The Lord's Sermon on the Mount 1.18–1.21

But now, to conclude this summary too, what more laborious and toilsome thing can be said or thought, in which the faithful mind may exert all the sinews of its industry, than overcoming a vicious habit? Let him cut off the members that hinder the kingdom of heaven, and not be broken by the pain; let him bear in conjugal fidelity all things which, however very troublesome, yet do not involve the crime of unlawful corruption, that is, of sexual immorality: for instance, if anyone has a wife who is barren, or deformed in body, or weak in her limbs, or blind, or deaf, or lame, or anything else, or worn down by diseases and pains and sicknesses, and whatever can be thought exceedingly dreadful except sexual immorality, let him bear it for the sake of fidelity and fellowship; and not only let him not cast off such a wife, but even if he does not have one, let him not marry a woman released from her husband, though she be beautiful, healthy, rich, fruitful. And if it is not lawful to do these things, let him think much less that he is permitted to approach any other unlawful intercourse; and let him so flee sexual immorality as to draw himself away from all base corruption. Let him speak the truth, and commend it not by frequent oaths but by uprightness of character; let him take refuge in the citadel of Christian warfare and from higher ground, as it were, lay low the countless hordes of all evil habits rebelling against him, of which a few have been mentioned so that all might be understood. But who would dare to undertake such great labours, except one who so burns with love of righteousness that, as though most vehemently inflamed by hunger and thirst, and thinking he has no life until he is filled with it, he does violence to the kingdom of heaven? For otherwise he will not be strong enough to bear all the things which the lovers of this world think laborious and arduous and altogether difficult in cutting off habits. “Blessed,” then, “are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be filled.”

Yet in these labours, when anyone suffers difficulty, and, making his way through hard and rough places, surrounded by various temptations, and seeing the mass of his past life rising up on this side and that, fears that he may not be able to fulfil what he has undertaken, let him seize upon counsel, that he may deserve help. And what other counsel is there but that he who desires to be helped by God in his own weakness should bear the weakness of others and help as far as he can? Accordingly, then, let us look at the precepts of mercy. The meek and the merciful seem to be one; but there is this difference, that the meek man, of whom we treated above, out of piety does not contradict the divine sentences that are pronounced against his sins, nor those words of God which he does not yet understand, but he confers no benefit on the one whom he does not contradict or resist; whereas the merciful man does not resist in such a way that he does it for the correction of the one whom he would make worse by resisting.

The Lord, then, goes on and says: “You have heard that it was said, An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. But I say to you, do not resist evil; but if anyone strikes you on your right cheek, offer him the other also; and whoever wishes to go to law with you and take your tunic, let him have your garment also; and whoever compels you to go a thousand paces, go with him two more. Give to everyone who asks you, and do not turn away from him who wishes to borrow from you.” The lesser righteousness of the Pharisees is not to exceed the measure in revenge, so that no one repays more than he has received; and this is a great step. For no one is easily found who, having received a blow, wishes to return only one blow, and who, having heard one word from a reviler, is content to return one word that is worth just as much; but either, disturbed by anger, he avenges himself immoderately, or he thinks it just that the one who injured first should be injured more gravely than the one who had given no offence was injured. Such a mind the Law in great part reined in, in which it is written, “An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth,” by which words a measure is signified, so that the vengeance does not exceed the injury. And this is the beginning of peace; but perfect peace is to wish for no such vengeance at all.

Between that first thing, then, which is outside the law, that a greater evil be returned for a lesser evil, and this which the Lord said to make his disciples perfect, that no evil at all be returned for evil, a certain middle place is held: that as much be returned as was received, by which a passage has been made from the highest discord to the highest concord, according to the distribution of times. See, then, how far he who first inflicts evil from a desire to injure and harm is from one who does not repay even when injured. But whoever has first done evil to no one, but yet, when injured, repays more gravely, whether in will or in deed, has withdrawn somewhat from the highest iniquity and advanced toward the highest righteousness, and yet does not yet hold what the law given through Moses commanded. He, then, who returns as much as he received already forgives something; for the guilty party does not deserve only as great a punishment as the innocent one, injured by him, has suffered. This righteousness, then, which is begun and is not severe but merciful, he brings to perfection who came to fulfil the law, not to abolish it. So he left the two steps that still lie between to be understood, and preferred to speak of the very summit of mercy. For there is still something that one can do who does not fulfil this greatness of the precept which pertains to the kingdom of heaven: that he return not as much, but less, for instance one blow for two, or cut off an ear for an eye plucked out. Rising from here, he who repays nothing at all approaches the Lord’s precept, and yet is not yet there. For it still seems little to the Lord if, for the evil you have received, you repay no evil, unless you are also ready to receive more. Wherefore he does not say, “But I say to you, do not return evil for evil,” although this too is a great precept; but he says, “do not resist evil,” so that you not only do not repay what has been inflicted on you, but also do not resist the infliction of more. For this is what he also goes on to explain: “But if anyone strikes you on your right cheek, offer him the other also.” For he does not say, “If anyone strikes you, do not strike him,” but, “Make yourself ready for him to strike you further.” That this belongs to mercy is felt most by those who serve the ones they love much, such as their children or any of their dearest when they are sick, or little ones, or the delirious, from whom they often suffer much; and if their health requires it, they offer themselves to suffer still more, until the weakness of age or of illness passes. Those, then, whom the Lord, the physician of souls, was instructing to cure their neighbours, what else could he teach but to bear with an even mind the weaknesses of those whose welfare they wished to serve? For all wickedness comes from weakness of mind, since nothing is more innocent than one who is perfect in virtue.

But it can be asked what the right cheek means. For so it is found in the Greek copies, to which greater trust must be given; for many Latin ones have only “cheek,” not “right” also. Now the face is that by which each one is recognized; and we read in the Apostle, “For you bear it if someone enslaves you, if someone devours you, if someone takes from you, if someone exalts himself, if someone strikes you in the face”; then he immediately adds, “I speak as regards dishonour,” to explain what it is to be struck in the face, that is, to be despised and looked down on. The Apostle does not say this so that they should not bear with those men, but so that they should bear rather with him, who loved them so much that he was willing to be spent for them. But since a face cannot be called right and left, and yet there can be honour both according to God and according to this world, it is divided as it were into a right cheek and a left, so that any disciple of Christ in whom what is Christian has been despised may be much more ready to have despised in himself whatever honours of this world he has. So the same Apostle, when men were persecuting the Christian name in him, would not have offered the other cheek to those who struck the right if he had kept silent about the rank he had in the world. For by saying, “I am a Roman citizen,” he was not unready to have despised in himself what he held as least, by those who had despised in him a name so precious and saving. For did he on that account bear any the less afterward the chains which it was not lawful to put on Roman citizens, or did he wish to accuse anyone of this injury? And if some spared him because of the name of Roman citizenship, yet he did not therefore fail to offer something for them to strike, since he desired by his patience to correct from so great a perversity those whom he saw honouring in him the left parts more than the right. For this alone must be attended to: with what mind he did all things, how kindly and gently he acted toward those from whom he suffered these things. For when, struck with the palm at the high priest’s command, he seemed to speak insultingly in saying, “God will strike you, you whitewashed wall,” it sounds like abuse to those who understand little, but to those who understand it is prophecy. For a whitewashed wall is hypocrisy, that is, pretence that displays priestly dignity and under this name, as under a white covering, hides an inner, as it were muddy, foulness. For what belonged to humility he kept wonderfully: when it was said to him, “Do you revile the chief of the priests?” he answered, “I did not know, brothers, that he is chief of the priests; for it is written, You shall not revile the ruler of your people.” Here he showed with how much tranquillity he had said what he seemed to have said in anger, since he answered so quickly and so gently, which cannot be done by the indignant and disturbed. And in that very word he spoke truly to those who understand: “I did not know that he is chief of the priests”; as if he said, “I have known another chief of the priests, for whose name I endure these things, whom it is not lawful to revile, and whom you revile, since in me you hate nothing but his name.” So one must not make a show of these things in pretence, but be prepared in the heart itself for all things, so as to be able to sing that prophetic word: “My heart is ready, O God, my heart is ready.” For many know how to offer the other cheek, but do not know how to love him by whom they are struck. But the Lord himself, who certainly first fulfilled the precepts he taught, did not offer the other cheek to the priest’s servant who struck him on the cheek, but said besides, “If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil; but if well, why do you strike me?” Yet he was not on that account unprepared in heart not only to be struck on the other cheek for the salvation of all, but to be crucified in his whole body.

Therefore what follows too, “And whoever wishes to go to law with you and take your tunic, let him have your garment also,” is rightly understood as a precept for the preparation of the heart, not for a show of the deed. But what was said of the tunic and the garment is to be done not in these alone, but in all the things which we say are ours by some right for a time. For if this was commanded about necessary things, how much more fitting is it to despise superfluous ones? Yet the things I have called ours are to be included in that class which the Lord himself prescribes, saying, “If anyone wishes to go to law with you and take your tunic.” So let all those things be understood about which there can be a lawsuit with us, so that they pass from our right into the right of him who sues or for whom he sues; such as clothing, a house, an estate, a beast of burden, and in general all property. Whether this is to be taken also of slaves is a great question. For a Christian ought not to possess a slave as he does a horse or silver, although it can happen that a horse is worth a higher price than a slave, and much more some object of gold or silver. But if that slave is brought up or governed by you, his master, more rightly and honourably and more suitably for worshipping God than he can be by the one who desires to take him away, I do not know whether anyone would dare to say that he should be disregarded like a garment. For man ought to love man as himself, since he is commanded by the Lord of all, as what follows shows, to love even his enemies.

Certainly it must be noted that every tunic is a garment, but not every garment is a tunic. The word “garment,” then, signifies more than the word “tunic.” And therefore I think it was said thus, “And whoever wishes to go to law with you and take your tunic, let him have your garment also,” as if he said, “Whoever wishes to take your tunic, let him have also whatever other clothing you have.” That is why some have translated as “cloak” what is set down in Greek as ἱμάτιον.

“And whoever compels you,” he says, “to go a thousand paces, go with him two more.” And this certainly not so much that you do it with your feet as that you be ready in mind. For in the Christian history itself, in which there is authority, you will find nothing of the kind done by the saints, or by the Lord himself when, in the human nature which he deigned to take up, he was giving us an example of living; although in almost all places you will find them to have been ready to bear with an even mind whatever had been wickedly thrust upon them. But are we to think that “go with him two more” was said by way of example? Or did he want three to be completed, by which number perfection is signified, so that whoever does this may remember that he is fulfilling perfect righteousness by mercifully bearing the weaknesses of those whom he wishes to be made whole? It can seem that he also set forth these precepts with three examples for this reason: the first of which is, if anyone strikes you on the cheek; the second, if anyone wishes to take your tunic; the third, if anyone compels you to go a thousand paces: in which third example the double is added to the single, so that the triple is completed. If this number here does not, as has been said, signify perfection, let it be taken thus: that in commanding he began with what is more bearable and rose gradually until he reached the bearing of a further double. For first he wished the other cheek to be offered when the right has been struck, so that you are ready to bear less than you have borne. For whatever the right signifies is certainly dearer than what the left signifies; and one who has borne something in a dearer matter, if he bears it also in a cheaper one, bears less. Next he commands that the garment also be given up to him who wishes to take the tunic, which is either just as much or not much more, yet not double. Third, concerning the thousand paces, to which he says two thousand are to be added, he commands you to bear even up to a further double: thus signifying that whether anyone wishes to be somewhat less wicked toward you than he has already been, or just as much, or more, it is to be borne with an even mind.

In these kinds of the three examples I see that no kind of injury has been passed over. For all the things in which we suffer some wickedness are divided into two kinds, of which one is what cannot be restored, the other what can. In that which cannot be restored, the consolation of vengeance is usually sought. For what does it profit that, having been struck, you strike back? Is what was injured in the body restored to wholeness on that account? But a swollen mind desires such poultices; whereas they do not help a sound and firm mind, which rather judges that the weakness of another is to be borne mercifully than that its own weakness, which is none, should be soothed by another’s punishment.

Nor is that punishment forbidden here which serves for correction; for it too pertains to mercy; nor does it hinder that resolve by which one is ready to bear more from him whom he wishes to be corrected. But no one is fit to administer this punishment except one who has overcome by the greatness of his love the hatred with which those who desire to avenge themselves usually burn. For there is no fear that parents may seem to hate a little son when he is beaten by them for sinning, so that he may not sin further. And certainly the perfection of love itself is set before us in imitation of God the Father, when it is said in what follows, “Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who persecute you”; and yet it is said of him through the prophet, “For whom the Lord loves he corrects, and he scourges every son whom he receives.” The Lord too says, “The servant who does not know his master’s will and does things worthy of stripes will be beaten with few; but the servant who knows his master’s will and does things worthy of stripes will be beaten with many.” Nothing more is required, then, than that he punish to whom power has been given in the order of things, and that he punish with the will that a father has toward his little son, whom, because of his age, he cannot yet hate. For from here the most fitting example is drawn, by which it is made sufficiently clear that sin can be punished out of love rather than be left unpunished, so that he wishes the one he punishes to be not wretched by the penalty but blessed by the correction; yet ready, if need be, to bear with an even mind more things inflicted by him whom he wishes to be corrected, whether he has power to restrain him or not.

But great and holy men, who already knew very well that this death which dissolves the soul from the body is not to be feared, nevertheless, in accordance with the mind of those who feared it, punished some sins with death, so that a useful fear might be struck into the living, and so that those who were punished with death might be harmed not by death itself but by sin, which could have increased if they had lived. Those to whom God had granted such judgment did not judge rashly. Hence it is that Elijah put many to death, both with his own hand and by fire obtained from God; which many other great and godly men also did, not rashly, by the same spirit of care for human affairs. When the disciples had cited this Elijah as an example, reminding the Lord of what had been done by him, that he might give them too power to call down fire from heaven to consume those who would not give them hospitality, the Lord rebuked in them not the example of the holy prophet, but the ignorance about punishing that was still in the untaught, noticing that they desired vengeance not out of love for correction but out of hatred. And so, after he had taught them what it is to love one’s neighbour as oneself, and had also poured out the Holy Spirit, whom he sent from above, as he had promised, when ten days were completed after his ascension, such punishments were not lacking, although much more rarely than in the Old Testament. For there for the greater part, being servants, they were pressed down by fear; but here they were nourished chiefly by love, as free men. For at the words of the apostle Peter too, Ananias and his wife, as we read in the Acts of the Apostles, fell down lifeless and were not raised up but buried. But if the heretics who oppose the Old Testament will not believe this book, let them look at the apostle Paul, whom they read along with us, saying of a certain sinner whom he handed over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that his soul may be saved. And if they will not understand death here (for perhaps it is uncertain), let them admit that some punishment was carried out by the Apostle through Satan; and that he did this not out of hatred but out of love is shown by the addition, “that his soul may be saved.” Or let them notice what we say in those books to which they themselves attribute great authority, where it is written that the apostle Thomas called down on someone by whom he had been struck with the palm the punishment of a most dreadful death, yet commended his soul, that he might be spared in the world to come; and when the man had been killed by a lion, a dog brought his hand, torn from the rest of the body, to the tables at which the Apostle was feasting. We are free not to believe this writing, for it is not in the catholic canon; yet they read it and honour it as most uncorrupted and most true, who rage most fiercely, with I know not what blindness, against the bodily punishments in the Old Testament, altogether ignorant with what intent and in what distribution of times they were carried out.

In this kind of injuries, then, which is atoned for by punishment, Christians will keep this measure: that when an injury has been received, the mind does not rise into hatred, but, out of mercy for weakness, is ready to suffer more; nor does it neglect correction, which it can use by counsel, or by authority, or by power. The other kind of injuries is that which can be restored to wholeness, of which there are two species, one pertaining to money, the other to labour. Therefore examples have been added, of the former concerning the tunic and the garment, of the latter concerning the forced service of a thousand and two thousand paces; because both a garment can be given back, and one whom you have helped with labour can himself also help you, if need be. Unless perhaps it should rather be distinguished thus: that the first, set down about the struck cheek, signifies all things inflicted by the wicked in such a way that they cannot be restored except by punishment; the second, set down about the garment, signifies all things that can be restored without punishment (and perhaps for this reason it was added, “Whoever wishes to go to law with you,” because what is taken away through a lawsuit is not thought to be taken away by the kind of force to which punishment is due); and the third is made from both, so that it can be restored both without punishment and with punishment. For he who violently exacts labour not owed, without any lawsuit, as does one who wickedly presses a man into service and unlawfully forces him to help against his will, can both pay the penalty of his wickedness and give back the labour, if he who bore the wickedness asks for it back. In all these kinds of injuries, then, the Lord teaches that the mind of a Christian must be most patient and most merciful and most ready to bear more.

But since it is little not to harm unless you also confer a benefit as far as you can, he goes on to add, “Give to everyone who asks you, and do not turn away from him who wishes to borrow from you.” “To everyone who asks,” he says; not “everything to one who asks”: so that you give what you can give honourably and justly. For what if he asks for money with which to try to oppress an innocent person? What, finally, if he asks for an act of sexual immorality? But, not to pursue many cases, which are countless, that is certainly to be given which harms neither you nor another, as far as can be known or believed by a man; and to one whom you have justly refused what he asks, justice itself is to be pointed out, so that you do not send him away empty. Thus you will give to everyone who asks you, although you will not always give what he asks; and sometimes you will give something better, when you have corrected one who asks for unjust things. And as for his saying, “Do not turn away from him who wishes to borrow from you,” it is to be referred to the mind. “For God loves a cheerful giver.” Now everyone who receives borrows, even if he himself is not going to pay back; for since God restores more to the merciful, everyone who confers a benefit lends at interest. Or if it is not agreeable to take “the borrower” except as one who receives and will repay, it must be understood that the Lord has embraced these two kinds of giving. For either we give as a gift what we give with good will, or we lend to one who will repay. And often men who are ready to give when the divine reward is set before them become slow to give what is asked as a loan, as if they were going to receive nothing from God, since he who receives pays back the thing that is given. Rightly, then, does the divine authority exhort us to this kind of conferring a benefit, saying, “And do not turn away from him who wishes to borrow from you”: that is, do not estrange your will from him who asks for the reason that your money will lie idle and God will not repay you, since the man will repay; but when you do this by God’s precept, it cannot be fruitless with him who commands these things.

Next he adds and says: “You have heard that it was said, You shall love your neighbour and hate your enemy. But I say to you, love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven, who commands his sun to rise on the good and the evil, and sends rain on the just and the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what reward will you have? Do not even the tax collectors do this? And if you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing? Do not even the Gentiles do this very thing? Be perfect, therefore, as your Father who is in heaven is perfect.” For without this love, by which we are commanded to love even our enemies and persecutors, who can fulfil what was said above? And the perfection of mercy, by which the labouring soul is most cared for, cannot be extended beyond love of an enemy; and therefore it is concluded thus: “Be perfect, therefore, as your Father who is in heaven is perfect”; yet so that God is understood to be perfect as God, and the soul perfect as a soul.

That there is nevertheless some step in the righteousness of the Pharisees, which pertains to the old Law, is understood from this, that many men hate even those by whom they are loved, as dissolute sons hate the parents who restrain their dissoluteness: he, then, climbs some step who loves his neighbour, although he still hates his enemy. But by the command of him who came to fulfil the Law, not to abolish it, he will bring good will and kindness to perfection when he has carried it as far as love of an enemy. For that step, though it is something, is yet so small that it can be shared even with the tax collectors. Nor is what was said in the Law, “You shall hate your enemy,” to be taken as the voice of one commanding the righteous, but of one making allowance for the weak.

Here indeed a question arises which must in no way be passed over: that to this precept of the Lord, by which he exhorts us to love our enemies, and to do good to those who hate us, and to pray for those who persecute us, many other parts of the Scriptures seem opposed to those who consider them less carefully and soberly; because in the Prophets too are found many imprecations against enemies, which are thought to be curses, such as this: “Let their table become a snare,” and the rest that is said there; and this: “Let his children be fatherless and his wife a widow,” and the other things that are said above or below in the same psalm by the Prophet in the person of Judas. Many other things are found everywhere in the Scriptures which seem contrary both to this precept of the Lord and to that of the Apostle in which he says, “Bless, and do not curse,” since it is written of the Lord too that he cursed the cities which did not receive his word, and the said Apostle said of someone, “The Lord will repay him according to his works.”

But these things are easily resolved, because the Prophet sang by way of imprecation what was going to happen, not with the mind of one wishing it but with the spirit of one foreseeing it; and so too the Lord, and so too the Apostle; although in their words too is found not what they wished but what they foretold. For when the Lord says, “Woe to you, Capernaum,” it means nothing but that some evil will come upon it in desert of its unbelief; which the Lord did not wish to happen out of ill will, but saw by his divinity. And the Apostle does not say, “May the Lord repay,” but, “The Lord will repay him according to his works,” which is the word of one foretelling, not imprecating. So too of that hypocrisy of the Jews, of which we have already spoken, whose overthrow he saw impending, he said, “God will strike you, you whitewashed wall.” And the prophets are especially accustomed to foretell future things in the figure of one imprecating, just as they often sang of things that were to come in the figure of past time, as in this: “Why did the nations rage, and the peoples meditate vain things?” For he did not say, “Why will the nations rage, and the peoples meditate vain things?”, although he was not recalling these things as already done, but foreseeing them as to come. Such too is this: “They divided my garments among them, and for my garment they cast lots”: for here too he did not say, “They will divide my garments among them, and for my garment they will cast lots.” Yet no one cavils at these words except one who does not perceive that this variety of figures in speaking takes nothing from the truth of things and adds very much to the feelings of minds.