Matthew 5:18

ord.: Having now exhorted His hearers to undergo all things for righteousness" sake, and also not to hide what they should receive, but to learn more for others" sake, that they may teach others, He now goes on to tell them what they should teach, as though He had been asked, "What is this which you would not have hid, and for which you would have all things endured? Are you about to speak any thing beyond what is written in the Law and the Prophets;" hence it is He says, "Think not that I am come to subvert the Law or the Prophets."

And that for two reasons. First, that by these words He might admonish His disciples, that as He fulfilled the Law, so they should strive to fulfil it. Secondly, because the Jews would falsely accuse them as subverting the Law, therefore he answers the calumny beforehand, but in such a manner as that He should not be thought to come simply to preach the Law as the Prophets had done.

He here asserts two things; He denies that He was come to subvert the Law, and affirms that He was come to fulfil it.

In this last sentence again there is a double sense; to fulfil the Law, either by adding something which it had not, or by doing what it commands.

Christ then fulfilled the Prophets by accomplishing what was therein foretold concerning Himself - and the Law, first, by transgressing none of its precepts; secondly, by justifying by faith, which the Law could not do by the letter.

And lastly, because even for them who were under grace, it was hard in this mortal life to fulfil that of the Law, "Thou shalt not lust," He being made a Priest by the sacrifice of His flesh, obtained for us this indulgence, even in this fulfilling the Law, that where through our infirmity we could not, we should be strengthened through His perfection, of whom as our head we all are members. For so I think must be taken these words, "to fulfil" the Law, by adding to it, that is, such things as either contribute to the explanation of the old gloss es, or to enable to keep them. For the Lord has shewed us that even a wicked motion of the thoughts to the wrong of a brother is to be accounted a kind of murder. The Lord also teaches us, that it is better to keep near to the truth without swearing, than with a true oath to come near to blasphemy. But how, ye Manichaeans, do you not receive the Law and the Prophets, seeing Christ here says, that He is come not to subvert but to fulfil them? To this the heretic Faustus replies [ed. note: Faustus was of Milevis in Africa and a Bishop and controversialist of the Manichees. He was a man of considerable abilities. Augustine was first his hearer, and in after years his opponent; and in his work against him he answers him seriatim. In this way the treatise of Faustus is preserved to us.], Whose testimony is there that Christ spoke this? That of Matthew. How was it then that John does not give this saying, who was with Him in the mount, but only Matthew, who did not follow Jesus till after He had come down from the mount? To this Augustine replies, If none can speak truth concerning Christ, but who saw and heard Him, there is no one at this day who speaks truth concerning Him. Why then could not Matthew hear from John's mouth the truth as Christ had spoken, as well as we who are born so long after can speak the truth out of John's book? In the same manner also it is, that not Matthew's Gospel, but also these of Luke and Mark are received by us, and on no inferior authority. And, that the Lord Himself might have told Matthew the things He had done before He called him. But speak out and say that you do not believe the Gospel, for they who believe nothing in the Gospel but what they wish to believe, believe themselves rather than the Gospel. To this Faustus rejoins, We will prove that this was not written by Matthew, but by some other hand, unknown, in his name. For below he says, "Jesus saw a man sitting at the toll-office, Matthew by name." [Matt 9:9] Who writing of himself say, "saw a man," and not rather, "saw me?" Augustine; Matthew does no more than John does, when he says, "Peter turning round saw that other disciple whom Jesus loved;" as it is well known that this is the common manner of Scripture writers, when writing their own actions. Faustus again, But what say you to this, that the very assurance that He was not come to destroy the Law and the Prophets, was the direct way to rouse their suspicions that He was? For He had yet done nothing that could lead the Jews to think that this was His object. Augustine; This is a very weak objection, for we do not deny that to the Jews who had no understanding, Christ might have appeared as threatening the destruction of the Law and the Prophets. Faustus; But what if the Law and the Prophets do not accept this fulfilment, according to that in Deuteronomy, "These commandments I give unto thee, thou shalt keep, thou shalt not add any thing to them, nor take away." Augustine; Here Faustus does not understand what it is to fulfil the Law, when he supposes that it must be taken of adding words to it. The fulfilment of the Law is love, which the Lord hath given in sending His Holy Spirit. The Law is fulfilled either when the things there commanded are done, or when the things there prophesied come to pass. Faustus; But in that we confess that Jesus was author of a New Testament, what else is it than to confess that He has done away with the Old? Augustine; In the Old Testament were figure of things to come, which, when the things themselves were brought in by Christ, ought to have been taken away, that in that very taking away the Law and the Prophets might be fulfilled wherein it was written that God gave a New Testament. Faustus; Therefore if Christ did say this thing, He either said it with some other meaning, or He spoke falsely, (which God forbid,) or we must take the other alternative, He did not speak it at all. But that Jesus spoke falsely none will aver, therefore He either spoke it with another meaning, or He spake it not at all. For myself I am rescued from the necessity of this alternative by the Manichaean belief, which from the first taught me not to believe all those things which are read in Jesus" name as having been spoken by Him; for that there be many tares which to corrupt the good seed some nightly sower has scattered up and down through nearly the whole of Scripture.

Manichaeus taught an impious error, that you should receive only so much of the Gospel as does not conflict with your heresy, and not receive whatever does conflict with it. We have learned of the Apostle that religious caution, "Whoever preaches unto you another Gospel than that we have preached, let him be accursed." [Gal 1:8] The Lord also has explained what the tares signify, not things false mixed with the true Scriptures, as you interpret, but men who are children of the wicked one. Faustus; Should a Jew then enquire of you why you do not keep the precepts of the Law and the Prophets which Christ here declares He came not to destroy but to fulfil, you will be driven either to accept an empty superstition, or to repudiate this chapter as false, or to deny that you are Christ's disciple.

The Catholics are not in any difficulty on account of this chapter as though they did not observe the Law and the Prophets; for they do cherish love to God and their neighbour, "on which hang all the Law and the Prophets." And whatever in the Law and the Prophets was foreshewn, whether in things done, in the celebration of sacramental rites, or in forms of speech, all these they know to be fulfilled in Christ and the Church. Wherefore we neither submit to a false superstition, nor reject the chapter, nor deny ourselves to be Christ's disciples. He then who says, that unless Christ had destroyed the Law and the Prophets, the Mosaic rites would have continued along with the Christian ordinances, may further affirm, that unless Christ had destroyed the Law and the Prophets, He would yet be only promised as to be born, to suffer, to rise again. But inasmuch as He did not destroy, but rather fulfil them, His birth, passion, and resurrection, are now no more promised as things future, which were signified by the Sacraments of the Law; but He is preached as already born, crucified, and risen, which are signified by the Sacraments now celebrated by Christians. It is clear then how great is the error of those who suppose, that when the signs or sacraments are changed, the things themselves are different, whereas the same things which the Prophetic ordinance had held forth as promises, the Evangelic ordinance points to as completed. Faustus: Supposing these to be Christ's genuine words, we should enquire what was His motive for speaking thus, whether to soften the blind hostility of the Jews, who when they saw their holy things trodden under foot by Him, would not have so much as given Him a hearing; or whether He really said them to instruct us, who of the Gentiles should believe, to submit to the yoke of the Law. If this last were not His design, then the first must have been; nor was there any deceit or fraud in such purpose. For of laws there be three sorts. The first that of the Hebrews, called the "law of sin and death," [Rom 8:2] by Paul; the second that of the Gentiles, which he calls the law of nature, saying, "By nature the Gentiles do the deeds of the law;" [Rom 2:14] the third, the law of truth, which he means, "The law of the Spirit of life." Also there are Prophets some of the Jews, such as are well known; others of the Gentiles as Paul speaks, "A prophet of their own hath said;" [Tit 1:12] and others of the truth of whom Jesus speaks, "I send unto you wise men and prophets." [Matt 23:34] Now had Jesus in the following part of this Sermon brought forward any of the Hebrew observances to shew how he had fulfilled them, no one would have doubted that it was of the Jewish Law and Prophets that He was now speaking; but when He brings forward in this way only those more ancient precepts, "Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not commit adultery," which were promulged of old to Enoch, Seth, and the other righteous men, who does not see that He is here speaking of the Law and Prophets of truth? Wherever He has occasion to speak of any thing merely Jewish, He plucks it up by the very roots, giving precepts directly the contrary; for example, in the case of that precept, "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth."

Which was the Law and which the Prophets, that Christ came "not to subvert but to fulfil," is manifest, to wit, the Law given by Moses. And the distinction which Faustus draw between the precepts of the righteous men before Moses, and the Mosaic Law, affirming that Christ fulfilled that one but annulled the other, is not so. We affirm that the Law of Moses was both well suited to its temporary purpose, and was not now subverted, but fulfilled by Christ, as will be seen in each particular. This was not understood by those who continued in such obstinate error, that they compelled the Gentiles to Judaize - those heretics, I mean, who were called Nazarenes.

But since all things which should befall from the very beginning of the world to the end of it, were in type and figure foreshewn in the Law, that God may not be thought to be ignorant of any of those things that take place, He therefore here declares, that heaven and earth should not pass till all things thus foreshewn in the Law should have their actual accomplishment.

"Amen" is a Hebrew word, and my be rendered in Latin, "vere," "fidenter," or "fiat;" that is, "truly," "faithfully," or "so be it." The Lord uses it either because of the hardness of heart of those who were slow to believe, or to attract more particularly the attention of those that did believe.

From the expression here used, "pass," we may suppose that the constituting elements of heaven and earth shall not be annihilated. [ed. note: The text of Hil. has "maxima, ut arbitramur, elementa esse solvends."]

But shall abide in their essence, but "pass" through renewal.

By the words "one iota or one point shall not pass from the Law," we must understand only a strong metaphor of completeness, drawn from the letters of writing, iota being the least of the letters, made with one stroke of the pen, and a point being a slight dot at the end of the same letter. The words there shew that the Law shall be completed to the very least matter.

He fitly mentions the Greek iota, and not the Hebrew job, because the iota stands in Greek for the number ten, and so there is an allusion to the Decalogue of which the Gospel is the point and perfection.

If even an honourable man blushes to be found in a falsehood, and a wise man lets not fall empty any word he has once spoken, how could it be that the words of heaven should fall to the ground empty? Hence He concludes, "Whoso shall break the least of these commandments, &c." And, I suppose, the Lord goes on to reply Himself to the question, Which are the least commandments? Namely, these which I am now about to speak.

He speaks not this of the old laws, but of those which He was now going to enact, of which he says, "the least," though they were all great. For as He so oft spoke humbly of Himself, so does He now speak humbly of His precepts.

Otherwise; the precepts of Moses are easy to obey; "Thou shalt not kill. Thou shalt not commit adultery." The very greatness of the crime is a check upon the desire of committing it; therefore the reward of observance is small, the sin of transgression great. But Christ's precepts, "Thou shalt not be angry, Thou shalt not lust," are hard to obey, and therefore in their reward they are great, in their transgression, "least." It is thus He speaks of these precepts of Christ, such as "Thou shalt not be angry, Thou shalt not lust," as "the least;" and they who commit these lesser sins, are the least in the kingdom of God; that is, he who has been angry and not sinned grievously is secure from the punishment of eternal damnation; yet he does not attain that glory which they attain who fulfil even these least.

Or, the precepts of the Law are called "the least," as opposed to Christ's precepts which are great. The least commandments are signified by the iota and the point. "He," therefore, "who breaks them, and teaches men so," that is, to do as he does, "shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven." Hence we may perhaps conclude, that it is not true that there shall none be there except they be great.

ord.: By "break," is meant, the not doing what one understands rightly, or the not understanding what one has corrupted, or the destroying the perfectness of Christ's additions.

Or, when you hear the words, "least in the kingdom of heaven," imagine nothing less than the punishment of hell. For He oft uses the word "kingdom," not only of the joys of heaven, but of the time of the resurrection, and of the terrible coming of Christ.

Or, by the kingdom of heaven is to be understood the Church, in which that teacher who breaks a commandment is called least, because he whose life is despised, it remains that his preaching be also despised.

Or, He calls the passion, and the cross, the least, which if one shall not confess openly, but be ashamed of them, he shall be least, that is, last, and as it were no man; but to him that confesses it He promises the great glory of a heavenly calling.

This head is closely connected with the preceding. It is directed against the Pharisees, who, despising the commandments of God, set up traditions of their own, and means that their teaching the people would not avail themselves, if they destroyed the very least commandment in the Law. We may take it in another sense. The learning of the master if joined with sin however small, loses him the highest place, nor does it avail any to teach righteousness, if he destroys it in his life. Perfect bliss is for him who fulfils in deed what he teaches in word.

Otherwise; "he who breaks the least of these commandments," that is, of Moses" Law, "and teaches men so, shall be called the least; but he who shall do (these least), and so teach," shall not indeed be esteemed great, yet not so little as he who breaks them. That he should be great, he ought to do and to teach the things which Christ now teaches.

2. The production, again, of the Duodecad of the Æons, is indicated by the fact that the Lord was twelve years of age when He disputed with the teachers of the law, and by the election of the apostles, for of these there were twelve. The other eighteen Æons are made manifest in this way: that the Lord, [according to them,] conversed with His disciples for eighteen months after His resurrection from the dead. They also affirm that these eighteen Æons are strikingly indicated by the first two letters of His name [ Ἰησοῦς ], namely Iota and Eta . And, in like manner, they assert that the ten Æons are pointed out by the letter Iota , which begins His name; while, for the same reason, they tell us the Saviour said, “One Iota , or one tittle, shall by no means pass away until all be fulfilled.”

2. But the servants would then have been proved false, and not sent by the Lord, if Christ on His advent, by being found exactly such as He was previously announced, had not fulfilled their words. Wherefore He said, “Think not that I have come to destroy the law or the prophets; I came not to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Until heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall not pass from the law and the prophets till all come to pass.” For by His advent He Himself fulfilled all things, and does still fulfil in the Church the new covenant foretold by the law, onwards to the consummation [of all things]. …

I could adduce ten thousand Scriptures of which not “one tittle shall pass away,” without being fulfilled; for the mouth of the Lord the Holy Spirit hath spoken these things. “Do not any longer,” he says, “my son, despise the chastening of the Lord , nor faint when thou art rebuked of Him.” O surpassing love for man! Not as a teacher speaking to his pupils, not as a master to his domestics, nor as God to men, but as a father, does the Lord gently admonish his children. Thus Moses confesses that “he was filled with quaking and terror” while he listened to God speaking concerning the Word. …

There are, then, according to Pythagoras, two worlds: one intelligible, which has the monad for an originating principle; and the other sensible. But of this (latter) is the quaternion having the iota, the one tittle, a perfect number. And there likewise is, according to the Pythagoreans, the i , the one tittle, which is chief and most dominant, and enables us to apprehend the substance of those intelligible entities which are capable of being understood through the medium of intellect and of sense. (And in this substance inhere) the nine incorporeal accidents which cannot exist without substance, viz., “quality,” and “quantity,” and “relation,” and “where,” and “when,” and “position,” and “possession,” and “action,” and “passion.” These, then, are the nine accidents (inhering in) substance, and when reckoned with these (substances), contains the perfect number, the i . …

Hence, too, they indicated the day of the consummation to us, and signified beforehand the day of the apostate that is to appear and deceive men at the last times, and the beginning and end of his kingdom, and the advent of the Judge, and the life of the righteous, and the punishment of the sinners, in order that we all, bearing these things in mind day by day and hour by hour, as children of the Church, might know that “not one jot nor one tittle of these things shall fail,” as the Saviour’s own word announced. Let all of you, then, of necessity, open the eyes of your hearts and the ears of your soul, and receive the word which we are about to speak. …

XIX . For since ye have known God through Jesus Christ , and all His dispensation, as it has been from the beginning, that He gave a plain law to assist the law of nature, such a one as is pure, saving, and holy, in which His own name was inscribed, perfect, which is never to fail, being complete in ten commands, unspotted, converting souls; which, when the Hebrews forgot, He put them in mind of it by the prophet Malachi, saying, “Remember ye the law of Moses , the man of God, who gave you in charge commandments and ordinances.” Which law is so very holy and righteous, that even our Saviour, when on a certain time He healed one leper, and afterwards nine, said to the first, “Go, show thyself to the high priest, and offer the gift which Moses commanded for a testimony unto them;” and afterwards to the nine, “Go, show yourselves to the priests.” For He nowhere has dissolved the law, as Sim …

5. Every one can see the weakness of the argument that Christ could not have said, "Think not that I am come to destroy the law and the prophets: I came not to destroy, but to fulfill," unless He had done something to create a suspicion of this kind. Of course, we grant that the unenlightened Jews may have looked upon Christ as the destroyer of the law and the prophets; but their very suspicion makes it certain that the true and truthful One, in saying that He came not to destroy the law and the prophets, referred to no other law than that of the Jews. This is proved by the words that follow: "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of the least of these commandments, and shall teach men so, shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven. …

9. It was not, then, without a purpose that these fishes were described as so many in number, and so large in size, that is, as both an hundred and fifty-three, and large. For so it is written, “And He drew the net to land full of great fishes, an hundred and fifty and three.” For when the Lord said, “I am not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill,” because about to give the Spirit, through whom the law might be fulfilled, and to add thereby, as it were, seven to ten; after interposing a few other words He proceeded, “Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. The latter, therefore, may possibly belong to the number of great fishes. …

Yea and Nay are but two syllables, yet there is often involved in these little words at once the best of all good things, Truth, and that beyond which wickedness cannot go, a Lie. But why mention Yea and Nay? Before now, a martyr bearing witness for Christ has been judged to have paid in full the claim of true religion by merely nodding his head. If, then, this be so, what term in theology is so small but that the effect of its weight in the scales according as it be rightly or wrongly used is not great? Of the law we are told “not one jot nor one tittle shall pass away;” how then could it be safe for us to leave even the least unnoticed? The very points which you yourself have sought to have thoroughly sifted by us are at the same time both small and great. …