Subscribe
to CF
Be
first to know
Read our AAA review
from Catholic Culture
Our Mission
To
bring Jesus Christ; the Way, the Truth and the Life; to all who will follow,
according to scripture and tradition, per the Magisterium
of the Roman Catholic Church.
While you visit!
Listen
to
Radio
For the Sacred
Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary. |
HOMILIES OF
ST. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM
ON THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS
HOMILIES X TO XIV (CHAPTERS 6, 7 & 8)
HOMILY X.
HEBREWS vi. 7, 8.
"For
the Earth which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft upon it, and bringeth
forth herbs meet
for them
by whom it is dressed, receiveth blessing
from God. But if it bear(1) thorns and briars it is rejected, and nigh unto
cursing, whose end is to be burned."
[1.] LET
us hear the oracles of God with fear, with fear and much trembling. For (it
is said) "Serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice unto Him with
trembling." (Ps. ii. 11.) But if even our joy and our exultation ought
to be "with trembling," of what punishment are we not worthy, if
we listen not with terror to what is said, when the things spoken, as now,
are themselves fearful?
For having
said that "it is impossible for those who have fallen away" to
be baptized a second time, and to receive remission through the layer, and
having pointed out the awfulness of the case, he goes on: "for the earth
which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft upon it, and bringeth forth herbs
meet for them by whom it is dressed, receiveth blessing from God. But if it
bear thorns and thistles, it is rejected,(2) and nigh unto cursing; whose end
is to be burned."
Let us
then fear, beloved! This threat is not Paul's, these words are not of man:
they are of the Holy
Ghost,
of Christ that speaketh in him. Is there
then any one that is clear from these thorns? And even if we were clear, not
even so ought we to be confident, but to fear and tremble lest at any time
thorns should spring up in us. But when we are "thorns and thistles" through
and through, whence (tell me) are we confident? And are becoming supine? What
is it which makes us inert? If "he that thinketh he standeth" ought
to fear "test he fall"; for (he says) "Let him that thinketh
he standeth, take heed lest he fall" (1 Cor. x. 12); he that falleth,
how anxious ought he to be that he may rise up again! If Paul fears, "lest
that by any means, when he had preached to others, he himself should be a castaway" (1
Cor. ix. 27); and he who had been so approved is afraid lest he should become
disapproved:(1) what pardon shall we have who are already disapproved, if we
have no fear, but fulfill our Christianity as a custom, and for form's sake.
Let us then fear, beloved: "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven." (Rom.
i. 18.) Let us fear, for it "is revealed" not "against impiety" only,
but "against all unrighteousness." What is "against all unrighteousness"?
[Against all] both small and great.
[2.] In
this passage he intimates the lovingkindness of God towards man: and the
teaching [of the
Gospel] he
calls "rain": and what he said above, "when
for the time ye ought to be teachers" (c. v. 12), this he says here also.
Indeed in many places the Scripture calls the teaching "rain." For
(it says) "I will command the clouds that they rain no rain upon it" (Isa.
v. 6), speaking of "the vineyard." The same which in another place
it calls "a famine of bread, and a thirst of water." (Amos viii.
11.) And again, "The river of God is full of waters." (Ps. lxv. 9.)
"For land," he says, "which drinketh in the rain that cometh
oft upon it." Here he shows that they received and drank in the word,
yea and often enjoyed this, and yet even so they were not profited. For if
(he means) thou hadst not been tilled, if thou hadst enjoyed no rains, the
evil would not have been so great. For (it is said) "If I had not come
and spoken unto them they had not had sin." (John xv. 22.)But if thou
hast often drunk and received [nourishment], wherefore hast thou brought forth
other things instead of fruits? For (it is said) "I waited that it should
bring forth grapes, and it brought forth thorns." (Isa. v. 2.)
Thou seest
that everywhere the Scripture calleth sins "thorns." For
David also saith, "I was turned into mourning when a thorn was fixed in
me." (Ps. xxxii. 4, so LXX.) For it does not simply come on us, but is
fixed in; and even if but a little of it remain in, even if we take it not
out entirely, that little of itself in like manner causes pain, as in the case
of a thorn. And why do I say, 'that little of itself'? Even after it has been
taken out, it leaves therein for a long time the pain of the wound. And much
care and treatment is necessary, that we may be perfectly freed from it. For
it is not enough merely to take away the sin, it is necessary also to heal
the wounded place.
But I
fear however lest the things said apply to us more than to others. "For," he
says, "the earth which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft upon it." We
are ever drinking, ever hearing, but "when the sun is risen" (Matt.
xiii. 6) we straightway lose our moisture, and therefore bring forth thorns.
What then are the thorns? Let us hear Christ saying, that "the care of
this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, choke the word, and it becometh
unfruitful." (Matt. xiii. 22.)
[3.] "For the earth which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft upon it," he
says, "and bringeth forth meet herbs." Because nothing is so meet
as purity of life, nothing so suitable as the best life, nothing so meet as
virtue.
"And bringeth forth" (saith he) "herbs meet for them by whom
it is dressed, receiveth blessing from God." Here he says that God is
the cause of all things, giving the heathen a blow, who ascribed the production
of fruits to the power of the earth. For (he says) it is not the hands of the
husbandman which stir up the earth to bear fruits, but the command from God.
Therefore he says, "receives blessing from God."
And see
how in speaking of the thorns, he said not, "bringing forth(2)
thorns," nor did he use this word expressive of what is useful; but what? "Bearing"(3)
[literally "putting out"] "thorns," as if one should say, "forcing
out," "throwing out."
"Rejected" (he says) "and nigh unto cursing." Oh! how
great consolation in this word! For he said "nigh unto cursing," not "a
curse." Now he that hath not yet fallen into a curse, but is come to be
near [thereto], may also come to be far off [therefrom].
And not
by this only did he encourage them, but also by what follows. For he did
not say "rejected and nigh unto cursing," "which shall
be burned," but what? "Whose end is to be burned," if he continue
[such] (he means) unto the end. So that, if we cut out and burn the thorns,
we shall be able to enjoy those good things innumerable and to become approved,
and to partake of blessing.
And with
good reason did he call sin "a thistle,"(4) saying "that
which beareth thorns and thistles"; for on whatever side you lay hold
on it, it wounds and stings, and it is unpleasant even to look at.
[4.] Having
therefore sufficiently rebuked them, and alarmed and wounded them, he in
turn heals
them, so as
not to cast them down too much, and make them
supine. For he that strikes one that is "dull," makes him more dull.
So then he neither flatters them throughout, test he should make them supine,
nor does he wound them throughout, but having inserted a little to wound them,
he applies much to heal in what follows.
For what does he say? We speak not these things, as having condemned you,
nor as thinking you to be full of thorns, but fearing test this should come
to pass. For it is better to terrify you by words, that ye may not suffer by
the realities. And this is specially of Paul's wisdom.
Moreover
he did not say, We think, or, we conjecture, or, we expect, or, we hope,
but what? (Ver.
9) "But beloved, we are persuaded better things
of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak." Which
word he also used in writing to the Galatians: "But I am persuaded of
you in the Lord, that ye will be none otherwise minded." (Gal. v. 10.)
For in that instance, inasmuch as they were greatly to be condemned, and he
could not praise them from things present, he does it from things future ("that
ye will be none otherwise minded," he says): he said not, ye are, but "ye
will be none otherwise minded." But here he encourages them from things
present. "We are persuaded better things of you, beloved, and things that
accompany to salvation, though we thus speak." And since he was not able
to say so much from things present, he confirms his consolation from things
past; and says,
Ver. 10. "For God is not unrighteous to forget your work, and[1] the
love, which ye have showed toward His name, in that ye have ministered unto
the saints and do minister." O how did he here restore their spirit, and
give them fresh strength, by reminding them of former things, and bringing
them to the necessity of not supposing that God had forgotten. (For he cannot
but sin who is not fully assured concerning his hope, and says that God is
unrighteous. Accordingly he obliged them by all means to look forward to those
future things. For one who despairs of present things, and has, given up exerting
himself, may be restored by [the prospect of] things future.) As he himself
also said in writing to the Galatians, "Ye did run well" (Gal. v.
7): and again, "Have ye suffered so many things in vain? if it be yet
in vain." (Gal. iii. 4.)
And as
in this place he puts the praise with the reproof, saying, "When
for the time ye ought to be teachers" (c. v. 12), so also there, "I
marvel that ye are so soon removed." (Gal. i. 6.) With the reproof is
the praise. For respecting great things we marvel, when they fail. Thou seest
that praise is concealed under the accusation and the blame. Nor does he say
this concerning himself only, but also concerning all. For he said not, I am
persuaded, but "we are persuaded better things of you," even good
things (he means). He says this either in regard to matters of conduct, or
to the recompense. In the next place, having said above, that it is "rejected
and nigh unto a curse," and that it "shall be for burning," he
says, we do not by any means speak this of you. "For God is not unrighteous
to forget your work, and love." (Ver. 10.)
[5.] Why
then did we say these things? (Ver. 11, 12) "But we desire that
everyone of you do show the same diligence to the full assurance of hope unto
the end; that ye be not slothful, but followers of them who through faith and
patience inherit the promises."
"We desire," he says, and we do not therefore merely labor for,
or even so far as words go, wish this. But what? "We desire" that
ye should hold fast to virtue, not as condemning your former conduct (he means),
but fearing for the future. And he did not say, 'not as condemning your former
conduct, but your present; for ye have fainted, ye are become too indolent';
but see how gently he indicated it, and did not wound them.
For what
does he say? "But we desire that every, one of you do show the
same diligence unto the end." For this is the admirable part of Paul's
wisdom, that he does not expressly show that they "had" given in,
that they "had" become negligent. For when he says, "We desire
that every one of you"--it is as if one should say, I wish thee to be
always in earnest; and such as thou weft before, such to be now also, and for
the time to come. For this made his reproof more gentle and easy to be received.
And he
did not say, "I will," which would have been expressive of
the authority of a teacher, but what is expressive of the affection of a father,
and what is more than "willing," "we desire." All but saying,
Pardon us, even if we say what is distasteful.
"We desire that every one of you do show the same diligence to the full
assurance of your hope unto the end." Hope (he means) carries us through:
it recovers us again. Be not wearied out, do not despair, lest your hope be
in vain. For he that worketh good hopeth also good, and never despairs of himself.
"That ye may not become dull."[2] Still[3] "become"; and
yet he said above, "seeing ye are become dull[2] of hearing." (c.
v. 11.) Observe however how he limited the dullness to the hearing. And here
he hints the very same thing; instead of[4] that ye may not continue in it,'
he says [this]. But again he leads on to that future time for which they were
not yet responsible; saying in effect "that ye may not become too slothful":
since for that which is not yet come we could not be responsible. For he who
in regard to the present time is exhorted to be in earnest, as being remiss,
will perhaps become even more slothful, but he who is exhorted with reference
to the future, not so.
"We desire" (he says) "that every one of you." Great
is his affection for them: he cares equally for great and small; moreover
he knows
all, and overlooks no one, but shows the same tender care for each, and equal
value for all: from which cause also he the rather persuaded them to receive
what was distasteful in his words.
"That ye be not slothful," he
says. For as inactivity hurts the body, so also inactivity as to what is
good renders the soul more supine and
feeble.
[6.] "But followers" (he says) "of them, who through faith
and patience inherit the promises." And who they are, he tells afterwards.
He said before, "Imitate your own former well-doings." Then, lest
they should say, What? He leads them back to the Patriarch: bringing before
them examples of well-doing indeed from their own history,[1] but of the thought
of being forsaken, from the Patriarch; that they might not suppose that they
were disregarded and forsaken as worthy of no account, but might know that
it is [the portion] of the very noblest men to make the journey of life through
trials; and that God has thus dealt with great and admirable men.
Now we ought (he says) to bear all things with patience: for this also is
believing: whereas if He say that He gives and thou immediately receivest,
how hast thou also believed? Since in that case this is no longer of thy faith,
but of Me, the Giver. But if I say that I give, and give after an hundred years,
and thou hast not despaired; then hast thou accounted Me worthy to be believed,
then thou hast the right opinion concerning Me. Thou seest that oftentimes
unbelief arises not from want of hope only, but also from faintheartedness,
and want of patience, not from condemning him who made the promise.
"For God" (he says) "is not unrighteous to forget your love" and
the zeal "which ye have showed toward His Name, in that ye have ministered
unto the saints, and do minister." He testifies great things of them,
not deeds only; but deeds done with alacrity, which he says also in another
place, "and not only so, but they gave themselves also to the Lord and
to us." (2 Cor. viii. 5.)
"Which" (he says) "ye have showed toward His Name, in that
ye have ministered to the saints, and do minister." See how again he soothes
them, by adding "and do minister." Still even at this time (he says)
ye are ministering, and he raises them up by showing that they had done [what
they did] not to them [the saints], but to God. "Which ye have showed" (he
says); and he said not "unto the saints," but "towards God," for
this is "toward His Name." It is for His Name's sake (he means) that
ye have done all. He therefore who has the enjoyment from you of[2] so great
zeal and love, will never despise you nor forget you.
[7.] Hearing
these things, let us, I beseech you, "minister to the saints." For
every believer is a saint in that he is a believer. Though he be a person living
in the world, he is a saint. "For" (he says) "the unbelieving
husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife by the husband." (1
Cor. vii. 14.) See how the faith makes the saintship. If then we see even a
secular person in misfortune, let us stretch out a hand [to him]. Let us not
be zealous for those only who dwell in the mountains; they are indeed saints
both in manner of life and in faith; these others however are saints by their
faith, and many of them also in manner of life. Let us not, if we see a monk
[cast] into prison, in that case go in; but if it be a secular person, refuse
to go in. He also is a saint and a brother.
What then
(you say) if he be unclean and polluted? Listen to Christ saying, "Judge
not that ye be not judged." (Matt. vii. 1.) Do thou act for GOD'S sake.
Nay, what am I saying? Even if we see a heathen in misfortune, we ought to
show kindness to him, and to every man without exception who is in misfortunes,
and much more to a believer who is in the world. Listen to Paul, saying, "Do
good unto all men, but especially to those who are of the household of faith." (Gal.
vi. 10.)
But I know not whence this [notion] has been introduced, or whence this custom
hath prevailed. For he that only seeks after the solitaries, and is willing
to do good to them alone, and with regard to others on the contrary is over-curious
in his enquiries, and says, 'unless he be worthy,[3] unless he be righteous,
unless he work miracles, I stretch out no hand'; [such an one] has taken away
the greater part of charity,[4] yea and in time he will in turn destroy the
very thing itself. And yet that is charity,[4] [which is shown] towards sinners,
towards the guilty. For this is charity,[1] not the pitying those who have
done well, but those who have done wrong.
[8.] And
that thou mayest understand this, listen to the Parable: "A
certain man" (it is said) "went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and
fell among thieves" (Luke x. 30, &c.); and when they had beaten him,
they left him by the way-side, having badly bruised him. A certain Levite came,
and when he saw him, he passed by; A priest came, and when he saw him, he hastened
past; a certain Samaritan came, and bestowed great care upon him. For he "bound
up his wounds" (Luke x. 34), dropped oil on them, set him upon his ass, "brought
him to the inn, said to the host, Take care of him" (Luke x. 35); and
(observe his great liberality), "and I," he says, "will give
thee whatsoever thou shalt expend." Who then is his neighbor? "He," it
is said, "that showed mercy on him. Go thou then also," He says, "and
do likewise." (Luke x. 37.) And see what a parable He spake. He said not
that a Jew did [so and so] to a Samaritan, but that a Samaritan showed all
that liberality. Having then heard these things, let us not care only for "those
that are of the household of faith" (Gal. vi. 10), and neglect others.
So then also thou, if thou see any one in affliction, be not curious to enquire
further. His being in affliction involves a just claim on thy aid.[2] For if
when thou seest an ass choking thou raisest him up, and dost not curiously
enquire whose he is, much more about a man one ought not to be over-curious
in enquiring whose he is. He is God's, be he heathen or be he Jew; since even
if he is an unbeliever, still he needs help. For if indeed it had been committed
to thee to enquire and to judge, thou wouldst have well said thus, but, as
it is, his misfortune does not suffer thee to search out these things. For
if even about men in good health it is not right to be over-curious, nor to
be a busybody in other men's matters, much less about those that are in affliction.
[9.] But
on another view what [shall we say]? Didst thou see him in prosperity, in
high esteem, that
thou shouldst
say that he is wicked and worthless? But
if thou seest him in affliction, do not say that he is wicked. For when a man
is in high credit, we fairly say these things; but when he is in calamity,
and needs help, it is not right to say that he is wicked. For this is cruelty,
inhumanity, and arrogance. Tell me what was ever more iniquitous than the Jews.
But nevertheless while God punished them, and that justly, yea, very justly,
yet He approved of those who had compassion on them, and those who rejoiced
over them He punished. (Amos v; 6.) For "they were not grieved," it
is said, "at the affliction of Joseph."
And again
it is said "Redeem [Ransom] those who are ready to be slain:
spare not." (Prov. xxiv. 11.) (He said not, enquire curiously, and learn
who he is; and yet, for the most part, they who are led away to execution are
wicked,) for this especially is charity. For he that doeth good to a friend,
doeth it not altogether for God's sake: but he that [doeth good] to one unknown,
this man acts purely for God's sake. "Do not spare" thy money, even
if it be necessary to spend all, yet give.
But we,
when we see persons in extreme distress,[3] bewailing themselves, suffering
things more grievous
than ten thousand deaths, and oftentimes unjustly,
we[I say] are sparing of our money, and unsparing of our brethren; we are careful
of lifeless things, but neglect the living soul. And yet Paul says, "in
meekness instruct those that oppose themselves, if peradventure God should
give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth, and they may recover
themselves out of the snare of the devil who are taken captive by him, at His
will." (2 Tim. ii. 25, 26.) "If peradventure," he says; thou
seest of how great long-suffering the word is full.
Let us also imitate Him, and despair of no one.
For the fishermen too, when they have cast many times [suppose it], have not
succeeded; but afterwards having cast again, have gained all. So we also expect
that ye will all at once show to us ripe fruit. For the husbandman too, after
he has sown, waits one day or two days, and is a long while in expectation:
and all at once he sees the fruits springing up on every side. This we expect
will take place in your case also by the grace and lovingkindness of our Lord
Jesus Christ, with whom to the Father and also to the Holy Ghost be glory,
might, honor, now and for ever and world without end. Amen.
HOMILY XI.
HEBREWS vi. 13-16.
"For
when God made promise to Abraham, because lie could swear by no greater,
He sware by Himself,
saying,
Surely blessing I will bless thee, and
multiplying I will multiply thee. And so after he had patiently endured, he
obtained the promise. For men verily swear by the greater, and an oath for
confirmation is to them an end of all strife."
[1.] HAVING boldly reflected on the faults of the Hebrews, and sufficiently
alarmed them, he consoles them, first, by praises, and secondly (which also
is the stronger ground), by the [thought] that they would certainly attain
the object of their hope. Moreover he draws his consolation, not from things
future, but again from the past, which indeed would the rather persuade them.
For as in the case of punishment, he alarms them rather by those [viz. things
future], so also in the case of the prizes [set before them], he encourages
them by these [viz. by things past], showing [herein] God's way of dealing.
And that is, not to bring in what has been promised immediately, but after
a long time. And this He does, both to present the greatest proof of His power,
and also to lead us to Faith, that they who are living in tribulation without
having received the promises, or the rewards, may not faint under their troubles.
And omitting all [the rest], though he had many whom he might have mentioned,
he brought forward Abraham both on account of the dignity of his person, and
because this had occurred in a special way in his case.
And yet
at the end of the Epistle he says, that "all these, having seen
the promises afar off, and having embraced them, received them not, that they
without us should not be made perfect." (c. xi. 13.) "For when God
made promise to Abraham" (he says) "because He could swear by no
greater, He sware by Himself, saying, Surely blessing I will bless thee, and
multiplying I will multiply thee. And so after he had patiently endured, he
obtained the promise." (c. xi. 39, 40.) How then does he say at the end
[of the Epistle] that "he received not the promises," and here, that "after
he had patiently endured he obtained the promise"? How did he not receive?
How did he obtain? He is not speaking of the same things in this place and
in the other, but makes the consolation twofold. God made promises to Abraham,
and after a long space of time He gave the things [spoken of] in this place,
but those others not yet.
"And so after he had patiently endured, he obtained the promise." Seest
thou that the promise alone did not effect the whole, but the patient waiting
as well? Here he alarms them, showing that oftentimes a promise is thwarted
through faintheartedness.[1] And this he had indeed shown through [the instance
of] the [Jewish] people: for since they were faint-hearted, therefore they
obtained not the promise. But now he shows the contrary by means of Abraham.
Afterwards near the end [of the Epistle] he proves something more also: [viz.]
that even though they had patiently endured, they did not obtain; and yet not
even so are they grieved.
[2.] "For men verily swear by the greater, and an Oath for confirmation
is to them an end of all strife. But God because He could swear by no greater,
sware by Himself." Well, who then is He that sware unto Abraham? Is it
not the SON? No, one says. Certainly indeed it was He: however, I shall not
dispute [thereon]. So when He [the Son] sweareth the same oath, "Verily,
verily, I say unto you," is it not plain that it was because He could
not swear by any greater? For as the Father sware, so also the Son sweareth
by Himself, saying, "Verily, verily, I say unto you." He here reminds
them also of the oaths of Christ, which He was constantly uttering. "Verily,
verily, I say unto thee, he that believeth on Me shall never die." (John
xi. 26.)
What is, "And an oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife"?
it is instead of, "by this every doubtful question is solved": not
this, or this, but every one.
God, however,
ought to have been believed even without an oath: (ver. 17) "wherein" (he
says) "God willing more abundantly to show unto the heirs of promise the
immutability of His counsel, confirmed it [lit. "mediated"[2]] by
an oath." In these words he comprehends also the believers, and therefore
mentions this "promise" which was made to us in common [with them]. "He
mediated" (he says) "by an oath." Here again he says that the
Son was mediator between men and God.
Ver. 18. "That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible that
God should lie." What are these two? The speaking and promising; and the
adding an oath to the promise. For since among men that which is [confirmed]
by an oath is thought more worthy of credit, on this account He added that
also.
Seest
thou that He regardeth not His own dignity, but how He may persuade men,
and endures to have unworthy
things said concerning Himself. That is He
wishes to impart full assurance. And in the case of Abraham indeed [the Apostle]
shows that the whole was of God, not of his patient endurance, since He was
even willing to add an oath, for He by whom men swear, by Him also God "sware," that
is "by Himself." They indeed as by one greater, but He not as by
one greater. And yet He did it. For it is not the same thing for man to swear
by himself, as for God. For man has no power over himself. Thou seest then
that this is said not more for Abraham than for ourselves: "that we" (he
says) "might have strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay
hold on the hope set before us." Here too again,[1] "after he had
patiently endured he obtained the promise."
"Now" he means, and he did not say "when[2] He swore." But
what the oath is, he showed, by speaking of swearing by a greater. But since
the race of men is hard of belief, He condescends to the same [things] with
ourselves. As then for our sake He swears, although it be unworthy of Him that
He should not be believed, so also did [the Apostle] make that other statement "He
learned from the things which He suffered" (c. v. 8), because men think
the going through experience more worthy of reliance.
What is "the hope set before us"?
From these [past events] (he says) we conjecture the future. For if these
came to pass after so long a time, so
certainly the others will. So that the things which happened in regard to Abraham
give us confidence also concerning the things to come.
[3.] (Ver.
19, 20) "Which [hope] we have as an anchor of the soul both
sure and steadfast, and which entereth into that within the veil: whither the
forerunner is for us entered, even JESUS, made High Priest forever after the
order of Melchisedec." He shows, that while we are still in the world,
and not yet departed from [this] life, we are already among the promises. For
through hope we are already in heaven. He said, "Wait; for it shall surely
be." Afterwards giving them full assurance, he says, "nay rather
by hope."[3] And he said not, "We are within," but 'It hath
entered within,' which was more true and more persuasive. For as the anchor,
dropped from the vessel, does not allow it to be carried about, even if ten
thousand winds agitate it, but being depended upon makes it steady, so also
does hope.
And see
how very suitable an image he has discovered: For he said not, Foundation;
which was not suitable;
but, "Anchor." For that which is on the tossing
sea, and seems not to be very firmly fixed, stands on the water as upon land,
and is shaken and yet is not shaken. For in regard to those who are very firm,
and philosophic, Christ with good reason made that statement, saying, "Whosoever
hath built his house on a rock." (Matt. vii. 24.) But in respect of those
who are giving way, and who ought to be carried through by hope, Paul hath
suitably set down this. For the surge and the great storm toss the boat; but
hope suffers it not to be carried hither and thither, although winds innumerable
agitate it: so that, unless we had this [hope] we should long ago have been
sunk. Nor is it only in things spiritual, but also in the affairs of this life,
that one may find the power of hope great. Whatever it may be, in merchandise,
in husbandry, in a military expedition, unless one sets this before him, he
would not even touch the work. But he said not simply "Anchor," but "sure
and steadfast" [i.e.] not shaken. "Which entereth into that within
the veil"; instead of 'which reacheth through even to heaven.'
[4.] Then
after this he led on to Faith also, that there might not only be hope, but
a very true
[hope].
For after the oath he lays down another thing
too, even proof by facts, because "the forerunner is for us entered in,
even JESUS." But a forerunner is a forerunner of some one, as John was
of Christ.
Now he
did not simply say, "He is entered in," but "where He
is entered in a forerunner for us," as though we also ought to attain.
For there is no great interval between the forerunner and those who follow:
otherwise he would not be a forerunner; for the forerunner and those who follow
ought to be in the same road, and to arrive after [each other].
"Being made an High Priest forever after the order," he says, "of
Melchisedec." Here is also another consolation, if our High Priest is
on high, and far better than those among the Jews, not in the kind [of Priesthood]
only, but also in the place, and the tabernacle, and the covenant, and the
person. And this also is spoken according to the flesh.
[5.] Those
then, whose High Priest He is, ought to be greatly superior. And as great
as the difference
is between
Aaron and Christ, so great should it
be between us and the Jews. For see, we have our victim[4] on high, our priest
on high, our sacrifice[1] on high: let us bring such sacrifices as can be offered
on that altar, no longer sheep and oxen, no longer blood and fat. All these
things have been done away; and there has been brought in their stead "the
reasonable service." (Rom. xii. 1.) But what is "the reasonable service"?
The [offerings made] through the soul; those made through the spirit. ("God," it
is said, "is a Spirit, and they that worship Him must worship Him in spirit
and in truth"--John iv. 24); things which have no need of a body, no need
of instruments, nor of special places, whereof each one is himself the Priest,
such as, moderation, temperance, mercifulness, enduring ill-treatment, long-suffering,
humbleness of mind.
These
sacrifices one may see in the Old [Testament] also, shadowed out beforehand. "Offer
to God," it is said, "a sacrifice of righteousness" (Ps. iv.
5); "Offer a sacrifice of praise" (Ps. 1. 14); and, "a sacrifice
of praise shall glorify Me" (Ps. 1. 23), and, "the sacrifice of God
is a broken spirit" (Ps. li. 17); and "what doth the Lord require
of thee but" to hearken to Him? (Mic. vi. 8.) "Burnt-offerings and
sacrifices for sin Thou hast had no pleasure in: then I said, Lo I come to
do Thy will, O God!" (Ps. xl. 6, 7), and again, "To what purpose
do ye bring the incense from Sheba?" (Jer. vi. 20.) "Take thou away
from Me the noise of thy songs, for I will not hear the melody of thy viols." (Amos
v. 23.) But instead of these "I will have mercy and not sacrifice." (Hosea
vi. 6.) Thou seest with what kind of "sacrifices God is well pleased." (c.
xiii. 16.) Thou seest also that already from the first the one class have given
place, and these have come in their stead.
These therefore let us bring, for the other indeed are [the offerings] of
wealth and of persons who have [possessions], but these of virtue: those from
without, these from within: those any chance person even might perform; these
only a few. And as much as a man is superior to a sheep, so much is this sacrifice
superior to that; for here thou offerest thy soul as a victim.
[6.] And other sacrifices also there are, which are indeed whole burnt-offerings,
the bodies of the martyrs: there both soul and body [are offered]. These have
a great savor of a sweet smell. Thou also art able, if thou wilt, to bring
such a sacrifice.
For what, if thou dost not burn thy body in the fire? Yet in a different fire
thou canst; for instance, in that of voluntary poverty, in that of affliction.
For to have it in one's power to spend one's days in luxury and expense, and
yet to take up a life of toil and bitterness, and to mortify the body, is not
this a whole burnt-offering? Mortify thy body, and crucify it, and thou shalt
thyself also receive the crown of this martyrdom. For what in the other case
the sword accomplishes, that in this case let a willing mind effect. Let not
the love of wealth burn, or possess you, but let this unreasonable appetite
itself be consumed and quenched by the fire of the Spirit; let it be cut in
pieces by the sword of the Spirit.
This is an excellent sacrifice, needing no priest but him who brings it. This
is an excellent sacrifice, performed indeed below but forthwith taken up on
high. Do we not wonder that of old time fire came down and consumed all? It
is possible now also that fire may come down far more wonderful than that,
and consume all the presented offerings:[2] nay rather, not consume, but bear
them up to heaven. For it does not reduce them to ashes, but offers them as
gifts to God.
[7.] Such
were the offerings of Cornelius. For (it is said) "thy prayers
and thine alms are come up for a memorial before God." (Acts x. 4.) Thou
seest a most excellent union. Then are we heard, when we ourselves also hear
the poor who come to us. "He" (it is said) "that stoppeth his
ears that he may not hear the poor" (Prov. xxi. 13), his prayer God will
not hearken to. "Blessed is he that considereth the poor and needy: the
Lord will deliver him in the evil day." (Ps. xl. 1.) But what day is evil
except that one which is evil to sinners?
What is
meant by "he that considereth"? He that understandeth what
it is to be a poor man, that has thoroughly learned his affliction. For he
that has learned his affliction, will certainly and immediately have compassion
on him. When thou seest a poor man, do not hurry by, but immediately reflect
what thou wouldest have been, hadst thou been he. What wouldest thou not have
wished that all should do for thee? "He that considereth" (he says).
Reflect that he is a free-man like thyself, and shares the same noble birth
with thee, and possesses all things in common with thee; and yet oftentimes
he is not on a level even with thy dogs. On the contrary, while they are satiated,
he oftentimes lies, sleeps, hungry, and the free-man is become less honorable
than thy slaves.
But they perform needful services for thee. What are these? Do they serve
thee well? Suppose then I show that this [poor man] too performs needful services
for thee far greater than they do. For he will stand by thee in the Day of
judgment, and will deliver thee from the fire. What do all thy slaves do like
this? When Tabitha died, who raised her up? The slaves who stood around or
the poor? But thou art not even willing to put the free-man on an equality
with thy slaves. The frost is hard, and the poor man is cast out in rags, well-nigh
dead, with his teeth chattering, both by his looks and his air fitted to move
thee: and thou passeth by, warm and full of drink; and how dost thou expect
that God should deliver thee when in misfortune?
And oftentimes thou sayest this too: 'If it had been myself, and I had found
one that had done man), wrong things, i would have forgiven him; and does not
God forgive?' Say not this. Him that has done thee no wrong, whom thou art
able to deliver, him thou neglectest. How shall He forgive thee, who art sinning
against Him? Is not this deserving of hell?
And how amazing! Oftentimes thou adornest with vestments innumerable, of varied
colors and wrought with gold, a dead body, insensible, no longer perceiving
the honor; whilst that which is in pain, and lamenting, and tormented, and
racked by hunger and frost, thou neglectest; and givest more to vainglory,
than to the fear of God.
[8.] And
would that it stopped here; but immediately accusations are brought against
the applicant.
For
why does he not work (you say)? And why is he to
be maintained in idleness? But (tell me) is it by working that thou hast what
thou hast, didst thou not receive it as an inheritance from thy fathers? And
even if thou dost work, is this a reason why thou shouldest reproach another?
Hearest thou not what Paul saith? For after saying, "He that worketh not,
neither let him eat" (2 Thess. iii. 10), he says, "But ye be not
weary in well doing." (2 Thess. iii. 13.)
But what say they? He is an impostor.[1] What sayest thou, 0 man? Callest
thou him an impostor, for the sake of a single loaf or of a garment? But (you
say) he will sell it immediately. And dost thou manage all thy affairs well?
But what? Are all poor through idleness? Is no one so from shipwreck? None
from lawsuits? None from being robbed? None from dangers? None from illness?
None from any other difficulties? If however we hear any, one bewailing such
evils, and crying out aloud, and looking up naked toward heaven, and with long
hair, and clad in rags, at once we call him, The impostor! The deceiver! The
swindler! Art thou not ashamed? Whom dost thou call impostor? Give nothing,
and do not accuse the man.
But (you say) he has means, and pretends. This is a charge against thyself,
not against him. He knows that he has to deal with the cruel, with wild beasts
rather than with men, and that, even if he utter a pitiable story, he attracts
no one's attention: and on this account he is forced to assume also a more
miserable guise, that he may melt thy soul. If we see a person coming to beg
in a respectable dress, This is an impostor (you say), and he comes in this
way that he may be supposed to be of good birth. If we see one in the contrary
guise, him too we reproach. What then are they to do? O the cruelty, O the
inhumanity!
And why (you say) do they expose their maimed limbs? Because of thee. If we
were compassionate, they would have no need of these artifices: if they persuaded
us at the first application, they would not have contrived these devices. Who
is there so wretched, as to be willing to cry out so much, as to be willing
to behave in an unseemly way, as to be willing to make public lamentations,
with his wife destitute of clothing, with his children, to sprinkle ashes on
[himself]. How much worse than poverty are these things? Yet on account of
them not only are they not pitied, but are even accused by us.
[9.] Shall we then still be indignant, because when we pray to God, we are
not heard? Shall we then still be vexed, because when we entreat we do not
persuade? Do we not tremble for fear, my beloved?
But (you say) I have often given. But dost thou not always eat? And dost thou
drive away thy children often begging of thee? O the shamelessness! Dost thou
call a poor man shameless? And thou indeed art not shameless when plundering,
but he is shameless when begging for bread! Considerest thou not how great
are the necessities of the belly? Dost not thou do all things for this? Dost
thou not for this neglect things spiritual? Is not heaven set before thee and
the kingdom of heaven? And thou fearing the tyranny of that [appetite] endurest
all things, and thinkest lightly of that [kingdom]. This is shamelessness.
Seest
thou not old men maimed? But O what trifling! 'Such an one' (you say) 'lends
out so many pieces
of
gold, and such an one so many, and yet begs.'
You repeat the stories and trifles of children; for they too are always hearing
such stories from their nurses. I am not persuaded of it. I do not believe
this. Far from it. Does a man lend money, and beg when he has abundance? For
what purpose, tell me? And what is more disgraceful than begging? It were better
to die than to beg. Where does our in inhumanity stop? What then? Do all lend
money? Are all impostors? Is there no one really poor? "Yea" (you
say) "and many." Why then dost thou not assist those persons, seeing
thou art a strict enquirer into their lives? This is an excuse and a pretense.
"Give to every one[2] that asketh of thee, and from him that would borrow
of thee turn not thou away." (Matt. v. 42.) Stretch out thy hand, let
it not be closed up. We have not been constituted examiners into men's lives,
since so we should have compassion on no one. When thou callest upon God why
dost thou say, Remember not my sins? So then, if that person even be a great
sinner, make this allowance in his case also, and do not remember his sins.
It is the season of kindness, not of strict enquiry; of mercy, not of account.
He wishes to be maintained: if thou art willing, give; but if not willing,
send him away without raising doubts.[1] Why art thou wretched and miserable?
Why dost thou not even thyself pity him, and also turnest away those who would?
For when such an one hears from thee, This [fellow] is a cheat; that a hypocrite;
and the other lends out money; he neither gives to the one nor to the other;
for he syspects all to be such. For you know that we easily suspect evil, but
good, not [so easily].
[10.]
Let us "be merciful," not simply so, but "as our heavenly
Father is." (Luke vi. 36.) He feeds even adulterers, and fornicators,
and sorcerers, and what shall I say? Those having every kind of wickedness.
For in so large a world there must needs be many such. But nevertheless He
feeds all; He clothes all. No one ever perished of hunger, unless one did so
of his own choice. So let us be merciful. If one be in want and in necessity,
help him.
But now we are come to such a degree of unreasonableness, as to act thus not
only in regard to the poor who walk up and down the alleys, but even in the
case of men that live in [religious] solitude.[2] Such an one is an impostor,
you say. Did I not say this at first, that if we give to all indiscriminately,
we shall always be compassionate; but if we begin to make over-curious enquiries,
we shall never be compassionate? What dost thou mean? Is a man an impostor
in order to get a loaf? If indeed he asks for talents of gold and silver, or
costly clothes, or slaves, or anything else of this sort, one might with good
reason call him a swindler. But if he ask none of these things, but only food
and shelter, things which are suited to a philosophic life,[3] tell me, is
this the part of a swindler? Cease we from this unseasonable fondness for meddling,
which is Satanic, which is destructive.
For indeed, if a man say that he is on the list of the Clergy, or calls himself
a priest, then busy thyself [to enquire], make much ado: since in that case
the communicating[4] without enquiry is not without danger. For the danger
is about matters of importance, for thou dost not give but receivest. But if
he want food, make no enquiry.
Enquire,
if thou wilt, how Abraham showed hospitality towards all who came to him.
If he had been
over-curious
about those who fled to him for refuge,
he would not have "entertained angels." (c. xiii. 2.) For perhaps
not thinking them to be angels, he would have thrust them too away with the
rest. But since he used to receive all, he received even angels.
What? Is it from the life of those that receive [thy bounty] that God grants
thee thy reward? Nay [it is] from thine own purpose, from thy abundant liberality;
from thy loving-kindness; from thy goodness. Let this be [found], and thou
shalt attain all good things, which may we all attain, through the grace and
lovingkindness of our Lord Jesus Christ, with whom to the Father and together
with the Holy Ghost, be glory, power, honor, now and for ever and world without
end. Amen.
HOMILY XII.
HEBREWS vii. 1-3.
"For
this Melchisedec, King of Salem, Priest of the most High God, who met Abraham
returning from
the
slaughter of the Kings, and blessed him: to
whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King
of Righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of Peace,
without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning
of days, nor end of life, But made like unto the Son of God, abideth a Priest
continually."
[1.] PAUL
wishing to show the difference between the New and Old [Covenant], scatters
it everywhere;
and shoots from
afar, and noises it abroad,[1] and
prepares beforehand. For at once even from the introduction, he laid down this
saying, that "to them indeed He spake by prophets, but to us by the Son" (c.
i. 1, 2), and to them "at sundry times and in divers manners," but
to us through the Son. Afterwards, having discoursed concerning the Son, who
He was and what He had wrought, and given an exhortation to obey Him, lest
we should suffer the same things as the Jews; and having said that He is "High
Priest after the order of Melchisedec" (c. vi. 20), and having oftentimes
wished to enter into [the subject of] this difference, and having used much
preparatory management; and having rebuked them as weak, and again soothed
and restored them to confidence; then at last he introduces the discussion
on the difference [of the two dispensations] to ears in their full vigor. For
he who is depressed in spirits would not be a ready hearer. And that you may
understand this, hear the Scripture saying, "They hearkened not to Moses
for anguish of spirit."[9] (Ex. vi. 9.) Therefore having first cleared
away their despondency by many considerations, some fearful, some more gentle,
he then from this point enters upon the discussion of the difference [of the
dispensations].
[2.] And
what does he say? "For this Melchisedec, King of Salem, Priest
of the Most High God." And, what is especially noteworthy, he shows the
difference to be great by the Type itself. For as I said, he continually confirms
the truth from the Type, from things past, on account of the weakness of the
hearers. "For" (he says) "this Melchisedec, King of Salem, Priest
of the Most High God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the Kings,
and blessed him, to whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all." Having
concisely set down the whole narrative, he looked at[3] it mystically.
And first
from the name. "First" (he says) "being by interpretation
King of righteousness": for Sedec means "righteousness"; and
Melchi, "King": Melchisedec, "King of righteousness." Seest
thou his exactness even in the names? But who is "King of righteousness," save
our Lord Jesus Christ? "King of righteousness. And after that also King
of Salem," from his city, "that is, King of Peace," which again
is [characteristic] of Christ. For He has made us righteous, and has "made
peace" for "things in Heaven and things on earth." (Col. i.
20.) What man is "King of Righteousness and of Peace"? None, save
only our Lord JESUS Christ.
[3.] He
then adds another distinction, "Without father, without mother,
without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made
like unto the Son of God, abideth a Priest continually." Since then there
lay in his way [as an objection] the [words] "Thou art a Priest for ever,
after the order of Melchisedec," whereas he [Melchisedec] was dead, and
was not" Priest for ever," see how he explained it mystically.
'And who
can say this concerning a man?' I do not assert this in fact (he says); the
meaning is,
we do not
know when[4] [or] what father he had, nor
what mother, nor when he received his beginning, nor when he died. And what
of this (one says)? For does it follow, because we do not know it, that he
did not die, [or] had no parents? Thou sayest well: he both died and had parents.
How then [was he] "without father, without mother"? How "having
neither beginning of days nor end of life"? How? [Why] from its not being
expressed? And what of this? That as this man is so, from his genealogy not
being given, so is Christ from the very nature of the reality.
See the "without beginning"; see the "without end." As
in case of this man, we know not either "beginning of days," or "end
of life," because they have not been written; so we know [them] not in
the case of JESUS, not because they have not been written, but because they
do not exist. For that indeed is a type,[1] and therefore [we say] 'because
it is not written,' but this is the reality,[2] and therefore [we say] 'because
it does not exist.' For as in regard to the names also (for there "King
of Righteousness" and "of Peace" are appellations, but here
the reality) so these too are appellations in that case, in this the reality.
How then hath He a beginning? Thou seest that the Son is "without beginning,"[3]
not in respect of His not having a cause;[4] (for this is impossible: for He
has a Father, otherwise how is He Son?) but in respect of His "not having
beginning or end of life."
"But made like unto the Son of God." Where
is the likeness? That we know not of the one or of the other either the end
or the beginning. Of
the one because they are not written; of the other, because they do not exist.
Here is the likeness. But if the likeness were to exist in all respects, there
would no longer be type and reality; but both would be type. [Here] then just
as in representations[5] [by painting or drawing], there is somewhat that is
like and somewhat that is unlike. By means of the lines indeed there is a likeness
of features,[6] but when the colors are put on, then the difference is plainly
shown, both the likeness and the unlikeness.
[4.] Ver.
4. "Now consider" (saith he) "how great this man
is to whom even the Patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils."[7]
Up to this point he has been applying the type: hence-forward he boldly shows
him [Melchisedec] to be more glorious than the Jewish realities. But if he
who bears a type of Christ is so much better not merely than the priests, but
even than the forefather himself of the priests, what should one say of the
reality? Thou seest how super-abundantly he shows the superiority.
"Now consider" (he says) "how great this man is to whom even
the Patriarch Abraham gave a tenth out of the choice portions." Spoils
taken in battle are called "choice portions."[8] And it cannot be
said that he gave them to him as having a part in the war, because (he said)
he met him "returning from the slaughter of the kings," for he had
staid at home (he means), yet [Abraham] gave him the first-fruits of his labors.
Ver. 5. "And verily they that are of the sons of Levi who receive the
office of Priesthood, have a commandment to take tithes of the people according
to the law, that is, of their brethren, though they come out of the loins of
Abraham." So great (he would say) is the superiority of the priesthood,
that they who from their ancestors are of the same dignity, and have the same
forefather, are yet far better than the rest. At all events they "receive
tithes" from them. When then one is found, who receives tithes from these
very persons, are not they indeed in the rank of laymen, and he among the Priests?
And not
only this; but neither was he of the same dignity with them, but of another
race: so that
he would
not have given tithes to a stranger unless his
dignity had been great. Astonishing! What has he accomplished? He has made
quite clear a greater point than those relating to faith which he treated in
the Epistle to the Romans. For there indeed he declares Abraham to be the forefather
both of our polity and also of the Jewish. But here he is exceeding bold against
him, and shows that the uncircumcised person is far superior. How then did
he show that Levi paid tithes? Abraham (he says) paid them. 'And how does this
concern us?' It especially concerns you: for you will not contend that the
Levites are superior to Abraham. (Ver. 6 ) "But he whose descent is not
counted from them, received tithes of Abraham."
And after
that he did not simply pass on, but added, "and blessed him
that had the promises." Inasmuch as throughout, this was regarded with
reverence, he shows that [Melchisedec] was to be reverenced more than Abraham,
from the common judgment of all men. (Ver. 7) "And without all contradiction," he
says, "the less is blessed of the better," i.e. in the opinion of
all men it is the inferior that is blessed by the superior. So then the type
of Christ is superior even to "him that had the promises."
(Ver.
8) "And here men that die receive tithes: but there he of whom
it is testified that he liveth." But lest we should say, Tell us, why
goest thou so far back? He says, (ver. 9) "And as I may so say" (and
he did well in softening it) "Levi also who receiveth tithes payed tithes
in Abraham." How? (Ver. 10) "For he was yet in his loins when Melchisedec
met him," i.e. Levi was in him, although he was not yet born. And he said
not the Levites but Levi.
Hast thou seen the superiority? Hast thou seen how great is the interval between
Abraham and Melchisedec, who bears the type of our High Priest? And he shows
that the superiority had been caused by authority, not necessity. For the one
paid the tithe, which indicates the priest: the other gave the blessing, which
indicates the superior. This superiority passes on also to the descendants.
In a marvelous
and triumphant way he cast out the Jewish [system]. On this account he said, "Ye are become dull," (c.
v. 12), because he wished to lay these foundations, that they might not start
away. Such is the wisdom
of Paul, first preparing them well, he so leads[1] them into what he wishes.
For the human race is hard to persuade, and needs much attention, even more
than plants. Since in that case there is [only] the nature of material bodies,
and earth, which yields to the hands of the husbandmen: but in this there is
will, which is liable to many alterations, and now prefers this, now that.
For it quickly turns to evil.
[5.] Wherefore
we ought always to "guard" ourselves, test at any
time we should fall asleep. For "Lo" (it is said) "he that keepeth
Israel shall neither slumber nor sleep" (Ps. cxxi. 4), and "Do not
suffer[2] thy foot to be moved." (Ps. cxxi. 3.) He did not say, 'be not
moved' but "do not thou suffer," &c. The suffering depends then
on ourselves, and not on any other. For if we will stand "steadfast and
unmoveable" (1 Cor. xv. 58), we shall not be shaken.
What then? Does nothing depend on God? All indeed depends on God, but not
so that our free-will is hindered. 'If then it depend on God,' (one says),
'why does He blame us?' On this account I said, 'so that our free-will is no
hindered.' It depends then on us, and on Him For we must first choose the good;
and then He leads us to His own.[3] He does not anticipate our choice,[4] lest
our free-will should be outraged. But when we have chosen, then great is the
assistance he brings to us.
How is
it then that Paul says, "not of him that willeth," if it
depend on ourselves also "nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth
mercy." (Rom. ix. 16.)
In the
first place, he did not introduce it as his own opinion, but inferred it
from what was before
him
and from what had been put forward[5] [in the discussion].
For after saying, "It is written, I will have mercy on whom I will have
mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion" (Rom.
ix. 15),he says, "It follows then[6] that it is not of him that willeth,
nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy." "Thou wilt
say then unto me, why doth He yet find fault?" (Rom. ix. 16, 19.)
And secondly
the other explanation may be given, that he speaks of all as His, whose the
greater
part is. For
it is ours to choose[7] and to wish; but
God's to complete and to bring to an end. Since therefore the greater part
is of Him, he says all is of Him, speaking according to the custom of men.
For so we ourselves also do. I mean for instance: we see a house well built,
and we say the whole is the Architect's [doing], and yet certainly it is not
all his, but the workmen's also, and the owner's, who supplies the materials,
and many others', but nevertheless since he contributed the greatest share,
we call the whole his. So then [it is] in this case also. Again, with respect
to a number of people, where the many are, we say All are: where few, nobody.
So also Paul says, "not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth,
but of God that showeth mercy."
And herein he establishes two great truths: one, that we should not be lifted
up:[8] even shouldst thou run (he would say), even shouldst thou be very earnest,
do not consider that the well doing[9] is thine own. For if thou obtain not
the impulse that is from above, all is to no purpose. Nevertheless that thou
wilt attain that which thou earnestly strivest after is very evident; so long
as thou runnest, so long as thou willest.
He did not then assert this, that we run in vain, but that, if we think the
whole to be our own, if we do not assign the greater part to God, we run in
vain. For neither hath God willed that the whole should be His, lest He should
appear to be crowning us without cause: nor again our's, lest we should fall
away to pride. For if when we have the smaller [share], we think much of ourselves,
what should we do if the whole depended on us?
[6.] Indeed God hath done away many things for the purpose of cutting away
our boastfulness, and still there is the[11] high hand. With how many afflictions
hath He encompassed us, so as to cut away our proud spirit! With how many wild
beasts hath He encircled us! For indeed when some say, 'why is this?' 'Of what
use is this?' They utter these things against the will of God. He hath placed
thee in the midst of so great fear, and yet not even so art thou lowly-minded;
but if thou ever attain a little success, thou reachest to Heaven itself in
pride.
For this cause [come] rapid changes and reverses; and yet not even so are
we instructed. For this cause are there continual and untimely deaths, but
are minded as if we were immortal, as if we should never die. We plunder, we
over-reach, as though we were never to give account. We build as if we were
to abide here always. And not even the word of God daily sounded into our ears,
nor the events themselves instruct us. Not a day, not an hour can be mentioned,
in which we may not see continual funerals. But all in vain: and nothing reaches
our hardness [of heart]: nor are we even able to become better by the calamities
of others; or rather, we are not willing. When we ourselves only are afflicted,
then we are subdued, and yet if God take off His hand, we again lift up our
hand: no one considers what is proper for man,[1] no one despises the things
on earth; no one looks to Heaven. But as swine turn their heads downwards,
stooping towards their belly, wallowing in the mire; so too the great body
of mankind defile themselves with the most intolerable filth, without being
conscious of it.
[7.] For
better were it to be defiled with unclean mud than with sins; for he who
is defiled with
the one, washes
it off in a little time, and becomes
like one who had never from the first fallen into that slough; but he who has
fallen into the deep pit of sin has contracted a defilement that is not cleansed
by water, but needs long time, and strict repentance, and tears and lamentations,
and more wailing, and that more fervent, than we show over the dearest friends.
For this defilement attaches to us from without, wherefore we also speedily
put it away; but the other is generated from within, wherefore also we wash
it off with difficulty, and cleanse ourselves from it. "For from the heart" (it
is said) "proceed evil thoughts, fornications, adulteries, thefts, false
witnesses." (Matt. xv. 19.) Wherefore also the Prophet said, "Create
in me a clean heart, O God." (Ps. li. 10.) And another, "Wash thine
heart from wickedness, O Jerusalem." (Jer. iv. 14.) (Thou seest that it
is both our [work] and God's.) And again, "Blessed are the pure in heart,
for they shall see God." (Matt. v. 8.)
Let us
become clean to the utmost of our power. Let us wipe away our sins. And how
to wipe them
away, the prophet
teaches, saying, "Wash you, make
you clean, put away your wickedness from your souls, before Mine eyes." (Isa.
i. 16.) What is "before Mine eyes"? Because some seem to be free
from wickedness, but only to men, while to God they are manifest as being "whited
sepulchers." Therefore He says, so put them away as I see. "Learn
to do well, seek judgment, do justice for the poor and lowly." "Come
now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: and though your sins be as
scarlet, I will make you white as snow, and if they be as crimson, I will make
you white as wool." (Isa. i. 17, 18.) Thou seest that we must first cleanse
ourselves, and then God cleanses us. For having said first, "Wash you,
make you clean," He then added "I will make you white."
Let no
one then, [even] of those who are come to the extremest wickedness, despair
of himself. For
(He says)
even if thou hast passed into the habit,
yea and almost into the nature of wickedness itself, be not afraid. Therefore
taking [the instance of] colors that are not superficial but almost of the
substance of the materials, He said that He would bring them into the opposite
state. For He did not simply say that He would "wash" us, but that
He would "make" us "white, as snow and as wool," in order
to hold out good hopes before us. Great then is the power of repentance, at
least if it makes us as snow, and whitens us as wool, even if sin have first
got possession and dyed our souls.
Let us
labor earnestly then to become clean; He has enjoined nothing burdensome. "Judge
the fatherless, and do justice for the widow." (Isa. i. 17.) Thou seest
everywhere how great account God makes of mercy, and of standing forward in
behalf of those that are wronged. These good deeds let us pursue after, and
we shall be able also, by the grace of God, to attain to the blessings to come:
which may we all be counted worthy of, in Christ Jesus our Lord, with whom
to the Father together with the Holy Ghost, be glory, power, honor, now and
for ever and world without end. Amen.
HOMILY XIII.
HEBREWS vii. 11--14.
"If therefore perfection were by[1] the Levitical priesthood; (for under
it the people have received the law'[2]) what further need was there that another
priest should arise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after
the order of Aaron? For the priesthood being changed, there is[3] made of necessity
a change also of the law. For He of whom these things are spoken, pertained
to another tribe, of[4] which no man gave attendance at the altar. For it is
evident that our Lord sprang out of Judah, of which tribe Moses spake nothing
concerning priests."[5]
[1.] "IF therefore" (he says) "perfection were by the Levitical
priesthood." Having spoken concerning Melchisedec, and shown how much
superior he was to Abraham, and having set forth the great difference between
them, he begins from this point forward to prove the wide difference as to
the covenant itself, and how the one is imperfect and the other perfect. However
he does not even yet enter on the matters themselves, but first contends on
the ground of the priesthood, and the tabernacle. For these things would be
more easily received by the unbelieving, when the proof was derived from things
already allowed, and believed.
He had
shown that Melchisedec was greatly superior both to Levi and to Abraham,
being to them in the rank
of
the priests. Again he argues from a different
point. What then is this? Why (he says) did he not say, "after the order
of Aaron"? And observe, I pray you, the great superiority [of his argument].
For from the very circumstance which naturally excluded His priesthood, viz.
that He was not "after the order of Aaron," from that he establishes
Him, and excludes the others. For this is the very thing that I say (he declares);
why has He " not been made after the order of Aaron"?
And the
[saying] "what further need" has much emphasis. For if Christ
had been "after the order of Melchisedec" according to the flesh,
and then afterwards the law had been introduced, and all that pertained to
Aaron, one might reasonably say that the latter as being more perfect, annulled
the former, seeing that it had come in after it. But if Christ comes later,
and takes a different type, as that of His priesthood, it is evident that it
is because those. were imperfect. For (he would say) let us suppose for argument's
sake, that all has been fulfilled, and that there is nothing imperfect in the
priesthood. "What need" was there in that case that He should be
called "after the order of Melchisedec and not after the order of Aaron"?
Why did He set aside Aaron, and introduce a different priesthood, that of Melchisedec? "If
then perfection," that is the perfection of the things themselves, of
the doctrines, of life,[6] "had been by the Levitical priesthood."
And observe
how he goes forward on his path. He had said that [He was] "after
the order of Melchisedec," implying that the [priesthood] "after
the order of Melchisedec" is superior: for [he was][7] far superior. Afterwards
he shows this from the time also, in that He was after Aaron; evidently as
being better.
[2.] And
what is the meaning of what follows? "For" (he says) "under
[or "upon"] it the people have received the Law for "have been
legislated for"]."[8] What is "under it" [&c.]? Ordereth
itself[9] by it; through it does all things. You cannot say that it was given
to others, "the people under it have received the law," that is,
have used it, and did use it. You cannot say indeed that it was perfect, it
did not govern the people; "they have been legislated for upon it," that
is, they used it.
What need
was there then of another priesthood? "For the priesthood being
changed, there is of necessity a change of the law also." But if there
must be another priest, or rather another priesthood, there must needs be also
another law. This is for those who say, What need was there of a new Covenant?
For he could indeed have alleged a testimony from prophecy also. "This
is the covenant which I made with your fathers" [&c.]. (c. viii. 10.)
But for the present he contends on the ground of the priesthood. And observe,
how be says this from the first. He said, "According to the order of "Melchisedec." By
this he excluded the order of Aaron. For he would not have said "After
the order of Melchisedec," if the other had been better. If therefore
another priesthood has been brought in, there must be also [another] Covenant;
for neither is it possible that there should be a priest, without a covenant
and laws and ordinances, nor that having received a different priesthood He
should use the former [covenant].
In the
next place, as to the ground of objection: "How could He be a
priest if He were not a Levite?" Having overthrown this by what had been
said above, he does not even think it worth answering, but introduces it in
passing. I said (he means) that the priesthood was changed, therefore also
the Covenant is. And it was changed not only in its character,[1] or in its
ordinances, but also in its tribe. For of necessity [it must be changed] in
its tribe also. How? "For the priesthood being changed [or "transferred "]," from
tribe to tribe, from the sacerdotal to the regal [tribe], that the same might
be both regal and sacerdotal.
And observe
the mystery. First it was royal, and then it is become sacerdotal: so therefore
also in
regard
to Christ: for King indeed He always was, but has
become Priest from the time that He assumed the Flesh, that He offered the
sacrifice. Thou seest the change, and the very things which were ground of
objection these he introduces, as though the natural order of things required
them. "For" (he says) "He of whom these things are spoken pertained
to another tribe." I myself also say it, I know that this tribe [of Judah]
had nothing of priesthood. For there is a transferring.
[3.] Yea
and I am showing another difference also (he would say): not only from the
tribe, nor yet
only from
the Person, nor from the character [of the
Priesthood], nor from the covenant, but also from the type itself., (Ver. 16) "Who
was made [" became" so], not according to the law of a carnal commandment,
but according to the power of an endless life. He became" (he says) "a
priest not according to the law of a carnal commandment ": for that law
was in many respects unlawful.[2]
What is, "of a carnal commandment"?
Circumcise the flesh, it says; anoint the flesh; wash the flesh; purify the
flesh; shave the flesh; bind upon
the flesh;[3] cherish the flesh; rest as to the flesh. And again its blessings,
what are they? Long life for the flesh; milk and honey for the flesh; peace
for the flesh; luxury for the flesh. From this law Aaron received the priesthood;
Melchisedec however not so.
Ver. 15. "And it is yet far more evident, if after the similitude of
Melchisedec there ariseth another priest." What is evident? The interval
between the two priesthoods, the difference; how much superior He is "who
was made not according to the law of a carnal commandment." (Who? Melchisedec?
Nay; but Christ.) "But according to the power of an endless[4] life. For
He testifieth, Thou art a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec";
that is, not for a time, nor having any limit, "but according to the power
of an endless life," that is, by means of power, by means of "endless
life."
And yet
this does not follow after, "who was made not according to the
law of a carnal commandment": for what would follow would be to say, "but
according to that of a spiritual one." However by "carnal," he
implied temporary. As he says also in another place, carnal ordinances imposed
until the time of reformation." (c. ix. 10.)
"According to the power of life," that
is, because He lives by His own power.
[4.] He had said, that there is also a change of law, and up to this point
he has shown it; henceforward he enquires into the cause, that which above
all gives full assurance to men's minds, [I mean] the knowing the cause thoroughly;
and it leads us more to faith[5] when we have learned also the cause, and the
principle according to which [the thing] comes to pass.
Ver. 18. "For there is verily" (he says) "a disannulling of
the commandment going before, for the weakness and unprofitablehess thereof." Here
the Heretics[6] press on. But listen attentively. He did not say "for
the evil," nor, "for the viciousness," but "for the weakness
and unprofitablehess [thereof]," yea and in other places also he shows
the weakness; as when he says "In that it was weak through the flesh." (Rom.
viii. 3.0 [The law] itself then is not weak, but we.
Ver. 19. "For the Law made nothing perfect." What is, "make
nothing perfect"? Made no man perfect, being disobeyed. And besides, even
if it had been listened to, it would not have made one perfect and virtuous.
But as yet he does not say this here, but that it had no strength: and with
good reason. For written precepts were there set down, Do this and Do not that,
being enjoined only, and not giving power within.[7] But "the Hope" is
not such.
What is "a disannulling"? A casting out. A "disannulling" is
a disannulling of things which are of force. So that he implied, that it [once]
was of force, but henceforward was of no account, since it accomplished nothing.
Was the Law then of no use? It was indeed of use; and of great use: but to
make men perfect it was of no use. For in this respect he says, "The Law
made nothing perfect." All were figures, all shadows; circumcision, sacrifice,
sabbath. Therefore they could not reach through the soul, wherefore they pass
away and gradually withdraw. "But the bringing in of a better hope did,
by which we draw nigh unto God."
[5.] (Ver.
20) "And forasmuch as not without the taking of an oath."[1]
Thou seest that the matter of the oath becomes necessary for him here. Accordingly
for this reason he previously treated much [hereon], how that God swore; and
swore for the sake of [our] fuller assurance.
"But the bringing in of a better hope." For that system also had
a hope, but not such as this. For they hoped that, if they were well pleasing
[to God], they should possess the land, that they should suffer nothing fearful.
But in this [dispensation] we hope that, if we are well pleasing [to God],
we shall possess not earth, but heaven; or rather (which is far better than
this) we hope to stand near to God, to come unto the very throne of the Father,
to minister unto Him with the Angels. And see how he introduces these things
by little and little. For above he says "which entereth into that within
the veil", (c. vi. 19), but here, "by which we draw nigh unto God."
"And inasmuch as not without an oath." What is "And inasmuch
as not without an oath"? That is, Behold another difference also. And
these things were not merely promised (he says). "For those priests were
made without an oath," (ver. 21, 22 ) "but This with an oath, by
Him that said unto Him, The Lord swore and will not repent, Thou art Priest
for ever after the order of Melchisedec.[2] By so much was Jesus made a surety
of a better covenant."[3] He lays down two points of difference, that
it hath no end as the [covenant] of the Law had;[4] and this he proves from
[its being] Christ who exercises [the priesthood]; for he says "according
to the power of an endless life." And he proves it also from the oath,
because "He swore," &c., and from the fact; for if the other
was cast out, because it was weak, this stands firm, because it is powerful.
He proves it also from the priest. How? Because He is One [only]; and there
would not have been One [only], unless He had been immortal. For as there were
many priests, because they were mortal, so [here is] The One, because He is
immortal. "By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better covenant," inasmuch
as He sware to Him that He should always be [Priest]; which He would not have
done, if He were not living.
[6.] (Ver.
25) "Wherefore He is able also to save them to the uttermost,
that come unto God by Him, seeing He ever liveth to make intercession for them." Thou
seest that he says this in respect of that which is according to the flesh.
For when He [appears] as Priest, then He also intercedes. Wherefore also when
Paul says, "who also maketh intercession for us" (Rom. viii. 34),
he hints the same thing; the High Priest maketh intercession. For He "that
raiseth the dead as He will, and quickeneth them," (John v. 21), and that "even
as the Father" [doth], how [is it that] when there is need to save, He "maketh
intercession'? (John v. 22 .) He that hath "all judgment," how [is
it that] He "maketh intercession"? He that "sendeth His angels" (Matt.
xiii. 41, 42), that they may "cast" some into "the furnace," and
save others, how [is it that] He "maketh intercession"? Wherefore
(he says) "He is able also to save." For this cause then He saves,
because He dies not. Inasmuch as "He ever liveth," He hath (he means)
no successor: And if He have no successor, He is able to aid all men. For there
[under the Law] indeed, the High Priest although he were worthy of admiration
during the time in which he was [High Priest] (as Samuel for instance, and
any other such), but, after this, no longer; for they were dead. But here it
is not so, but "He" saves "to the uttermost."[5]
What is "to the uttermost"? He hints at some mystery. Not here[6]
only (he says) but there[7] also He saves them that "come unto God by
Him." How does He save? "In that He ever liveth" (he says) "to
make intercession for them." Thou seest the humiliation? Thou seest the
manhood? For he says not, that He obtained this, by making intercession once
for all, but continually, and whensoever it may be needful to intercede for
them.
"To the uttermost." What
is it? Not for a time only, but there also in the future life. ' Does He
then always need to pray? Yet how can [this]
be reasonable? Even righteous men have oftentimes accomplished all by one entreaty,
and is He always praying? Why then is He throned with [the Father]?' Thou seest
that it is a condescension. The meaning is: Be not afraid, nor say, Yea, He
loves us indeed, and He has confidence towards the Father, but He cannot live
always. For He doth live alway.
[7.] (Ver.
26) "For such an High Priest also[8] became us, who is holy,
harmless, undefiled, separate from the sinners." Thou seest that the whole
is said with reference to the manhood. (But when I say 'the manhood,' I mean
[the manhood] having Godhead; not dividing [one from the other], but leaving
[you] to suppose[1] what is suitable.) Didst thou mark the difference of the
High Priest? He has summed up what was said before, "in all points tempted
like as we are yet without sin." (c. iv. 15.) "For" (he says) "such
an High Priest also became us, who is holy, harmless." "Harmless ":
what is it? Without wickedness: that which another[2] Prophet says: "guile
was not found in His mouth" (Isa. liii. 9), that is, [He is] not crafty.
Could any one say this concerning God? And is one not ashamed to say that God
is not crafty, nor deceitful? Concerning Him, however, in respect of the Flesh,
it might be reasonable [to say it]. "Holy, undefiled." This too would
any one say concerning God? For has He a nature capable of defilement? "Separate
from sinners."
[8.] Does
then this alone show the difference, or does the sacrifice itself also? How?
(Ver. 27) "He needeth not" (he says) "daily, as the
High Priest,[3] to offer up sacrifices for his sins, for this He did once for
all, when He offered up Himself. "This," what? Here what follows
sounds a prelude concerning the exceeding greatness of the spiritual sacrifice
and the interval [between them]. He has mentioned the point of the priest;
he has mentioned that of the faith; he has mentioned that of the Covenant;
not entirely indeed, still he has mentioned it. In this place what follows
is a prelude concerning the sacrifice itself. Do not then, having heard that
He is a priest, suppose that He is always executing the priest's office. For
He executed it once, and thenceforward "sat down." (c. x. 12.) Lest
thou suppose that He is standing on high, and is a minister, he shows that
the matter is [part] of a dispensation [or economy]. For as He became a servant,
so also [He became] a Priest and a Minister. But as after becoming a servant,
He did not continue a servant, so also, having become a Minister, He did not
continue a Minister. For it belongs not to a minister to sit, but to stand.
This then he hints at here, and also the greatness of the sacrifice, if being
[but] one, and having been offered up once only, it affected that which all
[the rest] were unable to do. But he does not yet [treat] of these points.
"For this He did," he says. "This"; what? "For" (he
says) "it is of necessity that this [Man] have somewhat also to offer" (c.
viii. 3); not for Himself; for how did He offer Himself? But for the people.
What sayest thou? And is He able to do this? Yea (he says). "For the Law
maketh men high priests, which have infirmity." (c. vii. 28.) And doth
He not need to offer for Himself? No, he says. For, that you may not suppose
that the [words, "this "] "He did once for all," are said
respecting Himself also, hear what he says: "For the law maketh men high
priests, which have infirmity." On this account they both offer continually,
and for themselves. He however who is mighty, He that hath no sin, why should
He offer for Himself, or oftentimes for others?
"But the word of the oath which was since the Law [maketh] the Son who
has been consecrated for evermore." "Consecrated":[4] what is
that? Paul does not set down the common terms of contradistinction;[5] for
after saying "having Infirmity," he did not say "the Son" who
is mighty, but "consecrated":[4] i.e. mighty, as one might say. Thou
seest that the name Son is used in contradistinction to that of servant. And
by "infirmity" he means either sin or death.
What is, "for evermore"?
Not now only without sin but always. If then He is perfect, if He never sins,
if He lives always, why shall He offer
many sacrifices for us? But for the present he does not insist strongly on
this point: but what he does strongly insist upon is, His not offering on His
own behalf.
[9.] Since
then we have such an High Priest, let us imitate Him: let us walk in His
footsteps. There
is no
other sacrifice: one alone has cleansed us, and
after this, fire and hell. For indeed on this account he repeats it over and
over, saying, "one Priest," "one Sacrifice," lest any one
supposing that there are many [sacrifices] should sin without fear. Let us
then, as many as have been counted worthy of The Seal,[6] as many as have enjoyed
The Sacrifice, as many as have partaken of the immortal Table, continue to
guard our noble birth and our dignity for failing away is not without danger.
And as
many as have not yet been counted worthy these [privileges], let not these
either be confident
on that
account. For when a person goes on in sin,
with the view of receiving holy baptism at the last gasp, oftentimes he will
not obtain it. And, believe me, it is not to terrify you that I say what I
am going to say. I have myself known many persons, to whom this has happened,
who in expectation indeed of the enlightening[1] sinned much, and on the day
of their death went away empty. For God gave us baptism for this cause, that
He might do away our sins, not that He might increase our sins. Whereas if
any man have employed it as a security for sinning more, it becomes a cause
of negligence. For if there had been no Washing, they would have lived more
warily, as not having [the means of] forgiveness. Thou seest that we are the
ones who cause it to be said "Let us do evil, that good may come." (Rom.
iii. 8.)
Wherefore, I exhort you also who are uninitiated, be sober. Let no man follow
after virtue as an hireling, no man as a senseless[2] person, no man as after
a heavy and burdensome thing, Let us pursue it then with a ready mind, and
with joy. For if there were no reward laid up, ought we not to be good? But
however, at least with a reward, let us become good. And how is this anything
else than a disgrace and a very great condemnation? Unless thou give me a reward
(says one), I do not become self-controlled. Then am I bold to say something:
thou wilt never be self-controlled, no not even when thou livest with self-control,
if thou dost it for a reward. Thou esteemest not virtue at all, if thou dost
not love it. But on account of our great weakness, God was willing that for
a time it should be practiced even for reward, yet not even so do we pursue
it.
But let us suppose, if you will, that a man dies, after having done innumerable
evil things, having also been counted worthy of baptism (which however I think
does not readily happen), tell me, how will he depart thither? Not indeed called
to account for the deeds he had done, but yet without confidence;[3] as is
reasonable. For when after living a hundred years, he has no good work to show,[4]
but only that he has not sinned, or rather not even this, but that he was saved
by grace[5] only, and when he sees others crowned, in splendor, and highly
approved: even if he fall not into hell, tell me, will he endure his despondency?
[10.] But to make the matter clear by an example, Suppose there are two soldiers,
and that one of them steals, injures, overreaches, and that the other does
none of these things, but acts the part of a brave man, does important things
well, sets up trophies in war, stains his right hand with blood; then when
the time arrives, suppose that (from the same rank in which the thief also
was) he is at once conducted to the imperial throne and the purple; but suppose
that the other remains there where he was, and merely of the royal kindness
does not pay the penalty of his deeds, let him however be in the last place,
and let him be stationed under the King. Tell me, will he be able to endure
his despair when he sees him who was [ranked] with himself ascended even to
the very highest dignities, and made thus glorious, and master of the world,
while he himself still remains below, and has not even been freed from punishment
with honor, but through the grace and kindness of the King? For even should
the King forgive him, and release him from the charges against him, still he
will live in shame; for surely not even will others admire him: since in such
forgiveness, we admire not those who receive the gifts, but those who bestow
them. And as much as the gifts are greater, so much the more are they ashamed
who receive them, when their transgressions are great.
With what eyes then will such an one be able to took on those who are in the
King's courts, when they exhibit their sweatings out of number and their wounds,
whilst he has nothing to show, but has his salvation itself of the mere loving-kindness
of God? For as if one were to beg off a murderer, a thief, an adulterer, when
he was going to be arrested, and were to command him to stay at the porch of
the King's palace, he will not afterwards be able to look any man in the face,
although he has been set free from punishment: so too surely is this man's
case.
For do not, I beseech you, suppose that because it is called a palace,[6]
therefore all attain the same things. For if here in Kings' courts there is
the Prefect, and all who are about the King, and also those who are in very
inferior stations, and occupy the place of what are called Decani[7] (though
the interval be so great between the Prefect and the Decanus) much more shall
this be so in the royal court above.
And this I say not of myself. For Paul layeth down another difference greater
even than these. For (he says) as many differences as there are between the
sun and the moon and the stars and the very smallest star, so many also between
those in the kingdom [of Heaven]. And that the difference between the sun and
the smallest star is far greater than that between the Decanus (as he is called)
and the Prefect, is evident to all. For while the sun shines upon all the world
at once, and makes it bright, and hides the moon and the stars, the other often
does not appear, not even in the dark. For there are many of the stars which
we do not see. When then we see others become suns, and we have the rank of
the very smallest stars, which are not even visible, what comfort shall we
have?
Let us not, I beseech you, let us not be so slothful, not so inert, let us
not barter away the salvation of God for an easy life, but let us make merchandise
of it, and increase it. For even if one be a Catechumen, still he knows Christ,
still he understands the Faith, still he is a hearer of the divine oracles,
still he is not far from the knowledge; he knows the will of his Lord. Wherefore
does he procrastinate? wherefore does he delay and postpone? Nothing is better
than a good life whether here or there, whether in case of the Enlightened
or of the Catechumens,
[11.] For tell me what burdensome command have we enjoined? Have a wife (it
is said) and be chaste. Is this difficult? How? when many, not Christians only
but heathens also, live chastely without a wife. That which the heathen surpasses[1]
for vainglory, thou dost not even keep for the fear of God.
Give (He says) to the poor out of what thou hast. Is this burdensome? But
in this case also heathen condemn us who for vainglory only have emptied out
their whole possessions.
Use not filthy communication. Is this difficult? For if it had not been enjoined,
ought we not to have done right in this, to avoid appearing degraded? For that
the contrary conduct is troublesome, I mean the using filthy communication,
is manifest from the fact that the soul is ashamed and blushes if it have been
led to say any such thing and would not unless perhaps it were drunk. For when
sitting in a public place, even if thou doest it at home, why dost thou not
do it there? Because of those that are present. Why dost thou not readily do
the same thing before thy wife? That thou mayest not insult her. So then thou
dost it not, lest thou shouldest insult thy wife; and dost thou not blush at
insulting God? For He is everywhere present, and heareth all things.
Be not
drunken, He says. For this very thing of itself, is it not a chastisement?
He did not say,
Put thy body
on the rack, but what? Do not give it free rein[2]
so as to take away the authority of the mind: on the contrary "make not
provision for the lusts thereof." (Rom. xiii. 14.)
Do not (He says) seize by violence what is not thine own; do not overreach;
do not forswear thyself. What labors do these things require ! what sweatings!
Speak evil of no man (He says) nor accuse falsely. The contrary indeed is
a labor. For when thou hast spoken ill of another, immediately thou art in
danger, in suspicion, [saying] Did he of whom I spake, hear? whether he be
great or small. For should he be a great man, immediately thou wilt be indeed
in danger; but if small, he will requite thee with as much, or rather with
what is far more grievous; for he will say evil of thee in a greater degree.
We are enjoined nothing difficult, nothing burdensome, if we have the will.
And if we have not the will, even the easiest things will appear burdensome
to us. What is easier than eating? but from great effeminacy many feel disgust
even at this, and I hear many say, that it is weariness even to eat. None of
these things is wearisome if thou hast but the will. For everything depends
on the will after the grace from above. Let us will good things that we may
attain also to the good things eternal, in Christ Jesus our Lord, whom to the
Father together with the Holy Ghost be glory, might, honor, now and for ever,
and world without end. Amen.
HOMILY XIV. <