Opening
Matthew 12:1.
Matt. XII. 1.
At that time Jesus walked through the grain fields on the Sabbath day, and His disciples were hungry and began to pick heads of grain and eat them.
At that time Jesus went on the Sabbath day through the grain; and His disciples were a hungered, and began to pluck the ears of grain, and to eat.
Luke says it was "on a double Sabbath." What is a double Sabbath? It is when there are two occasions requiring rest from work at the same time: both the regular Sabbath and another feast day falling on it. They called any rest from work a sabbath.
But Luke says, On a double Sabbath. Now what is a double Sabbath? When the cessation from toil is twofold, both that of the regular Sabbath, and that of another feast coming upon it. For they call every cessation from toil, a sabbath.
But why would He have led them away from it, when He knew everything in advance, unless He intended for the Sabbath to be broken? He did intend it, but not in a simple or straightforward way. This is why He never breaks it without a reason, but always provides reasonable justifications—so that He might bring the law to an end while not shocking them. However, there are occasions when He abolishes it directly, without any special circumstances. For example, when He anoints the eyes of the blind man with clay (John 9:6, 14), or when He says, "My Father works until now, and I work." He does these things for different reasons: in one case to glorify His own Father, and in the other to accommodate the weakness of the Jews. In the present case, He is doing the latter, putting forward the necessity of nature as His defense. Of course, in cases involving acknowledged sins, such necessity could never serve as an excuse. A murderer cannot plead his anger, nor an adulterer his lust, nor can anyone offer any other such excuse. But here, by mentioning their hunger, He freed them from all blame.
But why could He have led them away from it, who foreknew all, unless it had been His will that the Sabbath should be broken? It was His will indeed, but not simply so; wherefore He never breaks it without a cause, but giving reasonable excuses: that He might at once bring the law to an end, and not startle them. But there are occasions on which He even repeals it directly, and not with circumstance: as when He anoints with the clay the eyes of the blind man; John 9:6, 14 as when He says, My Father works hitherto, and I work. And He does so, by this to glorify His own Father, by the other to soothe the infirmity of the Jews. At which last He is laboring here, putting forward as a plea the necessity of nature; although in the case of acknowledged sins, that could not of course ever be an excuse. For neither may the murderer make his anger a plea, nor the adulterer allege his lust, no, nor any other excuse; but here, by mentioning their hunger, He freed them from all blame.
Please admire, I ask you, the disciples, and how completely they control themselves and give no thought to bodily things, but treat physical nourishment as a secondary matter. Even though they have to struggle with constant hunger, they still do not abandon their calling. If hunger had not severely pressed them, they would not have done even this much.
But do thou, I pray you, admire the disciples, how entirely they control themselves, and make no account of the things of the body, but esteem the table of the flesh a secondary thing, and though they have to struggle with continual hunger, do not even so withdraw themselves. For except hunger had sorely constrained them, they would not have done so much as this.
What then do the Pharisees do? When they saw it, the text says, they said to Him, "Look, Your disciples are doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath day." Matthew 12:2
What then do the Pharisees? When they saw it, it is said, they said to Him, Behold, Your disciples do that which is not lawful to do upon the Sabbath day. Matthew 12:2
Here the Pharisees do not react with great intensity (though that would have been consistent with their character). They are not violently angry but simply criticize. However, when Jesus stretched out the withered hand and healed it, they became so enraged that they plotted together to kill and destroy Him. When nothing great and remarkable is accomplished, they remain calm. But when they see anyone healed, they become furious and agitated, and no one is as intolerable as they are—such enemies they are of human salvation.
Now here indeed with no great vehemence (yet surely that would have been consistent in them) — nevertheless they are not vehemently provoked, but simply find fault. But when He stretched out the withered hand and healed it, then they were so infuriated, as even to consult together about slaying and destroying Him. For where nothing great and noble is done, they are calm; but where they see any made whole, they are savage, and fret themselves, and none so intolerable as they are: such enemies are they of the salvation of men.
How then does Jesus defend His disciples? "Have you not read," He says, "what David did in the temple when he was hungry, along with all those who were with him? How he entered into the house of God and ate the showbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, nor for those who were with him, but only for the priests?" Matthew 12:3-4
How then does Jesus defend His disciples? Have ye not read, says He, what David did in the temple, when he was an hungered, himself and all they that were with him? How he entered into the house of God, and did eat the show-bread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests? Matthew 12:3-4
Thus, when He pleads for His disciples, He brings forward David as an example; but for Himself, He brings forward the Father.
Thus, whereas in pleading for His disciples, He brings forward David; for Himself, it is the Father. John 5:17
And notice the way He rebukes them: "Have you not read what David did?" The glory of that prophet was indeed great, so much so that Peter, when later pleading with the Jews, spoke in this way: "Let me speak freely to you about the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried." Acts 2:29
And observe His reproving manner: Have ye not read what David did? For great indeed was that prophet's glory, so that Peter also afterwards pleading with the Jews, spoke on this wise, Let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried. Acts 2:29
But why does He not call him by the title of his rank, either at this time or later? Perhaps because He traced His ancestry from him.
But wherefore does He not call him by the name of his rank, either on this occasion or afterwards? Perhaps because He derived His race from him.
If they had been the kind of people who were fair-minded, He would have addressed His response to the disciples' hunger. But since they were detestable and lacking in humanity, He instead recounts a story to them.
Now had they been a candid sort of persons, He would have turned His discourse to the disciples' suffering from hunger; but abominable as they were and inhuman, He rather rehearses unto them a history.
But Mark says, "In the days of Abiathar the High Priest," not stating what was contrary to the history, but implying that he had two names. He adds that he gave it to him, indicating that in this matter David had much to say for himself, since even the priest himself allowed him to do this. And not only did the priest allow it, but he even served him. For don't tell me that David was a prophet, because even so it was not lawful, but the privilege belonged to the priests. This is why He added, "but for the priests only." For even if he were a prophet ten thousand times over, he was still not a priest. And even if he himself were a prophet, those who were with him were not, since we know that he gave to them as well.
But Mark says, In the days of Abiathar the High Priest: not stating what was contrary to the history, but implying that he had two names; and adds that he gave unto him, indicating that herein also David had much to say for himself, since even the very priest suffered him; and not only suffered, but even ministered unto him. For tell me not that David was a prophet, for not even so was it lawful, but the privilege was the priests ': wherefore also He added, but for the priests only. For though he were ten thousand times a prophet, yet was he not a priest; and though he were himself a prophet, yet not so they that were with him; since to them too we know that he gave.
What then, someone might ask, were they all just like David? Why bring up dignity to me when there appears to be a violation of the law, even if it was due to natural necessity? Yet in this way too He has more completely cleared them of the accusations, since the one who is greater is shown to have done the same thing.
What then, it might be said, were they all one with David? Why talk to me of dignity, where there seems to be a transgression of the law, even though it be the constraint of nature? Yea, and in this way too He has the more entirely acquitted them of the charges, in that he who is greater is found to have done the same.
And what does this have to do with the question, someone may ask, since it was not the Sabbath that he violated? You tell me about something that is greater and that especially demonstrates the wisdom of Christ—that passing over the Sabbath, He brings forward another example greater than the Sabbath. For it is by no means the same thing to break in upon a day and to touch that holy table which it was not lawful for any man to touch. Since the Sabbath has indeed been violated, and that often; in fact it is continually being violated, both by circumcision and by many other works; and at Jericho too one may see the same to have happened. But this happened only once. So He more than wins the argument. How then did no one blame David, although there was yet another ground for accusation heavier than this—the murder of the priests, which had its origin from this? But He does not mention it, since He is addressing Himself only to the present subject.
And what is this to the question, one may say; for it was not surely the Sabbath, that he transgressed? You tell me of that which is greater, and which especially shows the wisdom of Christ, that letting go the Sabbath, He brings another example greater than the Sabbath. For it is by no means the same, to break in upon a day, and to touch that holy table, which it was not lawful for any man to touch. Since the Sabbath indeed has been violated, and that often; nay rather it is continually being violated, both by circumcision, and by many other works; and at Jericho Joshua 6:15 too one may see the same to have happened; but this happened then only. So that He more than obtains the victory. How then did no man blame David, although there was yet another ground of charge heavier than this, that of the priests' murder, which had its origin from this? But He states it not, as applying himself to the present subject only.
Afterwards, He refutes it in another way as well. For just as at first He brought in David, using the dignity of the person to silence their pride, so after He had stopped their mouths and put down their boasting, He then adds the more appropriate refutation. And what is this? "Do you not know that in the temple the priests profane the Sabbath and are blameless?" (Matthew 12:5). For in that other case, He says, the emergency made the relaxation permissible, but here there is relaxation even without emergency. However, He did not immediately refute them in this way, but first by way of concession, and afterwards by insisting on His argument. Because it was fitting to draw the stronger conclusion last, although the former argument also had its proper force.
2. Afterwards again He refutes it in another way also. For as at first He brought in David, by the dignity of the person quelling their pride; so when He had stopped their mouths, and had put down their boasting, then He adds also the more appropriate refutation. And of what sort is this? Do you not know, that in the temple the priests profane the Sabbath, and are blameless? Matthew 12:5 For in that other instance indeed, says He, the emergency made the relaxation, but here is the relaxation even without emergency. He did not however at once thus refute them but first by way of permission, afterwards as insisting upon his argument. Because it was meet to draw the stronger inference last, although the former argument also had of course its proper weight.
Tell me not that it does not free someone from blame to point to another person committing the same sin. For when the person doing the act incurs no blame, the action he has undertaken becomes a precedent for others to cite.
For tell me not, that it is not freeing one's self from blame, to bring forward another who is committing the same sin. For when the doer incurs no blame, the act on which he has ventured becomes a rule for others to plead.
Nevertheless He was not satisfied with this, but adds something even more decisive, saying that the deed is no sin at all. This more than anything was the sign of a glorious victory: to point to the law repealing itself, and doing so in two ways—first by the place, then by the Sabbath. Or rather, even in three ways, since the work being done is twofold, and along with it goes another thing, namely that it is done by the priests. And what is yet more, it is not even brought as a charge. For they, He says, are blameless.
Nevertheless He was not satisfied with this, but subjoins also what is more decisive, saying that the deed is no sin at all; and this more than anything was the sign of a glorious victory, to point to the law repealing itself, and in two ways doing so, first by the place, then by the Sabbath; or rather even in three ways, in that both the work is twofold that is done, and with it goes also another thing, its being done by the priests; and what is yet more, that it is not even brought as a charge. For they, says He, are blameless.
Do you see how many points He has stated? The place, for He says "in the temple"; the persons, for they are the priests; the time, for He says "the Sabbath"; the act itself, for they profane (He did not say they break, but what is more serious, they profane); and that they not only escape punishment but are even free from blame, for He says they are blameless.
Do you see how many points He has stated? The place; for He says, In the temple; the persons, for they are the priests; the time, for He says, the Sabbath; the act itself, for they profane; (He not having said, they break, but what is more grievous, they profane;) that they not only escape punishment, but are even free from blame, for they, says He, are blameless.
Do you therefore not regard this example, He says, as being like the previous one. For that one was indeed done only once, not by a priest, and out of necessity—which is why those involved deserved to be excused. But this latter case happens every Sabbath, is performed by priests, occurs in the temple, and is done according to the law. And so again, they are acquitted of the charges not as a favor, but in a legal manner. For I did not speak that way to blame them, He says, nor to free them from blame by showing indulgence, but according to the principle of justice.
Do not ye therefore account this, He says, like the former instance. For that indeed was done both but once, and not by a priest, and was of necessity; wherefore also they were deserving of excuse; but this last is both done every Sabbath, and by priests, and in the temple, and according to the law. And therefore again not by favor, but in a legal way, they are acquitted of the charges. For not at all as blaming them did I so speak, says He, nor yet as freeing them from blame in the way of indulgence, but according to the principle of justice.
He appears to be defending them, but it is actually His disciples whom He is clearing of the charges made against them. For when He says those are blameless, He means all the more so are these.
And He seems indeed to be defending them, but it is His disciples whom He is clearing of the alleged faults. For when He says, those are blameless, He means, much more are these.
But they are not priests. Actually, they are greater than priests. For the Lord of the temple Himself is here: the reality, not the symbol. This is why He also said,
But they are not priests. Nay, they are greater than priests. For the Lord of the temple Himself is here: the truth, not the type. Wherefore He said also,
But I say to you that here there is One greater than the temple.
But I say unto you, That in this place is one greater than the temple.
Nevertheless, as great as the sayings were that they heard, they made no reply, because the salvation of people was not their goal.
Nevertheless, great as the sayings were which they heard, they made no reply, for the salvation of men was not their object.
Then, because this would seem harsh to his hearers, he quickly softens it, giving his teaching a more lenient turn as he had done before, though even so expressing himself with a rebuke. "But if you had known what this means, 'I will have mercy and not sacrifice,' you would not have condemned the guiltless." (Matthew 12:7)
Then, because to the hearers it would seem harsh, He quickly draws a veil over it, giving His discourse, as before, a lenient turn, yet even so expressing Himself with a rebuke. But if you had known what this means, I will have mercy and not sacrifice, you would not have condemned the guiltless. Matthew 12:7
Do you see how once again He softens His speech with gentleness, yet at the same time shows them to be beyond the reach of gentleness? For "you would not have condemned," He says, "the guiltless." Earlier He drew the same conclusion from what is said about the priests, using the words "they are guiltless," but here He states it on His own authority—or rather, this too comes from the law, since He was quoting a prophetic saying from Hosea 6:6.
Do you see how again He inclines His speech to lenity, yet again shows them to be out of the reach of lenity? For you would not have condemned, says He, the guiltless. Before indeed He inferred the same from what is said of the priests, in the words, they are guiltless; but here He states it on His own authority; or rather, this too is out of the law, for He was quoting a prophetic saying. Hosea 6:6
After this He mentions another reason as well: "For the Son of man," He says, "is Lord of the Sabbath day," speaking this of Himself. But Mark reports that He said this concerning our common nature as well, for He said, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath."
3. After this He mentions another reason likewise; For the Son of man, says He, is Lord of the Sabbath day; Matthew 12:8 speaking it of Himself. But Mark relates Him to have said this of our common nature also; for He said, The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. Mark 2:27
Why then was the man who gathered sticks punished? Because if the laws were going to be ignored right from the start, they would hardly be kept later on.
Wherefore then was he punished that was gathering the sticks? Numbers 15:32-36 Because if the laws were to be despised even at the beginning, of course they would scarcely be observed afterwards.
The Sabbath indeed provided many great benefits from the beginning. For example, it made people gentle toward their household members and humane. It taught them about God's providence and the creation, as Ezekiel says. It gradually trained them to abstain from wickedness and disposed them to focus on spiritual things.
For indeed the Sabbath did at the first confer many and great benefits; for instance, it made them gentle towards those of their household, and humane; it taught them God's providence and the creation, as Ezekiel says; Ezekiel 20:12 it trained them by degrees to abstain from wickedness, and disposed them to regard the things of the Spirit.
For because they could not have borne it if, when He was giving the law for the Sabbath, He had said, "Do your good works on the Sabbath, but do not do the works which are evil," therefore He restrained them from all works alike, for He says, "You must do nothing at all"—and not even then were they kept in order. But He Himself, in the very act of giving the law of the Sabbath, did even then hint obscurely that He wanted them to refrain only from evil works, by the saying, "You must do no work, except what must be done to sustain your life." And in the temple too all work continued, and with more diligence and double effort. Thus even by means of the very shadow He was secretly revealing to them the truth.
For because they could not have borne it, if when He was giving the law for the Sabbath, He had said, Do your good works on the Sabbath, but do not the works which are evil, therefore He restrained them from all alike for, You must do nothing at all, says He: and not even so were they kept in order. But He Himself, in the very act of giving the law of the Sabbath, did even therein darkly signify that He will have them refrain from the evil works only, by the saying, You must do no work, except what shall be done for your life. And in the temple too all went on, and with more diligence and double toil. Numbers 28:9-10 Thus even by the very shadow He was secretly opening unto them the truth.
Did Christ then, some will ask, abolish something so very beneficial? Not at all—rather, He greatly improved it. For it was time for them to be trained in all things by higher principles, and there was no need to tie the hands of someone who was freed from wickedness and equipped for every good work. Nor did they need to learn in this way that God made all things, or to be made gentle through this means, since they are called to imitate God's own love for humanity (for He says, "Be merciful, as your Heavenly Father" Luke 6:36). Nor did they need to make one day a festival when they are commanded to keep a feast their whole life long (for it says, "Let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with leaven of malice and wickedness, but with unleavened bread of sincerity and truth" 1 Corinthians 5:8). Just as they do not need to stand by an ark and a golden altar when they have the very Lord of all dwelling within them and hold communion with Him in all things—through prayer, through offering, through scriptures, through almsgiving, and by having Him within them. So now, why would any Sabbath be required by someone who is always keeping the feast, whose life is in Heaven?
Did Christ then, it will be said, repeal a thing so highly profitable? Far from it; nay, He greatly enhanced it. For it was time for them to be trained in all things by the higher rules, and it was unnecessary that his hands should be bound, who was freed from wickedness, winged for all good works; or that men should hereby learn that God made all things; or that they should so be made gentle, who are called to imitate God's own love to mankind (for He says, Be merciful, as your Heavenly Father); Luke 6:36 or that they should make one day a festival, who are commanded to keep a feast all their life long; ( For let us keep the feast, it is said, not with old leaven, neither with leaven of malice and wickedness; but with unleavened bread of sincerity and truth); 1 Corinthians 5:8 as neither need they stand by an ark and a golden altar, who have the very Lord of all for their inmate, and in all things hold communion with Him; by prayer, and by oblation, and by scriptures, and by almsgiving, and by having Him within them. Lo now, why is any Sabbath required, by him who is always keeping the feast, whose conversation is in Heaven?
Let us keep the feast continually, then, and do nothing evil, for this is what it means to feast. Let our spiritual concerns become more intense while our earthly concerns take a lesser place. Let us rest with a spiritual rest, holding back our hands from covetousness and withdrawing our bodies from excessive and useless labors—the kind that the Hebrew people once endured in Egypt. There is no difference between us when we are gathering gold and those who were bound in the mire, working at making bricks, gathering stubble, and being beaten. Even now the devil commands us to make bricks, just as Pharaoh did then. What else is gold but mire? What else is silver but stubble? Like stubble, it kindles the flame of desire; like mire, gold defiles the one who possesses it.
4. Let us keep the feast then continually, and do no evil thing; for this is a feast: and let our spiritual things be made intense, while our earthly things give place: and let us rest a spiritual rest, refraining our hands from covetousness; withdrawing our body from our superfluous and unprofitable toils, from such as the people of the Hebrews did of old endure in Egypt. For there is no difference between us who are gathering gold, and those that were bound in the mire, working at those bricks, and gathering stubble, and being beaten. Yea, for now too the devil bids us make bricks, as Pharaoh did then. For what else is gold, than mire? And what else is silver, than stubble? Like stubble, at least, it kindles the flame of desire; like mire, so does gold defile him that possesses it.
Therefore He sent us, not Moses from the wilderness, but His Son from heaven. If, then, after He has come, you remain in Egypt, you will suffer along with the Egyptians. But if you leave that land and go up with the spiritual Israel, you will see all the miracles.
Wherefore He sent us, not Moses from the wilderness, but His Son from Heaven. If then, after He has come, thou abide in Egypt, you will suffer with the Egyptians: but if leaving that land thou go up with the spiritual Israel, you shall see all the miracles.
Yet even this is not enough for salvation. For we must not only be delivered out of Egypt, but we must also enter into the promise. Since the Jews too, as Paul says, both passed through the Red Sea, and ate manna, and drank spiritual drink, but nevertheless they all perished.
Yet not even this suffices for salvation. For we must not only be delivered out of Egypt, but we must also enter into the promise. Since the Jews too, as Paul says, both went through the Red Sea, and ate manna, and drank spiritual drink, but nevertheless they all perished.
So that the same thing doesn't happen to us, let's not be lazy or hold back. When you hear evil scouts even now spreading a bad report about the narrow and difficult way, and saying the same sort of things as those ancient spies, don't follow the crowd but instead take Joshua and Caleb the son of Jephunneh as your examples. And don't give up until you have received the promise and entered into the Heavens.
Lest then the same befall us also, let us not be slow, neither draw back; but when you hear wicked spies even now bringing up an evil report against the strait and narrow way, and uttering the same kind of talk as those spies of old, let not the multitude, but Joshua, be our pattern, and Caleb the son of Jephunneh; and do not thou give up, until thou have attained the promise, and entered into the Heavens.
Don't think the journey is hard. For if we were reconciled to God when we were enemies, how much more, now that we are reconciled, will we be saved. Romans 5:10 But someone will say this way is narrow and difficult. Yes, but the former path you came from is not only narrow and difficult, but actually impassable and full of savage wild beasts. And just as there was no way to pass through the Red Sea unless that miracle had happened, so we could never have gone up to heaven while remaining in our former life, except that baptism came between. Now if the impossible has become possible, then certainly what is difficult will become easy.
Neither account the journey to be difficult. For if when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God, much more, being reconciled, shall we be saved. Romans 5:10 But this way, it will be said, is strait and narrow. Well, but the former, through which you have come, is not strait and narrow only, but even impassable, and full of savage wild beasts. And as there was no passing through the Red Sea, unless that miracle had been wrought, so neither could we, abiding in our former life, have gone up into Heaven, but only by baptism intervening. Now if the impossible has become possible, much more will the difficult be easy.
But someone will say that was grace alone. Well, for this very reason you have special cause to take courage. For if He worked with you when it was grace alone, will He not much more be your aid when you also show forth laborious works? If He saved you when you were doing nothing, will He not much more help you when you are working?
But that, it will be said, was of grace only. Why, for this reason especially you have just cause to take courage. For if, where it was grace alone, He wrought with you; will He not much more be your aid, where ye also show forth laborious works? If He saved you, doing nothing, will He not much more help you, working?
Earlier I was saying that you should take courage about the difficult things from the fact that God has accomplished impossible things. But now I add this: if we are watchful, these things won't even be so difficult. For consider this: death has been trampled down, the devil has been defeated, the law of sin has been abolished, the grace of the Spirit has been given, life has been compressed into a small span, and the heavy burdens have been shortened.
Above indeed I was saying, that from the impossibilities you ought to take courage about the difficulties also; but now I add this, that if we are vigilant, these will not be so much as difficult. For mark it: death is trodden under foot, the devil has fallen, the law of sin is extinguished, the grace of the Spirit is given, life is contracted into a small space, the heavy burdens are abridged.
To prove this to you through real results, look at how many people have gone beyond Christ's commandments; so are you afraid of what is simply their standard? What excuse will you have, then, when others are leaping beyond the limits while you yourself are too lazy even for what is required?
And to convince you hereof by the actual results, see how many have overshot the injunctions of Christ; and are you afraid of that which is just their measure? What plea then will you have, when others are leaping beyond the bounds, and you yourself too slothful for what is enacted?
We urge you to give alms from what you have, but someone else has stripped himself of all his possessions. We require you to live chastely with your wife, but someone else has not even entered into marriage. We urge you not to be envious, but we find someone else giving up even his own life for charity. Again, we urge you to be lenient in judgments and not severe toward those who sin, but someone else, even when struck, has turned the other cheek as well.
Thus, you we admonish to give alms of such things as you have, but another has even stripped himself of all his possessions: you we require to live chastely with your wife, but another has not so much as entered into marriage: and you we entreat not to be envious, but another we find giving up even his own life for charity: you again we entreat to be lenient in judgments, and not severe to them that sin, but another, even when smitten, has turned the other cheek also.
What then shall we say, I ask you? What excuse shall we have for not even doing these things, when others go so far beyond us? And they would not have gone beyond us if the thing were not very easy. For who wastes away—he who envies other people's blessings, or he who takes pleasure with them and rejoices? Who views everything with suspicion and constant trembling—the chaste man, or the adulterer? Who is cheered by good hopes—he who robs by violence, or he who shows mercy and shares what he has with the needy?
What then shall we say, I pray you? What excuse shall we make, not doing even these things, when others go so far beyond us? And they would not have gone beyond us, had not the thing been very easy. For which pines away, he who envies other men's blessings, or he who takes pleasure with them, and rejoices? Which eyes all things with suspicion and continual trembling, the chaste man, or the adulterer? Which is cheered by good hopes, he that spoils by violence, or he that shows mercy, and imparts of his own to the needy?
Let us keep these things in mind and not be sluggish in our pursuit of virtue. Instead, let us prepare ourselves with complete readiness for these glorious struggles and work hard for a little while, so that we may win the eternal and imperishable crowns. May we all attain them, by the grace and love towards man of our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom be glory and might forever and ever. Amen.
Let us then bear in mind these things, and not be torpid in our career for virtue's sake; but having stripped ourselves with all readiness for these glorious wrestlings, let us labor for a little while, that we may win the perpetual and imperishable crowns; unto which may we all attain, by the grace and love towards man of our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom be glory and might forever and ever. Amen.