16. Let us see, then, how the questioner styled Him, beside calling Him good. He said, Good Master, what good thing shall I do479    Ib. xix. 16.? adding to the title of “good” that of master. If Christ then did not chide because He was called good, it must have been because He was called “good Master.” Further the manner of His reproof shews that it was the disbelief of the questioner, rather than the name of master, or of good, which He resented. A youth, who provides himself upon the observance of the law, but did not know the end of the law480    Rom. x. 4., which is Christ, who thought himself justified by works, without perceiving that Christ came to the lost sheep of the house of Israel481    St. Matt. xv. 24; cf. x. 6., and to those who believe that the law cannot save through the faith of justification482    Cf. Rom. viii. 3, “What the law could not do;” and Gal. iii. 11 ff., “No man is justified by the law in the sight of God.…The law is not of faith.”, questioned the Lord of the law, the Only-begotten God, as though He were a teacher of the common precepts and the writings of the law. But the Lord, abhorring this declaration of irreverent unbelief, which addresses Him as a teacher of the law, answered, Why callest thou Me good? and to shew how we may know, and call Him good, He added, None is good, save one, God, not repudiating the name of good, if it be given to Him as God.

16. Fidem interrogantis arguit, non dicta.---Videamus itaque, quid praeter bonum interrogans dixerit: ait enim, Magister bone, quid boni faciam (Marci X, 17)? Duas igitur res connuncupavit: et bonum, et magistrum. Et quia non arguit bonum se dici; hoc necesse est arguat, quod magister bonus dictus sit. Ita autem arguit se magistrum bonum dici, ut fidem interrogantis potius, quam vel magistri in se vel boni nomen argueret. Juvenis enim insolens per observantiam legis , et finem legis qui Christus est nesciens, et justificatum se in operibus existimans, et non intelligens venisse eum ad oves perditas domus 0294B Israel (Matth. XV, 24), et impossibile esse legi per fidem justificationis salvare credentes (Rom. VIII, 3), tamquam communium praeceptorum et in lege scriptorum magistrum interrogat Dominum legis et unigenitum Deum. Detestatus itaque Dominus hanc de se irreligiosae fidei professionem, quod tamquam magister legis interrogaretur, respondit, Quid me vocas bonum? Atque ut significaret quatenus 271 intelligendus et profitendus bonus esset, subjecit, Nemo bonus, nisi unus Deus; non respuens bonitatis nomen, si sibi hoc tamquam Deo deputaretur.