 Question 39, Part 2 of Summa Theologica Terziapars, Trietis on the Saviour. This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. Summa Theologica Terziapars, Trietis on the Saviour by St. Thomas Aquinas, translated by the Fathers of the English Dominican Province. Question 39 of The Baptizing of Christ in Eight Articles. Part 2, Articles 6 through 8. Sixth Article Whether it is fitting to say that when Christ was baptized, the Holy Ghost came down on him in the form of a dove. Objection one! You would seem that it is not fitting to say that when Christ was baptized, the Holy Ghost came down on him in the form of a dove. For the Holy Ghost dwells in man by grace. But the fullness of grace was in the man Christ from the beginning of his conception, because he was the only begotten of the Father, as is clear from what has been said above, in Question 7, Article 12, and in Question 34, Article 1. Therefore, the Holy Ghost should not have been sent to him at his baptism. Objection two further! Christ is said to have descended into the world in the mystery of the incarnation when he emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, according to Philippians 2.7. But the Holy Ghost did not become incarnate? Therefore, it is unbecoming to say that the Holy Ghost descended upon him. Objection three! Further, that which is accomplished in our baptism should have been shown in Christ's baptism as in an exemplar. But in our baptism no visible mission of the Holy Ghost takes place? Therefore, neither should a visible mission of the Holy Ghost have taken place in Christ's baptism. Objection four further! The Holy Ghost is poured forth on others through Christ, according to John 1.16. Of his fullness we have all received. But the Holy Ghost came down on the apostles in the form not of a dove, but of fire. Therefore, neither should he have come down on Christ in the form of a dove, but in the form of fire. On the contrary, it is written in Luke 3.22. The Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape as a dove upon him. I answer that, what took place with respect to Christ in his baptism, as Chrysostom says in his homily number four on the Gospel of Matthew, is connected with the mystery accomplished in all who were to be baptized afterwards. Now all those who are baptized with the baptism of Christ receive the Holy Ghost, unless they approach unworthily, according to Matthew 3.11. He shall baptize you in the Holy Ghost. Therefore, it was fitting that when our Lord was baptized, the Holy Ghost should descend upon him. Apply to Objection 1. As Augustine says in On the Trinity 15. It is most absurd to say that Christ received the Holy Ghost when he was already thirty years old, for when he came to be baptized, since he was without sin, therefore was he not without the Holy Ghost. For if it is written of John that he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost from his mother's womb, what must we say of the man Christ, whose conception in the flesh was not carnal but spiritual? Therefore now, that is, at his baptism, he deigned to foreshadow his body, that is, the church, in which those who are baptized receive the Holy Ghost in a special manner. Apply to Objection 2. As Augustine says in On the Trinity 2. The Holy Ghost is said to have descended on Christ in a bodily shape as a dove, not because the very substance of the Holy Ghost was seen, for he is invisible, nor as though that visible creature were assumed into the unity of the Divine Person, since it is not said that the Holy Ghost was the dove, as it is said that the Son of God is man by reason of the Union. Nor again was the Holy Ghost seen under the form of a dove after the manner in which John saw the slain lamb in the Apocalypse, in Chapter 5, Verse 6. For the latter vision took place in the Spirit through spiritual images of bodies, whereas no one ever doubted that this dove was seen by the eyes of the body, nor again did the Holy Ghost appear under the form of a dove in the sense in which it is said, in 1 Corinthians 10.4. Now the Rock was Christ, for the latter had already a created existence, and through the manner of its action was called by the name of Christ, whom it signified. Whereas this dove came suddenly into existence, to fulfill the purpose of its signification, and afterwards ceased to exist, like the flame which appeared in the bush to Moses. Hence the Holy Ghost is said to have descended upon Christ, not by reason of his being united to the dove, but either because the dove itself signified the Holy Ghost, in as much as it descended when it came upon him. Or again by reason of the spiritual grace, which is poured out by God so as to descend as it were, on the creature, according to James 1.17. Every best gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of Lights. Reply to Objection 3, as Chris Ostum says in his Homily 12 on the Gospel of Matthew. At the beginning of all spiritual transactions, sensible visions appear, for the sake of them who could not conceive at all an incorporeal nature, so that, though afterwards no such thing occur, they may shape their faith according to that which has occurred once for all, and therefore the Holy Ghost descended visibly, under a bodily shape, on Christ at his baptism, in order that we may believe him to descend invisibly on all those who are baptized. Reply to Objection 4. The Holy Ghost appeared over Christ at his baptism, under the form of a dove, for four reasons. First, on account of the disposition required in the one baptized, namely, that he approach in good faith, since as it is written in Wisdom 1.5, the Holy Spirit of Discipline will flee from the deceitful, for the dove is an animal of a simple character, void of cunning and deceit, whence it is said in Matthew 10.16, be ye simple as doves. Secondly, in order to designate the seven gifts of the Holy Ghost, which are signified by the properties of the dove, for the dove dwells beside the running stream, in order that, on perceiving the hawk, it may plunge in and escape. This refers to the gift of Wisdom, whereby the saints dwell beside the running waters of Holy Scripture, in order to escape the assaults of the devil. Again, the dove prefers the more choice seeds. This refers to the gift of knowledge, whereby the saints make choice of sound doctrines, with which they nourish themselves. Further, the dove feeds the brood of other broods. This refers to the gift of counsel, with which the saints, by teaching and example, feed men who have been the brood, that is, imitators of the devil. Again, the dove tears not with its beak. This refers to the gift of understanding, wherewith the saints do not rend sound doctrines as heretics do. Again, the dove has no gall. This refers to the gift of piety, by reason of which the saints are free from unreasonable anger. Again, the dove builds its nest in the cleft of a rock. This refers to the gift of fortitude, wherewith the saints build their nest, that is, take refuge and hope, in the death wounds of Christ, who is the rock of strength. Lastly, the dove has a plaintive song. This refers to the gift of fear, wherewith the saints delight in bewailing sins. Thirdly, the Holy Ghost appeared under the form of a dove on account of the proper effect of baptism, which is the remission of sins and reconciliation with God. For the dove is a gentle creature. Wherefore, as Chrysostom says in his twelfth homily on the Gospel of Matthew, At the deluge, this creature appeared bearing an olive branch and published the tidings of the universal peace of the whole world. And now again, the dove appears at the baptism, pointing to our deliverer. Forthly, the Holy Ghost appeared over our Lord at his baptism in the form of a dove in order to designate the common effect of baptism, namely, the building up of the unity of the church. Hence it is written in Ephesians 5 verses 25 through 27. Christ delivered himself up that he might present to himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, cleansing it by the laver of water in the word of life. Therefore it was fitting that the Holy Ghost should appear at the baptism under the form of a dove, which is a creature both loving and gregarious. Wherefore also it is said of the church, in the Song of Songs 6-8, One is my dove. But on the apostles, the Holy Ghost descended under the form of fire for two reasons. First, to show with what fervor their hearts were to be moved, so as to preach Christ everywhere, though surrounded by opposition. And therefore he appeared as a fiery tongue. Hence Augustine says in his commentary on the Gospel of John, Our Lord manifests the Holy Ghost visibly in two ways, namely, By the dove coming upon the Lord when he was baptized. By fire coming upon the disciples when they were met together. In the former case simplicity is shown. In the latter fervor. We learn then from the dove that those who are sanctified by the spirit should be without guile, and from the fire that their simplicity should not be left to wax cold. Nor let it disturb anyone that the tongues were cloven in the dove recognized unity. Secondly, because as Christosum says, Since sins had to be forgiven, which is affected in baptism, meekness was required. This is shown by the dove. But when we have obtained grace, we must look forward to be judged. And this is signified by the fire. Seventh article. Whether the dove in which the Holy Ghost appeared was real. Objection one. It would seem that the dove in which the Holy Ghost appeared was not real. For that seems to be a mirror apparition which appears in its semblance. But it is stated in Luke 322 that The Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape as a dove upon him. Therefore it was not a real dove, but a semblance of a dove. Objection two further, just as nature does nothing useless, so neither does God, according to On the Heavens One. Now since this dove came merely, in order to signify something and pass away, as Augustine says in On the Trinity two, a real dove would have been useless, because the semblance of a dove was sufficient for that purpose. Therefore it was not a real dove. Objection three further, the properties of a thing lead us to a knowledge of that thing. If therefore this were a real dove, its properties would have signified the nature of the real animal, and not the effect of the Holy Ghost. Therefore it seems that it was not a real dove. On the contrary, Augustine says in On Christian Struggle 22, Nor do we say this as though we asserted that our Lord Jesus Christ alone had a real body, and that the Holy Ghost appeared to men's eyes in fallacious manner. But we say that both these bodies were real. I answer that, as stated above in Question 5 Article 1. It was unbecoming that the Son of God, who is the truth of the Father, should make use of anything unreal, wherefore he took not an imaginary, but a real body. And since the Holy Ghost is called the Spirit of Truth, as appears from John 1613, therefore he too made a real dove in which to appear, though he did not assume it into the unity of person. Wherefore, after the words quoted above, Augustine adds, Just as it behoved the Son of God not to deceive men, so it behoved the Holy Ghost not to deceive. But it was easy for Almighty God, who created all creatures out of nothing, to frame the body of a real dove without the help of other doves, just as it was easy for him to form a true body in Mary's womb without the seed of a man. Since the corporeal creature obeys its Lord's command and will, both in the mother's womb informing a man, and in the word itself informing a dove. Reply to Objection 1. The Holy Ghost is said to have descended in the shape or semblance of a dove, not in the sense that the dove was not real, but in order to show that he did not appear in the form of his substance. Reply to Objection 2. It was not superfluous to form a real dove in which the Holy Ghost might appear, because by the very reality of the dove the reality of the Holy Ghost and of his effects is signified. Reply to Objection 3. The properties of the dove lead us to understand the dove's nature and the effects of the Holy Ghost in the same way. Because from the very fact that the dove has such properties, it results that it signifies the Holy Ghost. 8. Whether it was becoming when Christ was baptized, that the Father's voice should be heard bearing witness to the Son. Objection 1. It would seem that it was unbecoming when Christ was baptized, for the Father's voice to be heard bearing witness to the Son. For the Son and the Holy Ghost, according as they have appeared visibly, are said to have been visibly sent. But it does not become the Father to be sent, as Augustine makes it clear in On the Trinity too. Neither, therefore, does it become him to appear. Objection 2 further. The voice gives expression to the word conceived in the heart. But the Father is not the word. Therefore, he is unfittingly manifested by a voice. Objection 3 further. The man Christ did not begin to be Son of God at his baptism, as some heretics have stated. But he was Son of God from the beginning of his conception. Therefore, the Father's voice should have proclaimed Christ's Godhead at his nativity rather than at his baptism. On the contrary, it is written in Matthew 3.17. Behold a voice from heaven saying, This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased. I answer that, as stated above in Article 5. That which is accomplished in our baptism should be manifested in Christ's baptism, which was the exemplar of ours. Now the baptism, which the faithful receive, is hallowed by the invocation and power of the Trinity, according to Matthew 28.19. Go ye and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Wherefore, as Jerome says on Matthew 3.16.17, The mystery of the Trinity is shown forth in Christ's baptism. Our Lord Himself is baptized in His human nature. The Holy Ghost descended in the shape of a dove. The Father's voice is heard bearing witness to the Son. Therefore, it was becoming that in the baptism the Father should be manifested by a voice. Reply to Objection 1. The visible mission adds something to the apparition, to wit, the authority of the sender. Therefore the Son and the Holy Ghost, who are from another, are said not only to appear, but also to be sent visibly. But the Father, who is not from another, can appear indeed, but cannot be sent visibly. Reply to Objection 2. The Father is manifested by the voice, only as producing the voice or speaking by it. And since it is proper to the Father to produce the word, that is, to utter or to speak, therefore was it most becoming that the Father should be manifested by a voice, because the voice designates the word. Wherefore, the very voice to which the Father gave utterance bore witness to the sonship of the word. And just as the form of the dove in which the Holy Ghost was made manifest is not the nature of the Holy Ghost, nor is the form of man in which the Son himself was manifested, the very nature of the Son of God, so neither does the voice belong to the nature of the word or of the Father who spoke. Hence, in John 5.37 our Lord says, Neither have you heard his, that is, the Father's, voice at any time, nor seen his shape, by which words, as Chrysostom says in his homily number 40 on the Gospel of John. He gradually leads them to the knowledge of the philosophical truth, and shows them that God has neither voice nor shape, but is above all such forms and utterances. And just as the whole trinity made both the dove and the human nature assumed by Christ, so also they formed the voice. Yet the Father alone as speaking is manifested by the voice, just as the Son alone assumed human nature, and the Holy Ghost alone is manifested in the dove, as Augustine makes evident. Reply to Objection 3. It was becoming that Christ's Godhead should not be proclaimed to all in his nativity, but rather that it should be hidden while he was subject to the defects of infancy. But when he attained to the perfect age, when the time came for him to teach, to work miracles, and to draw men to himself, then did it behoove his Godhead to be attested from on high by the Father's testimony, so that his teaching might become the more credible. Hence he says in John 5.37, The Father himself who sent me hath given testimony of me, and specially at the time of baptism, by which men are born again into adopted sons of God. Since God's sons by adoption are made to be like unto his natural Son, according to Romans 8.29. Whom he foreknew, he also predestined to be made conformable to the image of his Son. Hence Hilary says in his commentary on the Gospel of Matthew 2, that when Jesus was baptized, the Holy Ghost descended on him, and the Father's voice was heard saying, This is my beloved Son, that we might know from what was accomplished in Christ, that after being washed in the waters of baptism, the Holy Ghost comes down upon us from on high, and that the Father's voice declares us to have become the adopted sons of God. End of Question 39 Read by Michael Shane Craig Lambert, LC Question 40 of Summa Theologica Terziapars Treaties on the Saviour This is the LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. Summa Theologica Terziapars, Treaties on the Saviour by St. Thomas Aquinas, translated by the Fathers of the English Dominican Province. Question 40 of Christ's Manor of Life in four articles Having considered those things which relate to Christ's entrance into the world or to his beginning, it remains for us to consider those that relate to the process of his life. And we must consider, 1. His manner of life 2. His temptation 3. His doctrine 4. His miracles Concerning the first, there are four points of inquiry. First, whether Christ should have led a solitary life or have associated with men. Second, whether he should have led an austere life as regards food, drink and clothing, or should he have conformed himself to others in these respects. Third, whether he should have adopted a lowly state of life or one of wealth and honor. Fourth, whether he should have lived in conformity with the law. First article, whether Christ should have associated with men or led a solitary life. Objection one, he would seem that Christ should not have associated with men, but should have led a solitary life. For it behooved Christ to show by his manner of life, not only that he was a man, but also that he was God. For it is not becoming that God should associate with men, for it is written in Daniel 211, except the gods whose conversation is not with men. And the philosopher says in Politics 1 that he who lives alone is either a beast, that is, if he do this from being wild, or a god, if his motive be the contemplation of truth. Therefore it seems that it was not becoming for Christ to associate with men. Objection two further, while he lived in mortal flesh, it behooved Christ to lead a most perfect life. But the most perfect is the contemplative life, as we have stated in the second part. In the parts, Secunda Secunde question 182, articles 1 and 2. Now solitude is most suitable to the contemplative life according to Hosea 214. I will lead her into the wilderness, and I will speak to her heart. Therefore it seems that Christ should have led a solitary life. Objection three further, Christ's manner of life should have been uniform, because it should always have given evidence of that which is best. But at times Christ avoided the crowd and sought lonely places. Hence, Remigius, commenting on Matthew says, We read that our Lord had three places of refuge. The ship, the mountain, the desert. To one or other of which he betook himself whenever he was harassed by the crowd. Therefore he ought always to have led a solitary life. On the contrary, it is written in Baruch 338. Afterwards he was seen upon earth and conversed with men. I answer that Christ's manner of life had to be in keeping with the end of his incarnation, by reason of which he came into the world. Now he came into the world, first that he might publish the truth. Thus he says himself in John 1837, For this was I born, and for this I came into the world, that I should give testimony to the truth. Hence it was fitting that not only should he hide himself by leading a solitary life, but that he should appear openly and preach in public. Wherefore, in Luke 4 verses 42 and 43, he says to those who wished to stay him. To other cities also I must preach the kingdom of God, for therefore am I sent. Secondly, he came in order to free men from sin, according to 1 Timothy 1.15. Christ Jesus came into this world to save sinners, and hence, as Chrysostom says, Although Christ might, while staying in the same place, have drawn all men to himself to hear his preaching, yet he did not do so. Thus giving us the example to go about and seek those who perish, like the shepherd in search of the lost sheep, and the physician in attendance on the sick. Thirdly, he came that by him we might have access to God, as it is written in Romans 5, 2. And thus it was fitting that he should give men confidence in approaching him by associating familiarly with them. Wherefore it is written in Matthew 9 verse 10. It came to pass as he was sitting in the house. Behold, many publicans and sinners came, and sat down with Jesus and his disciples. On which Jerome comments as follows. They had seen the publican who had been converted from a sinful to a better life, and consequently they did not despair of their own salvation. Reply to Objection 1. Christ wished to make his Godhead known through his human nature, and therefore, since it is proper to man to do so, he associated with men, at the same time manifesting his Godhead to all by preaching and working miracles. And by leading among men a blameless and righteous life. Reply to Objection 2. As stated in the second part, in the Parse Secunda Secunde question 182 article 1, as well as in question 188 article 6. The contemplative life is, absolutely speaking, more perfect than the act of life, because the latter is taken up with bodily actions. Yet that form of act of life in which a man, by preaching and teaching, delivers to others the fruits of his contemplation, is more perfect than the life that stops at contemplation, because such a life is built on an abundance of contemplation, and consequently, such was the life chosen by Christ. Reply to Objection 3. Christ's action is our instruction. And therefore, in order to teach preachers that they ought not to be forever before the public, our Lord withdrew himself sometimes from the crowd. We are told of three reasons for His doing this. First, for the rest of the body. Hence, in Mark 6, verse 31, it is stated that our Lord said to His disciples, come apart into a deserted place and rest a little. For there were many coming and going, and they had not so much as time to eat. But sometimes it was for the sake of prayer. Thus it is written in Luke 6, verse 12. It came to pass in those days that He went out into a mountain to pray, and He passed the whole night in the prayer of God. On this Ambrose remarks that, By His example He instructs us in the precepts of virtue, and sometimes He did so in order to teach us to avoid the favour of men. Wherefore, Chrysostom, commenting on Matthew 5.1, which reads, Jesus seeing the multitude went up into a mountain, says, By sitting not in the city and in the marketplace, but on a mountain and in a place of solitude, He taught us to do nothing for show and to withdraw from the crowd, especially when we have to discourse of needful things. Second article. Whether it was becoming that Christ should lead an astir life in this world. Objection one. It would seem that it was becoming that Christ should lead an astir life in this world. For Christ preached the perfection of life much more than John did. But John led an astir life in order that He might persuade men by His example to embrace a perfect life, for it is written in Matthew 3.4 that the same John had his garment of camel's hair and a leather girdle about his loins, and his meat was locusts and wild honey, on which Chrysostom comments as follows in his tenth homily, It was a marvellous and strange thing to behold such austerity in a human frame, which thing also particularly attracted the Jews. Therefore it seems that an astir life was much more becoming to Christ. Objection two further. Abstinence is ordained to continency. For it is written in Hosea 4.10 They shall eat and shall not be filled. They have committed fornication and have not ceased. But Christ both observed continency in Himself and proposed it to be observed by others when He said in Matthew 19.12 There are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven. He that can take it, let him take it. Therefore it seems that Christ should have observed an astir life both in Himself and in His disciples. Objection three further. It seems absurd for a man to begin a stricter form of life and to return to an easier life. For one might quote to his discredit that which is written in Luke 14.30 This man began to build and was not able to finish. Now Christ began a very strict life after his baptism, remaining in the desert and fasting for forty days and forty nights. Therefore it seems unbecoming that after leading such a strict life he should return to the common manner of living. On the contrary, it is written in Matthew 11.19 The son of man came eating and drinking. I answer that as stated above in Article 1. It was in keeping with the end of the incarnation that Christ should not lead a solitary life but should associate with men. Now it is most fitting that he who associates with others should conform to their manner of living according to the words of the Apostle in 1 Corinthians 9.22 I became all things to all men and therefore it was most fitting that Christ should conform to others in the matter of eating and drinking. Hence Augustine says in against Faustus 16 that John is described as neither eating nor drinking because he did not take the same food as the Jews. Therefore, unless our Lord had taken it, it would not be said of him in contrast eating and drinking. Reply to Objection 1 In his manner of living, our Lord gave an example of perfection as to all those things which of themselves relate to salvation. Now abstinence in eating and drinking does not of itself relate to salvation according to Romans 14.17 The kingdom of God is not meat and drink and Augustine in his Questions on the Gospels Part 2, Question 11 explains Matthew 11.19 Wisdom is justified by her children saying that this is because the holy apostles understood that the kingdom of God does not consist in eating and drinking but in suffering indigence with equanimity for they are neither uplifted by affluence nor distressed by want. Again he says in on Christian Teaching 3 that in all such things it is not making use of them but the wantonness of the user that is sinful. Now both these lives are lawful and praiseworthy, namely that a man withdraw from the society of other men and observe abstinence and that he associate with other men and live like them and therefore our Lord wished to give men an example of either kind of life as to John according to Chrysostom in his homily 37 on the Gospel of Matthew. He exhibited no more than his life and righteous conduct but Christ had the testimony also of miracles. Leaving therefore John to be illustrious by his fasting he himself came the opposite way both coming unto publicans tables and eating and drinking. Reply to Objection 2 Just as by abstinence other men acquire the power of self-restraint so also Christ in himself and in those that are his subdued the flesh by the power of his Godhead. Wherefore as we read in Matthew 9.14 the Pharisees and the disciples of John fasted but not the disciples of Christ on which Bede comments saying that John drank neither wine nor strong drink because abstinence is meritorious where the nature is weak. But why should our Lord who's right by nature it is to forgive sins avoid those whom he could make holier than such as abstain? Reply to Objection 3 as Chrysostom says in his homily 13 on the Gospel of Matthew that thou mightest learn how great a good is fasting and how it is a shield against the devil and that after baptism thou shouldest give thyself up not to luxury but to fasting. For this cause did he fast not as needing it himself but as teaching us and for this did he proceed no further than Moses and Elias lest his assumption of our flesh might seem incredible. The mystical meaning as Gregory says in his 16th homily on the Gospel is that by Christ's example the number 40 is observed in his fast because the power of the Decalogue is fulfilled throughout the four books of the Holy Gospel since 10 multiplied by 4 amounts to 40. Or because we live in this mortal body composed of the four elements and by its lusts we transgress the commandments of the Lord which are expressed in the Decalogue or according to Augustine in his 83 questions question 81 To know the Creator and the creature is the entire teaching of wisdom the Creator is the Trinity the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost Now the creature is partly invisible as the soul to which the number three may be ascribed for which we are commanded to love God in three ways with our whole heart our whole soul and our whole mind and partly visible as to the body to which the number four is applicable on account of its being subject to heat moisture cold and dryness Hence if we multiply 10 which may be referred to the entire moral code by four which number may be applied to the body because it is the body that executes the law the product is the number 40 in which consequently the time during which we sigh and grieve is shown forth and yet there was no inconsistency in Christ's returning to the common manner of living after fasting and retiring into the desert for it is becoming to that kind of life which we hold Christ to have embraced wherein a man delivers to others the fruits of his contemplation that he devote himself first of all to contemplation and that afterwards come down to the publicity of active life by associating with other men Hence Bede says on Mark 2 18 Christ fasted that thou mightest not disobey the commandment he ate with sinners that thou mightest discern his sanctity and acknowledge his power third article whether Christ should have led a life of poverty in this world objection one it would seem that Christ should not have led a life of poverty in this world because Christ should have embraced the most eligible form of life but the most eligible form of life is that which is a mean between riches and poverty for it is written in Proverbs 30 verse 8 give me neither beggary nor riches give me only the necessaries of life therefore Christ should have led a life not of poverty but of moderation objection two further external wealth is ordained to bodily use as food and raiment but Christ conformed his manner of life to those among whom he lived in the matter of food and raiment therefore it seems that he should have observed the ordinary manner of life as to riches and poverty and have avoided extreme poverty objection three further Christ specially invited men to imitate his example of humility according to Matthew 11 29 learn of me because I am meek and humble of heart but humility is most commendable in the rich thus it is written in 1st Timothy 6 11 charge the rich of this world not to be high-minded therefore it seems that Christ should not have chosen a life of poverty on the contrary it is written in Matthew 8 20 the son of man have not where to lay his head as though he were to say as Jerome observes why desirous thou to follow me for the sake of riches and worldly gain since I am so poor that I have not even the smallest dwelling place and I am sheltered by a roof that is not mine and on Matthew 17 26 that we may not scandalize them go to the sea Jerome says this incident taken literally affords edification to those who hear it when they are told that our Lord was so poor that he had not the wherewithal to pay the tax for himself and his apostles I answer that it was fitting for Christ to lead a life of poverty in this world first because this was in keeping with the duty of preaching for which purpose he says that he came in Mark 138 let us go into the neighboring towns and cities that I may preach there also for to this purpose I am come now in order that the preachers of God's word may be able to give all their time to preaching they must be wholly free from care of worldly matters which is impossible for those who are possessed of wealth wherefore the Lord himself when sending the apostles to preach said to them in Matthew 10 9 do not possess gold nor silver and the apostles in Acts 6 2 say it is not reasonable that we should leave the word of God and serve tables secondly because just as he took upon himself the death of the body in order to bestow spiritual life on us so did he bear bodily poverty in order to enrich us spiritually according to 2nd Corinthians 8 verse 9 you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ that he became poor for our sakes that through his poverty we might be rich thirdly lest if he were rich his preaching might be ascribed to cupidity wherefore Jerome says on Matthew 10 9 that if the disciples had been possessed of wealth they had seemed to preach for gain not for the salvation of mankind and the same reason applies to Christ 4thly that the more lowly he seemed by reason of his poverty the greater might the power of his Godhead be shown to be hence in a sermon of the Council of Ephesus we read he chose all that was poor and despicable all that was of small account and hidden from the majority that we might recognize his Godhead to have transformed the terrestrial sphere for this reason did he choose a poor maid for his mother a poorer birthplace for this reason did he live in want learn this from the manger reply to objection one those who wish to live virtuously need to avoid abundance of riches and beggary in as far as these are occasions of sin since abundance of riches is an occasion for being proud and beggary is an occasion of thieving and lying or even of perjury but for as much as Christ was incapable of sin he had not the same motive as Solomon for avoiding these things yet neither is every kind of beggary an occasion of theft and perjury as Solomon seems to add in Proverbs 30 verse 8 but only that which is involuntary in order to avoid which a man is guilty of theft and perjury but voluntary poverty is not open to this danger and such was the poverty chosen by Christ reply to objection two a man may feed and clothe himself in conformity with others not only by possessing riches but also by receiving the necessaries of life from those who are rich this is what happened in regard to Christ for it is written in Luke 8 verses 2 and 3 that certain women followed Christ and ministered unto him of their substance for as Jerome says on Matthew 27 55 it was a Jewish custom nor was it thought wrong for women following the ancient tradition of their nation out of their private means to provide their instructors with food and clothing but as this might give scandal to the heathens Paul says that he gave it up thus it was possible for them to be fed out of a common fund but not to possess wealth without their duty of preaching being hindered by anxiety reply to objection three humility is not much to be praised in one who is poor of necessity but in one who like Christ is poor willingly poverty itself is a sign of very great humility fourth article whether Christ conformed his conduct to the law objection one he would seem that Christ did not conform his conduct to the law for the law forbade any work whatsoever to be done on the Sabbath since God rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had done but he healed a man on the Sabbath and commanded him to take up his bed therefore it seems that he did not conform his conduct to the law objection to further what Christ taught that he also did according to acts one one Jesus began to do and to teach but he taught in Matthew 15 11 that not all that which goeth into the mouth defileeth a man and this is contrary to the precept of the law which declared that a man was made unclean by eating and touching certain animals as stated in Leviticus 11 therefore it seems that he did not conform his conduct to the law objection three further he who consents to anything is of the same mind as he who does it according to Romans 132 not only they that do them but they also that consent to them that do them but Christ by excusing his disciples consented to their breaking the law by plucking the ears of corn on the Sabbath as is related in Matthew 12 verses one through eight therefore it seems that Christ did not conform his conduct to the law on the contrary it is written in Matthew 5 17 do not think that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets commenting on these words Christm says he fulfilled the law in one way by transgressing none of the precepts of the law secondly by justifying us through faith which the law in the letter was unable to do I answer that Christ conformed his conduct in all things to the precepts of the law in token of this he wished even to be circumcised for the circumcision is a kind of protestation of a man's purpose of keeping the law according to Galatians 5 3 I testify to every man circumcising himself that he is a debtor to do the whole law and Christ indeed wished to conform his conduct to the law first to show his approval of the old law secondly that by obeying the law he might perfect it and bring it to an end in his own self so as to show that it was ordained to him thirdly to deprive the Jews of an excuse for slandering him fourthly in order to deliver men from subjection to the law according to Galatians 4 verses 4 and 5 God sent his son made under the law that he might redeem them who were under the law reply to objection one our lord excuses himself from any transgression of the law in this matter for three reasons first the precept of the hallowing of the Sabbath forbids not divine work but human work for though God ceased on the seventh day from the creation of new creatures yet he ever works by keeping and governing his creatures now that Christ brought miracles was a divine work and he says in John 5 17 my father worketh until now and I work secondly he excuses himself on the ground that this precept does not forbid works which are needful for bodily health therefore he says in Luke 13 15 doth not every one of you on the Sabbath day loose his ox or his ass from the manger and lead them to water and further on in Luke 14 5 which of you shall have an ass or an ox fall into a pit and will not immediately draw him out on the Sabbath day now it is manifest that the miraculous works done by Christ related to health of body and soul thirdly because this precept does not forbid works pertaining to the worship of God wherefore he says in Matthew 12 5 have you not read in the law that on the Sabbath days the priests in the temple break the Sabbath and are without blame and in John 7 23 it is written that a man receives circumcision on the Sabbath day now when Christ commanded the paralytic to carry his bed on the Sabbath day this pertained to the worship of God that is to the praise of God's power and thus it is clear that he did not break the Sabbath although the Jews through this false accusation in his face saying in John 9 16 this man is not of God who keepeth not the Sabbath reply to objection to by those words Christ wished to show that man is made unclean as to his soul by the use of any sort of foods considered not in their nature but only in some signification and that certain foods are in the law called unclean is due to some signification when Augustine says in against Faustus 6 if a question be raised about swine and lambs both are clean by nature since all God's creatures are good but by a certain signification lambs are clean and swine unclean reply to objection 3 the disciples also when being hungry they plucked the ears of corn on the Sabbath are to be excused from transgressing the law since they were pressed by hunger just as David did not transgress the law when through being compelled by hunger he ate the loaves which it was not lawful for him to eat end of question 40 read by Michael Shane Craig Lambert LC question 41 of Summa Theologica tertia pars triates on the savior this is a LibriVox recording all LibriVox recordings are in the public domain for more information or to volunteer please visit LibriVox.org Summa Theologica tertia pars triates on the savior by Saint Thomas Aquinas translated by the fathers of the English Dominican province question 41 of Christ's temptation in four articles we have now to consider Christ's temptation concerning which there are four points of inquiry question 43 first whether it was becoming that Christ should be tempted second of the place third of the time fourth of the mode and order of the temptation first article whether it was becoming that Christ should be tempted objection one it would seem that it was not becoming for Christ to be tempted for to tempt is to make an experiment which is not done save in regard to something unknown but the power of Christ was known even to the demons for it is written in Luke 441 that he suffered them not to speak for they knew that he was the Christ therefore it seems that it was unbecoming for Christ to be tempted objection two further Christ was come in order to destroy the works of the devil according to first John 3 8 for this purpose the Son of God appeared that he might destroy the works of the devil but it is not for the same to destroy the works of a certain one and to suffer them therefore it seems unbecoming that Christ should suffer himself to be tempted by the devil objection three further temptation is from a threefold source the flesh the world and the devil but Christ was not tempted either by the flesh or by the world therefore neither should he have been tempted by the devil on the contrary it is written in Matthew 4 1 Jesus was led by the spirit into the desert to be tempted by the devil I answer that Christ wished to be tempted first that he might strengthen us against temptations hence Gregory says in a homily his homily number 16 on the gospel it was not unworthy of our redeemer to wish to be tempted who came also to be slain in order that by his temptations he might conquer our temptations just by his death he overcame our death secondly that we might be warned so that none however holy may think himself safe or free from temptation therefore also he wished to be tempted after his baptism because as Hilary says in his commentary on Matthew chapter 3 the temptations of the devil assail those principally who are sanctified for he desires above all to overcome the holy hence also it is written in ecclesiasticus 2 son when thou comest to the service of god stand in justice and in fear and prepare thy soul for temptation thirdly in order to give us an example to teach us to wit how to overcome the temptations of the devil hence Augustine says in on the trinity for that Christ allowed himself to be tempted by the devil that he might be our mediator in overcoming temptations not only by helping us but also by giving us an example fourthly in order to fill us with confidence in his mercy hence it is written in Hebrews 4 verse 15 we have not a high priest who cannot have compassion on our infirmities but one tempted in all things like as we are without sin reply to objection one as Augustine says in on the city of god nine christ was known to the demons only so far as he willed not as the author of eternal life but as the cause of certain temporal effects from which they formed a certain conjecture that christ was the son of god but since they also observed in him certain signs of human frailty they did not know for certain that he was the son of god wherefore the devil wished to tempt him this is implied by the words of Matthew 4 verses 2 and 3 saying that after he was hungry the tempter came to him because as Hilary says in his commentary on Matthew chapter 3 had not christ's weakness in hungering betrayed his human nature the devil would not have dared to tempt him moreover this appears from the very manner of the temptation when he said if thou be the son of god which words ambrose explains as follows in his commentary on Luke chapter 4 what means this way of addressing him save that though he knew that the son of god was to come yet he did not think that he had come in the weakness of flesh reply to objection to christ came to destroy the works of the devil not by powerful deeds but rather by suffering from him and his members so as to conquer the devil by righteousness not by power thus Augustine says in on the Trinity 13 that the devil was to be overcome not by the power of god but by righteousness and therefore in regard to christ's temptation we must consider what he did of his own will and what he suffered from the devil for that he allowed himself to be tempted was due to his own will therefore it is written in Matthew 4 verse 1 Jesus was led by the spirit into the desert to be tempted by the devil and Gregory in his homily 16 on the gospel says this to be understood of the holy ghost to wit that thither did his spirit lead him where the wicked spirit would find him and tempt him but he suffered from the devil in being taken up onto the pinnacle of the temple and again into a very high mountain nor is it strange as Gregory observes that he allowed himself to be taken by him onto a mountain who allowed himself to be crucified by his members and we understand him to have been taken up by the devil not as it were by force but because as origin says in his homily 21 on the gospel of Luke he followed him in the course of his temptation like a wrestler advancing of his own accord reply to objection 3 as the apostle says in Hebrews 4 verse 15 Christ wished to be tempted in all things without sin now temptation which comes from an enemy can be without sin because it comes about by merely outward suggestion but temptation which comes from the flesh cannot be without sin because such a temptation is caused by pleasure and concupiscence and as Augustine says in On the City of God 19 it is not without sin that the flesh desireth against the spirit and hence Christ wished to be tempted by an enemy but not by the flesh second article whether Christ should have been tempted in the desert objection one it would seem that Christ should not have been tempted in the desert because Christ wished to be tempted in order to give us an example as stated above in article one but an example should be set openly before those were to follow it therefore he should not have been tempted in the desert objection to further Christmastem says in his homily 12 on the gospel of Matthew then most especially does the devil assail by tempting us when he sees us alone thus did he tempt the woman in the beginning when he found her apart from her husband hence it seems that by going into the desert to be tempted he exposed himself to temptation since therefore his temptation is an example to us it seems that others too should take such steps as will lead them into temptation and yet this seems a dangerous thing to do since rather should we avoid the occasion of being tempted objection three further according to Matthew four five Christ's second temptation is set down in which the devil took Christ up into the holy city and set him upon the pinnacle of the temple which is certainly not in the desert therefore he was not tempted in the desert only on the contrary it is written in mark one verse 13 that Jesus was in the desert 40 days and 40 nights and was tempted by Satan I answer that as stated above in article one second reply Christ of his own free will exposed himself to be tempted by the devil just as by his own free will he submitted to be killed by his members else the devil would not have dared to approach him now the devil prefers to assail a man who is alone for as it is written in Ecclesiastes 412 if a man prevail against one two shall withstand him and so it was that Christ went out into the desert as to a field of battle to be tempted there by the devil hence Ambrose says on Luke 4 one that Christ was led into the desert for the purpose of provoking the devil for had the devil not fought Christ would not have conquered he adds other reasons saying that Christ in doing this set forth the mystery of Adam's delivery from exile who had been expelled from paradise into the desert and set an example to us by showing that the devil envies those who strive for better things reply to objection one Christ is set as an example to all through faith according to Hebrews 12 verse 2 looking on Jesus the author and finisher of faith now faith as it is written in Romans 10 17 cometh by hearing but not by seeing nay it is even said in John 20 verse 29 blessed are they that have not seen and have believed and therefore in order that Christ's temptation might be an example to us it behooved that men should not see it and it was enough that they should hear it related reply to objection to the occasions of temptation are twofold one is on the part of man for instance when a man causes himself to be near to sin by not avoiding the occasion of sinning and such occasions of temptation should be avoided as it is written of lot in Genesis 19 17 neither stay thou in all the country about Sodom another occasion of temptation is on the part of the devil who always envies those who strive for better things as Ambrose says in his commentary on Luke 4 1 and such occasions of temptation are not to be avoided hence chrisostom says in his homily five on the gospel of Matthew not only Christ was led into the desert by the spirit but all God's children that have the Holy Ghost for it is not enough for them to sit idle the Holy Ghost urges them to endeavor to do something great which is for them to be in the desert from the devil standpoint for no unrighteousness in which the devil delights is there again every good work compared to the flesh and the world is the desert because it is not according to the will of the flesh and of the world now there is no danger in giving the devil such an occasion of temptation since the help of the Holy Ghost who is the author of the perfect deed is more powerful than the assaults of the envious devil reply to objection three some say that all the temptations took place in the desert of these some say that Christ was led into the holy city not really but in an imaginary vision while others say that the holy city itself that is a Jerusalem is called a desert because it was deserted by God but there is no need for this explanation for mark says that he was tempted in the desert by the devil but not that he was tempted in the desert only third article whether Christ's temptation should have taken place after his fast objection one he would seem that Christ's temptation should not have taken place after his fast for it has been said above in question 40 article two that an austere mode of life was not becoming to Christ but it savers of extreme austerity that he should have eaten nothing for 40 days and 40 nights for Gregory in his homily 16 on the gospel explains the fact that he fasted 40 days and 40 nights during that time he partook of no food whatever it seems therefore that he should not have thus fasted before his temptation objection to further it is written in mark 113 that he was in the desert 40 days and 40 nights and was tempted by Satan now he fasted 40 days and 40 nights therefore it seems that he was tempted by the devil not after but during his fast objection three further we read that Christ fasted but once but he was tempted by the devil not only once for it is written in Luke 4 13 that all the temptation being ended the devil departed from him for a time as therefore he did not fast before the second temptation so neither should he have fasted before the first on the contrary it is written in Matthew 4 verses 2 and 3 when he had fasted 40 days and 40 nights afterwards he was hungry and then the tempter came to him I answer that it was becoming that Christ should wish to fast before his temptation first in order to give us an example for since we are all in urgent need of strengthening ourselves against temptation as stated above in article 1 by fasting before being tempted he teaches us the need of fasting in order to equip ourselves against temptation hence the apostle in 2nd Corinthians 6 verses 5 and 7 reckons fastings together with armor of justice secondly in order to show that the devil assails with temptations even those who fast as likewise those who are given to other good works and so Christ's temptation took place after his fast as also after his baptism hence since rather chrysostom says in his homily 13 on the gospel of Matthew to instruct the how great a good is fasting and how it is a most powerful shield against the devil and that after baptism thou shouldest give thyself up not to luxury but to fasting for this cause Christ fasted not as needing it himself but as teaching us thirdly because after the fast hunger followed which made the devil dare to approach him as already stated in article one first reply now when our lord was hungry says hillary in his commentary on Matthew 3 it was not because he was overcome by want of food but because he abandoned his manhood to its nature for the devil was to be conquered not by god but by the flesh where for chrysostom two says he proceeded no farther than moses and alias lest his assumption of our flesh might seem incredible reply to objection one it was becoming for christ not to adopt an extreme form of a steer life in order to show himself outwardly in conformity with those to whom he preached now no one should take up the office of preacher unless he be already cleansed and perfect in virtue according to what is said of christ that jesus began to do and to teach as stated in acts one one consequently immediately after his baptism christ adopted and a steer form of life in order to teach us the need of taming the flesh before passing on to the office of preaching according to the apostle in first rinthians 9 27 i chastise my body and bring it into subjection lest perhaps when i have preached to others i myself should become a cast away reply to objection two these words of mark may be understood as meaning that he was in the desert 40 days and 40 nights and that he fasted during that time and the words and he was tempted by satan may be taken as referring not to the time during which he fasted but to the time that followed since matthew says that after he had fasted 40 days and 40 nights afterwards he was hungry thus affording the devil a pretext for approaching him and so the words that follow and the angels ministered to him are to be taken in sequence which is clear from the words of matthew for 11 then the devil left him that is after the temptation and behold angels came and ministered to him and as to the words inserted by mark and he was with the beasts according to chris ostum in his homily 13 on the gospel of matthew they are set down in order to describe the desert as being impassable to man and full of beasts on the other hand according to beads exposition of mark one versus 12 and 13 our lord was tempted 40 days and 40 nights but this is not to be understood of the visible temptations which are related by matthew and luke and occurred after the fast but of certain other assaults which perhaps christ suffered from the devil during that time of his fast reply to objection 3 as ambrose says on luke 4 verse 13 the devil departed from christ for a time because later on he returned not to tempt him but to assail him openly namely at the time of his passion nevertheless he seemed in this later assault to tempt christ to dejection and hatred of his neighbor just as in the desert he attempted him to gluttonous pleasure and idolatrous contempt of god fourth article whether the mode and order of the temptation were becoming objection one it would seem that the mode and order of the temptation were unbecoming for the devil tempts in order to induce us to sin but if christ had assuaged his bodily hunger by changing the stones into bread he would not have sinned just as neither did he sin when he multiplied the loaves which was no less a miracle in order to sucker the hungry crowd therefore it seems that this was no wise attemptation objection two further a counselor is inconsistent if he persuades the contrary to what he intends but when the devil said christ on a pinnacle of the temple he purposed to tempt him to pride or vain glory therefore it was inconsistent to urge him to cast himself thence for this would be contrary to pride or vain glory which always seeks to rise objection three further one temptation should lead to one sin but in the temptation on the mountain he counseled two sins namely covetousness and idolatry therefore the mode of the temptation was unfitting objection four further temptations are ordained to sin but there are seven deadly sins of which we have stated in the second part in the parts prima secunde question 84 article four but the tempter only deals with three notably gluttony vain glory and covetousness therefore the temptation seems to have been incomplete objection five further after overcoming all the vices man is still tempted to pride or vain glory since pride worms itself in stealthily and destroys even good works as agustin says in his letter 211 therefore matthew unfittingly gives the last place to the temptation to covetousness on the mountain and the second place to the temptation of vain glory in the temple especially since luke puts them in reverse order objection six further Jerome says on matthew four for that christ purposed to overcome the devil by humility not by might therefore he should not have repulsed him with a hotty rebuke saying be gone satan objection seven further the gospel narrative seems to be false for it seems impossible that christ have been set on a pinnacle of the temple without being seen by others nor is there to be found a mountain so high that all the world can be seen from it so that all the kingdoms of the earth could be shown to christ from its summit it seems therefore that christ's temptation is unfittingly described on the contrary is the authority of scripture i answer that the temptation which comes from the enemy takes the form of a suggestion as gregarry says in his homily sixteen on the gospel now a suggestion cannot be made to everybody in the same way it must arise from those things towards which each one has an inclination consequently the devil does not straight away tempt the spiritual man to grave sins but he begins with lighter sins so as gradually to lead him to those of greater magnitude where for gregarry in his commentary on job 31 expounding on job 39 verse 25 he smelleth the battle afar off the encouraging of the captains and the shouting of the army says the captains are fittingly described as encouraging and the army as shouting because vices begin by insinuating themselves into the mind under some specious pretext then they come on the mind in such numbers as to drag it into all sorts of folly deafening it with their bestial clamor thus to did the devil said about the temptation of the first man for at first he enticed his mind to consent to the eating of the forbidden fruit saying in genesis 31 why hath god commanded you that you should not eat of every tree of paradise secondly he tempted him to vain glory by saying your eyes shall be opened thirdly he led the temptation to the extreme height of pride saying you shall be as gods knowing good and evil the same order did he observe in tempting christ for at first he tempted him to that which men desire however spiritual may be namely the support of the corporeal nature by food secondly he advanced to that matter in which spiritual men are sometimes found wanting in as much as they do certain things for show which pertains to vain glory thirdly he led the temptation on to that in which no spiritual men but only carnal men have a part namely to desire worldly riches and fame to the extent of holding god in contempt and so in the first two temptations he said if thou be the son of god but not in the third which is inapplicable to spiritual men who are sons of god by adoption whereas it does apply to the two preceding temptations and so christ resisted these temptations by quoting the authority of the law not by enforcing his power so as to give more honor to his human nature and a greater punishment to his adversary since the foe of the human race was vanquished not as by god but as by man as pope leo says in a sermon on lent reply to objection one to make use of what is needful for self support is not the sin of gluttony but if a man do anything inordinate out of the desire for such support it can pertain to the sin of gluttony now it is inordinate for a man who has human assistance at his command to seek to obtain food miraculously for mere bodily support hence the lord miraculously provided the children of israel with manna in the desert where there was no means of obtaining food otherwise and in like fashion christ miraculously provided the crowds with food in the desert when there was no other means of getting food but in order to assuage his hunger he could have done otherwise than work a miracle as did john the baptist according to matthew three four or he could have hastened to the neighboring country consequently the devil esteemed that if christ was a mere man he would fall into sin by attempting to assuage his hunger by a miracle reply to objection two it often happens that a man seeks to derive glory from external humiliation whereby he is exalted by reason of spiritual good hence augustin says in on the sermon of the mount to twelve it must be noted that it is possible to boast not only of the beauty and splendor of material things but even of filthy squalor and this is signified by the devil urging christ to seek spiritual glory by casting his body down reply to objection three it is a sin to desire worldly riches and honors in an inordinate fashion and the principal sign of this is when a man does something wrong in order to acquire such things and so the devil was not satisfied with instigating to a desire for riches and honors but he went so far as to tempt christ for the sake of gaining possession of these things to fall down and adore him which is a very great crime and against god nor does he say merely if thou wilt adore me but he adds if falling down because as ambrose says on luke four five ambition harbors yet another danger within itself for while seeking to rule it will serve it will bow in submission that it may be crowned with honor and the higher it aims the lower it abases itself in like manner the devil in the preceding temptations tried to lead christ from the desire of one sin to the commission of another thus from the desire of food he tried to lead him to the vanity of the needless working of a miracle and from the desire of glory to tempt god by casting himself headlong reply to objection four as ambrose says on luke four verse 13 scripture would not have said that all the temptation being ended the devil departed from him unless the matter of all sins were included in the three temptations already related for the causes of temptations are the causes of desires namely lust of the flesh hope of glory eagerness for power reply to objection five as augustin says in his consensus of the evangelists too it is not certain which happened first whether the kingdoms of the earth were first shown to him and afterwards he was set on the pinnacle of the temple or the latter first and the former afterwards however it matters not provided it be made clear that all these things did take place it may be that the evangelists set these things in different orders because sometimes cupidity arises from vain glory sometimes the reverse happens reply to objection six when christ had suffered the wrong of being tempted by the devil saying if thou beat the son of god cast thyself down he was not troubled nor did he upbraid the devil but when the devil usurped to himself the honor due to god saying all these things will i give thee if falling down thou wilt adore me he was exasperated and repulsed him saying be gone satan that we might learn from his example to bear bravely insults leveled at ourselves but not to allow ourselves so much as to listen to those which are aimed at god reply to objection seven as chrissostom says in his homily five on the gospel of matthew the devil set him on a pinnacle of the temple that he might be seen by all whereas unawares to the devil he acted in such sort that he was seen by none in regard to the words he showed him all the kingdoms of the world and the glory of them we're not to understand that he saw the very kingdoms with the cities and inhabitants their gold and silver but that the devil pointed out the quarters in which each kingdom or city lay and set forth to him in words their glory and estate or again as origin says in his homily number 30 on the gospel of luke he showed him how by means of the various vices he was the lord of the world end of question 41 read by michael shane greg lambert lc