1

STAq commentary on 2Cor 12,1-10

2 Cor. 12:1-2
1 I must boast; there is nothing to be gained by it, but I will go on to visions
and revelations of the Lord. 2 I know a man in Christ who fourteen years
ago was caught up to the third heavenwhether in the body or out of the
body I do not know, God knows.
440. Having commended himself for the evils he suffered, the Apostle continues to
commend himself and shows the pre-eminence of his dignity in regard to good things
received from God. For he first gloried in his weaknesses, but now in his good things. In
regard to this he does two things. First, he commends himself on the good things received
from God; secondly, he begs pardon for this commendation, alleging that he is compelled
to do this (v. 11). In regard to the first he does two things. First, he extols the greatness of
the things conferred on him by God; secondly, he discloses the remedy given to him against
the danger of pride (v. 7). In regard to the first he does two things: first, he mentions a good
divinely conferred; secondly, he shows how he behaved in regard to glorying in it (v. 5). In
regard to the first he does two things. First, he shows in general that this was divinely
bestowed; secondly, in particular (v. 2).
441. The good divinely bestowed on the Apostle are revelations made to him by God; it is
of these that he wishes to glory. Hence he says: If I must boast [glory], i.e., because I must
glory for your sake, although in itself there is nothing to be gained by it, because a person
who glories in a good he has received runs the risk of losing what he has: Through this,
i.e., by vain glory, are the treasures of the virtues opened, and the clouds fly out like
birds. (Sir. 43:15, Aquinas Latin). And this is signified in Hezekiah, when he showed the
treasures of the Lords house to the messengers of the king in Babylon (Is. 39:2). And
although, absolutely speaking, it is not expedient to glory, nevertheless, for some special
reason a man may glory, as is clear from what has been stated above. Therefore he says:
because I must boast [glory], I will leave off commending myself on my infirmities and
come by commending myself to visions and revelations of the Lord.
442. Here it should be noted the difference between a vision and a revelation. For a
revelation includes a vision, but not vice versa. For sometimes things are seen, the
understanding and significance of which are hidden from the beholder; in that case it is
only a vision, as in the visions of Pharaoh and Nebuchadnezzar, the vision of the ears of
corn and of the statue was only a vision. But in regard to Joseph and Daniel, who
understood the meaning of what was seen, it was a revelation and a prophecy. Both,
however, namely vision and revelation, are sometimes produced by God: There is a God
in heaven who reveals mysteries (Dan. 2:28); It was I who multiplied visions (Hos.
12:10); Open my eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out of your law (Ps. 119:18);
but sometimes by an evil spirit: They prophesied by Baal and led my people Israel astray
(Jer. 23:13). To the Apostle were made both vision and revelation, because he fully
understood the secret things he saw. They were produced by the Lord and not by an evil
spirit. Hence he says: I will go on to visions and revelations of the Lord. Now a revelation
2

is a removing of a veil. But a veil can be of two kinds: one on the part of the beholder, and
this is unbelief or sin or hardness of heart. Of this veil he said above (3:15): Yes, to this
day whenever Moses is read a veil lies over their minds; the other is on the part of the
object seen, namely, when spiritual things are proposed to someone under the figures of
sense-perceptible objects. Concerning this it says in Num. (chap. 4) that the priests
delivered the vessels of the sanctuary veiled to the Levites, because weaker persons cannot
grasp spiritual things as they are in themselves. This is why the Lord spoke to the
multitudes in parables (Matt. 13:13).
443. Then the Apostle describes these visions and revelations in details, speaking of
himself as though of another person; hence he says, I know a man in Christ. He mentions
two visions: the first begins here; the second at v. 3.
444. When speaking of the first vision, the Apostle makes use of a distinction, for he says
in regard to this revelation that he knew certain things and other things not. But he knew
three things, namely, the condition of the beholder; hence he says: I know a man in Christ;
the time of the vision, that is, who fourteen years ago; and the high point of the vision,
because he was caught up to the third heaven. And he says that he did not know the
disposition of the beholder, whether in the body or out of the body I do not know.
445. Therefore let us see what he knew, so that through what is known we may more
easily attain to what was not known. First of all, the condition of the beholder, which is
praiseworthy, because he was in Christ, i.e., conformed to Christ. But on the contrary, no
one is in Christ, unless he has charity, because He who abides in love abides in God (1
Jn. 4:16). Therefore, he knew that he had charity, which is contrary to what is stated in Ec.
(9:1): The righteous and the wise and their deeds are in the hand of God; whether it is love
or hate man does not know. I answer that being in Christ can be taken in two ways: in one
way by faith and the sacrament of faith according to Gal. (3:27): For as many of you as
were baptized into Christ have put on Christ, namely, by faith and the sacrament of faith.
This is the sense in which the Apostle knew that he was in Christ. In another way a person
is said to be in Christ through charity, and in this way no one knows for certain that he is in
Christ, except by certain tests and signs, inasmuch as he feels himself disposed and joined
to Christ in such a way that he would not permit himself to be separated from him for any
reason including death. This the Apostle experienced in regard to himself, when he said:
For I am sure that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present,
nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will
be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Rom. 8:38). Hence,
he could have had such signs that he was in the charity of Christ.
446. Secondly, the time of the vision, which was fitting, because it was fourteen years
ago; for fourteen years had elapsed from the time he saw the vision, until he wrote this
epistle, because when he wrote this epistle he had not yet been cast into prison. Hence it
seems to have been written at the beginning of Neros reign, by whom he was killed much
later. Hence if we go back fourteen years from the beginning of Neros reign, it is clear that
the Apostle had these visions at the beginning of his conversion. For he had been converted
to Christ in the same year that the Lord suffered. But Christ suffered near the end of
Tiberius Caesars reign, who was succeeded at death by the emperor Caius, who lived four
years, after which Nero became emperor. Therefore, between Tiberius and Nero there were
3

four years. Adding two years from Tiberius reign, because he was not yet dead, when Paul
was converted, and from Neros reign the eight years which had passed until he wrote this
epistle, there were fourteen years between the time of his conversion to the time he wrote
this epistle. Therefore, some say quite probably that the Apostle had these visions during
those three days after he was struck down by the Lord, when he remained neither seeing
nor eating nor drinking (Ac. 9:9). But he recalls the time of his conversion to show that if
he was so pleasing to Christ from the time of his conversion that he revealed such things to
him, then how much more pleasing was he after fourteen years, when he had grown in
charity before God and in the virtues and graces?
447. Thirdly, let us see the high point of the vision, because he was caught up (raptus) to
the third heaven. But it should be noted that it is one thing to be the victim of thievery and
another to be rapt. Properly speaking, the former takes place when something is taken away
from another in a secret way, hence, in Gen. (40:13) Joseph said: For I was indeed stolen
out of the land of the Hebrews. A person is properly speaking rapt when something is
taken suddenly and by force: As the torrent that passes swiftly (raptim), i.e., suddenly and
rapidly, in the valleys (Job 6:15). Hence it is that plunderers who despoil violently are
called ravagers (raptores). But note that a man is said to be rapt from men, as Enoch: He
was caught up (raptim) lest evil change his understanding or guile deceive his soul (Wis.
4:11); sometimes the soul is rapt from the body: Fool! This night your soul is required of
you (Lk. 12:20). Sometimes a person is said to be rapt by himself, when for some reason
he is made to be outside himself; and this is the same as ecstasy. But a man is made to be
outside himself both by his appetitive power and by his cognitive power. For by the former
a person is in himself, when he cares only for things that are his own; but he is made to be
outside himself when he does not care about things that are his own, but about things that
pertain to others; and this is the work of charity: Love does not insist on its own way (1
Cor. 13:5). Concerning this ecstasy Dionysius says in the Divine Names (chap. 4): Ecstasy
is produced by divine love not permitting one to be a lover of self but of the beloved, i.e.,
of the things loved. But a person is made to be outside himself according to the cognitive
power when he is raised up above the human mode to see something. This is the rapture
about which the Apostle is speaking here.
448. But it should be noted that a mode natural to human knowing is that a man know
simultaneously with his mental power, which is the intellect, and with a bodily one, which
is a sense. This is why a man in knowing has a free judgment of the intellect, when the
senses are well disposed in their vigor and not hindered by a fettering, as happens during
sleep. Therefore a man is made to be outside himself when he is removed from this natural
disposition for knowing, namely, when the intellect, being withdrawn from the use of the
senses and sense-perceptible things, is moved to see certain things. This occurs in two
ways: first, by a lack of power, no matter how it is produced. This happens in phrenitis and
other mental cases, so that this withdrawal from the senses is not a state of being elevated,
but of being cast down, because their power has been weakened. But the other way is by
divine power, and then it is, properly speaking, an elevation, because since the agent makes
the thing it works on to be like itself, a withdrawal produced by divine power and above
men is something higher than mans nature.
449. Therefore, a rapture of this sort is defined as an elevation from that which is
according to nature into that which is above nature, produced in virtue of a higher nature.
4

In this definition are mentioned its genus, when it is called an elevation; the efficient cause,
because it is by the power of a higher nature; and the two termini of the change, namely, the
terminus from which and into which, when it is described as being from that which is
according to nature into what is above nature. Thus it is clear what rapture is.
450. Then he mentions the terminus reached by the rapture, when he says, to the third
heaven. But it should be noted that the third heaven is taken in three ways: in one way
according to the things below the soul; in another way according to the things in the soul;
and in a third way according to things above the soul. Below the soul are all bodies, as
Augustine says in the book On The True Religion. And so we can think of a threefold
heaven: the ethereal, sidereal, and empyrean. In this way the Apostle is said to have been
rapt to the third heaven, i.e., to see things in the empyrean heaven; not to exist there,
because then he would have known whether he was in the body or out of the body. Or
according to Damascene, who does not admit an empyrean heaven, we can say that the
third heaven, to which the Apostle was rapt, is above the eighth sphere, so that he could
clearly see the things which exist above all corporeal nature.
451. But if we take heaven according to the things in the soul itself, then we should call
heaven some altitude of mind which transcends natural human knowledge. Now there are
three kinds of sight, namely, bodily, by which we can see and know bodies; spiritual or
imaginary, by which we see likenesses of bodies; and intellectual, by which we know the
nature of things in themselves. For the proper object of the intellect is the what it is (quod
quid est) of things. But such a sight of things, if it takes place according to the natural mode
(e.g. if I see something visible, if I imagine something previously seen, or if I understand
through phantasms) cannot be called heaven. But each of these is called heaven when they
are above the natural faculty of human knowledge. For example, if you see something with
your bodily eyes above the faculty of nature, then you are rapt into the first heaven. This is
the way Belshazzar was rapt, when he saw the handwriting on the wall, as it is stated in
Dan. (5:5). But if you are raised up by the imagination or spirit to know something
supernaturally, then you are rapt to the second heaven. This is the way Peter was rapt, when
he saw the linen sheet descending from heaven (Ac. 10:11). But if a person were to see
intelligible things themselves and their nature, not through sense-perceptible things not
through phantasms, he would be rapt to the third heaven.
452. But it should be noted that to be rapt to the first heaven is to be alienated from the
bodily senses. Hence, since no one can be totally withdrawn from the bodily senses, it is
obvious that no one can be rapt in the strict sense to the first heaven, but only in a qualified
sense, inasmuch as it sometimes happens that a person is so engrossed in one sense that he
is withdrawn from the act of the others. One is rapt to the second heaven when he is
alienated from sense to see imaginable things; hence, such a person is always said to be in
ecstasy. And so when Peter saw the linen sheet (Ac. 10:11), it is said that he was in ecstasy.
But Paul is said to have been rapt to the third heaven, because he was so alienated from the
senses and lifted above all bodily things that he saw intelligible things naked and pure in
the way angels and separated souls see them. What is more, he saw God in his essence, as
Augustine expressly says in Gen. ad Litt.12 and in a Gloss, and ad Paulinus in the book, De
Videndo Deum. Furthermore, it is not probable that Moses, the minister of the Old
Testament to the Jews saw God, and the minister of the New Testament to the Gentiles, the
teacher of the Gentiles, was deprived of this gift. Hence he says above (3:9): For if there
5

was splendor in the dispensation of condemnation, the dispensation of righteousness must
far exceed it in splendor. That Moses saw God in his essence is clear, for he begged God:
Show me your face (Ex. 33:13, Vulgate). And although it was denied him at that time, it
is not stated that the Lord finally denied him. Hence, Augustine says that this was granted
him by reason of what is stated in Num. (12:6): If there is a prophet among you, I the
LORD make myself known to him in a vision, I speak with him in a dream. Not so with my
servant Moses; he is entrusted with all my house. For he saw God openly and not in a dark
manner.
453. But would it have been possible for Paul to see God without being rapt? I answer:
No, for it is impossible that God be seen in this life by a man not alienated from his senses,
because no image or phantasm is a sufficient medium for showing Gods essence;
therefore, he must be abstracted and alienated from the senses.
454. In a third way, by taking heaven according to things above the soul; in this way the
three heavens are the three hierarchies of angels. According to this the Apostle was rapt to
the third heaven, i.e., to see Gods essence as clearly as the angels of the higher and first
hierarchy see him, because they see God in such a way as to receive illumination in God
himself and to know the divine mysteries. This is the way Paul saw.
455. But if he saw God as the angels of the higher and first hierarchy do, then it seems
that the Apostle was beatified and, consequently, was immortal. I answer that although he
saw God in his essence, he was not absolutely beatified, but only in a qualified sense. Yet it
should be noted that the vision of God by essence takes place by means of a certain light,
namely, the light of glory, of which it says in Ps. 36 (9): In your light we see light. But
light is communicated to some things after the manner of a passing quality and to others
after the manner of an inhering form, i.e., connaturally produced; but it is found in the air as
a passing form and not as a permanent form, because it vanishes when the sun is absent.
Similarly, the light of glory is infused in the mind in two ways: in one way, after the
manner of a form connaturally made and permanent, and then it makes a mind beatified in
the strict sense. This is the way it is infused in the beatified in heaven. Hence they are
called comprehenders and, so to say, seers. In another way the light of glory affects a
human mind as a passing quality; this is the way Pauls mind in rapture was enlightened by
the light of glory. Hence, the very name, rapture, suggests that this was done in a passing
manner. Consequently, he was not glorified in the strict sense or had the mark of glory,
because that brightness was not produced as a property. As a result it was not derived from
the soul in the body, nor did he remain in this state permanently. Hence, when he was in
rapture, he had only the act of the beatified, but he was not beatified. Thus it is clear what
the Apostle saw in his rapture, namely, the condition of the beholder, the time of the vision,
and the high point of the vision.
456. Then he tells what he did not know, namely, whether he was in the body or out of
the body, although he says that God knew. Hence he says, whether in the body or out of the
body I do not know, God knows. Some interpret this as meaning that the rapture referred to
his body, saying that the Apostle did not say he did not know whether the soul was joined
to the body in that rapture, but whether he was rapt according to the soul and body
simultaneously, so as to have been transported bodily into heaven as Habakkuk was
transported (Dan. 14:35-39), or whether it was according to the soul only that he enjoyed
6

the vision of God, as it says in Ez. (8:3): He brought me in visions of God to Jerusalem.
This was the way a certain Jew understood, as Jerome mentions in the Prol. to Dan. 3ff.,
where he says: Finally, he says that even our Apostle does not dare to say that he was rapt
in the body, but he said: whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, God
knows. But Augustine disproves this interpretation in Gen. ad Litt.12, because it does not
agree with the other words of the Apostle. For the Apostle says that he was rapt to the third
heaven; hence he knew for certain that it was the third heaven. Consequently, he knew
whether that heaven was corporeal or incorporeal, i.e., an incorporeal thing. But if it was
incorporeal, he knew that he could not have been rapt there bodily, because a body cannot
exist in an incorporeal thing. But if it had been corporeal, he knew that the soul was not
there without the body, because the soul joined to the body cannot be in a place where there
is no body, unless the incorporeal heaven is called a likeness of the bodily heaven. But if
that were the case, the Apostle would not have said that he knew he was rapt to the third
heaven, i.e., to a likeness of heaven, because by that same token it could be said that he was
rapt in the body, i.e., in the likeness of a body.
457. Therefore it must be admitted according to Augustine that no one set in this life and
living this mortal life can see the divine essence. Hence, the Lord says: For man shall not
see me and live (Ex. 33:20), i.e., no man will see me, unless he is entirely separated from
the body, namely, in such a way that his soul is not in the body as a form, or if it is as a
form, nevertheless his mind is totally and altogether alienated from the sense in such a
vision. Therefore, it must be said that the Apostle says he does not know whether the soul
was entirely separated from the body in that vision. Hence he says, whether out of the body,
or whether his soul existed in the body as a form, but his mind was alienated from the
bodily senses; hence, he says, whether in the body. Even others concede this.

12-2
2 Cor. 12:3-6
3 And I know that this man was caught up into Paradisewhether in the
body or out of the body I do not know, God knows 4 and he heard things
that cannot be told, which man may not utter. 5 On behalf of this man I will
boast, but on my own behalf I will not boast, except of my weaknesses. 6
Though if I wish to boast, I shall not be a fool, for I shall be speaking the
truth. But I refrain from it, so that no one may think more of me than he sees
in me or hears from me.
458. Having spoken of the first rapture, the Apostle speaks of a second rapture. First, he
mentions the rapture; secondly, its excellence (v. 4b).
459. It should be noted that a Gloss says that this rapture was distinct from the first, and if
one considers the matter well, two things are written of the Apostle to which these two
raptures can be referred. For in Acts (chap. 9) it is recorded that he remained for three days
without seeing and without taking food or drink; and the first rapture can be referred to this
event, namely, that he was rapt to the third heaven at that time. But in Acts (chap. 22) it
says that he was in a trance in the temple; hence the second rapture can refer to this. But
7

this does not seem to be a similar case, because when he was in the trance, the Apostle had
been cast into prison; but the Apostle wrote this epistle long before that. Therefore it must
be said that this rapture differs from the first in regard to that into which he was rapt. For in
the first rapture he had been rapt to the third heaven, but in the second to the paradise of
God
460. But if you take the third heaven in a corporeal sense according to the first
acceptation of the heavens, as mentioned above, or if it was an imaginary vision, it could be
called a bodily paradise, so that he was rapt to an earthly paradise. But this is against the
authors intention, according to whom we say that he was rapt to the third heaven, i.e., to a
vision of intelligible things according to which they are seen in themselves and in their own
natures, as has been said above. Hence, according to this we must not understand one thing
by heaven and another by paradise, but one and the same thing by both, namely, the glory
of the saints, but according to one thing in one case and according to another thing in the
other case. For heaven suggests a certain loftiness accompanied by brightness, but paradise
a certain joyful pleasantness. Now these two things are present in an excellent way in the
saints and angels who see God, because there is present in them a most excellent brightness
by which they see God, and a supreme agreeableness by which they enjoy God. Therefore,
they are said to be in heaven as to the brightness and in paradise as to the pleasantness:
You shall see, and your heart shall rejoice (Is. 66:14). Therefore, both of these were
conferred on the Apostle, namely to be raised up to that most excellent clearness of
knowledge, which he signifies when he says, to the third heaven, and to experience the
agreeableness of the divine sweetness; hence he says, into paradise: O how great is the
multitude of thy sweetness, O Lord (Ps. 31:20); To him who conquers I will give some of
the hidden manna (Rev. 2:17). This sweetness is the delight experienced in enjoying God,
and is mentioned in Matt. (25:13): Enter into the joy of your master. Thus the terminus of
the rapture is clear, namely, into paradise, i.e., into that sweetness with which those who are
in the heavenly Jerusalem are unceasingly refreshed.
461. Then he mentions the excellence of that rapture, because he heard things that cannot
be told, which man may not utter. This can be explained in two ways: in one way so that
the word, man, is construed with may and utter. Then the sense is this: he heard
secret words, i.e., he perceived an intimate understanding of Gods secret essence, as
though by words, which words it is not lawful to be uttered by a man. In the other way, so
that man is construed only with may not. Then the sense is this: he heard words, which
it is not lawful to utter to a man, i.e., to an imperfect man.
462. But it should be noted according to Augustine that Paul was rapt to a vision of the
divine essence, which of course, cannot be seen by any created likeness. Hence, it is clear
that what Paul saw of the divine essence cannot be described by any human tongue;
otherwise, God would not be incomprehensible. Therefore, according to the first
explanation it must be said: he heard, i.e., considered, secret words, i.e., the magnificence
of the godhead, which no man can utter. He says heard for saw because that
consideration was according to an interior act of the soul, in which the same is heard and
seen, as it says in Num. (12:8): For I speak to him mouth to mouth. That consideration is
called a vision, inasmuch as God is seen in it; and an utterance inasmuch as man in
instructed about divine things in it.
8

463. And because such spiritual things are not to be disclosed to the simple and imperfect,
but to the perfect, as it says in 1 Cor. (2:6): Yet among the mature we do impart wisdom,
it is explained in the second way, so that the secrets he heard there it is not lawful to man to
utter, i.e., to the imperfect, but to the spiritual, among whom we speak wisdom: It is the
glory of God to conceal things (Prov. 25:2), i.e., the fact that it is necessary to conceal the
marvelous things of God pertains to Gods glory. The Psalm is according to the translation
of Jerome: Your praise , O God, is silent to you (cf. Ps. 108:2, Vulgate), that is, cannot be
comprehended by our words.
464. Then when he says, On behalf of this man I will boast, he shows how he reacted to
this glory. In regard to this he does three things. First, he shows that he did not glory in
such revelations; secondly, he suggests that he has something else in which to glory (v. 6).
465. In regard to the first it should be noted that the statement, on behalf of this man I
will boast [glory], but on my own behalf I will not boast, can be read in two ways. In one
way so that the Apostle is showing that he is the one in whom he glories, i.e., that he is the
one who saw these visions. In another way, to show that it was someone else who saw these
visions. For it should be noted that there are two things to consider in man, namely, the gift
of God and the human condition. If a person glories in a gift of God as received from God,
that glorying is good, as has been state above (10:17). But if he glories in that gift as though
he had it of himself, then such glorying is evil: What have you that you did not receive? If
then you received it, why do you boast as if it were not a gift? (1 Cor. 4:7). According to
this, therefore, the Apostle says, on behalf of this man, namely, for the visions and gifts
conferred on me by God, I will boast, but on my own behalf I will not boast, i.e., will not
glory in them as though I were their source, because I had them from God. But if I must
glory, I will glory in nothing except my weaknesses, i.e., I have nothing in which I can
glory save in my own condition.
466. But if it is explained as showing that it was someone else who saw, even if it was he,
then the sense is as though he were speaking of someone, saying, on behalf of this man I
will boast, i.e., for the man who saw this and who received these gifts I will glory; but on
my own behalf, as wishing to show that I am such a one, I will not boast except of my
weaknesses, i.e., in the tribulations I suffer.
467. But because they could say to him, O Apostle, it is not strange that you do not
glory, because you have nothing in which to glory, he shows that even besides these
visions he has something in which to glory. Although I might glory in such a man and not
in myself, yet I can rightfully glory in myself, for if I should wish to boast either in such
tribulations or in other things bestowed on me by God, or even for my infirmity, I shall not
be a fool, i.e., I will not act foolishly. Why? For I will be speaking the truth about the other
things in which I can glory besides those visions. He says, I shall not be a fool, because he
gloried in the things he had; for when a person glories in things he does not have, he is
speaking foolishly: For you say, I am rich, I have prospered, and I need nothing; not
knowing that you are wretched, pitiable, poor, blind, and naked (Rev. 3:17); and because
he gloried with sufficient reason, as is clear from the foregoing.
468. Then when he says, But I refrain from it, he indicates the reason he does not glory in
everything, if he can glory, the reason being that he wishes to spare them. Hence he says, I
9

refrain from it, so that no one may think more of me than he sees in me or hears from me.
As if to say: I could glory in many other things, but I forbear, i.e., I glory sparingly, of I
forbear commending myself, lest I become burdensome to you. For God has conferred on
me such things that if you knew them, you would regard me as much greater; and these are
the many charismatic gifts which the Apostle had and for which the men of this world are
wont to commend others and regard them as great more than for doing something pleasing.
Hence he says, I do not wish to be commended on these gifts; therefore I refrain, i.e., I do
not glory. Why? So that no one may think more of me than what he sees in me or hears
from me.
469. Or another way: man is known in two ways: by his manner of life and by his
doctrine. Although he could have done so, the Apostle did not wish to say about himself
certain things which went beyond his life and doctrine. Consequently, I refrain, so that no
one may think more of me than he sees in me, i.e., in my outward conduct, or hears from
me, i.e., from the doctrine of my preaching and exhortation and instruction, because they
might perhaps think him immortal or an angel: A man of understanding remains silent
(Prov. 11:12): A fool gives full vent to his anger, but a wise man quietly holds it back
(Prov. 29:11).
470. Or he says: But I refrain, on account of his detractors, namely, the false apostles,
who said that he glories from elation without cause or for things that were not in him.
Therefore, he says, But I refrain, i.e., I glory sparingly, so that no one, i.e., the false
apostles, think of me as having an excessive spirit of elation, more than that which he sees
in me or has heard from me, i.e., above the power of my merits: O LORD, my heart is not
lifted up, my eyes are not raised too high (Ps. 131:1); The greater you are, the more
humble yourself in all things (Sir. 3:10, Vulgate).

12-3
2 Cor. 12:7-10
7 And to keep me from being too elated by the abundance of revelations, a
thorn was given me in the flesh, a messenger of Satan, to harass me, to keep
me from being too elated. 8 Three times I besought the Lord about this, that
it should leave me; 9 but he said to me, My grace is sufficient for you, for
my power is made perfect in weakness. I will all the more gladly boast of
my weaknesses, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. 10 For the sake
of Christ, then, I am content with weaknesses, insults, hardships,
persecutions, and calamities; for when I am weak, then I am strong.
471. Here he speaks of the remedy against pride. In regard to this he does three things.
First, he mentions the remedy applied; secondly, he discloses his prayer to have the remedy
removed (v. 8); thirdly, he tells the Lords answer giving the reason for the remedy applied
(v. 9).
472. In regard to the first it should be noted that very often a wise physician procures and
permits a lesser disease to come over a person in order to cure or avoid a greater one. Thus,
10

to cure a spasm he procures a fever. This the Apostle shows was done to him by the
physician of souls, our Lord Jesus Christ. For Christ, as the supreme physician of souls, in
order to cure greater sins, permits them to fall into lesser, and even mortal sins. But among
all the sins the gravest is pride, for just as charity is the root and beginning of the virtues, so
pride is the root and beginning of all vices: Pride is the beginning of all sin (Sir. 10:15,
Vulgate). This is made clear in the following way. Charity is called the root of all the
virtues, because it unites one to God, who is the ultimate end. Hence, just as the end is the
beginning of all actions to be performed, so charity is the beginning of all the virtues. But
pride turns away from God, for pride is an inordinate desire for ones own excellence. For
if a person seeks some excellence under God, if he seeks it moderately and for a good end,
it can be endured. But if it is not done with due order, he can even fall into other vices, such
as ambition, avarice, vainglory and the like. Yet it is not, properly speaking, pride, unless a
person seeks excellence without ordaining it to God. Therefore pride, properly called,
separates from God and is the root of all vices and the worst of them. This is why God
resists the proud, as it says in Jas. (4:6). Therefore, because the matter of this vice, that is,
pride, is mainly found in things that are good, because its matter is something good, God
sometimes permits his elect to be prevented by something on their part, e.g. infirmity or
some other defect, and sometimes even mortal sin, from obtaining such a good, in order
that they be so humbled on this account that they will not take pride in it, and that being
thus humiliated, they may recognize that they cannot stand by their own powers. Hence it
says in Rom. (8:28): We know that in everything God works for good with those who love
him, not by reason of their sin, but by Gods providence.
473. Therefore, because the Apostle had good reason for glorying in the spiritual choice
by which he was chosen by God: He is a chosen instrument of mine (Ac. 9:15), and in his
knowledge of Gods secrets, because he says that he was caught up into the third heaven
where he heard secret words, which it is not granted to man to utter, and in enduring evils
because he had far more imprisonments, with countless floggings, and often near death (2
Cor. 11:23), and in his virginal integrity, because I wish that all were as I myself am (1
Cor. 7:7), and especially in the outstanding knowledge with which he shone and which
especially puffs one up: for these reasons the Lord applied a remedy, lest he be lifted up
with pride. And this is what he says: to keep me from being too elated by the abundance of
revelations: Do not exalt yourself through your souls counsel, lest your soul be torn in
pieces like a bull (Sir. 6:2); Being exalted I have been humbled and troubled (Ps. 88:15,
Vulgate). Furthermore, to show that these revelations were made to him, he says: a thorn
was given me, i.e., for my benefit and my humiliation: You have lifted me up and set me
as it were upon the wind (Job 31:22); there was given, I say, to me a thorn tormenting my
body with bodily weakness, that the soul might be healed. For it is said that he literally
suffered a great deal from pain in the ileum [pelvis]. Or a thorn in the flesh, i.e., of
concupiscence arising from my flesh, because he was troubled a great deal: For I do not do
the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I do. . . So I find it to be a law that when
I want to do right, evil lies close at hand. . . So then, I of myself serve the law of God with
my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin (Rom. 7:19, 21, 25). Hence, Augustine
says that there existed in him movements of concupiscence which Gods grace,
nevertheless, restrained.
11

474. That thorn, I say, is a messenger of Satan, i.e., a wicked angel, for it was an angel
sent by God or permitted, but it was Satans because Satans intention is to subvert, but
Gods is to humble and to render approved. Let the sinner beware, if the Apostle and vessel
of election was not secure.
475. Now the Apostle was anxious to have this thorn removed and prayed that it might;
hence he says: Three times I besought the Lord about this, that it should leave me. Here it
should be noted a sick person, ignorant of the reason why a physician supplies a stinging
plaster, asks him to remove it. But the physician, knowing its purpose, that is, for health,
does not oblige him, caring more for his improvement. Similarly the Apostle, feeling that
the sting was painful to him, sought the help of the unique physician to remove it. For he
expressly and devoutly asked God three times to remove it, the thorn, from him: We do
not know what to do, but our eyes are upon you (2 Chr. 20:12). Perhaps he asked this
many times, but he asked him expressly and earnestly three times, or three times, namely,
many times. For three is a perfect number. And of course it was right to ask, because For
he wounds, but he binds up (Job 5:18); Pray that you may not enter into temptation (Lk.
22:46).
476. Then he states the Lords answer: but he, i.e., the Lord, said to me: My grace is
sufficient for you. Here he does two things. First, he states the Lords answer; secondly, the
reason for the answer (v. 9b).
477. He says therefore, I asked, but the Lord said to me, my grace is sufficient for you. As
if to say: it is not necessary that this bodily weakness leave you, because it is not
dangerous, for you will not be led into impatience, since my grace strengthens you; or that
this weakness of concupiscence depart, because it will not lead you to sin, for my grace will
protect you: Justified by his grace as a gift (Rom. 3:24). And of course, Gods grace is
sufficient for avoiding evil, doing good, and attaining to eternal life: By the grace of God I
am what I am (1 Cor. 15:10); But the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our
Lord (Rom. 6:25).
478. But on the other hand it says in Jn. (15:16): Whatever you ask the Father in my
name, he may give it to you. Therefore, Paul either asked discreetly and deserved to be
heard, or indiscreetly and hence sinned. I answer that a man can speak of one and the same
thing in two ways: in one way according to itself and the nature of things; in another way
according to its relation to something else. Hence, it happens that something evil according
to itself and to be avoided is in relation to something else able to be sought. Thus, a
medicine, inasmuch as it is bitter should be avoided, yet, when it is considered in relation to
health, a person seeks it. Therefore a thorn in the flesh according to itself is to be avoided as
troublesome, but inasmuch as it is a means to virtue and an exercise of virtue, it should be
desired. But because that secret of divine providence, namely, that it would turn out to his
advantage, had not been revealed to him yet, the Apostle considered that in itself it was bad
for him. But God who had ordained this to the good of his humility did not oblige him, as
far as his wish was concerned; indeed, once he understood its purpose, the Apostle gloried
in it, saying, I will all the more gladly boast of my weaknesses, that the power of Christ
may rest upon [dwell in] me. And although he did not oblige him as to his wish, yet he
heard him and does hear his saints to their advantage. Hence, Jerome says in the Letter to
12

Paulinus: The good Lord frequently does not grant what we wish, in order to bestow what
we should prefer.
479. Then he gives the reason for the Lords response when he says, for my power is
made perfect in weakness [infirmity]. This is a remarkable expression: virtue is made
perfect in infirmity; fire grows in water. But this can be understood in two ways, namely,
materially and by way of occasion. If it is taken materially, the sense is this: infirmity is the
material on which to exercise virtue; first, humility, as stated above; secondly, patience:
The testing of your faith produces steadfastness (Jas. 1:3); thirdly, temperance, because
hunger is weakened by infirmity and a person is made temperate. But if it is taken as an
occasion, infirmity is the occasion for arriving at perfect virtue, because a man who knows
that he is weak is more careful when resisting, and as a result of fighting and resisting more
he is better exercised and, therefore, stronger. Hence it says in Jdg. (3:1) that the Lord was
not willing to destroy all the inhabitants of the land, but preserved some in order that the
children of Israel might be exercised by fighting against them. In the same way, Scipio also
did not wish to destroy the city of Carthage, in order that the Romans, having external
enemies, would not have internal enemies, against whom it is more painful to wage war
than against outsiders, as he said.
480. Then the Apostle mentions the effect of this answer from the Lord, saying: I will all
the more gladly boast of my weaknesses, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. He
mentions two effects. One is glorying; hence he says: because my virtue is made perfect in
infirmity, I will all the more gladly boast of my weaknesses, i.e., given to me for my profit;
and this because it joins me closer to Christ: But far be it from me to glory except in the
cross of our Lord Jesus Christ (Gal. 6:14); But he that is glorified in poverty, how much
more in wealth? (Sir. 10:34. Vulgate). The reason I will glory gladly is that the power of
Christ may rest upon me [dwell in me], i.e., that through infirmity the grace of Christ may
dwell and be made perfect in me: He gives power to the faint, and to him who has no
might he increases strength (Is. 40:29).
481. The other effect is joy. Hence he says: For the sake of Christ, then, I am content with
weaknesses. In regard to this he does two things. First, he mentions the effect of joy;
secondly, he assigns the reason for it (v. 10b).
482. He mentions the effect of joy and the matter of joy. He says therefore: because the
power of Christ dwells in me in all tribulations, I am content, i.e., I am greatly pleased and
take joy in the infirmities I mentioned: Count it all joy, my brethren, when you meet
various trials (Jas. 1:2). The weaknesses in which he rejoices abundantly on account of
Christs grace are then listed. First, those which come from an internal cause, namely, his
infirmities; hence he says, in my weaknesses: Their infirmities were multiplied: afterwards
they made haste (Ps. 16:5, Vulgate), namely, toward grace. Secondly, those that come
from an external cause: first, as to the word, when he says, in insults: Then they left the
presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer dishonor for the
name (Ac. 15:4); then as to deed, and this either as to a lack of good things, when he says,
in hardships, i.e., in the lack of things necessary and in the poverty by which he was
pressed: Contribute to the needs of the saints (Rom. 12:13). Or as to experiencing evils
inflicted, and this as to external things: Blessed are those who are persecuted for
righteousness sake (Matt. 5:10), when he says, in bodily persecutions, which we
13

experience from place to place and everywhere, as well as to internal things, saying, in
calamities, i.e., in anxieties of soul: I am straitened on every side (Dan. 13:22, Vulgate).
But in all these things the material which makes for joy is that they are for Christ. As if to
say: I am pleased because I suffer for Christ: But let none of you suffer as a murderer, or a
thief (1 Pet. 4:15).
483. He assigns the reason for this joy, when he says, for when I am weak, then I am
strong, i.e., when as a result of what is in me or as a result of persecutions, I fall into any of
the aforesaid, Gods help is applied to me to strengthen me: Your consolations cheer my
soul (Ps. 94:19); Let the weak say, I am strong (Jl. 3:10, Vulgate); Though our outer
nature is wasting away, our inner nature is being renewed every day (2 Cor. 4:16). And in
Ex. (1:12) it says that the more the Israelites were oppressed, the more they multiplied.