Chapter XXX.—Of the Section Where It is Recorded, that Being Moved with Compassion for the Multitudes, He Sent His Disciples, Giving Them Power to Work Cures, and Charged Them with Many Instructions, Directing Them How to Live; And of the Question Concerning the Proof of Matthew’s Harmony Here with Mark and Luke, Especially on the Subject of the Staff, Which Matthew Says the Lord Told Them They Were Not to Carry, While According to Mark It is the Only Thing They Were to Carry; And Also of the Wearing of the Shoes and Coats.

70. As to the events next related, it is true that their exact order is not made apparent by Matthew’s narrative. For after the notices of the two incidents in connection with the blind men and the dumb demoniac, he continues in the following manner: “And Jesus went about all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the kingdom of the gospel,464    Regnum evangelii. and healing every sickness and every disease. But when He saw the multitudes, He was moved with compassion on them, because they were troubled and prostrate,465    Vexati et jacentes. as sheep having no shepherd. Then saith He unto His disciples, The harvest truly is plenteous, but the labourers are few: pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that He will send forth466    The mss. read ejicias: some editions have mittat, send. labourers into His harvest. And when He had called unto Him His twelve disciples, He gave them power against unclean spirits;” and so forth, down to the words, “Verily I say unto you, he shall not lose his reward.”467    Matt. ix. 35-x. 42. This whole passage which we have now mentioned shows how He gave many counsels to His disciples. But whether Matthew has subjoined this section in its historical order, or has made its order dependent only on the succession in which it came up to his own mind, as has already been said, is not made apparent. Mark appears to have handled this paragraph in a succinct method, and to have entered upon its recital in the following terms: “And He went round about the villages, teaching in their circuit:468    In circuitu docens. and He called unto Him the twelve, and began to send them by two and two, and gave them power over unclean spirits;” and so on, down to where we read, “Shake off the dust from your feet for a testimony against them.”469    Mark vi. 6–11. But before narrating this incident, Mark has inserted, immediately after the story of the raising of the daughter of the ruler of the synagogue, an account of what took place on that occasion on which, in His own country, the people were astonished at the Lord, and asked from whence He had such wisdom and such capabilities,470    Virtutes. when they perceived His judgment: which account is given by Matthew after these counsels to the disciples, and after a number of other matters.471    Matt. xiii. 54. It is uncertain, therefore, whether what thus happened in His own country has been recorded by Matthew in the succession in which it came to mind, after having been omitted at first, or whether it has been introduced by Mark in the way of an anticipation; and which of them, in short, has kept the order of actual occurrence, and which of them the order of his own recollection. Luke, again, in immediate succession to the mention of the raising of the daughter of Jairus to life, subjoins this paragraph, bearing on the power and the counsels given to the disciples, and that indeed with as great brevity as Mark.472    Luke ix. 1–6. This evangelist, however, does not, any more than the others, introduce the subject in such a way as to produce the impression that it comes in also in the strictly historical order. Moreover, with regard to the names of the disciples, Luke, who gives their names in another place,473    The Ratisbon edition and nineteen mss. read alio nomine, by another name instead of alio loco.—Migne.—that is to say, in the earlier passage, where they are [represented as being] chosen on the mountain,—is not at variance in any respect with Matthew, with the exception of the single instance of the name of Judas the brother of James, whom Matthew designates Thaddæus, although some codices also read Lebbæus.474    In five mss. Lebdæum, Lebdeus, is given instead of Lebbeus, but wrongly, as appears from the Greek text of Matt. x. 3.—Migne. [The Vulgate (Matt x. 3) reads Thaddæus, now accepted by critical editors; so Revised Version. The Authorized Version follows a composite reading (with two early uncials and Syriac versions): “Lebbæus, whose surname was Thaddæus.” A harmonistic gloss—R.] But who would ever think of denying that one man may be known under two or three names?

71. Another question which it is also usual to put is this: How comes it that Matthew and Luke have stated that the Lord said to His disciples that they were not to take a staff with them, whereas Mark puts the matter in this way: “And He commanded them that they should take nothing for their journey, save a staff only;”475    Mark vi. 8. [In Matt. x. 10, Luke ix. 3, the later authorities substitute the plural “staves,” probably to avoid the seeming discrepancy. The better sustained reading in both passages is “staff.”—R.] and proceeds further in this strain, “no scrip, no bread, no money in their purse:” thereby making it quite evident that his narrative belongs to the same place and circumstances with which the narratives of those others deal who have mentioned that the staff was not to be taken? Now this question admits of being solved on the principle of understanding that the staff which, according to Mark, was to be taken, bears one sense, and that the staff which, according to Matthew and Luke, was not to be taken with them, is to be interpreted in a different sense; just in the same way as we find the term “temptation” used in one meaning, when it is said, “God tempteth no man,”476    Jas. i. 13. and in a different meaning where it is said, “The Lord your God tempteth [proveth] you, to know whether ye love Him.”477    Deut. xiii. 3. For in the former case the temptation of seduction is intended; but in the latter the temptation of probation. Another parallel occurs in the case of the term “judgment,” which must be taken in one way, where it is said, “They that have done good unto the resurrection of life, and they that have done evil unto the resurrection of judgment;”478    Judicii. John v. 29. and in another way, where it is said, “Judge me, O God, and discern479    Discerne. my cause, in respect of an ungodly nation.”480    Ps. xliii. 1. For the former refers to the judgment of damnation, and the latter to the judgment of discrimination.

72. And there are many other words which do not retain one uniform signification, but are introduced so as to suit a variety of connections, and thus are understood in a variety of ways, and sometimes, indeed, are adopted along with an explanation. We have an example in the saying, “Be not children481    Pueri. in understanding; howbeit in malice be ye little children, that in understanding ye may be perfect.”482    Parvuli estote ut sensibus perfecti sitis. 1 Cor. xiv. 20. For here is a sentence which, in a brief and pregnant form, might have been expressed thus: “Be ye not children; howbeit be ye children.” The same is the case with the words, “If any man among you thinketh himself to be wise in this world, let him become a fool that he may be wise.”483    1 Cor. iii. 18. For what else is the statement there but this: “Let him not be wise, that he may be wise”? Moreover, the sentences are sometimes so put as to exercise the judgment of the inquirer. An instance of this kind occurs in what is said in the Epistle to the Galatians: “Bear ye one another’s burdens, and so ye will fulfil the law of Christ. For if a man thinketh himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself. But it is meet that every man should prove his own work; and then shall he have rejoicing in himself, and not in another. For every man shall bear his own burden.”484    Gal. vi. 2–5. Now, unless the word “burden” can be taken in different senses, without doubt one would suppose that the same writer contradicts himself in what he says here, and that, too, when the words are placed in such close neighbourhood in one paragraph.485    [Augustin fails to notice that the word “burden” represents different Greek words in Gal. vi. 2–5. His argument here resembles the method of modern expositors who explain the discrepancies of the Authorized Version without consulting the original.—R.] For when he has just said, “One shall bear another’s burdens,” after the lapse of a very brief interval he says, “Every man shall bear his own burden.” But the one refers to the burdens which are to be borne in sharing in one’s infirmity, the other to the burdens borne in the rendering of an account of our own actions to God: the former are burdens to be borne in our [duties of] fellowship with brethren; the latter are those peculiar to ourselves, and borne by every man for himself. And in the same way, once more, the “rod” of which the apostle spoke in the words, “Shall I come unto you with a rod?”486    1 Cor. iv. 21. is meant in a spiritual sense; while the same term bears the literal meaning when it occurs of the rod applied to a horse, or used for some other purpose of the kind, not to mention, in the meantime, also other metaphorical significations of this phrase.

73. Both these counsels, therefore, must be accepted as having been spoken by the Lord to the apostles; namely, at once that they should not take a staff, and that they should take nothing save a staff only. For when He said to them, according to Matthew, “Provide neither gold nor silver, nor money in your purses, nor scrip for your journey, neither two coats, neither shoes, nor yet a staff,” He added immediately, “for the workman is worthy of his meat.” And by this He makes it sufficiently obvious why it is that He would have them provide and carry none of these things. He shows that His reason was, not that these things are not necessary for the sustenance of this life, but because He was sending them in such a manner as to declare plainly that these things were due to them by those very persons who were to hear believingly the gospel preached by them; just as wages are the soldier’s due, and as the fruit of the vine is the right of the planters, and the milk of the flock the right of the shepherds. For which reason Paul also speaks in this wise: “Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit thereof? who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock?”487    1 Cor. ix. 7. For under these figures he was speaking of those things which are necessary to the preachers of the gospel. And so, a little further on, he says: “If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things? If others are partakers of this power over you, are not we rather? Nevertheless we have not used this power.”488    1 Cor. ix. 11, 12. This makes it apparent that by these instructions the Lord did not mean that the evangelists should not seek their support in any other way than by depending on what was offered them by those to whom they preached the gospel (otherwise this very apostle acted contrary to this precept when he acquired a livelihood for himself by the labours of his own hands, because he would not be chargeable to any of them489    1 Thess. ii. 9.), but that He gave them a power in the exercise of which they should know such things to be their due. Now, when any commandment is given by the Lord, there is the guilt of non-obedience if it is not observed; but when any power is given, any one is at liberty to abstain from its use, and, as it were, to recede from his right. Accordingly, when the Lord spake these things to the disciples, He did what that apostle expounds more clearly a little further on, when he says, “Do ye not know that they who minister in the temple490    In templo operantur. live of the things of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar? Even so hath the Lord ordained, that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel. But I have used none of these things.”491    1 Cor. ix. 13–15. When he says, therefore, that the Lord ordained it thus, but that he did not use the ordinance, he certainly indicates that it was a power to use that was given him, and not a necessity of service that was imposed upon him.

74. Accordingly, as our Lord ordained what the apostle declares Him to have ordained,—namely, that those who preach the gospel should live of the gospel,—He gave these counsels to the apostles in order that they might be without the care of providing492    [Ut securi non possiderent.—R.] or of carrying with them things necessary for this life, whether great or the very smallest; consequently He introduced this term, “neither a staff,” with the view of showing that, on the part of those who were faithful to Him, all things were due to His ministers, who themselves, too, required nothing superfluous. And thus, when He added the words, “For the workman is worthy of his meat,” He indicated quite clearly, and made it thoroughly plain, how and for what reason it was that He spake all these things. It is this kind of power, therefore, that the Lord denoted under the term “staff,” when He said that they should “take nothing” for their journey, save a staff only. For the sentence might also have been briefly expressed in this way: “Take with you none of the necessaries of life, neither a staff, save a staff only.” So that the phrase “neither a staff” may be taken to be equivalent to “not even the smallest things;” while the addition, “save a staff only,” may be understood to mean that, in virtue of that power which they received from the Lord, and which was signified by the name “staff” [or, “rod”], even those things which were not carried with them would not be wanting to them. Our Lord therefore used both phrases. But inasmuch as one and the same evangelist has not recorded them both, the writer who has told us that the rod, as introduced in the one sense, was to be taken, is supposed to be in antagonism to him who has told us that the rod, as occurring again in the other sense, was not to be taken. After this explanation of the matter, however, no such supposition ought to be entertained.

75. In like manner, also, when Matthew tells us that the shoes were not to be carried with them on the journey, what is intended is the checking of that care which thinks that such things must be carried with them, because otherwise they might be unprovided. Thus, too, the import of what is said regarding the two coats is, that none of them should think of taking with him another coat in addition to the one in which he was clad, as if he was afraid that he might come to be in want, while all the time the power (which was received from the Lord) made him sure of getting what was needful. To the same effect, when Mark says that they were to be shod with sandals or soles, he gives us to understand that this matter of the shoe has some sort of mystical significance, the point being that the foot is to be neither covered, nor yet left bare to the ground; by which the idea may be conveyed that the gospel was neither to be concealed, nor yet made to depend on the good things of earth. And as to the fact that what is forbidden is neither the carrying nor the possessing of two coats, but more distinctly the putting of them on,—the words being, “and not put on two coats,”—what counsel is conveyed to them therein but this, that they ought to walk not in duplicity, but in simplicity?

76. Thus it is not by any means to be made a matter of doubt that the Lord Himself spake all these words, some of them with a literal import, and others of them with a figurative, although the evangelists may have introduced them only in part into their writings,—one inserting one section, and another giving a different portion. Certain passages, at the same time, have been recorded in identical terms either by some two of them, or by some three, or even by all the four together. And yet not even when this is the case can we take it for granted that everything has been committed to writing which was either uttered or done by Him. Moreover, if any one fancies that the Lord could not in the course of the same discourse have used some expressions with a figurative application and others with a literal, let him but examine His other addresses, and he will see how rash and inconsiderate such a notion is. For, then (to mention but a single instance which occurs meantime to my mind), when Christ gives the counsel not to let the left hand know what the right hand doeth,493    Matt. vi. 3. he may suppose himself under the necessity of accepting in the same figurative sense at once the almsgivings themselves referred to, and the other instructions offered on that occasion.

77. In good truth, I must repeat here once more an admonition which it behoves the reader to keep in mind, so as not to be requiring that kind of advice so very frequently, namely, that in various passages of His discourses, the Lord has reiterated much which He had uttered already on other occasions. It is needful, indeed, to call this fact to mind, lest, when it happens that the order of such passages does not appear to fit in with the narrative of another of the evangelists, the reader should fancy that this establishes some contradiction between them; whereas he ought really to understand it to be due to the fact that something is repeated a second time in that connection which had been already expressed elsewhere. And this is a remark that should be held applicable not only to His words, but also to His deeds. For there is nothing to hinder us from believing that the same thing may have taken place more than once. But for a man to impeach the gospel simply because he does not believe in the repeated occurrence of some incident, which no one [at least] can prove to be an impossible event, betrays mere sacrilegious vanity.

CAPUT XXX. Ubi turbarum misertus misit discipulos suos, dans eis postestatem sanitatum praestandarum, et eis multa mandavit, ordinans quemadmodum viverent: ubi quaerendum est quomodo Matthaeus Marco et Lucae congruat maxime de virga quam secundum Matthaeum dicit non ferendam, secundum Marcum autem solam ferendam; et de habitu calceamentorum atque vestium.

70. Sane deinceps non apparet ordo rerum gestarum. Nam post haec duo facta, de caecis et muto daemonio, 1112 ita sequitur: Et circumibat Jesus civitates omnes et castella, docens in synagogis eorum, et praedicans regnum Evangelii, et curans omnem languorem, et omnem infirmitatem. Videns autem turbas, misertus est eis; quia erant vexati, et jacentes, sicut oves non habentes pastorem. Tunc dicit discipulis suis: Messis quidem multa, operarii autem pauci: rogate ergo Dominum messis, ut ejiciatoperarios in messem suam. Et convocatis duodecim discipulis suis, dedit illis potestatem spirituum immundorum, et caetera, usque ad aliud ubi ait, Amen dico vobis non perdet mercedem suam (Id. IX, 35; X, 42). In hoc toto loco, quem nunc commemoramus, multa monuit discipulos suos: sed utrum eum ex ordine Matthaeus subjunxerit, an ei ordo narrandi recordatio sua fuerit, sicut dictum est, non apparet. Hunc locum brevitur videtur perstrinxisse Marcus, et eum sic ingressus est, dicens: Et circumibat castella in circuitu docens. Et convocavit duodecim, et coepit eos mittere binos; et dabat illis potestatem spirituum immundorum, et caetera, usque ad illud ubi ait, Excutite pulverem de pedibus vestris, in testimonium illis (Marc. VI, 6-11). Sed antequam hoc narraret Marcus, prius post resuscitatam filiam archisynagogi, illud narravit, ubi Dominum in patria sua mirabantur, unde illi esset tanta sapientia et virtutes, cum ejus cogitationem nossent: quod Matthaeus post admonitionem istam discipulorum, et post alia multa commemorat (Matth. XIII, 54). Itaque incertum est, utrum hoc quod agitur in ejus patria, Matthaeus omissum revocaverit; an Marcus recordatum anticipaverit; quisnam eorum ordinem rei gestae, et quis recordationis suae tenuerit. Lucas autem continuo post resurrectionem filiae Jairi, subjungit hunc locum de potestate et admonitione discipulorum (Luc. IX, 1-6), tam breviter sane quam Marcus: neque ipse ita, ut hoc sequi etiam in rerum gestarum ordine appareat. In nominibus ergo discipulorum, Lucas, qui eos alio loco nominat , cum prius eliguntur in monte, a Matthaeo non discrepat, nisi in nomine Judae Jacobi (Id. VI, 14-16), quem Matthaeus Thaddaeum appellat; nonnulli autem codices habent Lebbaeum . Quis autem unquam prohibuerit duobus vel tribus nominibus hominem unum vocari?

71. Solet item quaeri, quomodo Matthaeus et Lucas commemoraverint dixisse Dominum discipulis ut nec virgam ferrent, cum dicat Marcus, Et praecepit eis ne quid tollerent in via, nisi virgam tantum; et sequatur etiam ipse, non peram, non panem, neque in zona aes: ut ostendat in eodem loco versari narrationem suam, in quo et illorum qui dixerunt nec virgam ferendam. Quod ita solvitur, ut intelligamus sub alia significatione dictam virgam, quae secundum Marcum ferenda est; et sub alia illam quae secundum Matthaeum et Lucam non est ferenda: sicut sub alia significatione 1113 intelligitur tentatio, de qua dictum est, Deus neminem tentat (Jacobi. I, 13); et sub alia de qua dictum est, Tentat vos Dominus Deus vester, ut sciat si diligitis eum (Deut. XIII, 3); illa seductionis est, haec probationis. Sicut judicium aliter accipitur, de quo dictum est, Qui bene fecerunt, in resurrectionem vitae; qui male fecerunt, in resurrectionem judicii (Joan. V, 29); et aliter, de quo dictum est, Judica me, Deus, et discerne causam meam de gente non sancta (Psal. XLII, 1): illud enim judicium damnationis est, hoc discretionis.

72. Et multa alia sunt verba quae non habent unam significationem, sed diversis locis congruenter posita, diverso modo intelliguntur, et aliquando cum expositione dicuntur: ut est illud, Nolite pueri effici sensibus, sed malitia parvuli estote, ut sensibus perfecti sitis (I Cor. XIV, 20). Hoc enim breviter clausa sententia dici potuit. Nolite esse pueri, sed estote pueri. Et illud, Si quis putat se sapientem esse in vobis in hoc saeculo, stultus fiat, ut sit sapiens (Id. III, 18): quid enim aliud dixit, quam, Non sit sapiens, ut sit sapiens? Aliquando autem clausae ita dicuntur, ut exerceant inquirentem: ut est quod ait ad Galatas, Invicem onera vestra portate, et sic adimplebitis legem Christi. Qui enim putat se esse aliquid, cum nihil sit, seipsum seducit. Opus autem suum probet unusquisque, et tunc in semetipso habebit gloriam, et non in altero. Unusquisque enim proprium onus portabit (Galat. VI, 2-5). Nisi oneris nomen sub diversis significationibus acceperis, procul dubio putabis eumdem sibi in loquendo esse contrarium, et hoc in una sententia tam vicine positis verbis: qui cum paulo ante diceret, Alter alterius onera portate; postea dixit, Unusquisque proprium onus portabit. Sed alia sunt onera participandae infirmitatis, alia reddendae rationis Deo de actibus nostris: illa cum fratribus sustentanda communicantur, haec propria ab unoquoque portantur. Ita et virga intelligitur spiritualiter, de qua dicebat Apostolus, In virga veniam ad vos (I Cor. IV, 21)? et corporaliter, sive ad equum qua utimur sive ad aliquid aliud opus fuerit: ut interim omittam et alias hujus nominis figuratas significationes.

73. Utrumque ergo accipiendum est a Domino Apostolis dictum, et ut nec virgam ferrent, et ut nonnisi virgam ferrent. Cum enim secundum Matthaeum diceret eis, Nolite possidere aurum, neque argentum, neque pecuniam in zonis vestris; non peram in via, neque duas tunicas, neque calceamenta, neque virgam; continuo subjecit, Dignus est enim operarius cibo suo. Unde satis ostendit cur eos haec possidere ac ferre noluerit: non quod necessaria non sint sustentationi hujus vitae; sed quia sic eos mittebat, ut eis haec deberi demonstraret ab illis ipsis quibus Evangelium credentibus annuntiarent, tanquam stipendia militantibus, tanquam fructum vineae plantatoribus, tanquam lac gregis pastoribus. Unde Paulus dicit: Quis militat suis stipendiis unquam? quis plantat vineam, et de fructu ejus non edit? quis pascit gregem, et de lacte gregis non percipit? Hinc enim loquebatur de iis quae necessaria sunt praedicatoribus 1114 Evangelii: unde paulo post dicit, Si nos vobis spiritualia seminavimus, magnum est si vestra carnalia metemus? Si alii potestatis vestrae participant, non magis nos? sed non sumus usi hac potestate. Unde apparet haec non ita praecepisse Dominum, tanquam Evangelistae vivere aliunde non debeant, quam eis praebentibus quibus annuntiant Evangelium; alioquin contra hoc praeceptum fecit idem apostolus, qui victum de manuum suarum laboribus transigebat, ne cuiquam gravis esset (I Thess. II, 9): sed potestatem dedisse, in qua scirent sibi ista deberi. Cum autem a Domino aliquid imperatur, nisi fiat, inobedientiae culpa est: cum autem potestas datur, licet cuique non uti, et tanquam de suo jure cedere. Haec ergo Dominus loquens discipulis, id agebat, quod ipse Apostolus paulo post apertius ita explicat: Nescitis quoniam qui in templo operantur, quae de templo sunt edunt? qui altari deserviunt, altari compartiuntur? Sic et Dominus ordinavit iis qui Evangelium annuntiant, de Evangelio vivere: ego autem nullius horum usus sum (I Cor. IX, 7-15). Cum itaque dicit ita Dominum ordinasse, se autem usum non esse, utique ostendit utendi potestatem datam, non impositam serviendi necessitatem.

74. Hoc ergo ordinans Dominus, quod eum ordinasse dicit Apostolus, qui Evangelium annuntiant, de Evangelio vivere, illa Apostolis loquebatur, ut securi non possiderent, neque portarent huic vitae necessaria, nec magna, nec minima. Ideo posuit, nec virgam, ostendens a fidelibus suis omnia deberi ministris suis, nulla superflua requirentibus. Ac per hoc addendo, Dignus est enim operarius cibo suo, prorsus aperuit et illustravit unde et quare haec omnia loqueretur. Hanc ergo potestatem virgae nomine significavit, cum dixit, ne quid tollerent in via, nisi virgam tantum. Potuit enim etiam sic breviter dici, Nihil necessariorum vobiscum feratis, nec virgam, nisi virgam tantum: ut illud quod dictum est nec virgam, intelligatur, ne minimas quidem res; quod vero adjunctum est, nisi virgam tantum, intelligatur, quia per potestatem a Domino acceptam, quae virgae nomine significata est, etiam quae non portantur non deerunt. Utrumque ergo Dominus dixit, sed quia non utrumque unus evangelista commemoravit, putatur ille qui virgam sub alia significatione positam tollendam dixit, ei qui virgam rursus aliud significantem non tollendam dixit, esse contrarius; sed jam ratione reddita non putetur.

75. Sic et calceamenta cum dicit Matthaeus in via non esse portanda, curam prohibet, qua ideo portanda cogitantur, ne desint. Hoc et de duabus tunicis intelligendum est, ne quisquam eorum praeter eam quam esset indutus, aliam portandam putaret, sollicitus ne opus esset, cum ex illa potestate posset accipere. Proinde Marcus dicendo calceari eos sandaliis vel soleis, aliquid hoc calceamentum mysticae significationis habere admonet, ut pes neque tectus sit, neque nudus ad terram; id est, nec occultetur Evangelium, nec terrenis commodis innitatur. Et quod non portari vel haberi duas tunicas, sed expressius indui prohibet dicens, Et ne induerentur duabus tunicis; quid eos monet 1115 nisi non dupliciter, sed simpliciter ambulare?

76. Ita Dominum omnia dixisse, nullo modo dubitandum est, partim proprie, partim figurate: sed Evangelistas, alia istum, alia illum inseruisse scriptis suis; quaedam vero eadem vel duos, vel tres eorum quoslibet, vel omnes quatuor posuisse: nec sic tamen omnia esse conscripta, quae ab illo seu dicta seu facta sunt. Quisquis autem putat non potuisse Dominum in uno sermone quaedam figurate, quaedam proprie ponere eloquia, caetera ejus inspiciat; videbit quam hoc temere atque inerudite arbitretur. Potest enim iste (ut unum aliquid dicam quod animo interim occurrit), quoniam monet ut non sciat sinistra quod facit dextra (Matth. VI, 3), et ipsas eleemosynas, et quidquid illic aliud praecipit, figurate accipiendum putare.

77. Sane rursus admoneo, quod oportet meminisse lectorem, ne tali admonitione saepissime indigeat, aliis atque aliis sermonum suorum locis Dominum multa iterasse quae alibi jam dixerat; ne forte ipsorum locorum ordo cum ex alio evangelista non convenerit, alicui eorum hinc putet esse contrarium; cum intelligere debeat iterum alibi dici, quod jam alibi dictum erat: nec tantum de dictis, verum etiam de factis observari debere. Nihil enim prohibet hoc idem iterum factum credere: calumniari autem Evangelio, dum non credit iterum factum, quod iterum fieri non potuisse nemo convincit, sacrilegae vanitatis est.