We read that the disciples of St. John the Baptist emulated for their master against Christ the Lord (Matt. 9:14, and especially John 3:26); and [that] James and John [emulated] for Christ the Lord (Luke 9:49) against a certain [man] casting out demons in Christ’s name, yet not cleaving to Christ the Lord (Mark 9:38; Luke 9:49); and a little after, against the Samaritans, who were unwilling to receive Christ the Lord into their lodging (v. 54). This disciple of Moses, then, let us compare with those. For there can be a comparison of these Masters too with Moses, since John showed that he, for whom his disciples were zealous, was not worthy (John 3:27), and Christ the Lord clearly said (Luke 9:50), “Forbid [them] not.” And that the disciples of John are free from fault—
(col. 145)
…[that the disciples of John] can be free from fault, I do not see — since they had seen, over Christ the Lord when He was baptized by John, the Holy Spirit, and the divine voices (Matt. 3, Luke 3), and had already heard so many testimonies from John about Him. And therefore the emulation of our Joshua [was] better. But the disciples of Christ the Lord, Calvin vehemently accuses — and those deceived by him [do too]. For in that forbidding of the [man] casting out demons, [he says] “they acted inconsiderately and rashly, proudly and enviously.” Inconsiderately indeed, because they forbade him without consulting the Lord; proudly and enviously, because they were unwilling for him to be endowed with a power equal to their own against the demons. Yet that they were free from sin, Theophylact and Bede taught — [saying] that they came to forbid [him] not from envy, but from charity. And this charity was partly toward Christ their Master, partly toward that caster-out of demons. Toward Christ, indeed, because — since He had hitherto granted that power to the Apostles alone — they were eager to keep the order and discipline appointed by Him. Toward that [man], because they thought he was going against this order, and therefore also transgressing. This is made plain from their running to Christ the Lord, and their eager and glad announcement. For as though they had best consulted His glory and discipline, boldly and almost boastfully they say: “Master, we saw a certain man casting out demons in Thy name, who followeth not us, and we forbade him.” And Christ the Lord did not reprehend this their intent, but taught that such are not thereafter to be forbidden — first, indeed, because they too would increase His divine glory, and would accord with the Apostles’ aim (that is, the faith of Christ the Lord, and the propagating of His glory), and would lend their work together [with them]. For this is the force of those two reasons: “There is no man that doth a miracle in my name, and can soon speak ill of me. For he that is not against you, is for you.” But in that very indignation against the Samaritans, the same Calvin says “they were puffed up with foolish confidence.” But the Fathers — St. Jerome (q. 5, to Algasia), Bede, [and] Titus of Bostra — [judge] far better of them. They say [the disciples] wished vengeance, not their own, but Christ the Lord’s; and that not by any fault of theirs, but only by ignorance of the Evangelical and Christian Spirit. For on this account they are rebuked by Christ the Lord. “The Apostles,” says St. Jerome in the cited place, “versed in the Law, in which they knew only justice — ‘an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth’ — strive to avenge the injury, and to imitate Elijah, at whose word fire had consumed the two captains-of-fifty of the soldiers.” “Nor indeed [is it] a wonder,” says our Maldonatus, “that the Apostles wished to do this, since they seemed to have so many causes of vengeance. First, the example of Elijah. Then, a juster cause than his. For he, on account of a servant excluded by the Jews, [but] these, on account of God ignominiously rejected, wished to send fire upon them” — as Titus argues. The place too invited [it]: for these were those Samaritans upon whom Elijah also had brought down fire from heaven (2 Kings 1); and they seemed worthy of a double penalty, who had not been amended by the single [one]. And if nothing else, at least the moderation they used [in saying “Wilt Thou that we say [that fire come down]?”] could free [them] from fault. Ambrose excuses [them] outright, who also says: “What wonder that the sons of thunder wished to lightning-flash?” If both these emulations of the Apostles be regarded — with respect to Him for whose honor and—
(col. 146)
—authority [each] was undertaken — both are assuredly better than this of Joshua. “For Christ is held worthy of ampler glory than Moses, by how much ampler honor he hath that built the house than the house [itself]” (Heb. 3, v. 3). But if, as to the causes of indignation, fear, and suspicion, the same emulations be considered, Joshua seems to have had a juster cause than the Apostles in their first emulation; but the same [Apostles], in the second, a better [cause] than he — as is nearly plain from what has been said. See the booklet On the Apostles, no. 38.