatione audita, fidem recepisse leguntur ad tria millia. Sed et Jacobus Epistolam suam scribit duodecim tribubus, quae in dispersione erant; utique tamquam fidelibus. Et in Apoc. Joannis cap. 7. centum quadraginta quatuor millia signati scribuntur ex omnibus tribubus filiorum Gall. Estii Conun. Tom. III. Israel. Quare nihil necespe est, imo nec ratio patitur, ut, quod nonnulli faciunt domum Israel restringamus ad eam partem decem tribuum, quae cum duabus tribubus remansit usque ad tempora Salvatoris, exclusis iis, qui per terras Assyriorum aliarumque gentium fuere dispersi. Caeterum promissionem hanc directe pertinere ad populum Israeliticum, satia ostendit, quod sequitur: Non secundum cestamentumj quod feci patribus eoi^um. Nam quibus primum testamentum datum est, non gentilium, sed Judaeorum patrea fuerunt; atque horum filiis novum promittitur. Hunc sensum aperte suggerit Hieronymi commentarius. Quaeres, num igitur haec novi testamenti promissio nihil ad Ecclesiam gentium? Respondeo, prorsus etiam ad eam pertinere, quoniam Apostoli ac caeteri, qui primi ex Judaeis in Christum crediderunt, magistri simt ac veluti patres atque primitiae eorum omnium, qui postea perducti sunt ad legem Christi; ut, quod illis promissum est ae praestitum, etiam filiis eorum undecumque ad fidem coUigendis promissum ac praestandum intelligatur.
8:9
9. Non secundum testamentum, quod feci patribus eorum. Ita LXX., nisi quod pro verbo feci apud eos legitur; die^ili'qv, disposui. Hieronymus ex Hebraeo vertit: Non secundum pactum, quod pepigi patribus eorum. Sensus est, novum hoc pactum seu testamentum non futurum, quale prius illud, sed eo longe perfectius atque excellentius; quam rem paulo post decUrat.
In die, qua apprehendi manum eorum, ut educerem illos de terra Aegypti. Hoc est, quo tempore eos velut apprehensa manu eduxi ex Aegjpto, ubi dura premebantur servitute. Dies pro tempore, quamvis in longum extenso, vulgatissima phrasis est Scripturae. Non enim populo tunc, quando de Aegypto egrediebatur, lex data fuit; sed demum quinquagesimo post egressionem die legis ferendae factum est initium. Addit autem haec verba per prophetam Dominus, non tam ut tempus prioris pacti designet, quam ut beneficii commemoratione ostendat ingratitudinem populi, cum quo pactum illud inierat. Haec enim cum exprobratione dicuntur pacti non servati, quemadmodum patet ex eo, quod sequitur:
Quoniam ipsi non permanserunt in testamento meo. Ilebraea sic habent: Quia ipsi irritum fecerunt pactum meum. Quamquam Hieronymus Hebraicum *it^*X °^^ causaliter interpretatus est, sed relative, dum verbis transpositis ita vertit: pactum, quod irritum fecerunt. Nam revera non hic causa redditur promissionis novi pacti; sed nariatur antiqui frustratio. Pagnino tamen et aliis, sicut et ipsis LXX., visum fuit conjunctionem causalem reddere, non quidem causaliter exponendam, sed expletive, quod Hebraeis frequens est. Sunt, qui causaliter expoaant, referendo partem hanc ad sequentem, hoc modo: Quoniam seu quandoquidem ipsi pactum meum non custodierunty sed irritum. fecerunt, ego quoque neglexi eos et abjeci. Sed eum sensum et constructionem, pato, non probabit, qui Hebraea diligenter expenderit. Probabilius dixeris, significari causam aUcujus subintellecti, nimirum veteris pacti rescissi a Deo. Hujus enim causa est, quoniam ipsi priores lUud violarunt. Nobis sermo videtur esse simjiliciter narrativus, ut sensus sit: Et ipsi pactum, quod cum eis ptpigi, irritum fecerunt. Id est legem, quam dedi eis cum luculentis promissionibus, praevaricati sunt; primum in deserto; deinde in ipsa terra promissionis, partim ac praecipue per idololatriam, partim vero per alia multa et magna peccata. Loquitur enim Propheta de peccatis totius temporis, quod hanc novi testamenti promissionem antecessit. D. Thomas, exponens haec verba: Quoniam ipsi non permanserunt in testamento meo, hanc quasi ratior.em Bubjicit, quia scilicet non erat scriptura in cordibus eorum; non quod haec proprie causa fuerit pacti non servati; sed quia, Deo non scribente legem in cordibus eorum, servare eam non poterant. Itaque haec ejus ratio procedit a negatione causae necessariae ad negationem effectus. Tale est, quod dicit Dominus ad Judaeos: Vos non creditis, quia non estis ex ovibus meis, id est, ex praedestinatis ad fidem, Joan. 10. Notanda sunt haec adversus opinionem quorundam existimantium, omnibus adesse sufficiens auxiliam gratiae Dei ad servandam ejus legem.
Et ego ntglexi eos, dicit Dominus. Hoc illati ve dicitur, ut sit sensus: Et proinde eos ego neglexi, curam eorum abjeci, bona, quae promiseram, subtraxi, videlicet pacti mei violatoribus. Est autem haec lectio secundum LXX. Nam in Hebraeo sic habetur: Et ego dominatus sum in eos. Ita quidem etiam Hieronymus vertit, licet in commentario non exponat. Apud alios autem variae leguntur interpretationes. Una hujusmodi: Pactum meum irritum fecerunt, quamvis ego dominarer eis, et curam eorum, tamquam dominus et vir ac sponsus, haberem, plurimisque eos auxissem beneficiis. Nam vox Hebraea proprie eam dominationem significat, quae viro competit in uxorem, de qua Gen. 3.: Et ipse dominabitur tui, tametsivocabulo in Hebraeis diverso. Quidam exponit per interrogationem, velut ab iudiguante profectam, hoc modo: Et ego conjugio junctus mansissem eis? quasi dicat: Minime; sed abjeci et repudiavi eos. Aliis vero, cum quibus sentit B. Thomas, magis placet hic intellectus: Quia pactum meum fecerunt irritum, idcirco dominatus sum eorum, id est, Dominum rae esse ostendi, non passus, impune legem meam contemni; punivi eos pro meritis tamquam eorum Dominus; atque ita punivi, ut abjicerem eos et pro neglectis haberem. Hanc expositionem probabilem facit locus similis apud Ezechieli cap. 20., ubi post commemorationem multorum scelerum, quibus pactum Dei praevaricati fuerant filii Israel, tandem subjungitur * divina comminatio: Vivo ego, dicit DO' r minus, quoniam in manu forti et brachio exfento et in furore effuso regnabo super vos. Nec dissimile est illud Psalm. 9.: Omnium inimicorum suorum dominabitur, et Psalm. 109.: Dominare in medio inimicorum tuorum. Tertia expositio, sicut et secunda, conciliat Hebraicam lectionem cum versione LXX. Porro sciendum, in nonnullis Graecis codicibus editionis LXX. apud Jeremiam non haberi: YjjuisAyjaa, neglexi; sed ejus compositi verbum simplex, idque contrariae significationis: £|isX7jaa, curavi. Quae si vera sit lectio, facilis erit conciliatio praesentis loci cum Hebraico textu juxta primam expositionem, quam dedimus. Sed ego veram esse non arbitror; tum quia veteribus incognita est, tum quia nuUi codices Imjus ad Hebraeos Epistolae ei suffragantur, ne quidem versio Syriaca, quae sic habet: Et ego sprevi eos • tum denique, quia aoristus ille Graecus: k\ii\Tp(x, pro eo, quod est: curavi aut curam habui, vix usum habet apud scriptores. Quod sequitur: dicit Dominus, adjectio est prophetica, qua claudere et confirmare solent verba ex persona Domini commemorata.
8:10
10. Quia hoc est testamentum, guod disponam domui Israel post dies illos, dicit Dominus. Exponit, quale sit, quod promittit novum testamentum. Hieronymus ey Hebraeo sic intorpretatur: Sed hoc erit pactum, quod feriam cum domo Israel etc. Ubi Hebraicum >3, id est quia j vertit in sed. Quod et Pag;ninus facit. Quamquam hoc loco, quemadmodum et alibi frequentissime, potius esse videatur particula ledundans, quae vel ornatui sermonis serviat vel consuetudini linguae. Unde et Syrus interpres itavertit: Hoc autem est foedus, quod etc. Pro Graeco verbo: dic.^riaoiiai, disponam, verti poterat: testabor, ut agnalio servaretur inter verbale et verburc quae conspicitur in Graeco. Atque iiu, vertit infra cap. 10., ubi haec Scriptura repetitur. Quod autem hic solam nominat domum Israel, brevitatis causa fnctum est a Propheta, ut eub hoc nomine generalius nunc accepto domum Juda coroprehenderet, ne quis mysterium subesse putet, quod hic domus Juda taceatur. Quod addit: post dies illos, non liquet de quibus diebus, id est, de quo tempore Propheta loquatur. Nam quod Oecumenius et S. Thomas intelligunt tempus datae legis Mosaicae, de quo paulo ante dictum est: In die, qua apprehendi manum eorum etc, non congruit. Cum enim illa legislatio tempora Jeremiae multis saeculis praecesserit, frustra, ne dicam inepte, Jeremias annuntiaret aliam legem dandam post illud tempus; cura utique jam non posset, nisi post illud tempus dari. Quare Theophylactus mavult intelligi prophetiam de illis diebus, de quibus ante dixerat: Ecce dies veniunt, quasi nunc dicat: Quum venerint dies illi, tunc feriam hujusmodi foedus. Verum id non est, testamentum dari post illos dies, sed illis ipsis diebus; nisi quis dicat, esse phrasim Scripturae: post illos dies, hoc est postquam illi dies advenerint; advenerint autem, quando illorum initium esse coeperit. Est, qui putet, tempus designari, quo vixit Propheta; quasi dicat: posthac, deinceps. Sed obstat vis pronominis demonstrativi. Non enim dicit: Fost hos dies, sed: post dies illos, ut sit necesse, remotum aliquod tempus intelligi. Alius quidam vir doctus censet, Prophetam respicere &d tempus, quo futurum sit, quod dixerat Dominus: Et ego neglexi eos; id est ad tempus rejectionis populi Judaici. De hac enim accipi vult illa Prophetae verba. Proinde secundum eum sensus est: Postquam Judaeos abjecero prupter suam incredulitatem, dabo novam legem filiis Israel, id est electis ex gentibus. Sed et hic commentarius non una parte laborat. Primum non fuere diversa tempora vejectionis Jndacorum et vocationis gentium, ubi locum haberet: post dies illos; sed eodem tempore coepit utrumque fieri; quemadmodum ex Actis Apostolicis clarum est. Deinde novum hoc testamentum promittitur eidem populo, cui datum erat vetus; id quod 1 2 ' superius ex ipsitis Prophetae verbis satis ostoudimus, ipso etiam auctore, de cujus seutfcntia nunc agimus, ibidem adstipulaure. Quare quod dicitur: Ego neglexi eos, non nisi valde incommoJe potest exponi de ejusdem populi r^jectione, quae tempore novi testamenti futura sit; praesertim quum, ut alibi diximus, in hac Epistola studiose caveat Apostolus, ne mentione secreti consilii divini de Judaeorum reprobatione et gentium vocatione suos Hebraeos offendat aut contrislct. Adde, quod testimcnium hoc propheticum ita contextum est, ut quaedam in eo commemorentur praetevita, quaedam promittautur futura. Atqui inter ea, quae leferuntur ut praeterita, nicut est illud: Ipsi non permanserunt in testamento meo, sic et istud cohaerens: Et ego neglexi eos. Non ergo pertinet hoc ad tempus adventus Christi, sed ad ea tempora, quae banc ipsam novi testamenti promissionem antecesserunt, uti dictum est supra. Quid tandem igitur sibi vult: post dies illos? Arbitror, hunc esse sensum, eumque planum ac simplicem: Post aliquantum temporis spatium. Ut ea locutione significetur in genere, futurum aliquod tempus, hominibus quiderii incertum, sed Deo certum ac definitum, quo transacto fiat, quod praedicitur. Tale est, quod Prophetae interdum dicunt: Post multos dies, ut Jes. 24.. Ezech. 38., Daniel. 8. Nam et haec apud eos frequentata: In illo tempore, in illa die, vel m illis diebus, saepe ponuntur absque designatione certi temporis. Jam quod annotant nonnulli, partem hanc adjungi posse sequentibus, hoc modo: Post dies illos (dicit DominusJ dando leges meas in mentem eorum etc., paene supervacuum est, cum recurrat in eundem sensum haec constructio cum priori; nec dubium, quin prior, quae omnium e.st interpretum, praeferenda sit.
Dando leges meas in mentem eorum. Graece: dans leges meas etc. Sic enim etiam apud LXX. legitur, licet quidam codices minus probati duplicent verbum: Dans dabo. Nam et in Hebraeo sine geminationescribitur: Dabo legemmeam in medio eorum, sive, ut alii vertunt, in interiora eorum, ut Hieronymus: in visceribus eorum. Haec Prophetae verba cum sequentibus apertam continent atque dilucidam novi testamenti promissionem. Quae ut plenius intelligatur, conferendus est hic locus cum aliis similibus, qualis imprimis est unus et alter apud Ezech. cap. 11. et 36.: Dabo vobis, inquit, cor novum, et spiritum novum ponam in medio vestri-, et auferam cor lapideum de carne vestra, et dabo VO" bis cor carneum. Et faciam, ut in praeceptis meis ambuletis, et judicia mea custodiatis, et operemini. Denique addit: Non propter vos ego faciam, ait Domitius Deus. Similialegere estDeuter. 30. et Jerem. 24. Sensus igitur promissionis est: Legem meam inseram animis eorum, potenter in eis operando, ut eam cognitam observent. Quod quidem facere, Dei proprium est, ait B. Thomas in commentario. Intelligitur autem lex, quae in decalogo scripta fuevat, et quidquid ad eam reducitur. Nam lex caeremonialis cessatura erat tempore novi testamenti. Quod vero Paulus, secutus LXX., plurali numero dixit leges, non dissidet. Umns enim decalogi plura sunt praecepta.
Et in corde eorum superscribam eas. Alii vertunt: inscribam. Non in Grceco repetitur eadem praepositio Itz\, tametsi Hebraicum ^V proprie super significat; sed hic eodem accipienda sunt: inseri-here et superscrihere. Sumpta est enim metaphora a membranis aut tabulis, in quibus, aut super quibus scribitur. Allusio est autem manitesta ad tabulas lapideas, quibus lex veteris testamenti fuerat inscripta; tamquam diceret Dominus: Novum hoc pactum feriam cum domo Israel, non iterum scripturus legem meam in tabulislapideis, sicut olimfeci; sed eam scripturus in cordibus eorum, sive, ut Apostolus loquitur 2 Cor. 3., in tabulis cordis carneis, id est per meam gratiam e£Scaciter inclinaturus eorum voluntates, ut legem meam ament et impleant. Haec gratia novi testamenti est; ad quam commendandam, ut bene Chrysostomus annotat, auctor gratiae Christus Dominus nihil in membranis aut chartis scriptum nobis relinquere voluit, ne his adminiculis ad imprimendam animis nostris legem suam opus habere videretur. Imo nec Apostoli ejus, nisi sero admodum, idque propter absentes et posteros, scribere coeperunt, ut testantur Irenaeus. lib. 3. adversus haereses, cap. 1., et Eusebius lib. 3. hist. eccles. cap. 24. Quidam inter hanc partem et praecedentem ita distinguunt, ut illic promitti inteHigatur illuminatio mentis ad legem cognoscendam, hic autem inclinatio cordis ad eandem implendam. Sed nostro judicio non recte. Nam agendorum et fugiendorum notitiam praestabat lex vetus: Per legem enim cognitio peccati; Gtpeccatum non cognovi, nisi per legem, inquit Apostolus Rom. 3. et 7. Idemque, ejusdem Epistolae cap. 2., Judaeum a gratia alienum et in sola lege requiescentem ita describit, ut dicat, eum nosse Dei voluntatem, et probare utiliora, videlicet instructum per legem, qui possit etiam alios docere ea, quae legis sunt. Non debuit ergo nuda mentis illuminatio de iis, quae agenda sunt, poni inter promissiones novi testamenti; sed ita demum poterit ad eas referri, quatenus per Dei gratiam ordinatur ad actionem, qua lex impleatur. Quocirca potius dicendam est, hanc partem a priori, quoad sententiam, non distingui; quemadmodum satis etiam intelligitur ex utriusque sensu jam dato. Neque enim infrequens est apud Prophetas, inculcationis causa rem eandem aliis verbis repeti. Ex dictis jam elucet verum, proprium atque praecipuum discrimen veteris legis ac novae. Quod enim ad praecepta attinet, moralia quidem utriusque legis eadem sunt, etsi caeremonialia diversa. Quare ex praeceptis discrimen illud peti non potest; sic enim solis caeremoniis differrent lex vetus et nova. Nec vero dicit Dominus per Prophetam: Dabo eis alia praecepta; sed: Dabo, inquit, leges meas in mentem eorum; atque in eo ponit discrimen. Unde patet, in testamento seu pacto novae legifi includi gratiam, quae praestet efficaciter, ut legem impleant omnes illi, ad quos hoc pactum pertinet. Quae gratia pacto veteris legis erat extranea. Haec igitur est, quae novam a vetere propriissime et, ut vere dicam, essentialiter discernit. Nam legem non nuda praecepta debemus intelligere, sed quatenus data sunt cum pactis ot promissionibus. Verum ex his emergunt duae tresve dubitationes. Quaeritur enim, quomodo valeat memoratum discrimen, cum tempore veteris testamenti in populo Israelitico non defuerint homines justi, qui legem datam servarent; sicut e diverso tempore novi testamenti multos esse constat in populo Christiano legis divinae transgressores. Respondeo, omnes justos, quotquot adventum Christi, quacumque aetate, praecesserunt, participes fuisso novi testamenti; nec aliter justificari potuisse, quam ejusdem novi testamenti participatione; caeterum Christianos ad novum testamentum non pertinere, nisi quatenus in eis promissio gratiae novi testamenti impletur. Itaque fatemur, tempore veteris testamenti quosdam fuisse novi testamenti filios; et contra temporo novi testamenti non paucos censeri filios testamenti veteris, videlicet eos omnes, qui carnalibus Judaeis similes, timore poenae, non amore justitiae legem servant; imo non servant, sed sibi servare videntur, ut loquitur Augustinus lib. 3. contra duas Epist. Pelag. cap. 4. Sed quaeres, quomodo potuerint antiqui justi participes esse novi testamenti, quod, per Jeremiam promissum, in Christi demum adventu praestandum fuit. Respondeo, testamentum novum, si primam ejus originem repetamus, initium accepisse statim a lapsu primi hominis, quando promissum est semen, quod contriturum esset caput serpentis, Gen. 3. Hoc enim semen est Christus Salvator, per quem, etsi longe post ventuium, promissa fuit omnium tempoium hominibus e potestate diaboli liberatio, divinae legis observatio et vita aeterna. Quo pertinent aliae similes de Christo venturo promissiones, si\e ad Abraham et Davidem factae, sive per PropLetas anuuntiatae, sive etiam per ipsas antiquae legis caeremonias significatae. Quod enim promissio facta Abrahae pertineat ad testamentum novum, docet nos Zacharias, Joannis Baptistae pater, in Cantico Luc. 1., ubi dicit, Deum memorari testamenti sui sancti ^ idque explicans, subjungit: Jusjurandum, quod juravit ad Abraham patrem nostrum, daturum se nobis, ut sine timore, de manu inimicorum nostrorum liberati, serviamus illi in sanctitate et justitia coram ipso omnibus diebus nostris. Quae profecto novi testamenti promissiones sunt. Liquet ergo, novum testamentum, si res ipsa spectetur, id est pactum et promissio novo testamento propria, tempore prius esse veteri testamento, quod datam est per Mosen. Recte tamen ac merito novum dicitur a Propheta; non solum quia hominem spiritualiter ex veteri facit novum, id quod gratiae proprium est; verum etiam ratione temporis; nam et sancitum est po- Bteriori tempore, scilicet in morte Christi redemptoris, et deinde mundo patefactum per Apostolorum praedicationem. Denique per idem tempus ac deinceps res promissa largius et copiosius est praestita. Quod proinde novi testamenti tempus appellatur. Alia dubitatio est, quomodo novum testamentum recte vocetur pactum seu foedus, quum promissionem contineat omnino grataitam, foederis autem ea sit natura, ut pactis hinc inde conditionibus ineatur. Nec est, qaod dicas, promissionem vitae aeternae exigere a nobis conditionem bonorum operum; nam et ipsa bona opera sub promissione novi testamenti continentur, Domino dicente: Dabo legem meam in mentem eorum, et: Faciam, ut in praeceptis meis ambuletis, Ezech. 36. Unde S. Prosper omnem conditionem a promissione novi testamenti removet, lib. 1. de vocat. gent. cap. 9. ita scribens: Manet prorsus, et quotidie impletur, quod Abrahae Dominus sine conditio7ie pruinisit, sine lege donavit. Hoc quippe est, quod Dominus apud Ezechielem dicit: Non propter vos ego faciam, sed propter nomen sanctum meum, ibidem. Ex quibus etiam refellitur imaginatio, qua dicere quis posset, hanc ipsam promissionem., qua dictum est: Dabo legem meam etc., ratam non fore, nisi etiam homo suum aliquid adferat praeter id, quod Deus se daturum promittit. Sic enim non absolute, nec sine conditione promisisset Deus. Quod si concesseris, poterit ergo novi testa,menti promissio frustrari, perinde ut veteris, homine pactam conditionem non servante; et de novo testamento dicetur, sicut de veteri: Quoniam ipsi non permanserunt in testamento meo, et ego neglexi eos. Quod est manifeste contra promittentis intentionem. Sed hujus dubitationis facilis erit solutio, si advertamus, vocabulum Hebraicum berith, pro quo nunc foedus, nunc pactum Latini reddunt interpretes, esse latae significationis, ut non solum ea com}a*ehendat, quae proprie foedera seu pacta dicuntur; verum etiam promissiones gratuitns et ab orani conditione liberas; imo et ordinationes Dei stabiles circa res inanimatas, a quibus nihil vicissim praestandum intelligi potest. Etenim promissio terrae Chanaan plane gratuita fuit, ipso Mose teste Deuter. 9. Quae tamen passim in Scriptura pactum vocatur, et quidem apertissime eo loco, ubi primum expressa ac distincta illius terrae facta est promissio, Gen. 15.: Tunc, inquit Moses, pepigit Dominus foedus cum y ^nham, dicens: Semini tuo dabo Lt-rafv hanc a flumine Aegypti etc. Ita quoque Dominus Genes. 9. in typum novi testamenti statr.it pactum cura generehumano, se nequaquam ultra deleturum eos aquis diluvii; ejusque pacti seu foederis signum ponit in nubibus arcum coelestem; nec ulla ibi conditio legitur. Rursum Jerem. 33. sic ait: Si irritum potest fieri pactum meum cum die, et pactum meum cum nocte, ut non sit dies et nox in tempore suo: et pactum meum irritum esse poterit cum David servo meOy ut non sit ex eo filius, qui regnet in throno ejus. Ubi sane priori loco ne iingi quidem poteyt conditio ex altera parte praestanda. Tale igitur pactum est hoc, quod vocatur novum testamentum; videlicet promissio Dei prorsus absoluta et gratuita, qua dignatus est homini in peccatum et interitum prolapso promittere Salvatorem, ac per eum peccatorum remissionem, legis obedientiam, hujusquemercedem vitam aeternam. Nunc ad reliqua prophetici testimonii pergamus.
Et ero eis in Deum, et ipsi erunt mihi in populum. Phrasis Hebraea pro eo, quod Latine diceretur: Et ero illis Deus, et ipsi erunt mihi populus, quemadmodum alii transtulerunt. Haec pars bifariam exponitur; aut hoc modo: Ego re ipsa me declarabo esse eorum Deum, in curam et tutelam meam eos recipiam, prosperabo eos et beatos faciam; juxta illud Psalmi: Beatus populus, cujus Dominus Deus ejus. Et ipsi vicissim factis oetendent, se esse populum meum, pure ac sincere me colendo, legesque meas observando. Aut sensu commutato, ad hunc modum: Illi me colent ut Deum suum, meisque mandatis obedient; et ego vicissim eos ut populum moum tuebor, et beneficentia mea complectar. Uterqae sensus probabilis est, et Hebraea loquendi forma neutrum respuit. Mihi tamen verisimilius est, utroque membro significari atfectum Dei in homines, quibus fit promissio; ut breviter hic Bit sensus: Ego me eis praestabo Deum, et habebo eos pro nopulo meo; id est, utroque nomine conjuncto: et quoniam ego D^us eorum ero, et quoniam ipsi populus meus erunt, benefaciam eis. Hic sensus prae aliis placet; cujus rationem dedi, quum ejusdem sententiae verba ex Levitico deprompta exponerera in 2 Cor. 6., ad quem locum lectorem remitto. Favet etiam illud similis formae, quodhabetnr hujus Epistolae cap. 1. 1 Ego ero illi in patrem, et ipse erit mihi in filium. Est autem eadem promissio, ct eodem sensu accipienda, quae, membris transpositis, legitur Apoc. 21.: Ipsi populus ejus erunt, et ipse Deus cum eis erit eorum Deus. Ex quo loco etiam intelligitur, hanc promissionem non solum esse temporis praesentis, sed extendi usque in futurum saeculum, ubi perfecte implebitur. Estque notandum; promissionem hanc non eandem esse cum praecedente, sed ex ea conseqiti. Prius est enim, ut legem suam Deus scribat in cordibus hominum, quam ut eos, tamquam populum sui cultorem, araplioribus beneficiis provehat et ad felicitatem aeternam perducat. Nam prius illud est donum justificationis; hoc vero complectitur ea beneficia, quae justificationem sequuntur.
8:11
11. Et non docebit unusquisque proximum suum, et unusquisque fratrem suum. Quidam Graeci codices loco proximi, iroXtTYjv, id est civem, legunt; atque ita vertit Stapulensis. Eadem varietas invenitur apud Jeremiam in exemplaribus ver.sionis interpretum LXX. Augustinus etiam lib. de spiritu et lit. cap. 19. legit civem. Sed et interpres Syrus secundum proprietatem linguae suae filium civitatis transtulit. Hebraica dictio n> "1 (reeh) significat socium, amicum, et in genere proximum, ut patet ex praecepto dilectionis proximi, quod habetur Levit. 19., et a Christo expositum est in Evangelio Luc. 10. Quamquam hoc loco Jeremiae strictius videtur accipi pro eo, qui est eiusdem civitatis aut reipublicae. Addit enim, quasi, quod dixerat, exponens: Et unusquisque fratrem suum. Nam fratres more Scripturae dicnntnr homines ejusdem gentis. Unde et alibi conjunguntur hae duae voces, velut cognatae significationis; ut Psalm. 121.: Propfer fratres meos et proximos meos loquebar pacem de te. Quocirca non est rejicienda lectio Graeca, quae habet civem; convenit enim cum significatione fratris.
Dicens: Cognosce Dominum. Nullus erit, inquit, qui proximum, scii civem, seii fratrem suum doceat nosse Deum. Ratio sequitur:
Quoniam omnes scient me, a minore usque ad majorem eorum. Graece: A parvo eorum usque ad magnum eorum, id est tam parvi, quam magni; quod nos diceremus: A minimo usque ad maximum, sicut et Hieronymus ex Hebraeo vertit. Refertur autem ad r.etatem, ut et alibi passim, etiam apud hunc ipsnra Prophetam, ut cap. 8. 42. et 44. Unde et Syrus vertit; usque ad senem, sivo (ut alius ex Syro Latine reddit) decrepitum. Sed diligenter explicanda esl haec promissio. Nam ut praeclara est, ita de sensu ejus non modica diificultas, quod non appareat, quando ant quomodo vel impleta sit, vel implenda. Quod enim tempus est novi testamenti, quo non sit opus, rudes cujusque aetatis homines inetruere ac docere, quae scire debeant, ut salvi fiant? Quorum primum est in Deum credere, quod est cognoscere Dominum. Dif&cultatem compendio videntur effugere, qui promissionem banc rejiciunt in faturum saeculum, ubi procul dubio omnis docendi cura cessabit. Cum enim venerit, quod perfectum est, evacuabitur j quod ex parte est, 1 Cor. 13. Sic Augustinus lib. de spiritu et lit. cap. 24. et 25., et eum secuti in commentariis PrimasiuB, seu quisquis auctor, et Anselmus, et Cajetanus. Sic et Theodoretus iuter Graecos. Sed cum tam praecedentia verba prophetici testimonii, quam ea, quao sequuntur, ad statura saeculi praesentis pertineant: utique consentaneum est, hanc quoque prcmissionis partem eodem referri; praesertim cum, Hieronymo teste, sicut initio monuimus, omnes ecclesiastici viri dicant, haec univeisa in primo Salvatoris adventu esse compJeta. Quare videndum, quid alii commentatores senserint. Ipse Hieron^nilus interpretatur, promitti filiis Israel, futurum, nt nequaquam Judaicos quaerant magistroB, et traditiones et mandata hominum, sed doceantur a Spiritu sancto. Chrysostomus exponit de manifestatione legis evangelicae per omnes gontes. Theophylactus et Oecumenius negari putant laboriosam institutionem, eo quod facili negotio persuadeatur hominibus fides Christi. S. Thomas in solis primis novi testamenti fundatoribus, id est Apostolis a Christo perfecte edoctis, censet impletam esse hanc promissionem, si quidem pertineat ad praesens saeculum; alioqui propensior in eam sententiam, quae refert ad statum beatorum. Nonnulli generalius exponunt, tamquam dictum de fidelibus Ecclesiae primitivae, quorum magna pars talis fuerit, ut in eos competeret ilhid, quod ad Corinthios scribit Apostolus 1 Epist. 1.: In omnibus divites facti estis in Christo, in omni verbo et in omni scientia, ita ut nihil vobis desit in ulla gratia. Rursus alia quaedam expositio refert ad totum tempus gratiae, non tamen ad totam fidelium multitudinem, sed ad majorem et meliorem partem, cujus numerus Deo cognitus sit. Alia denique, quae est Francisci Riberae, extendit ad omnes omnino fideles. Quoniam, inquit, de omnibus et singulis Christi fidelibus verum est, eos per fidem scire Deum et Christum ejus. Ut autem in hac commentariorum varietate verum Prophetae sensum assequamur, proferendae sunt in medium aliae Scripturae similes, quarum collatione praesens locus ilhistretur. Ejusmodi imprimis est illa Jes. 54.: Ponam universos filios tuos doctos a Domino. Quam esse novi testamenti promissionem, ad tempus gratiae Christi pertinentem, certissime constat ipsius Christi testimonio, Joan. 6.: Estscriptum, inquit, in Prophetis: Et erunt omnes docibiles Dei. Deinde exponendo subjungit: Omnis, qui audivit a Patre et didicit, venit ad me. Quod haud dubie de gratia novi testamenti dictum est, et neque ad solos spectat Apostolos, neque ad solos primi temporis Christianos, sed ad totum tempus novae legis. Hoc autem Jesaiae testimoniam in eandem convenire sententiam cum isto Jeremiae, docet Hieronymus in Jesaiae commentariis. Persimilis est locus apud eundem Prophetam cap. 11., ubi post annuntiatum Christi adventum de tempore Ecclesiae consequenter addit: Quia repleta est terra scientia Dominij sicut aquae maris operientes. Ubi nota, quod tetram nominat, non coelum, ne quis ad Ecclesiam in coelo regnantem remitt&t hoc vaticinium. Simile est et illud, quod Joannes 1 Epist. 2. scribit generatim ad fideles: Vos unctionem habetis a Sancto, et nostis omnia. Non scripsi vobis, quasi ignorantibus veritatem; sed quasi scientibus eam. Et paulo post: ^on necesse habetii, ut aliquis doceat vos; sed sicut unctio ejus docet vos de omnibus. Hoc quid aliud est, quam quod per Jeremiam Dominus praedixit: Non docebit unusquisque proximum, quoniam omnes scient me? Eodem prorsus modo Paulus loquitur 1 Thessal. 4.: De caritate fraternitatis, inquit, non necesse habetis (ita in Graeco est), ut scribam vobis. Ipsi enim vos a Deo didicistis, ut diligatis invicem. Etenim illud facitis in omnes fratres. His ita praemissis, ad intelligentiam praesentis loci tria notanda sunt. Primum est, Prophetam loqui non de nuda cognitione Dei, qualis fuit eorum, de quibusdiciturRom. 1.: Quia, cumcognovissent Deum, non sicut Deum glorificaverunt; aut qualis Judaeorum, in Dei notitia et lege gloriantium, ibidem cap. 2. Nec de cognitione profundorum Dei mysteriorum, quae Paulus loquebatur inter perfectos, spiritualibus spiritualia comparans, 1 Cor. 2. Sedde notitia Dei, quanta necessaria est ad salutem, eaque viva, formata, et (ut ita dicam) affectiva, qua nimirum sic cognoscitur Deus, ut affectus cognitioni respondeat, id est ut etiam, sicut diligendus est, diligatur; quomodo notitia Dei tum in prima Epistola Joannis, tum alibi in Scripturis frequenter accipitur. Ad hoc indicandum Jonathas ChaldaeuB illa Prophetae verba: Cognosce Dominum, quoniam omnes scient me. reddidit hac paraphrasi: Scitote timere Dominum, quia omnes discent, ut sciant timorem mei. Constat enim, in Scriptu.ris per timorem Domini passim significari sincerum cultum et pietatem in Deum. Secundum ex primo consequens est, promissionem hanc nec ad omnes homines (etsi generali nomine proximos) pertinere, nec vero ad omnes Christianos, bonos et malos; sed ad omnes ac solos filios novi testamenti, qui sunt filii promissionis. Huc imprimis facit, quod civem ac fratrem nominat, id est hominem ejusdem civitatis ac familiae; quae civitas ac familia non alia est, quam Ecclesia credentium. Deinde probatur, quia haec promissio est novi testamenti, quemadmodum et duae praecedentes et ea, quae subsequitur; quae proinde omnes filiis novi testamenti propriae sunt, et a malis Christianis alienae. Declaratur hoc ipsum ex differentia veteris ac novi testamenti. Nam vetus testamentum dabat quidem Dei legisque notitiam, sed sterilem atque fructu divini amoris ac bonorum operum vacuam. Itaque qui sub veteri erant testamento, non permanserunt (ut hic dicitur) in testamento Dei, quia pactum observandae legis non custodierunt; sed opus erat illis dicere: Cognosce Dominum, nec tamen cognoverunt; quemadmodum supra cap. 3. dictum est de ilHs: Ipsi autem non cognoverunt vias meas, et Tit. 1.: Confitentur, se nosse Deum, factis autem negant. At novum testamentum praebet spiritum gratiae et caritatis, facitque legem impleri, juxta promissionem superius expositam» Et ideo novi testamenti filii permanent in testamento, cognoscentes Dominum ea notitia, de qua nunc eermo est. Quibus proinde non est opus homine doctore, qui dicat eis: Cognosce Dominum. Tertio notandum est, in verbis Prophetae significationem esse cujusdam immensae multitudinis eorum, qui cognoscent Dominum. Dicens enim: Omnes scient me, a minore usque ad majorem eorum, indicat, hanc Dei notitiam, simul cum Ecclesia, latissime per gentes propagatum iri. Id quod expressius significatum est supra citatis Jesaiae verbis: Repleta est terra scientia Domini. Ex dictis igitur hunc colligo sensum promissionis: Inter eos omnes, quibus feriam testamentum novum, nullus erit, qui proximum seu fratrem suum, videlicet ejusdem populi civem, ejusdemque testamenti consortem, doceat notitiam, amorem et observantiam mei. Nec sane opus erit. Omnes enim illi (quorum quidem erit maxima. longeque ac late diMisa multitudo) cognoscent, amabunt, observabunt me. Ratio manifesta ex praecedentibus testamenti verbis: Quia legem meam habebunt inditam et inscriptam in cordibus suis; item quia, secundum nlterum Prophetam, erunt docti a Domino, et, secundum Joannem, habentes unctionem magistram a Spiritu Sancto. Locum hunc Anabaptistae pneumatici trahere solent ad patrocinium sui erroris, quo dicunt, post adventum Christi cessare debere externum verbi ministerium, velut supervacaneum, ubi intus adspirat et docet Deus. Verum facile refelluntur. Nam quomodo hic eubmovetur extemum ministerium docentis, quod ipsum Paulus, sibi divinitus injunctum, tanto studio tantisque laboribus subiit? Qui etiam pastores et doctores a Christo datos Ecclesiae testatur Ephes. 4. Sed hoc loco negatur, opus esse doctrina et institutiono humana, quam interior Spiritus S. doctrina praevenerit. lis autem, qui nondum didicerunt cognoscere Dominum, sive in Ecclesia sint, sive e^tra, adhibenda est ab hominibus docendi cura, ut discant; ita tamen, ut fructus omnis exspectetur a magistro intus docente Spiritu S., quia, neque qui plantat, est aliquid, neque qui rigat; sed qui incrementum dat Deus, 1 Oor. 3.
8:12
12. Quia propitius ero iniquitatibus eorum, et peccatorum eorum jam non memorabor. Plus est in Graecis codicibuB; sic enim habent: Quia propitius ero injustitiis eorum, et peccatorum eorum et iniquitatum eorum non recordabor ampJius Caeteram quid veteres Graeci legerint, ex eorum commentariis non liquet. In fonte Hebraeo et apud LXX, non plus legitur, quam quod hic habent codices nostri Latini, quibus et Syriaca translatio consentit; ut verisimile sit, in Graecis temere seu casu quopiam additum esse illud: etiniquitatum eorum. Nec puto, quaerendum hoc loco discrimen inter iniguitatem et peccatum, ut quae in Prophetis et P.salmis fere pro eodem accipiantur. Porro hanc promissionem multi interpretantur de remissione peccatorum, quae fit in baptismo, iu quo sic abolentur peccata, ut nec ad aeternam, nec ad temporalem futuri saeculi poenam Deus eorum recordetur. Juxta quem intellectum est hic species quaedam occupationis. Nam dicipoterat, omnes esse peccatores, ot per hoc indignos beneficiis ante commemoratis, et ad ea ineptos. Ad hoc quasi lespondens, promittit, se omnium peccatorum impedimenta simul et semel ablaturum, ut eos caeteris suis beneficiis aptos reddat. Sed quia remissio omnium peccatorum, etiam post baptisma commissorum, perlinet ad gratiam novi testamenti, nihil vetat, eam in universum sub hac promissione comprehendi. Nam etiam relapsorum peccata remittens, Deus dicitur eorum non amplius recordari et ea non imputare, Ezech. 18. et 33. et Psalm. 31.; quia nimirum ea non imputat ad poenam aeteraam, quae proprium est mortalis peccati stipendium. Quod autem hujusmodi peccatorum remissio etiam sit in promissione, probant hae Scripturae, 1 Reg. 7.: Qui si inique aliquid gesserit, arguam eum; misericordiam autem meam non auferam ab eo; Psalm. 88.: Si dereliquerint filii ejus legem meam, visitabo in virga iniquitates eorum; misericordiam autem meam non dispergam ab eo. Quae loca mystice de novi testamenti filiis accipienda, non est dubium. Hic generalis sensus si placet, dicemus, voculam quia non causaliter sumi, sed expletive, quod in Hebraea lingua frequens est; ut sensus sit: Denique, ut nihil desit ad gratiam, nihilque relinquatur impedimenti ad vitam aeternam, omnia eis peccata tam priora quam posteriora condonabo. Hactenus cxposnimus verba Prophetae; sequitur Apostolus:
8:13
13. Dicendo autem novum, veteravit prius. Veteravit, Latinius: antiquavit f ut est in textu Ambrosii, sicut et interpres ipse mox vertit ejusdem Graeci verbi passivum: antiquatur. Adduxit Apostolus propheticum testimonium, ut probaret aliud quoddam, id est a priore diversum, testamentum a Deo promitti, ideoque prius illud habiturum finem; sicut diximus ad ea verba: Non utique secundi locus inquireretur, supra v. 7. Nunc, quoniam secundum hoc testamentum a Propheta appellatum est novum, inde rursus argumentum sumit, quo doceat, prius abrogandum. Nam Propheta, cum dicit novum, consequenter illud prius declarat esse vetus; novum enim respectu veteris dicitur. Ubi denuo nota singulare studium Apostoli in observandis et ponderandis Scripturae verbis. Etenim nusquam alibi in tota Scriptura veteris instrumenti (quod et Augustinus animadvertit lib. de spiritu et litera, cap. 20.) testamentum seu foedus, quod prioris loco Deus promiftit, appellatur novum. Quod ergo semel tantummodo legitur, id Apostolus arripit, expendit, et pro novo argumento assumit, aliud ex eo colligens, quod nusquam in Scriptura legerat, scilicet, prius testamentum esse vetus. Quidam veteravit interpretantur: abrogavit, quomodo dicitur antiquatum, quod abrogatum est; sed minus recte. Nam abrogationem futuram, deinceps ex eo, quia vetus est, concludit.
Quod autem antiquatur et senescit, prope interitum est. Pro interitu Graece: acpaviOjjLog, deductum a verbo a^aviCo- /xai, quod signilicat: dispareo, e conspectu evanesco. Undo Erasmus et alii vertunt: prope est, ut evanescat. Sensus tamen idem est. Nam qrae intereunt, evanescunt. Unde et verbale hoc pro interitu sumitur apud Graecos. Usus est autem moUiori vocabulo propter honorem foederis antiqui, quod erat a Deo; tum ne suos Hebraeos offendat. Est vero Apostoli ratiocinatio talis: Hoc testamentum novum est; ergo illud vetus. Porro quod vetus est, in dies magis magisque veterascit, et (ut in hominibus) senescit; quod autem veterascit aut senescit, ad interitum et mortem properat. Ex quo concludendum relinquit, prius testamentum tandem debuisse finiri, atque in plenitudine temporis, id est revelato firmatoque per Christum novo testamento, finem accepisse. Vim argumenti probat experientia. Consonant etiam Scripturae, Levit. 26.: Vetera, novis advenientibm, projicietis; et 2 Cor. 5.: Vetera transierunt; ecce, facta sunt omnia nova. CAPOTNONOffl.
8:2
… by the Septuagint, to indicate, therefore, the sacred office of the priests and Levites in the Temple; thus too it was used by the writers of the New Testament (Lk. 1:23 with regard to Zechariah), also to designate the acts of Jesus as eternal priest (Hebr. 8:2); similar expressions are found in the Didaché (15:1) and in Clement of Rome (To the Corinthians, 44:2). Later it meant only the act of worship par excellence, the Mass (perhaps …
… In the one elected to Grace, sin carries with it a mystery of malice and of decay that cannot be repaired as is fitting except by the priesthood, the ministry (Heb. 8:2) and immolation of the God-Man (ibid. 2:10-15). True it is that the capital act of reparation, the Redemption (v.), will remain exclusively personal to the Incarnate Word; but, organized …
8:7
… (cf. Acts 7:53), which was only an L. or a revelation (λόγος), and that inaugurated by Christ, which is a salvation (σωτηρία), that is, a religious institution that saves (Hebr. 2:2 ff.); between the first covenant, which was not without defects (ibid. 8:7), and the second, which has its laws written in minds and hearts, rather than on stone (ibid. 8:8 ff.).
8:8
… which is a salvation (σωτηρία), that is, a religious institution that saves (Hebr. 2:2 ff.); between the first covenant, which was not without defects (ibid. 8:7), and the second, which has its laws written in minds and hearts, rather than on stone (ibid. 8:8 ff.).
His kingdom will be universal, definitive and spiritual: Is. 11, 10; 42, 1-7; 49, 5 ff.; 61, 1 ff.; Jer. 31, 31-34 (= Hebr. 8, 8-12); Dan. 7, 14-27; 9, 24; its center of diffusion will be Zion (Hos. 2, 19-24; Is. 2, 2 ff.; Mic. 4, 2 ff.; Jer. 31, 33; Ez. 16, 60 ff.; 17, 23; etc.); it will be a source of blessings …
8:13
… Thus, as Old Testament (cf. Hebr. 8, 13) was designated the ancient period of Revelation in which God had made a "pact" or "covenant" with the nation of Israel alone; as New Testament (cf. Mt. 26, 28; II Cor. 3, 6), …
economy, has ceased (II Cor. 5:17; Heb. 8:13); we are near the "end of all things" of the world (Heb. 10:25, 37; Jas. 5:8; I Pet. 4:7; I John 2:18). When the Apostles proclaim "the Lord is near" (Phil. 4:5; Rom. 13:11; Jas. 5:8; …
Douay-Rheims (Challoner) · Vulgata Clementina · original Douay-Rheims (Rheims 1582), transcription by EEBO-TCP (CC0) · La Sacra Bibbia, tradotta dalla Volgata da Antonio Martini (1769-1781) (LaParola (laparola.net), Martini OSIS text, Public domain (LaParola's electronic edition marks it 'Dominio pubblico')). Public domain.