Homilies on Matthew, Homily 17

“You have heard that it was said to people long ago, ‘You shall not commit adultery’; but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” Having finished the previous commandment and extended it to the height of self-denial, He moves on in sequence to the second, following the law’s order here too. “And yet,” someone may say, “this is the third, not the second; for the first is not ‘You shall not kill,’ but ‘The Lord your God is one Lord.’” So it is also worth asking why He did not begin with that. Why, then? Because if He had begun there, He would have had to expand it too and introduce Himself together with His Father. But the time had not yet come to teach anything like this about Himself. Besides, for a time He was presenting only His moral teaching, intending first through this and through His miracles to convince His hearers that He was the Son of God. Now, if He had said immediately, before He had said or done anything, “You have heard that it was said to people long ago, ‘I am the Lord your God, and there is no other besides me,’ but I say to you, Worship me just as you worship Him,” everyone would have thought Him mad. For even after His teaching and His great miracles, while He was still not saying this openly, they called Him possessed by a demon. If He had tried to say anything like this before all those things, what would they not have said? What would they not have thought? But by holding back His teaching on these subjects at the proper time, He was making the doctrine acceptable to the multitude. So for now He passed over it quickly, but once He had established it everywhere through His miracles and His excellent teaching, He later revealed it in words as well. For the present, however, He reveals it as occasions arise, gradually and quietly, through the display of His miracles and the very manner of His teaching. For His authoritative enactment of such laws and such corrections to laws would lead an attentive, understanding hearer little by little toward an understanding of His doctrine. For it says, “They were astonished at Him, because He did not teach like their scribes.” 2. For He began with the passions most common to our whole race—I mean anger and desire (for these above all rule absolutely within us and are more natural than the rest). With great authority, the authority proper to a lawgiver, He corrected them and brought them into strict order. For He did not say that only the adulterer is punished; what He did with the murderer, He does here too, punishing even the unchaste look, to teach you how He surpasses the scribes. Accordingly, He says, “He who looks at a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery with her”: that is, someone who makes a practice of studying beautiful bodies, hunting for lovely features, feasting his soul on the sight, and fixing his eyes on beautiful faces. For He came to free not only the body from all evil deeds, but the soul too, before the body. So, because it is in the heart that we receive the grace of the Spirit, He cleanses it first. “And how,” someone may say, “is it possible to be freed from desire?” I answer, first, that if we were willing, even this could be deadened and remain inactive. Next, He does not eliminate desire altogether here, but the desire that arises in people from looking. For someone eager to gaze at beautiful faces is himself chiefly responsible for kindling the furnace of that passion, making his own soul a captive, and soon going on to the act itself. So we see why He did not say, “Whoever desires to commit adultery,” but, “Whoever looks in order to lust.” In the case of anger He made a distinction, saying, “without a cause,” and “for nothing”; but He did not do so here. Instead, He removed the desire once and for all. Yet surely both are naturally implanted in us, and both are placed in us for our benefit—both anger and desire: the one so that we may punish the wicked and correct those who behave in a disorderly way; the other so that we may have children and our race may be replenished through successive generations. Why, then, did He not make a distinction here too? In fact, if you pay attention, you will see that a very significant distinction is included here as well. For He did not simply say, “Whoever desires,” since someone can desire even while sitting in the mountains, but, “Whoever looks in order to lust”: that is, someone who gathers lust into himself; someone who, when nothing compels him, brings the wild beast into his thoughts while they are calm. For this no longer comes from nature, but from self-indulgence. Even the ancient Scripture corrects this from the beginning, saying, “Do not gaze at beauty that belongs to another.” And then, so that no one might say, “What if I gaze and am not taken captive?” He punishes the look, so that trusting you are safe will not lead you to fall into sin someday. “What, then,” someone may say, “if I look and do desire, but do no evil?” Even so, you are counted among the adulterers. For the Lawgiver has pronounced it, and you must ask no further questions. If you look this way once, twice, or three times, you may perhaps be able to restrain yourself; but if you keep doing it and kindling the furnace, you will certainly be captured. For you do not stand outside the nature common to humanity. Just as we beat a child whom we see holding a knife, even if we do not see him hurt, and forbid him ever to hold it, so God removes the unchaste look even before the act, so that you may never fall into the act as well. For someone who has once kindled the flame keeps forming images of shameful things on his own, even when the woman he saw is absent, and from these he often goes on to the deed itself. That is why Christ removes even the embrace that takes place only in the heart. What can those who have virgin women living with them say now? Under the terms of this law, they must be guilty of ten thousand adulteries, looking at them with desire every day. This is why blessed Job also laid down this law from the beginning, shutting himself off on every side from this kind of gazing. For the struggle is truly greater when we see the object of our affection without possessing it. The pleasure we gain from the sight is not as great as the harm we suffer by increasing this desire. We thus strengthen our opponent and give the devil more room, and no longer have the strength to repel him, now that we have brought him deep within us and opened our mind to him. Therefore He says, “Commit no adultery with your eyes, and you will commit none with your mind.” For it is possible to look in another way, as the chaste do. That is why He did not prohibit seeing altogether, but seeing accompanied by desire. If He had not meant this, He would simply have said, “He who looks at a woman.” But He did not say that; He said, “He who looks in order to lust,” “he who looks to please his eyes.” For God did not give you eyes so that you could use them to introduce adultery, but so that, looking at His creatures, you might admire their Maker. Just as someone may become angry without reason, someone may also look without reason—that is, when you do it for lust. Instead, if you desire to look and find pleasure, look at your own wife and love her continually; no law forbids that. But if you eagerly study another woman’s beauty, you injure both your wife, by letting your eyes wander elsewhere, and the woman you look at, by touching her unlawfully. For although you have not touched her with your hand, you have caressed her with your eyes. That is why this too is counted as adultery, and even before that great punishment it brings a considerable punishment of its own. For then everything within the man is filled with unrest and turmoil; the storm is great, the pain is severe, and no captive or person in chains can be worse off than someone in this state of mind. Often the woman who shot the dart has flown away, while the wound still remains. Or rather, she did not shoot the dart; you inflicted the fatal wound on yourself through your unchaste look. I say this to free modest women from the accusation. For certainly, if a woman adorns herself and draws the eyes of those she encounters toward herself, even if she does not wound the man who meets her, she incurs the utmost punishment. For she mixed the poison and prepared the hemlock, even if she did not offer the cup. Or rather, she did offer the cup, even though no one was found to drink it. 3. “Why, then, does He not address them too?” someone may ask. Because the laws He establishes apply to everyone in every case, even though He seems to address only men. For when He addresses the head, He extends His warning to the whole body as well. For He regards woman and man as one living creature and nowhere distinguishes their kind. But if you also want to hear His rebuke directed specifically at them, listen to Isaiah, who speaks at length against them and mocks their dress, their appearance, their walk, their trailing garments, their dainty steps, and their drooping necks. Along with him, hear blessed Paul too, who lays down many laws for them and strongly rebukes this sex concerning braided hair, luxurious living, and all other such things. Christ too hinted at this very thing in what follows, for when He says, “Pluck out and cut off the one who causes you to stumble,” He indicates His anger against them. 3. That is also why He adds, “If your right eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out and throw it away from you.” So, to prevent you from saying, “But what if she is related to me? What if she belongs to me in some other way?” He gave these commands. He was not speaking about our limbs—far from it—for nowhere does He say that our flesh is to blame; everywhere it is the evil mind that is accused. For it is not the eye that sees, but the mind and thought. Often, for example, when our attention is entirely elsewhere, our eye does not see those who are present. So the matter does not depend entirely on the eye’s activity. Again, if He had been speaking of parts of the body, He would not have said this about one eye, or only the right eye, but about both. For someone who is led into sin by his right eye will clearly suffer the same evil through his left as well. Why, then, did He mention the right eye and add the hand? To show you that He is speaking about those close to us, rather than limbs. Thus He says, “If you love someone as though he were your right eye, if you think him so useful to you that you regard him as a hand, and he harms your soul, cut off even such people.” And notice the emphasis: He does not say, “Withdraw from him,” but, to show how complete the separation must be, He says, “Pluck it out and throw it away from you.” Then, because His command was severe, He also shows the advantage from both sides, both through the benefits and through the evils, continuing the metaphor. “For it is better for you,” He says, “that one of your members should perish than that your whole body should be thrown into hell.” For when he does not save himself and destroys you too, what kindness is there in both of you sinking, when, if you were separated, at least one might have been saved? But why, someone may ask, did Paul choose to become accursed? Not on the condition that nothing would be gained, but with the salvation of others in view. Here, however, the harm affects both. That is why He said not only, “Pluck it out,” but also, “Throw it away from you”: do not receive him again if he remains as he is. In this way you will both save him from a heavier charge and free yourself from ruin. But to see the benefit of this law even more clearly, let us, if you are willing, test what has been said with a hypothetical case involving the body itself. I mean, if you were given a choice and had either to keep your eye and be thrown into a pit and perish, or to pluck it out and preserve the rest of your body, would you not naturally choose the latter? The answer is clear to everyone. For this would be the action of someone who loves the rest of the body, rather than someone who hates the eye. Apply this same reasoning to men and women too: if someone who harms you through his friendship remains incurable, cutting him off in this way will free you from all harm, and he himself will also be spared the heavier charges, since he will not have to answer for your destruction along with his own evil deeds. Do you see how full the law is of gentleness and tender care, and how much love for humanity is revealed in what most people consider severity? Let those who hurry to the theaters and make themselves adulterers every day listen to these things. For if the law commands us to cut off someone whose connection with us causes us harm, what excuse can people have who, by frequenting those places, draw to themselves every day even people they do not yet know, and provide themselves with countless occasions for ruin? For as He continues, He not only forbids us to look unchastely, but, having shown the harm that follows, He makes the law even stricter, commanding us to cut off, sever, and throw far away. The One who has spoken countless words about love commands all this, so that in both ways you may learn His providential care and how He seeks your benefit from every source. 4. “Now it has been said, Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce. But I say to you, Whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.” He does not move on to the next subject until He has thoroughly dealt with the previous ones. For look: He shows us still another kind of adultery. What is it? An ancient law had been made allowing a man who hated his wife, for any reason whatever, to send her away and bring another woman home in her place. The law, however, did not direct him simply to do this, but to give the woman a certificate of divorce first, so that she could not return to him again. In this way at least the form of marriage might remain. For if He had not commanded this, but it had been lawful first to send her away and take another, and then afterward to take back the first, great confusion would certainly have followed, with all men continually taking one another’s wives; and the result would have been outright adultery. To address this, He devised the certificate of divorce as a substantial restraint. But these things were done because of another, far greater wickedness. I mean that if He had required a man to keep even a hated wife in the house, the husband would have killed her out of hatred. For such was the Jewish race. Those who did not spare children, who killed prophets and “shed blood like water,” would have shown women even less mercy. That is why He allowed the lesser evil to remove the greater. To see that this was not His original law, hear Him say, “Moses wrote these things because of the hardness of your hearts,” so that you would send them away rather than kill them in the house. But since He had removed all anger, forbidding not only murder but even the mere feeling of anger, He easily introduces this law as well. This is also why He constantly recalls the earlier words: to show that His sayings agree with them rather than contradict them, that He is enforcing them rather than overthrowing them, perfecting them rather than abolishing them. And notice that He addresses the man throughout. Thus He says, “He who divorces his wife causes her to commit adultery, and he who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.” That is, the first man, even if he does not take another wife, has made himself blameworthy by that act alone, having made his first wife an adulteress; and the second has become an adulterer by taking a woman who belongs to another. Do not tell me, “The other man sent her away.” For even after being sent away, she remains the wife of the man who expelled her. Then, to keep the wife from becoming more headstrong because He placed all the blame on the man who sent her away, He also closed to her the doors of the man who would later receive her, by saying, “He who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.” In this way He makes the woman chaste even against her will, completely blocks her access to everyone, and does not allow her to give any occasion for jealousy. For a woman who has been made aware that she must either keep the husband originally allotted to her or, if sent out of that house, have no other refuge, is compelled, even against her will, to make the best of life with her husband. And do not be surprised that He does not address her at all about these things; for the woman is weaker. That is why He leaves her aside and fully corrects her negligence through His threats against the men. It is just as if someone with a wasteful child were to leave him aside, rebuke those who make him that way, and forbid them to associate with him or approach him. And if this is hard to bear, please remember His earlier sayings and the terms on which He pronounced His hearers blessed, and you will see that it is quite possible and easy. For how will someone who is meek, a peacemaker, poor in spirit, and merciful send his wife away? How will someone accustomed to reconciling others quarrel with his own wife? He has also made the command easier in another way: He leaves the husband one ground for dismissal when He says, “Except for sexual immorality,” since otherwise the matter would have ended in the same problem again. For if He had commanded the husband to keep her in the house even while she defiled herself with many men, He would have made the matter end in adultery again. Do you see how these sayings agree with what came before? For someone who does not look at another woman with unchaste eyes will not engage in sexual immorality; and by not engaging in sexual immorality, he will give the husband no occasion to send his wife away. So, as you see, after this He presses the point without reservation and builds up this fear as a defensive wall, impressing on the husband the great danger of sending her away, since he makes himself accountable for her adultery. Thus, so that when you heard, “Pluck out the eye,” you would not suppose this was said even of a wife, He added this correction at the right time, allowing her to be sent away in only one case and no other. 5. “Again, you have heard that it was said to people long ago, You shall not swear falsely, but shall fulfill your oaths to the Lord. But I say to you, do not swear at all.” Why did He pass over the commandment against theft and go straight to false witness? Because someone who steals also swears on occasion; but someone who does not practice either swearing or lying will be much less willing to steal. So by this He has defeated the other sin as well, since lying arises from stealing. But what does “You shall fulfill your oaths to the Lord” mean? This: “You shall be truthful when you swear.” “But I say to you, do not swear at all.” Next, to lead them farther away from swearing by God, He says, “Neither by Heaven, for it is God’s throne, nor by the earth, for it is the footstool of His feet; nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King.” He is still speaking from the prophetic writings and showing that He is not opposed to the ancients. This was because they had a custom of swearing by these things, a custom the evangelist indicates near the end of his Gospel. But please notice the basis on which He exalts the elements: their relation to God, as it had been declared in accommodation to human understanding, rather than their own nature. For because idolatry’s tyranny was great, He gave the reason we have mentioned so that the elements would not be thought worthy of honor for their own sake; and this reason would in turn direct the glory to God. For He did not say, “because Heaven is beautiful and great,” or, “because the earth is useful,” but, “because the one is God’s throne and the other His footstool,” urging them toward their Lord from every side. “Neither by your head,” He says, “because you cannot make one hair white or black.” Here again, He has forbidden swearing by one’s head, not out of admiration for humanity (for then humanity itself would be worshiped), but to refer the glory to God and show that you are not even master of yourself, and therefore certainly not of oaths made by your head. For if no one would surrender his own child to another, much less will God surrender His own work to you. For although it is your head, it belongs to another; and so far are you from being its master that you cannot do even the smallest thing with it. For He did not say, “You cannot make one hair grow,” but, “You cannot even change its quality.” “But what,” someone may say, “if someone demands an oath and uses force?” Let the fear of God be stronger than the force. For if you are going to offer excuses like this, you will keep none of the commands. Yes, for first, concerning your wife, you will say, “What if she is quarrelsome and extravagant?” Then, concerning the right eye, “What if I love it and am burning with passion?” And concerning the unchaste look, “What if I cannot help seeing?” And concerning our anger against a brother, “What if I have a quick temper and cannot control my tongue?” In short, you could trample all His sayings underfoot in this way. Yet with human laws you never dare use this excuse or say, “What if this or that is the case?” Instead, willingly or unwillingly, you accept what is written. Besides, you will never have to endure compulsion at all. For someone who has listened to those earlier blessings and shaped himself into the person Christ commanded will have no such compulsion to endure from anyone, since everyone will regard him with reverence and respect. “But let your yes be yes, and your no, no; for whatever goes beyond these comes from the evil one.” What, then, goes beyond “yes” and “no”? The oath, rather than perjury. For everyone acknowledges that perjury comes from the evil one, and no one needs to be taught this. Nor is it an addition, but an opposite; whereas going beyond means something more, added over and above—and that is what swearing is. “What, then,” someone says, “did it come from the evil one? And if it came from the evil one, how was it a law?” Well, you will say the same thing about the wife too: how is something now counted as adultery when it was previously permitted? What can we reply to this? That the commands given then took account of the weakness of those receiving the laws. For being worshiped with the smoke of sacrifice is also very unworthy of God, just as lisping is unworthy of a philosopher. Accordingly, now that the standards of virtue have advanced, that kind of conduct has been declared adultery and swearing has been declared to come from the evil one. But if these things had been laws of the devil from the beginning, they would not have brought people to such great goodness. For if those laws had not first prepared the way, the ones we now have would not have been accepted so easily. So do not judge their excellence by the present, when their usefulness is past, but by the time when they were needed. Or rather, if you wish, consider them even now. For even now their worth is shown, especially by the very reason we find fault with them. The fact that they now appear as they do is their greatest commendation. For if they had not brought us up well and made us fit to receive the greater commands, they would not now appear this way. Thus the breast, once it has done its part and is sending the child on to more mature food, afterward appears useless. The parents who previously thought it necessary for the baby now ridicule it in countless ways (and many, not content even with insulting words, also smear it with bitter substances, so that when their words cannot break the child’s untimely attachment to it, the actual taste may quench the longing). In the same way, Christ says that these things come from the evil one, not to indicate that the old law is from the devil, but to lead them away from their ancient poverty with the greatest urgency. He says these things to them; but as for the Jews who were unresponsive and persisted in the same ways, He smeared their city all around with the terror of captivity, as with some bitter substance, and made it inaccessible. But since even this could not restrain them, and they longed to see it again, running to it just as a child runs to the breast, He hid it from them altogether, both pulling it down and leading most of them far away from it. It is the same with our cattle: many people, by keeping the calves away, eventually induce them to give up their familiar habit of drinking milk. But if the old law had belonged to the devil, it would not have led people away from idolatry; it would instead have drawn them toward it and thrown them into it, for that was what the devil desired. Yet we see the old law producing the opposite effect. Indeed, this very practice of taking an oath was established long ago for this reason: so that they would not swear by idols. For He says, “You shall swear by the true God.” So the benefits the law brought about were very great, far from small. For their reaching “solid food” was the work of its care. “What, then,” someone may ask, “does swearing not come from the evil one?” Yes, indeed, it comes entirely from the evil one—that is, now, after so high a standard of self-restraint has been given; but it was not so then. “But how,” someone may say, “can the same thing be good at one time and not good at another?” I say quite the opposite: how could it fail to become good and not good, when everything cries aloud that this is so—the arts, the fruits of the earth, and everything else? See this happening first, for example, among our own kind. Being carried is good in the earliest stage of life, but harmful afterward. Eating food that has been softened in the mouth is good at the beginning of our life, but disgusting afterward. Being fed on milk and running to the breast is beneficial and healthy at first, but afterward leads to decline and harm. Do you see how the same actions appear good and then not good because of the time? Yes, and wearing a child’s robe is proper while you are a boy, but disgraceful once you become a man. Would you also like to learn from the reverse case, how a man’s things are unsuitable for a child? Give a boy a man’s robe, and there will be great laughter—and greater danger, since he often trips while walking dressed that way. Let him handle public affairs, trade, sow, and reap, and again there will be great laughter. And why do I mention these things, when killing—which everyone acknowledges to be an invention of the evil one—killing, I say, when done at its proper time, caused Phinehas, who committed it, to be honored with the priesthood? For to see that killing is the work of the one I just mentioned, hear what Christ says: “You will do the works of your Father; he was a murderer from the beginning.” Yet Phinehas became a killer, and “it was counted to him” (as He puts it) “as righteousness.” And Abraham too, by becoming not only a killer, but (what was far worse) the killer of his child, won still greater approval. Peter too carried out a double killing, yet what he did was of the Spirit. So let us examine not simply the acts, but also the time, the causes, the intention, the differences between the people involved, and whatever else may accompany them. Let us investigate these things with the greatest care, for there is no other way to arrive at the truth. And if we want to reach the kingdom, let us diligently demonstrate something beyond the old commandments, since otherwise we cannot obtain the things of Heaven. For if we reach only the same level as the ancients, we will stand outside that threshold. For “unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you cannot enter the kingdom of Heaven.” 6. Yet although so severe a threat has been set down, some people fall short of this righteousness, far from surpassing it. Far from avoiding oaths, they even swear falsely; far from avoiding an unchaste gaze, they even fall into the wicked act itself. And they dare to do all the other forbidden things, as though they had lost all feeling, waiting for only one thing: the day of punishment and the time when they must pay the most extreme penalty for their wrongdoing. This is the lot only of those who have ended their lives in wickedness. For they have reason to despair and from then on to expect nothing but punishment; whereas those still here can renew the fight, conquer, and easily be crowned. So do not lose heart, my fellow human being, or abandon your noble determination; for the commands are truly not burdensome. What trouble is it, please tell me, to avoid an oath? Does it cost money? Does it require sweat and hardship? You need only resolve to do it, and the whole thing is done. But if you bring up your habit, that is the very reason I especially say that doing right is easy for you. For if you establish a different habit, you will have accomplished everything. Consider, for example, how among the Greeks people who lisp have often completely cured their faltering speech through much practice, while others, accustomed to shrugging their shoulders in an improper way and constantly moving them, broke themselves of the habit by placing a sword above them. For since the Scriptures do not persuade you, I am compelled to shame you through outsiders. God also did this to the Jews when He said, “Go out to the islands of Kittim, and send to Kedar, and find out whether nations will change their gods, which are not gods at all.” He also often sends us to the animals, saying, “Go to the ant, you lazy person, and imitate her ways,” and, “Go out to the bee.” So I say this to you now too: consider the Greek philosophers, and then you will know how great a punishment we deserve for disobeying God’s laws. For they took extraordinary pains to appear proper before others, while you do not show the same diligence even for the things of Heaven. But if you reply, “Habit has an extraordinary power to mislead even those who are very earnest,” I acknowledge that too. Yet I also say something else along with it: just as it has power to mislead, it can also be corrected easily. For if you appoint many people at home to watch over you—your servant, your wife, your friend—you will easily break your bad habits, pressed hard and kept under close restraint by everyone. If you succeed in doing this for just ten days, you will need no further time after that; everything will be secured for you, newly rooted in the firmness of an excellent habit. So when you begin to correct this, even if you break your rule a first, second, third, or twentieth time, do not despair. Get up again and renew the same effort, and you will surely succeed. For perjury is certainly no small evil. If swearing comes from the evil one, how great a punishment will false swearing bring! Did you applaud what was said? I do not want applause, commotion, or noise. I want only one thing: that you listen quietly and thoughtfully and do what is said. That is my applause; that is my tribute of praise. But if you praise what I say without doing what you applaud, the punishment is greater and the accusation more serious; and for us it brings shame and ridicule. For what takes place here is no theatrical performance, nor are you sitting here watching actors merely to applaud. This place is a spiritual school. So there is only one aim: to carry out properly what has been said and demonstrate our obedience through our deeds. Only then will we have achieved everything. As things stand, to tell the truth, we have quite given up in despair. For I have never stopped giving these warnings, either to those I meet privately or when addressing you all together. Yet I see no benefit gained at all; you still cling to the same basic first lessons, and this is enough to exhaust the teacher. Look, for example, at Paul himself, who could hardly bear it because his students were spending so long on their first lessons: “For by this time,” he says, “you ought to be teachers, but you need to be taught again the first principles of God’s oracles.” That is why we too mourn and lament. And if I see you persisting, I will forbid you from now on to set foot across this sacred threshold or partake of the immortal mysteries, just as we do with those who engage in sexual immorality, adulterers, and people charged with murder. Yes, for it is better to offer our customary prayers with two or three who keep God’s laws than to gather a multitude of transgressors who corrupt others. Let no rich man or powerful person come here snorting at me and raising his eyebrows. All these things are to me a fable, a shadow, a dream. For none of those who are rich now will stand up for me there when I am called to account and accused of failing to uphold God’s laws thoroughly and with all due earnestness. For this—this was what ruined even that admirable old man, although his own life gave no grounds for blame. Yet because he overlooked the trampling of God’s laws, he was punished along with his children and paid that terrible penalty. And if, where the natural bond had such absolute authority, someone who failed to treat his own children with proper firmness suffered such a terrible punishment, what leniency will we receive when we are free of that bond’s power and yet ruin everything through flattery? So, to keep you from destroying both us and yourselves along with us, I beg you to listen. Appoint very many people to watch over you and call you to account, and so free yourselves from the habit of taking oaths. Then, advancing from there in an orderly way, you may easily succeed in attaining every other virtue and enjoy the good things to come. May God grant that we all obtain them, through the grace and love for humanity of our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom be glory and might now and always, forever and ever. Amen.