by St. John Chrysostom

From Homily 58 on The Gospel of John.

“If a man should come here with earnestness – even though he does not read the Scriptures at home – and if he pays attention to what is said here, within the space of even one year he will be able to  obtain  a  considerable  acquaintance  with  them. For we do not read these Scriptures today, and tomorrow others that are quite different, but always the same section and consecutively. However, in spite of this, many have such an apathetic attitude that after such reading they do not even know the names of the books. And they are not ashamed, nor do they shudder with dread, because they have come so carelessly to the hearing of the word of God. On the other hand, if a musician, or a dancer, or anyone else connected with the theater should summon them to the city, they all hurry eagerly, and thank the one who invited them, and spend an entire half-day with their attention fixed on the performer exclusively. Yet when God addresses us through the prophets and apostles, we yawn, we are bored, we become drowsy.”

© 2011, Fr. John A. Peck. All rights reserved.

Mark 13:32 and Matthew 24:36 seem to indicate that not only are all men and angels ignorant of the time of the Second Coming of Christ, but that also Jesus is ignorant of the time of His imminent return. In fact, Jesus says that only the Father knows the day and the hour of the Second Coming of Christ. Therefore, was Jesus indeed ignorant of the day and hour of His Second Coming?

Two Church Fathers, St. Basil the Great and St. John Chrysostom, specifically addressed this issue. St. Basil’s response can be read , and St. John’s response can be read .

St. Basil’s response can be read in his letter to Amphilochius of Iconium (Letter 236), where he adamantly states that Jesus was in fact not ignorant of His Second Coming. First, he states that the opinion that Jesus was ignorant of His Second Coming has its origins from the heretics, and that the tradition he received from his youth and by all Orthodox is that Jesus was in fact not ignorant.

Second, he shows how to properly interpret these passages of Scripture. He puts forwards Mark 10:18 where Jesus says that

“there is none good but one, that is, God.”

He explains that this does not exclude that Jesus is good, but rather indicates that God the Father is the first good. Also in Matthew 11:27, where Jesus says,

“No one knoweth the Son but the Father”,

we are not to believe that the Holy Spirit is ignorant of the Son, but rather that to the Father naturally belongs the first knowledge. St. Basil also puts forward other passages of Scripture where Jesus talks about knowing when His Second Coming will be, such as Matthew 24:6. He further brings forward the fact that Jesus as man often spoke of Himself in human terms and weaknesses, but that as God He possessed the

“wisdom and power of God” (1 Corinthian 1:24).

It should also be pointed out that most Byzantine texts of the Gospels do not contain the words “nor the Son” in Matthew 24:36.

It seems that this was added to the text of the Gospel of Matthew based on the text that does contain it, in Mark 13:32. why this is so, but St. Basil refers to this fact when he shows that though Mark does seem to indicate an ignorance of the Son, Matthew does not. St. John Chrysostom, in a rare exception, adds “nor the Son” in Matthew. For Basil, this indicates that the words

“but My Father only”

are offered in contradistinction to the angels and men, but not the Son. Rather, Matthew more clearly shows that the Father has first knowledge by nature, whereas the Son has knowledge through the Father. Otherwise there would be a contradiction here with John 16:15, where Jesus says:

““All things that the Father hath are Mine.”

John 10:15 also states clearly:

“As the Father knoweth Me even so know I the Father.”

St. Basil clarifies Mark 13:32 when he says that it should be read in the following manner:

“Of that day and of that hour knoweth no man, nor the angels of God; but even the Son would not have known if the Father had not known, for the knowledge naturally His was given by the Father.”

Keeping in mind that the knowledge and divinity of the Son comes from the Father, this passage is much more clearly understood.

According to St. John Chrysostom in his Homilies on the Gospel of Matthew, the reason Jesus seems to indicate ignorance in this passage was so that the disciples may not even entertain the thought of inquiring into the matter. Though Jesus does know the time of His Second Coming, He is pointing out here a greater mystery, that the source of this knowledge comes from the Father and through the Father is given to the Son. But since the disciples do not yet understand this relationship between the Father and the Son, to them it is merely an indication to not further inquire into the matter. It appeared to them that the Son was ignorant so that they not feel scorned by Jesus or perplexed why they were not given knowledge He possessed.

Thus, by Jesus saying “nor the Son”, He was indicating to the disciples that He is indeed honoring them and has concealed nothing from them, but that knowledge of the Second Coming would be more harmful to them rather than beneficial. Meanwhile, St. John clearly indicates that the time of the Second Coming is perfectly known by the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit; for the Holy Trinity, Who created heaven and earth, created time as well. Mankind has no need to know neither the time of the judgment, nor how the Son will judge.

St. John Chrysostom puts the following words into the mouth of Jesus to explain this further:

“For that indeed I am not ignorant of it [the Second Coming], I have shown by many things; having mentioned intervals, and all the things that are to occur, and how short from this present time until the day itself (for this did the parable of the fig tree indicate), and I lead thee to the very vestibule; and if I do not open unto thee the doors [of knowledge], this also I do for your good.”

St. John even shows how Jesus speaks specifically of knowing the day and hour of His coming when He speaks of His coming suddenly and unexpectedly in the verses following Matthew 24:36.

We can thus conclude that according to the tradition of the Church, Jesus is not nor ever was ignorant of the time of His Second Coming.

And more patristic quotes on this subject.

- “If anyone says that the one Jesus Christ, true Son of God and true Son of Man, was ignorant of future things, or of the day of the last judgment … let him be anathema.”

— Pope Vigilius, Against Nestorians, May 14, 553

- “If anyone does not say that the Son of God is true God just as [His] Father is true God [and] He is all-powerful and omniscient and equal to the Father, he is a heretic.”

— Council of Rome, Tome of Pope Damasus, Canon 12 (A.D. 382)

- “These things being so, come let us now examine into ‘But of that day and that hour knows no man, neither the Angels of God, nor the Son ;’[Mark 13:32] for being in great ignorance as regards these words, and being stupefied about them, they think they have in them an important argument for their heresy. But I, when the heretics allege it and prepare themselves with it, see in them the giants again fighting against God. For the Lord of heaven and earth, by whom all things were made, has to litigate before them about day and hour; and the Word who knows all things is accused by them of ignorance about a day; and the Son who knows the Father is said to be ignorant of an hour of a day; now what can be spoken more contrary to sense, or what madness can be likened to this? Through the Word all things have been made, times and seasons and night and day and the whole creation; and is the Framer of all said to be ignorant of His work? And the very context of the lection shows that the Son of God knows that hour and that day, though the Arians fall headlong in their ignorance. For after saying, ‘nor the Son,’ He relates to the disciples what precedes the day, saying, ‘This and that shall be, and then the end.’ But He who speaks of what precedes the day, knows certainly the day also, which shall be manifested subsequently to the things foretold. But if He had not known the hour, He had not signified the events before it, as not knowing when it should be. And as any one, who, by way of pointing out a house or city to those who were ignorant of it, gave an account of what comes before the house or city, and having described all, said, ‘Then immediately comes the city or the house,’ would know of course where the house or the city was (for had he not known, he had not described what comes before lest from ignorance he should throw his hearers far out of the way, or in speaking he should unawares go beyond the object), so the Lord saying what precedes that day and that hour, knows exactly, nor is ignorant, when the hour and the day are at hand….Now why it was that, though He knew, He did not tell His disciples plainly at that time, no one may be curious where He has been silent; for ‘Who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has been His counsellor [Romans 11:34]?’ but why, though He knew, He said, ‘no, not the Son knows,’ this I think none of the faithful is ignorant, viz. that He made this as those other declarations as man by reason of the flesh. For this as before is not the Word’s deficiency , but of that human nature whose property it is to be ignorant….”

— St Athanasius, Discourse 3 Against the Arians, Chapter 28

- “Certainly when He says in the Gospel concerning Himself in His human character, ‘Father, the hour is come, glorify Your Son ,’[John 17:1] it is plain that He knows also the hour of the end of all things, as the Word, though as man He is ignorant of it, for ignorance is proper to man, and especially ignorance of these things. Moreover this is proper to the Savior’s love of man; for since He was made man, He is not ashamed, because of the flesh which is ignorant , to say ‘I know not,’ that He may show that knowing as God, He is but ignorant according to the flesh . And therefore He said not, ‘no, not the Son of God knows,’ lest the Godhead should seem ignorant, but simply, ‘no, not the Son,’[Mark 13:32] that the ignorance might be the Son’s as born from among men.”

- St Athanasius, Discourse 3 Against the Arians, Chapter 43

- “No man save Him who for our salvation has designed to put on flesh has full knowledge and a complete grasp of the truth.”

- St Jerome, Letter to Pope Damacus in reply to Genesis 27:23

- “Their tenth objection is the objection, and the statement that of the last ‘day and hour knows no man, not even the Son Himself, but the Father.’[Mark 13:32] And yet how can Wisdom be ignorant of anything? …How then can you say that all things before that hour He knows accurately, and all things that are to happen about the time of the end, but the hour itself He is ignorant? For such a thing would be like a riddle, as if one were to say that he knew accurately all that was in front of the wall, but did not know the wall itself; or that, knowing the end of the day, he did not the beginning of night–where knowledge of the one neccessarily brings in the other. Thus everyone must see He knows as God, and knows not as man,–if one may separate visible from that which discerned by thought alone.”

- St Gregory Nazianzen, On the Holy Spirit, Chapter 30:15

- “For He, as the Only-begotten Son of the Father, and the Word, both was and is omnipotent, and there is nothing that is not easy to Him.”

— St Cyril of Jerusalem Homilies On Luke, 47

- “We can now understand why He said that He knew not the day. If we believe Him to have been really ignorant, we contradict the Apostle, who says, “In Whom are all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge hidden” [Colossians 2:3]. There is knowledge which is hidden in Him, and because it has to be hidden, it must sometimes for this purpose be professed as ignorance, for once declared, it will no longer be secret. In order, therefore, that the knowledge may remain hidden, He declares that He does not know. But if He does not know, in order that the knowledge may remain hidden, this ignorance is not due to His nature, which is omniscient, for He is ignorant solely in order that it may be hidden. Nor is it hard to see why the knowledge of the day is hidden.”

— St Hilary of Poiters, On the Trinity Book IX Chapter 67

- “The Son is ignorant, then, of nothing which the Father knows, nor does it follow because the Father alone knows, that the Son does not know. Father and Son abide in unity of nature, and the ignorance of the Son belongs to the divine Plan of silence, seeing that in Him are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. This the Lord Himself testified, when He answered the question of the Apostles concerning the times, “It is not yours to know times or moments, which the Father has set within His own authority” [Acts 1:7]. The knowledge is denied them, and not only that, but the anxiety to learn is forbidden, because it is not theirs to know these times. Yet now that He is risen, they ask again, though their question on the former occasion had been met with the reply, that not even the Son knew. They cannot possibly have understood literally that the Son did not know, for they ask Him again as though He did know. They perceived in the mystery of His ignorance a divine Plan of silence, and now, after His resurrection, they renew the question, thinking that the time has come to speak. And the Son no longer denies that He knows, but tells them that it is not theirs to know, because the Father has set it within His own authority. If then, the Apostles attributed it to the divine Plan, and not to weakness, that the Son did not know the day, shall we say that the Son knew not the day for the simple reason that He was not God? Remember, God the Father set the day within His authority, that it might not come to the knowledge of man, and the Son, when asked before, replied that He did not know, but now, no longer denying His knowledge, replies that it is theirs not to know, for the Father has set the times not in His own knowledge, but in His own authority. The day and the moment are included in the word ‘times’: can it be, then, that He, Who was to restore Israel to its kingdom, did not Himself know the day and the moment of that restoration? He instructs us to see an evidence of His birth in this exclusive prerogative of the Father, yet He does not deny that He knows: and while He proclaims that the possession of this knowledge is withheld from ourselves, He asserts that it belongs to the mystery of the Father’s authority.

We must not therefore think, because He said He did not know the day and the moment, that the Son did not know. As man He wept, and slept, and sorrowed, but God is incapable of tears, or fear, or sleep. According to the weakness of His flesh He shed tears, slept, hungered, thirsted, was weary, and feared, yet without impairing the reality of His Only-begotten nature; equally so must we refer to His human nature, the words that He knew not the day or the hour [Mark 13:32].”

— St Hilary of Poiters, On the Trinity, Book IX Chapter 74

- “Those, then, who say that He is a servant divide the one Christ into two, just as Nestorius did. But we declare Him to be Master and Lord of all creation, the one Christ, at once God and man, and all-knowing. ‘For in Him are all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge, the hidden treasures’” [Col 2:3].

— St John of Damascus, An Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, Book III Chapter 21

© 2011, admin. All rights reserved.

John was called to the priesthood and ordained by Flavian, bishop of Antioch, early in the year 386.  So this is the date of his first discourse: he had not yet descended into the lists, as he himself puts it.  In this essay, his modesty shines no less than his eloquence: he frequently calls himself a little boy; although, as his birth dated back at least to the year 347, he was then about forty years old. This shows that the terms, childhood, old age, and the like, so often used by the speaker, provide no data when it comes to working out the dates of his life. This point we have already made and solidly proven in the famous discourse on his mother.

HOMILY.

St. John Chrysostom speaks of himself, the bishop and the people.

1.  Is what has happened to us true?  Is what strikes us reality? Are we not in  the grip of an illusion? Are these hallucinations of the night and of dreams, or the clear sight of day, and are we all awake at this hour? Who can persuade himself that in broad daylight, when men have all their intelligence and all their activity, a poor child, without any merit, is vested with such power and such an honor?

That this might happen in a dream is not a wonder: awkward people, men so poor they do not have even necessary food, they sometimes dream that they take on strength and beauty, that they are seated at a royal table, but this alas! is just an effect of sleep, a trick of the imagination; we know that dream is a skilled craftsman of errors and wonders; it likes to trick us, it delights in a world of strange phantoms. Daytime is another matter, and nothing similar takes place in the world of realities. It is impossible, nevertheless, to doubt  it: this is all too certain, everything is done, done, done before your eyes; the wonders of the dream are overwhelmed by the simple truth, and I see here now this great city, so many people, this astonishing multitude, who direct their eager eyes to my littleness, as if something remarkable and beautiful must come out of my mouth.

Well! even if my words could flow with the fullness and majesty of the great rivers, and I had in me the waves of eloquence, the sight of the crowd gathered to listen would stop them suddenly in there course and make them flow back to their source. And when we are so far from such an abundance, where our words can not even compare with the slightest rain, how could they not be withered by fear to some degree?

How is it that the same phenomenon does not happen in the soul as in the body? What can I say? Does it not often happen that we seem to be afraid of the things that we have before us and that we have a firm grasp of, as if our nerves were paralyzed and our powers destroyed. This is what I fear at the moment: the thoughts that I have gathered with much trouble, although they are basically irrelevant and worthless, I tremble to see them escape my memory, fade and vanish, leaving my soul in a vacuum. I beseech you all, you who command, and you whom I must obey, the agony in which you have thrown me by your willingness to come and hear me: change it, by your fervent prayers, into a holy boldness; inspire me with the strength by your representations to He who fills intrepid pioneers of truth with his word (Psalm., 67:12), to put His discourses on my lips. Ephes., vi, 19.

This will not be difficult for you, numerous as you are, and having so many merits to present to God, to strengthen a soul which is lacking experience and frozen with fear. In fact you will satisfy a duty of justice by fulfilling our wishes: for you and your charity, we will face up to the chances of a most violent and most tyrannical game, in addressing, despite our inability, the Ministry of the word, in coming to tread the burning arena of intellect, we who have never attempted this noble exercise, and always kept silent in the ranks of listeners.

What sort of man would be so cold, so insensitive as to remain silent in the face of such a meeting, even if he was not speaking to brothers whose sympathy is equal to their pious impatience, and if he was the most incompetent of men to speak in public? I promised myself, opening my mouth for the first time in church, to devote to God the first fruits of my word, this gift that comes to us from him. It must be so: if the first-fruits of the crops and the wine-press are owed to him, still more are those of the word: to him, thus, our first flowers! The more the fruits are blessed for us, the more they are acceptable to Him.

The grape and the ear of corn grow from of the bosom of the earth, nourished by the waters of heaven and the labors of man: the sacred hymn of devotion born of the soul is nourished by a pure conscience, and God receives it into the heavenly granaries. As the soul is superior to the earth, so the latter result outweighs the first. As one of the prophets, a man eminent and sublime, Hosea, speaking to sinners who wanted to appease the wrath of God, advised them to make an offering, not whole herds of cattle, nor abundant measures of wheat, nor a turtle-dove, or pigeon, or anything similar, finally, and what then? what does he say?

“Bring words with you.” Hos. xiv, 3.

— What kind of sacrifice is that? you may ask. — The greatest of all, O my beloved! the most beautiful, most perfect. Who says so? A man deeply versed in the science of religion, the famous, the magnanimous David. Rendering thanks to God one day for a victory he had won, he said:

“I will praise the name of my God through a song, and I will honour him by my praises.” Psalm., 68:31.

And to show the excellence of this sacrifice, he immediately adds:

“And this tribute will be more pleasing to God than the sacrifice of a young bull whose horns and nails have begun to grow.” Ibid., 32.

And I too wanted to sacrifice some victims on this day, to water the spiritual altar  with streams of mystical blood. But, alas! a wise man closes my mouth and stops me with these words:

“Praise loses its beauty on the lips of a sinner.” Eccli., xv, 9.

Although a garland may be priceless, it is not enough that the flowers are pure, pure also must be the hand that has woven it.  Likewise, although an anthem may be worthy of God, the devotion of the words must be united to the piety of the soul who offers them. And mine has no purity, no confidence, it is full of sins. Under these provisions, silence is not only commanded by this law, there is a still more ancient law that the prophet who spoke to us earlier of sacrifices gives:

“Praise the Lord in the heavens, praise him on the highest peaks;”

and further on:

“Praise the Lord upon the earth.” Psalm., 148:1 and 7.

In calling for the same purpose the two types of creatures, those of the upper world and those of the underworld, things visible and invisible, those who fall within our senses and those that are perceived by the intelligence, in forming a single choir of heaven and earth to celebrate the King of the universe, David does not accept the sinner, he obviously excludes him from this divine harmony.

2.  So that the truth is put in its true light, let us return to the main features of this psalm. Having said:

“Praise the Lord in the heavens, praise him on the highest peaks,”

the Psalmist continues:

“All you angels of the Lord, all ye Virtues of God, set forth his praises.”

You see the angels who praise the Creator, you see the archangels, you see the cherubim and seraphim, the supreme virtues. In this last word, all the people in heaven are included. Do you see the sinner? And let no one say: How could we see a sinner in heaven?  —Well, descend to earth, pass to another part of the choir, the sinner is no more visible:

“Praise the Lord, inhabitants of the earth, sea-monsters, and all who people the depths, beasts of the field, and cattle, reptiles, and birds that go through the air on your wings.”

It was not without reason that I stopped once more, in repeating these words: confusion reigned in my thoughts, I could not restrain my tears, and I was about to burst into tears. What could be conceived more appalling, tell me? The scorpions, reptiles and dragons are called by the Prophet to praise him who gave them life: the sinner alone is excluded from the sacred choir. And nothing is more just.  It is a perverse and cruel beast, sin; it works its malice, not on the body, its slave, but even on the glory of God,

“Because of you, says the Lord, my name is blasphemed among the nations.” Isa., 52:5.

That is why the Prophet banishes the sinner from the concert of creatures, like a bad citizen is exiled from his homeland. A skilled musician removes from his lute a string that makes inharmonic sounds, so that it does not destroy the effect of the instrument; a doctor versed in his art does not hesitate to cut off a gangrenous limb, lest the evil is communicated to the healthy part of the body:  the Prophet does the same, and makes dissent and decay disappear from the universe.

What conduct should we adopt? Expelled, cut off as we are, we should, it seems, condemn ourselves to silence. So we should not mention ourselves, I ask? Is it not permissible to celebrate the Lord by our hymns? Have we have in vain solicited the help of your prayers, called for the protection of your charity? I think not: I perceive, I have adopted another way to glorify God. Your prayers illuminate my perplexity like lightning in the darkness: I will praise those who serve the same God as myself. Yes, I can praise them, and these praises, directed to servants, turn to the honor of our common Master. It is impossible to doubt it, because the Saviour said:

“Let your light shine before men, so that they shall see your good works and glorify your Father who is in heaven.” Matt., 5:16.

See then another kind of glorification which the sinner himself can use without violating the law.

3. But which of the servants of our God may we praise? And who else but our spiritual father, the minister of the Gospel charged with instructing the our land, and through our land the world? From him you have learned how to remain faithful to the truth unto death, and under his inspiration, you have taught the rest of mankind to give up life rather than piety. Would you like us to braid a garland for him, after that?

This also was my desire, but I have before me a vast ocean of merits, and I fear that my feeble voice, once engaged in these depths, would no longer be able to return to the surface. It is necessary here to talk of brilliant deeds that are already long ago, of perilous journeys and long vigils, of dedicated care and judgments full of wisdom, of noble battles, victories added to victories, trophies to trophies: all things which are beyond the power not only of my tongue, but of human language, and which, to be celebrated with dignity, demand the voice and zeal of an apostle able to say and teach everything. But we will leave this difficult subject to deal with another that presents fewer dangers, a sea in which a small boat can venture.

Let us talk simply of the austerity of his manners, his rigid temperance, his utter contempt for material well-being, the admirable simplicity of his table, and do not forget the grandeur and luxury that surrounded him in childhood. It is no wonder, indeed, that a man brought up in poverty as a practical way of life, is resigned to such harsh deprivation.  Poverty itself, the constant companion of his pilgrimage, makes every day the burden lighter. But anyone who has been master of much wealth does not readily disengage himself from it, such is the swarm of many passions that have enveloped his soul.  On the eyes of his intelligence weighs a cloud so thick of disordered appetite, that he can no longer see the heavens, that constantly he has his head and heart inclined towards the earth. Nothing blocks our rise towards heaven like riches and the evils of which they are the source.

It is not I who say this. Christ himself pronounced this sentence:

“A camel will pass more easily through the eye of a needle than a rich man will enter the kingdom of heaven.”  Matt., 19:24.

However a thing so difficult, or rather, impossible, offers only more difficulty. What Peter doubted in the presence of his Master, the problem that demanded a solution, we have now amply witnessed by experience. Not only do the rich go into heaven, but he has also led in an entire people.  And that, despite his wealth and other obstacles that are not inferior to that one: youth, a premature independence as a result the death of his parents, things are so full of charms and so fruitful in poisons. Our father has triumphed over all, he has somehow taken possession of heaven, embracing the heavenly philosophy.

No, he did not allow himself to be seduced by the splendor of this life, he has not turned his eyes to the glory of his ancestors. I am wrong, however; the glory of his ancestors, he has always had present to his mind. Not those to whom nature had united him by ties beyond his control, but those he himself chose in religion, and it is these that he has followed in his life.

He considered the patriarch Abraham, and the great Moses who, although high in the royal palace, accustomed from childhood to lavish meals, having lived among the parties of the Egyptians —  and you know what were the manners of those barbarians, to what degree they heaped up pomp and pride —  repulsed all these benefits to go knead clay, aspiring to become a slave, himself the son of his king and already sharing in the honors of the throne. Soon he reappeared, invested with a higher power than that of which he had deprived. After the exile, the servitude with his stepfather, the weariness of distance, he was on his return made the master, or rather the god of the king himself.

“I have made you the god of Pharaoh.” Exod., vii, 1.

Without wearing the diadem, without wearing purple, or driving in a chariot of gold, trampling all this regal pomp underfoot, he eclipsed the splendors of royalty,

“All the glory of the daughter of the king came from within.” Psalm. 45:14.

We saw him scepter in hand, for he commanded, not only men, but also heaven, earth, sea, the very essence of air and water, lakes, springs, and rivers. The elements were transformed at Moses’ command, nature obeyed his will, and it seemed a docile servant, eager, who, seeing the friend of its master, shows him its submission and renders him the duty that would be obtained by the master himself. This is the model on which he whom we are praising formed himself.

He imitated it from his youth, if ever he was young. Myself, I do not think so, since the maturity of his intellect dates even from the cradle. Still young in the number of years, he embraced all the teachings of the divine philosophy.  Scarcely had he understood that human nature is like a wild and uncultivated soil than he set vigorously to work, he cut short all the diseases of the soul.  The word of piety for him was like a sickle to cut off all weeds, and his soul was just like pure earth ready to receive the divine seed; this seed, he buried deeply, so that it was neither withered by the rays of the sun, nor suffocated by the thorns.

This is how he has treated his soul. As for the flesh, he has checked its leanings by the remedies of temperance; seeing it as an impetuous horse, he pull on the reins by fasting, not afraid to bloody the mouth of the passions in order to master them and lead them to his goal. All the same he did so with a wise moderation, and was careful not to exhaust the body, lest, after having ruined the powers of the horse, he rendered it unserviceable.  But he kept it no less from getting overweight and exuberant, so that it would not rise against reason, when responsible for his conduct; he did not want it either weak or recalcitrant.

As he was in youth, so he showed himself later; and now that his age protects him against the storms of life, his vigilance is still the same.

Youth, indeed, is like a sea of angry waves, constantly agitated by the winds, while old age is a quiet haven in which happy sailors whose courage has merited this noble repose enjoy profound security. Although, as I said, quietly sitting in the harbor, he watches with equal care. And this holy terror he received from Paul, who was transported into heaven, and on touching the earth again, exclaimed:

“I fear that after having preached the Gospel to others, I myself may be reproved.”  I Cor. 9:27.

Thus he keeps himself in perpetual fear, so as to be in perpetual security. He is always there at the helm, constantly observing, not the movement of the stars nor the rocks hidden beneath the waves, nor the dangers that threaten the ship, but the attacks of demons and the wiles of the devil, the struggles of the spirit and the tempests of the heart, looking out at all his army in order to make it invincible. It is not enough for him that the ship does not sink. He has left nothing undone so sedition or pirates cannot seize any of his traveling companions. Thanks to his care, thanks to his prudence, we pursue in peace the course of our voyage, setting out all our sails in the wind.

4. Certainly when we had lost the father that we had before, and who had formed himself for us, our state seemed deplorable to us, and we gave out inconsolable wailing, hoping that this throne would be occupied by a man like him, but as soon as his successor appeared among us, all this sadness vanished, our troubles vanished like clouds under the sun, and that not in a slow and gradual way, but with as much rapidity as if the blessed pontiff, rousing in the tomb, was back on his throne. What am I doing, though, what imprudence is mine? In my love for our father, in my admiration for his virtues, I have let myself be dragged beyond the limits, not of my subject, but those limits imposed on me by my youth; because I do not think that I have spoken an eulogy when I consider the merits which need celebration.

No matter; let us bring our boat back into the port and confine ourselves to a respectful silence. It is not without regret, however, that my speech will stop. I long to take it further, and I feel a bitter pain to leave it incomplete. Children, it is impossible to appease our hunger.  Let us cease to pursue what we never reach, and let us content ourselves with what we have said. When we have in our hands a rare and precious perfume, it is not just pouring it in the bowl, it’s by dipping your fingertips in it that you change the air around you and anoint those present. This is what is happening to us right now, not by the powers of our eloquence, but the living emanations of his virtues.

Enough. Let us turn to prayer. Let us ask God that our common mother remains unshaken and unsullied, and that we shall long have this father, this pastor, this master, this pilot. I dare not speak to you about myself.  I can hardly count myself among the priests, an abortion should not be counted among the children on whom nature has lavished all his gifts. But if you deign to remember me, as we remembers a miserable and wretched being, pray that a superabundant power comes on me from on high. I needed protection while I was living for myself, free from all other cares, and now I am obliged to appear in the church — is it by the favor of man, is it by the will of God?

I have not said it to him, I should not discuss this matter before you, lest I be accused of hiding my thoughts — now that I belong to the people, and I submit, never more to shake off this heavy yoke, the more I need you all to extend a helping hand to me, that all pray for me so that I may restore intact to the Divine Master the deposit that he gave me. On that day each custodian will appear before the Supreme Court and give an account of his administration.

Yes, pray that I do not experience the fate of those who were loaded with chains and plunged into the outer darkness, that I am counted with those to whom will be shown mercy by the grace and love of Jesus Christ Our Lord, to whom glory, empire, and adoration belongs, for the ages of ages.  Amen.

Source

© 2011, Fr. John A. Peck. All rights reserved.

But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. The other disciples therefore said unto him,

“We have seen the Lord.” But he said, “Except I shall see in His hands — I will not believe.”

1. As to believe carelessly and in a random way, comes of an over-easy temper; so to be beyond measure curious and meddlesome, marks a most gross understanding. On this account Thomas is held to blame. For he believed not the Apostles when they said,

“We have seen the Lord”;

not so much mistrusting them, as deeming the thing to be impossible, that is to say, the resurrection from the dead. Since he says not, “I do not believe you,” but,

“Except I put my hand— I do not believe.”

But how was it, that when all were collected together, he alone was absent? Probably after the dispersion which had lately taken place, he had not returned even then. But do thou, when you see the unbelief of the disciple, consider the lovingkindness of the Lord, how for the sake of a single soul He showed Himself with His wounds, and comes in order to save even the one, though he was grosser than the rest; on which account indeed he sought proof from the grossest of the senses, and would not even trust his eyes. For he said not,

“Except I see,” but, “Except I handle,” he says,

lest what he saw might somehow be an apparition. Yet the disciples who told him these things, were at the time worthy of credit, and so was He that promised; yet, since he desired more, Christ did not deprive him even of this.

And why does He not appear to him straightway, instead of

“after eight days”? [John 20:26]

In order that being in the mean time continually instructed by the disciples, and hearing the same thing, he might be inflamed to more eager desire, and be more ready to believe for the future. But whence knew he that His side had been opened? From having heard it from the disciples. How then did he believe partly, and partly not believe? Because this thing was very strange and wonderful. But observe, I pray you, the truthfulness of the disciples, how they hide no faults, either their own or others’, but record them with great veracity.

Jesus again presents himself to them, and waits not to be requested by Thomas, nor to hear any such thing, but before he had spoken, Himself prevented him, and fulfilled his desire; showing that even when he spoke those words to the disciples, He was present. For He used the same words, and in a manner conveying a sharp rebuke, and instruction for the future. For having said,

“Reach hither your finger, and behold My hands; and reach hither your hand, and thrust it into My side”; He added, “And be not faithless, but believing.”

Do you see that his doubt proceeded from unbelief? But it was before he had received the Spirit; after that, it was no longer so, but, for the future, they were perfected.

And not in this way only did Jesus rebuke him, but also by what follows; for when he, being fully satisfied, breathed again, and cried aloud,

“My Lord, and my God.” He says, “Because you have seen Me, you have believed; blessed are they who have not seen, and yet have believed.”

For this is of faith, to receive things not seen; since,

“ Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” [Hebrews 11:1]

And here He pronounces blessed not the disciples only, but those also who after them should believe. “Yet,” says some one, “the disciples saw and believed.” Yes, but they sought nothing of the kind, but from the proof of the napkins, they straightway received the word concerning the Resurrection, and before they saw the body, exhibited all faith. When therefore any one in the present day say, “I would that I had lived in those times, and had seen Christ working miracles,” let them reflect, that,

“Blessed are they who have not seen, and yet have believed.”

It is worth enquiring, how an incorruptible body showed the prints of the nails, and was tangible by a mortal hand. But be not thou disturbed; what took place was a matter of condescension. For that which was so subtle and light as to enter in when the doors were shut, was free from all density ; but this marvel was shown, that the Resurrection might be believed, and that men might know that it was the Crucified One Himself, and that another rose not in His stead. On this account He arose bearing the signs of the Cross, and on this account He eats. At least the Apostles everywhere made this a sign of the Resurrection, saying,

“We, who ate and drank with Him.” [Acts 10:41]

As therefore when we see Him walking on the waves before the Crucifixion, we do not say, that that body is of a different nature, but of our own; so after the Resurrection, when we see Him with the prints of the nails, we will no more say, that he is therefore corruptible. For He exhibited these appearances on account of the disciple.

Source

© 2011, admin. All rights reserved.

This is perhaps the greatest sermon ever written. It is read in every Orthodox Church in the world, every year at the Paschal Vigil, during the Matins of Pascha. St. John was the Archbishop of Constantinople during the fourth century. He was fearless when denouncing sin in high places, and was a prolific writer, and bold preacher, unafraid to hit the topical issues of the day squarely between the eyes with all the subtlety of a ball peen hammer.  His last words were “Glory to God for all things!”

If any man be devout and love God, let him enjoy this fair and radiant triumphal feast. If any man be a wise servant, let him rejoicing enter into the joy of his Lord. If any have labored long in fasting, let him now receive his recompense.

If any have wrought from the first hour, let him today receive his just reward. If any have come at the third hour, let him with thankfulness keep the feast.

If any have arrived at the sixth hour, let him have no misgivings; because he shall in nowise be deprived therefor.

If any have delayed until the ninth hour, let him draw near, fearing nothing.

If any have tarried even until the eleventh hour, let him, also, be not alarmed at his tardiness; for the Lord, who is jealous of his honor, will accept the last even as the first; he gives rest unto him who comes at the eleventh hour, even as unto him who has wrought from the first hour.

And he shows mercy upon the last, and cares for the first; and to the one he gives, and upon the other he bestows gifts. And he both accepts the deeds, and welcomes the intention, and honors the acts and praises the offering. Wherefore, enter you all into the joy of your Lord; and receive your reward, both the first, and likewise the second.

You rich and poor together, hold high festival.

You sober and you heedless, honor the day.

Rejoice today, both you who have fasted and you who have disregarded the fast. The table is full-laden; feast ye all sumptuously. The calf is fatted; let no one go hungry away. Enjoy ye all the feast of faith: Receive ye all the riches of loving-kindness.

Let no one bewail his poverty, for the universal kingdom has been revealed.

Let no one weep for his iniquities, for pardon has shown forth from the grave.

Let no one fear death, for the Savior’s death has set us free. He that was held prisoner of it has annihilated it. By descending into Hell, He made Hell captive.

He embittered it when it tasted of His flesh. And Isaiah, foretelling this, did cry:

Hell, said he, was embittered, when it encountered Thee in the lower regions.

It was embittered, for it was abolished.

It was embittered, for it was mocked.

It was embittered, for it was slain.

It was embittered, for it was overthrown.

It was embittered, for it was fettered in chains.

It took a body, and met God face to face. It took earth, and encountered Heaven. It took that which was seen, and fell upon the unseen.

O Death, where is your sting? O Hell, where is your victory?

Christ is risen, and you are overthrown.

Christ is risen, and the demons are fallen.

Christ is risen, and the angels rejoice.

Christ is risen, and life reigns.

Christ is risen, and not one dead remains in the grave.

For Christ, being risen from the dead, is become the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep. To Him be glory and dominion unto ages of ages. Amen.

© 2011, Fr. John A. Peck. All rights reserved.

How does one prove that Christ is God? We should not try to answer this question by using the argument of the creation of heaven and earth, because the unbeliever will not accept it. If we tell him that He raised the dead, healed the blind, expelled demons, he still will not agree. If we tell him that He promised us resurrection from the dead, the kingdom of heaven, and ineffable goods, not only he will not agree, but also he will laugh at us.

How then shall we lead him to the faith, especially when he is not spiritually developed? Surely, we shall do this by resting on truths which are acceptable both to us and to him without any dispute or shadow of doubt.

We shall start from the fact that Christ planted the Church in the world. What is the point then that we absolutely agree upon? It is the fact that Christ planted the Church. It is by this means that we shall reveal the power and prove the divinity of Christ. We shall see that it is impossible to regard the dissemination of Christianity in the whole wide world in such a short period of time as a human work. And indeed, when Christian ethics invites people who have bad habits and are slaves to sin to a higher life. And yet, the Lord managed to liberate from such things not only us, but the entire human species.

Christ’s superbly wondrous achievement is the Church. He achieved this without using arms, without spending money, without mobilizing armies, without causing wars. He achieved it by starting only with twelve disciples, who were insignificant, uneducated, poor, naked, unarmed… It was with such human resource that He succeeded in persuading the nations to think correctly, not only in the present life, but also in the life which is to come. He managed to nullify the ancestral laws, to uproot ancient customs, and to plant new ones. He managed to detach man from an easy way of life and to lead him to a difficult one. He managed all these things, although all fought against Him, and He had to endure a degrading crucifixion and an ignominious death!

This superbly wondrous achievement is not human. Surely, such things do not occur to human beings. What occurs is the exact opposite. In other words, as long as they are alive and prosper their work progresses. When, however, they die, what they created is destroyed along with them. This is endured not only by the rich or the leading ones, but also by the chief governors. This is so, because their laws are abolished, their memory is obliterated, and their names are forgotten, while their intimate associates are pushed aside. These things occur to those who originally governed the nations by a mere nod, and led to war grand armies; to those who condemned to death and recalled the exiled. To the Lord, however, it was the exact opposite that occurred.

It is superbly wondrous because it was achieved by the Crucified Christ. Before the crucifixion the state of his work looked pitiful. Judas betrayed Him. Peter denied Him. The rest of the Disciples fled in order to save their lives, while many believers abandoned Him. He was left alone among enemies. And yet, after the slaughter and the death, so that you may learn that the Crucified Christ was not a mere man, all things became brighter, jollier, and glorious. Peter, the head Apostle, who before the crucifixion did not bear the threat of a maidservant, but after so many heavenly teachings and his participation in the divine mysteries said that he does not know the Lord, the same one after the crucifixion preached Him to the ends of the world. Innumerable martyrs were sacrificed, because they preferred to be put to death than to deny Christ, as the head Apostle had denied Him after being intimidated by a young maiden.

The amazing submission of the world to the Crucified Christ and His Apostles: Now, all the lands, all the cities, the deserted and the inhabited places, confess the Crucified Lord. On Him faith is placed by kings and generals, archons and consuls, slaves and freemen, unlettered and educated, the barbarians and the various nations of humanity. Even that small and insignificant tomb that received the blood stained and tortured body of the Lord is more valued than a thousand royal palaces and more venerable even to kings. What is even a greater paradox is the fact that what happened to the Lord also happened to His disciples. Because, those who were despised and imprisoned, those who were atrociously tortured and underwent innumerable martyrdoms, the very same ones, after their death, were more honored than the kings. Where do we see this? In Rome, the emperors, the consuls and the generals put aside all things and run to venerate the tombs of Peter the fisherman and Paul the tent maker. In Constantinople, those who bear diadems on their heads, wish to be buried next not close to the tombs of the Apostles but at the entrance of their temples. And so the kings become the doormen of the fishermen! Indeed, they are not ashamed for this, but boast about it, not only themselves but also their descendants.

Christ’s prophesy about the Church and its speedy fulfillment. When Christ’s disciples were only twelve and the Church was not in any one’s thought, when the Jewish synagogue was still flourishing and the impious idolatry dominated almost the entire world, the Lord had prophesied:

“On this stone (i.e. on Peter’s confession of faith) I will build my Church, and the powers of Hades will not prevail against it” (Matthew 16:18).

Do you realize the truth of this prophesy? Do you see its fulfillment? Think how important a fact is the spreading of the Church almost to the entire earth in a very brief span of time. Think how the life of so many nations changed and led to the faith so many peoples, how it abolished ancestral customs, how it liberated from age-long habits, how it scattered like dust the domination of pleasure and the power of sin, how it extinguished like smoke the foul smell of the sacrifices, the idolatrous ceremonies, the abominable feasts, the idols, the pagan altars and temples, how it erected sacred altars everywhere, in our land and in the lands of the Persians, the Scythians, the Africans and the Indians. What I say? Even in the British Isles, which are beyond the Mediterranean, in the ocean, the Church was spread and erected altars.

The superbly wondrous liberation and change that the Church induced in the world: The work of liberation of so many peoples from age-long shameful habits, as well as the change in the manner of life from an easier to a more difficult one, is indeed wondrous, or rather superbly wondrous. It is a proof of divine operation (energy), even if no one had opposed it, even if peace had prevailed and many had assisted. Because this spreading of the Church did not only come into collision with ancient habit, but also with pleasure, the happy manner of life. In other words, it had two powerful opponents, which tyrannized humanity: habit and pleasure. Whatsoever people had received, from centuries ago, from their fathers, their grandfathers and their ancient ancestors, even what they had received from the philosophers and the rhetoricians, all these things they agreed to despise, an attitude extremely difficult. Besides, they had to accept a new manner of life, which was indeed much more difficult; because she removed them from luxury and attached them to fasting. She removed them from avarice and led them to lack of property. She removed them from profanity and led them to chastity. She removed them from aggressiveness and led them to gentleness. She removed them from envy and led them to friendship. She removed them from an easygoing and pleasurable life and led them to a life of difficulties, hardships, and full of sorrows. Indeed she led to this life those who had been accustomed to the life of luxuries. Surely, those who became Christians were not people who lived in some other worlds and did not have sinful habits, but were those who had rotted in them and had become more flexible than clay. It was them that she called to follow the hard and ragged road. And it persuaded them to follow it!

The superbly wondrous work of the Twelve Apostles in the spreading of the Church. How many were persuaded? Not two, not ten, not twenty, not a hundred, but an innumerable crowd. And how many did she use to persuade them? She used two men, uneducated, uncultured, unknown, poor, without property, without bodily strength, without glory, without illustrious ancestry, without rhetorical eloquence. She used twelve men who were fishermen, tent makers, whose mother tongue was foreign; because, they did not speak the same tongue with the idolaters.

They spoke Hebrew, which was different from all other languages. It was with them that the Church was built up and spread to the ends of the world. This is not the only wondrous fact, but there is also the fact that these few, these poor, these uneducated and despised men, who set out to change humanity, did not pursue their work without disturbance. They were confronted with innumerable wars from every side.

They were opposed by every nation and in every city. But why do I speak of nations and cities? War was raised against them even on every house. Their teaching separated on many occasions the child from the father, the daughter in law from the mother in law, the brother from the brother, the servant from the master, the citizen from the ruler, the man from the woman, and the woman from the man. In every family not all believed simultaneously,, and so the Christians suffered daily harassments, ceaseless enmities, a myriad of deaths. All fought them as common opponents and enemies.

They were pursued by kings, governors, citizens, freemen, slaves, crowds, cities. They did not pursue only them, but –how terrible– even the neophyte catechumens, i.e. those who just believed

The victory of the Apostles and the Church is due to the power of the Crucified but also Risen Lord. It caused horror and wrath to the idolaters the thought of abandoning their pagan altars, of despising their bloody sacrifices, which all their fathers and ancestors practiced, and of believing in the Lord; of believing in Him who took flesh from the Virgin Mary, and stood trial before Pilate, and suffered numberless tribulations and degradations, underwent a dishonorable death, was buried and rose again. It is indeed a paradox, that, while the sufferings of the Lord were indisputable, -inasmuch as many had seen the lashings, the biting, the spitting, the slapping, the cross, the mocking, the entombment– it was not the same with the resurrection. The Lord, after his resurrection, manifested Himself only to the disciples. In spite of this fact, they spoke about the resurrection and persuaded the peoples and built up the Church. How did they do it? They did it with the power of the Lord, who sent them to preach his Gospel to the nations. It was He who opened to them the way. It was He who facilitated their difficult task. Had they not been assisted by the divine power, the spreading of Christianity would not have even begun.

The persecutions against the Church did not inhibit its expansion. The reason was that while the tyrants were forearmed against the Church, while the soldiers interposed their arms, while the mobs raged like a wild fire, while the bad habit was lined up in opposition, while orators, sophists, the rich people, ordinary citizens and leaders were aroused in enmity, the word of God, being stronger than the flame, turned the thistles into ashes, cleansed the fields and sowed the word of the preaching. Some of the believers were thrown into the prisons, others were exiled, others had their property confiscated, others were assassinated, and others were torn to pieces. In spite of the fact that Christians were treated as common criminals, suffering patiently every kind of punishment, humiliation and persecution, more and more people joined the Church. Indeed, the new believers not only were not discouraged by the tortures which they saw the older believers undergoing, but became more eager!

They run by themselves, without constraint, showing gratitude to their torturers. They became more fervent in the faith, seeing the torrents of the blood of the believers.

The expansion of the Church in spite of the persecutions proves the incomparable and unconquerable power of Christ. Did you see the incomparable power of Him who achieved all these wonders? How is it possible that people who are undergoing such horrid martyrdoms feel no sorrow? And yet, they rejoiced, and were elated! This is what St. Luke the Evangelist adduces as an example, when he says about the Apostles that

“they left from the council rejoicing, because they were proved worthy to be ill-treated for the shake of Christ” (Acts 5:41).

While no one can build even a wall with stones and plaster when is persecuted, the Apostles built up the Church throughout the world while sufferings persecutions, imprisonments, exiles and deaths as martyrs. They did not build her up with stones, but with souls –which is much more difficult; since it is not the same to build a wall as to persuade perverted souls to change their manner of life, to abandon their demonic madness and to follow the life of virtue. They achieved this, because they had with them the unconquerable power of the Lord, who had prophesied;

“I will build up my Church, and the powers of Hell will not prevail against her” (Matthew 16:18).

Consider how many tyrants fought the Church and how many persecutions they raised against it… Augustus, Tiberius, Gaius, Nero, Vespasian, Titus and their successors right down to Constantine, were all idolaters. All of them –some more moderately, and some more harshly– fought the Church. Even if some of them did not raise persecutions, nevertheless, their attachment to idolatry motivated those who wanted to flatter them to oppose the Church. In spite of all this, the evil schemes and attacks of the idolaters were dissolved as cobwebs, scattered like dust, vanished like smoke. Besides, what were planned against the Church became the occasion of great benefits for the Christians. The reason was that such plans created choruses of martyrs, who constitute the treasure, the pillars, and towers of the Church.

The wondrous fulfillment of what Christ prophesied about the Church reveals most clearly his true Godhead. Do you see the wondrous fulfillment of this prophesy? Indeed,

“the powers of Hell cannot prevail against her.”

Looking at what came to pass, believe what is to come. No one in the future will be able to prevail against the Church. If they did not manage to crush her when she numbered but a few members, when her teaching seemed novel and strange, when so many terrible wars and so many persecutions were raised against her from everywhere, much more they will not manage to injure her today, when she has spread in the whole world, and increased her dominion among all nations, abolishing their pagan altars and idols, their festivals and celebrations, the smoke and the smell of their abominable sacrifices. How did the Apostles achieve such a great, such an important task, after so many obstacles? Surely, it was by the divine and unconquerable power of Him, who prophesied about the creation and triumph of His Church.

No one can deny this, unless he is mindless and completely unable to think.

Source

© 2011, admin. All rights reserved.

© 2011, admin. All rights reserved.

This sermon was apparently given at St. Vladimir Seminary sometime in the recent past, and is an excellent homily on why the three are commemorated, and their importance to the Church, students, and the clergy.

Dear brothers and sisters in Christ!

There is much in common among the three hierarchs and great ecumenical teachers whom we commemorate today: Saints Basil the Great, Gregory the Theologian and John Chrysostom. All three lived in a time when the Christian Church, after almost three centuries of persecution, received freedom and was flourishing throughout the Byzantine ‘oikoumene‘. All the three were involved in contesting contemporary heresies, of which the most dangerous was Arianism, which rejected the Divinity of Jesus Christ. All the three combined serving the Church in episcopal rank with literary activity, and it is precisely their literary legacy which secured for them the paramount place that they occupy in Christian Tradition. All the three were victims of ecclesiastical intrigues, and suffered – in one way or another – from their fellow bishops: in fact, two of the three (Gregory and John) were deposed and died in exile. Their posthumous glory, however, exceeded any expectations their contemporaries might have had, and their significance for the entire Christian Church in East and West cannot be overestimated.

A particular common characteristic of the three holy hierarchs was their love for scholarship and learning. Gathered as we are today, in this place of Christian learning, in this chapel of which they are the holy patrons, it seems appropriate to remind ourselves of some features of their attitude toward scholarship. In what follows I will focus mostly on St Gregory the Theologian’s teaching on this subject.

Gregory was educated in the Academy of Athens, where he extensively studied Greek literature, poetry and philosophy. Apart from Greek authors, he also read the Christian Scriptures, as well as the writings of Origen, from whom he may have inherited the high respect for ancient Greek scholarship. Gregory’s closest friends, Basil the Great and Gregory of Nyssa, contributed considerably to the development of Greek scholarship on Christian soil. St Basil wrote a famous ‘Exhortation to Youths as to How They shall Best Profit by the Writings of Pagan Authors‘, where he recommends Christian youth to use the works by ancient Greek writers, poets and philosophers for educational purposes. The same approach is exhibited by Gregory of Nyssa, who allegorically interpreted the ‘jewellery of silver and of gold’, stolen by the Jews on their departure from Egypt (Ex. 12:35-6), to be the wealth of pagan learning which Christians must borrow from the Greeks. He said that this wealth included ‘natural philosophy, geometry, astronomy, dialectic, and whatever else is sought by those outside the Church’.

The fourth-century Fathers realized that they were living at a time when the scholarly and intellectual wealth inherited from ancient Greek culture needed to be appropriated by the Christian Church. While insisting on the superiority of Christian learning over Hellenistic wisdom, they at the same time thought it necessary for Christians to accumulate everything positive that had been amassed by human civilisation outside Christianity.

In accordance with these views Gregory the Theologian promoted the idea that heathen culture and Hellenistic education do not belong to the pagans: though pagan in origin, they belong to the Christians as long as Christians are able to receive them. Not only Greek scholarship, but also world civilisation in general belongs to the Christian Church, Gregory claimed. Together with Origen and Gregory of Nyssa he was convinced that the jewellery of Egypt, which symbolizes pagan learning, must not be left by the New Israel (Christians) in the hands of Egyptians (pagans).

We may note that early Christian literature at times saw human civilisation, art and culture, as being demonic in their provenance, since they result from the fall. John Chrysostom himself wrote that ‘cities, arts, clothes and many other things… were introduced by death’. In the ‘Macarian Homilies’ we read that wise men, philosophers, writers, poets, artists, sculptors, architects and archaeologists were ‘prisoners and slaves of the evil power’ and worked under the influence of the devil.

Yet many church writers pointed to the positive aspects of human civilisation and culture. Gregory the Theologian was one of them. He argued that no nation, religion, or philosophical school can monopolise culture, science and art, because these belong to the whole of humanity. For Gregory, it is God himself who is the true creator of human civilisation, and the artists are instruments in God’s hands: ‘Language belongs not to those who invented it but rather to all who use it, and so also art and every occupation which you can imagine. In music, each string has its own sound, high or low – so also in these arts the Divine Word, Artist and Creator, appointed various inventors of various occupations and arts, giving everything to those who desire to use it, in order to unite us by the bonds of common life and friendship, and to make our life more civilised’.

Gregory the Theologian respected everything which demonstrates the power of human reason, be it humanitarian and natural sciences, rhetoric, literature, poetry, music or other arts, even the art of circus trainers, about which he spoke with great admiration. Gregory’s ideal is a man of reason, of high intellectual culture, of great erudition, who combines the true faith with knowledge in various fields and with an open attitude to the world. It is reason that makes humans alike to the divine Logos. Many of Gregory’s poetic works contain praises of reason, education, and scholarship.

‘Consider reason as the lamp of your whole life’, he says.

‘Do not think that there is anything better than education’, he writes elsewhere.

At the same time Gregory underlines that education should not be considered as an aim in itself: it is necessary in order to bring one to the knowledge of God and to contribute to one’s progress in faith. One has to study in youth in order to offer the fruits of one’s learning to the divine Spirit when one reaches maturity. This was Gregory’s own aspiration from his early years. In the twilight of his life he wrote:

‘One glory was pleasing to me, to progress in literary sciences, which are collected by East and West, and by Athens, the glory of Greece. In them I toiled much for a long time. But even these I placed before Christ, having prostrated myself, in order that they should give room to the Word of great God, which eclipses any changeable and diverse invention of the human mind’.

Thus, secular letters and the fullness of non-Christian culture withdraw into shadow when a person encounters Christ. Compared with the Divine Word, every human word is nothing but myth, tale and invention. Yet the studies of Greek philosophy, mythology, poetry and other humanitarian and natural sciences are necessary in order to bring them to Christ’s feet.

Gregory the Theologian had before his eyes many living examples of true Christian scholarship. One of them was Basil the Great, his friend and classmate, of whose erudition and learning he spoke with admiration. Praising Basil’s knowledge of rhetoric, grammar, history, poetry, philosophy, astronomy, geometry, mathematics and medicine, Gregory exclaims:

‘He was a ship loaded with scholarship insofar as human nature can possibly accumulate’.

Remembering their days in the Academy of Athens, Gregory writes with nostalgia:

‘Two ways were familiar to us: the first and more precious leading us to our sacred buildings and the masters there; the second. to our secular teachers. All else-festivals, spectacles, assemblies, and banquets-we left to those with a taste for such things. Our great concern. was to be Christians and be called Christians’.

Being a defender of the Greek paideia, Gregory the Theologian was a strong opponent to any kind of ignorance and obscurantism. Resistance to learning, contempt for education and unwillingness to accumulate the richness of human culture are, according to Gregory, incompatible with Christianity. The understanding of Christianity as a semi-catacomb sect which encloses itself by thick walls of suspicion and prejudice, opposed to the outside world, is alien to Gregory. On the contrary, Christianity must be open and all-embracing enough to be able to contain within itself the achievements of human reason.

In our days there are people who say:

‘It is not necessary for a Christian to study much: the important thing is to observe the rules of the Church’. Some even claim that great learning is an obstacle to salvation and refer to the ‘ancient times’, when ‘there were bishops and priests who could neither read nor write, who were not versed in sciences, and still achieved genuine holiness’.

To this we must first of all reply that there were nevertheless other bishops and priests who could not only read and write, but who were among the most brilliantly educated people of their times: Basil the Great, Gregory the Theologian and John Chrysostom, together with many other great hierarchs and teachers, belonged to this group.

Secondly, even those bishops and priests of Christian antiquity who did not know how to read or write were not necessarily uneducated: many of them studied sciences orally (which was quite widespread in those days).

Thirdly, we are no longer in the fourth, the fourteenth or even the nineteenth century; we have entered the twenty-first century, where it is very unlikely that there will be any place for ignorant and half-educated clergy. Priests and lay leaders seeking to build the Church in our times, to defend it from the attacks of enemies both internal and external, must themselves be educated. Priests wishing not only to save themselves, but others as well (which is precisely the essence of priesthood), not only the ignorant and the illiterate, but also the intelligent and the educated – such priests must themselves be educated.

Our time, dear brothers and sisters, is not less challenging for the Church than the time of the fourth century, and the mission which is set before us is in no way less important than one carried out by the great hierarchs and teachers of the past. In order to face the challenges of modernity we – I now mean especially the pastors and future pastors of the Church gathered here – must be highly educated.

Dear students! Use the time which is given to you to acquire as much knowledge in different fields of scholarship as possible in order to be able to put it to Christ’s feet, when the time comes. Follow the example of the great hierarchs of the past, whose worldly erudition did not prevent them from but, on the contrary, assisted them in becoming true pillars of the Church. Follow also the example of the teachers of our times, such as Fr Alexander Schmemann and Fr John Meyendorff, whose legacy is preserved by this Seminary and who combined total dedication to serving the Church with great erudition and scholarship.

May this school be for you a true place of learning, a new Academy of Athens, in which you will know only two ways: the way to the church and the way to your teachers. May you become ‘ships loaded by scholarship’ insofar as your human capacity allows. And may the prayer of the three great hierarchs, whose memory we keep today, assist you in your studies and in your spiritual life. Amen.

Source

© 2011, admin. All rights reserved.

A lecture delivered by Fr John Behr, Dean of St Vladimir’s Theological Seminary, at the parish of St John Chrysostom Orthodox Church, House Springs, Missouri, September 29, 2007,  on the occasion of the 1600th Anniversary of St John’s repose.

In his oration of thanks to his teacher, St Gregory the Wonderworker commented:

For a mighty and energetic thing is the discourse of man, and subtle with its sophisms, and quick to find its way into the ears and mould the mind, and impress us with what it conveys; and when once it has taken possession of us, it can win us over to love it as truth; and it holds its place within us even though it be false and deceitful, overmastering us like some enchanter and retaining as its champion the very man it has persuaded (deluded).

All three—Sts Basil, Gregory and John—were highly trained rhetoricians/orators, praised even by the great pagan orators such as Libanius, and they put this talent to the service of the Christian faith. Yet among these three, it is St John who has been given the title “Chrysostom”—the golden mouthed. He is known not so much for his involvement in the dogmatic disputes of his day (though he does have important things to say), but precisely for his oratory—his preaching.

Chrysostom on Priesthood

In his work on the Priesthood, St John does occasionally speak in very high terms of the priest as the liturgical officiant, but his main concern is with the priestly ministry more generally, following the example of Christ, who came to serve rather than be served. As he puts it, while the priesthood is ranked among the heavenly ordinances, it is nevertheless is enacted on earth. And the tasks of the priest are numerous: he was the teacher and moral guide of the community; he was the liturgical leader, deciding which catechumens should be admitted to baptism, and he presided at the Eucharist; he was the spiritual guide for those who wanted to lead more ascetic lives; he received guests from other churches; he maintained an elaborate system of charity for the care of strangers, the support of widows, orphans and the poor, he cared for the women who were ranked in the order of “virgins,” ordained presbyters and deacons.

Judging from his writings, it was the concern for the widows, the virgins, and the poor which caused him the greatest anxiety: he speaks of the holiness and knowledge necessary for such work, and also the endless patience and ability to steward alms in an irreproachable manner (On the Priesthood 3.12). Elsewhere, he mentions that in Antioch there were some three thousand of widows and virgins who were looked after by the Church. One can only imagine the immense amount of work that this required!

When St John turns to speak of the tools or instruments that the priest has at his disposal, he focuses upon the priest’s words (On the Priesthood 4.2 ff). It is Christ’s own body that the priest is entrusted with, and he is responsible for training it to perfect health and incredible beauty, being vigilant to ensure that no spot or blemish mars its grace and loveliness. His whole energy must be devoted to making sure that the body is worthy of the Head to which it is subjected. But unlike a doctor who cures physical diseases and ailment by prescribing medications, rest, or surgery, the spiritual doctor only has recourse to words, to exhortations and persuasions:

In the case before us, it is impossible to use any of these things; there is but one method and way of healing appointed, after we have gone wrong, and that is the powerful application of the Word. This is the one instrument, the only diet, the finest atmosphere. This takes the place of medicine, cautery and cutting, and if it be needful to sear and amputate, this is the means which we must use, and if this is of no avail, all else is wasted; with this we both rouse the soul when it sleeps and reduce it when it is inflamed; with this we cut off excesses and fill up defects, and perform all manner of other operations which are needed for the soul’s health. (On the Priesthood 4.3)

It is only through the words that a priest uses, St John is saying, that those under his charge can be persuaded to pay attention to themselves, to orient their lives towards Christ, to willingly cooperate in the surgery being applied by the priest, for this can only be done through words and cooperation.

St John continues by asking whether or not an exemplary life of the priest is sufficient, for this may well stimulate others to emulation. He concedes that this may well be the case for the ordering of our daily lives, but when it comes to matters of doctrine, which is not simply a matter of accepting abstract items of belief, but a matter of having the mind of Christ, so that the whole outlook of the Christian is informed and shaped by a Christian perspective, In such matters, an exemplary life is not sufficient:

“Should a conflict arise on matters of doctrine and all the combatants rely on the same scriptures, what weight will his life carry then?” (On the Priesthood, 4.9)

Even if a bishop or priest were able to perform miracles, as did the apostles, even this is not sufficient:

Even in the days of miracles the Word was by no means useless, but essentially necessary. For St. Paul made use of it himself, although he was everywhere so great an object of wonder for his miracles; and another of those who belonged to the ‘glorious company of the Apostles’ exhorts us to apply ourselves to acquiring this power, when he says:

‘Be ready always to give an answer to every man that asks of you a reason concerning the hope that is in you’ (1 Pet 3.15),

and they all, with one accord, committed the care of the poor widows to Stephen, for no other reason than that they themselves might have time

“for the ministry of the Word. (Acts 6.4; On the Priesthood 4.3)

Again using the example of the Apostle Paul, St John also answers those who would point out that the apostles —unlettered fishermen—had no knowledge of the finer points of oratory, that they did not have “the polish of Isocrates, the weight of Demosthenes, the dignity of Thucydides, and the sublimity of Plato.” But he points out that Paul makes a careful distinction, saying that

“even if I am unskilled in speaking, I am not in knowledge” (2 Cor 11.6, so likening himself to Moses).

St John then continues:

But I pass by all such matters and the elaborate ornaments of profane oratory; and I take no account of style or of delivery; even if a man’s diction be poor and his composition simple and unadorned, let him not be unskilled in the knowledge and accurate statement of doctrine; nor in order to hide his own sloth, deprive that holy apostle of the greatest of his gifts, and the sum of his praises. (On the Priesthood 4.6)

The content of Paul’s preaching may well be folly to the Greeks and a stumbling block to the Jews, and it may also be expressed in unpolished terseness, but it is nevertheless a clear, concise and profound statement of the Wisdom and Power of God. Paul’s rhetoric (for rhetoric it is) matches the content.

A similar point is made by St Gregory the Theologian, when he speaks of education, as being the supreme advantage of human beings, especially the use of words:

We must not then dishonor education, because some men are pleased to do so, but rather suppose such men to be boorish and uneducated, desiring all men to be as they themselves are, in order to hide themselves in the general, and escape the detection of their want of culture. (Oration 43.11)

St Basil also makes similar comments at the beginning of his work On the Holy Spirit, pointing out that:

Those who are idle in the pursuit of righteousness count theological terminology as secondary, together with attempts to search out the hidden meaning in this phrase or that syllable, but those conscious of the goal of our calling realize that we are to become like God as far as this is possible for human beings. But we cannot become like God unless we have knowledge of Him, and without lessons there will be no knowledge. Instruction begins with the proper use of speech, and syllabus and words are the elements of speech. (On the Holy Spirit 1.2)

Word and deed go together for St John: a priest with a gift for oratory undermines what he says if he is not himself striving to live the life that he speaks about; and likewise, an exemplary life, without a good apologia for one’s faith, can easily be misunderstood by others, and will not necessarily lead them into the life of Christ. This is the ultimate aim of their teaching: to lead disciples, both by what they do and what they say, into the way of that blessed life which Christ commanded. Example alone is not sufficient.” (On the Priesthood 4.8)

If the priest is to shepherd his people into growth in life and faith and spiritual understanding, then he must devote his energy to the development of the means by which alone he can do this:

In short, to meet all these difficulties, there is no help given but that of speech, and if any be destitute of this power, the souls of those who are put under his charge (I mean of the weaker and more meddlesome kind) are no better off than ships continually storm tossed. So that the Priest should do all that in him lies, to gain this means of strength. (On the Priesthood 4.5)

Words are important; and finding the right words is indispensable, not necessarily those of worldly rhetorical beauty, but certainly those which enable the communication of the Gospel to others, the ministry of the Word. This is, for St John, the means by which the priest carries out his ministry. When we contemplate St John as “the Golden-Mouthed,” and consider how he is celebrated alongside Sts Basil and Gregory as a Great Hierarch and Universal Teacher, we should take to heart the importance of this verbal dimension of the priestly art, the art of arts.

The Pastoral Power of Theology

This appreciation of the verbal dimension of the pastoral art, in turn, helps us to appreciate better the pastoral nature of theology itself. The discipline of theology has fragmented in various unfortunate ways. During the course of the first millennium, a student of theology was formed by the discipline of reading Scripture in the context of the tradition of the Fathers and the liturgical life of the Church. But during the course of the second millennium, this unified discipline has fallen apart, for various reasons. One key factor is the systematization of theology over many centuries into handbooks of dogmatic theology which are then drawn upon to provide the categories by which the writings of the Fathers can be categorized, so that theology itself comes to be seen as an abstract discipline, a system of dogmas.

Think of how many books on Church History or Patristics divide up the theological reflection of the early Church into various periods corresponding to modern systematic categories: the “Trinitarian” debates of the fourth century (clarifying how we speak of unity and multiplicity in God, a divine arithmetic as it were), followed by the “Christological” debates of the following centuries (explaining how one of the divine Persons became incarnate). Dogmatics or systematic theology (and consequently the reading of the Fathers) has become an abstract discourse about God, only occasionally providing a quotation from Scripture.  Scriptural study, on the other hand, tends to set out on the quest to discover “the real history” behind the text, or the history of the text, uninformed by or unengaged with the theological positions of those who had been reading the Scriptures for centuries.

Theology has become an abstract, neutral discourse about God. If one looks the word up in a dictionary, one will find that the term “theology” is comprised of theos-God and logos-word/discourse and so the definition of theology is “words about God.” It is a discipline that speaks about God, his revelation and relation to the world. Theology is therefore analogous to geology or zoology, it just happens that its subject-matter is God, rather than the earth or animals.

With theology defined in this way, it is hard to see its pastoral implications. How does one, for instance, explain the pastoral dimension of the term consubstantial when it is understood as part of the language about God. And so it is not surprising that a whole field of “pastoral theology” has opened up in the past century, as a separate discipline, more often than not drawing upon what the social sciences have to offer: how to counsel people in various situations, work with addictions, look after different groups – youth, the aged etc. I’m not suggesting that these are not necessary, but I would question whether they are in fact theology.

Even to insist that prayer is also essential for true theology, following the saying of Evagrius that

“one who prays is a theologian, and a theologian is one who prays” (On Prayer 66),

is not enough: we would be giving a prayerful aspect to our current understanding of theology, rather than asking if by the high title of “theology” (or “prayer” for that matter), the fathers understood something else.

The apophatic aspect of orthodox theology should caution us against thinking that theology can simply be words about God, as if theological statements are “informative propositions” about God “out there,” as if he were subject to our investigation and scrutiny, to be described by our objective and unengaged words about him. The Fathers knew very well that God is not “out there,” at least if we are using the word “is” in any way commensurate with how we speak about creation and ourselves. As St Gregory Palamas put it, God

“is not a being, if others are beings, and if He is a being, the others are not beings”:

as the creator of all being, God is not a part of “being,” and as such, we cannot use the word “is” with respect to God in the same manner in which we use it of ourselves and created reality, even if we do so prayerfully.

For the early Christians, theology was not a matter of speaking about God. Indeed, the presumption and arrogance of such a discourse would have been shocking to them, if even comprehensible—as if we can look upon, and thereby stand over, God to describe him and his activity in neutral, uninvolved terms.  Instead of speaking about God, theology was more specifically the affirmation of the divinity of the crucified and exalted Lord, Jesus Christ.  As an anonymous writer at the end of the second century put it, in the Scriptures and the writings of many Christians “Christ is spoken of as God” (lit. “Christ is theologized”);  likewise, he continued, “all the psalms and hymns which were written by the faithful from the beginning, hymn Christ as the Word of God, speaking of him as God” (lit. “theologizing him”).  For St Athanasius the Great, it was writers of Scripture, such as David, who are “theologians”; and the apostles, such as Paul “who speaks of the Savior himself,” are also “theologians,” especially the evangelist John, “the theologian.” They are the theologians in a unique and unrepeatable manner, for it is they who spoke and wrote about Christ; those who “theologize” Christ thereafter, do so on the basis of their account.

One can perhaps be even more specific about this. From the end of the second century, the Gospel of John was widely regarded as being the most “spiritual” amongst the Gospels, and the Evangelist thereafter was known in Church tradition as “the theologian,” a title he eventually came to share with St Gregory the Theologian, and later on with St Symeon the New Theologian.  While the bestowal of this honorific upon these figures is often explained in terms of their lofty theology and their poetic and forceful writing, a more immediate and specific reason would be that they each “theologized” in a particular manner:  the Gospel of John contains the clearest affirmation that Christ is “my Lord and my God” (20.28)”; St Gregory, unlike St Basil, unabashedly affirmed that, even if the Scriptures do not speak of the Holy Spirit as “God,” nevertheless “God” the Spirit is, for that is how Scripture speaks of him, even if not using the term theos; and St Symeon reverses the biblical affirmation that

“God is light” (1 Jn 1.5)

to approach the divine Light asking

“My God, is it you?” and hearing the reply “Yes, I am God who became man for your sake and behold I have made you, as you see, and will make you into a god.”

Theology as Confession

To understand further the particular nature of theological discourse, we must look more closely at how the first “theologians” spoke about Christ.  It is a striking fact that, with one exception, the disciples are presented in the canonical Gospels as continually failing to understand who Jesus is.  The one time that Peter confesses that Jesus is

“the Christ, the Son of the Living God” (Mat 16.16)

—a confession following which Jesus begins to explain how he must go to Jerusalem to suffer, die and be raised—Peter is then called “Satan” for attempting to get between Christ and his Cross (Mat 16.23).

Whatever the disciples heard about Jesus’ birth from his mother, or about his baptism from others, whatever divine teachings they themselves heard from his lips or miracles they saw him doing with their own eyes, even transfigured on Tabor in glory—they abandoned him at the time of the Passion.  Neither did the empty tomb persuade them.  When the women arrive at the tomb early in the morning, they are perplexed, not knowing what to make of it being empty; they require an angel to explain what has happened.  The Christian faith is not based on the empty tomb, for this “bare fact” requires interpretation—was the body perhaps stolen?  The same holds true for the resurrectional appearances: when he appears, not only did they not recognize him, but they start telling him about this Jesus who was put to death, and that the tomb was found empty (Lk 24.22-4). The Christian faith is not based on the appearances of the risen Lord. It is only when the crucified and risen Christ opens the Scriptures to them to show how it was necessary for him to have gone to his Passion to enter his glory, that the disciples’ hearts began to burn, so that they were prepared to recognize him in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24.28-35).

The disciples did not come to a true knowledge of the revelation of God in Christ by hearing reports about his birth, nor by accompanying him for a period of time. This simply reflects the fact that the usual methods of human knowledge—scientific analysis, historical inquiry or philosophical reflection—are inadequate when the desired object of knowledge is God, for God is not subject to human, physical or mental, perception, but shows himself as and when he wills, just as the risen Christ comes and goes at his own pleasure, and, as we have seen, disappears from sight once he is recognized, so that he does not remain as an external object for our scrutiny (we are to become his body, his tangible and perceptible presence in this world).  Neither was it merely seeing Christ on the cross that prompted the disciples, finally, to know the Lord, nor even the report about the empty tomb or the encounter with the risen Christ: the tomb is empty, but this in itself is ambiguous, and when he appears he is not immediately recognized.

Rather, the disciples came to recognize the Lord as the one whose Passion is spoken of by the Scriptures (meaning what we call “the Old Testament”) and encountered in the breaking of the bread, at which point, consuming his offering, they become his body. These two complementary ways—the engagement with the Scriptures, understanding how Christ

“died according to the Scriptures and was raised according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor 15.3-5),

and sharing in the Lord’s meal,

“proclaiming his death until he comes” (1 Cor 11.26)

—are what Paul has received and handed down (from the Lord himself in the case of the eucharistic meal) to later generations (cf. 1 Cor 11.23, 15.3).  They are, as it were, the matrix and the sustenance of the Christian tradition, within which theology speaks.

If this is so, then Christian theology proceeds by reflecting upon the crucified and risen Christ understood through the medium of the Scriptures (the “Old Testament”) in the context of the liturgy. This one is

“the image of the invisible God,”

“in whom the fullness of divinity dwelt bodily” (Col 1.15, 2.9)

—there is no surplus of divinity, as it were, elsewhere, to be discovered by any other means. Christian theology is intrinsically confessional and scriptural, in the sense that it does not simply affirm a mere “historical” statement, for instance, that Jesus “was crucified under Pontius Pilate,” something that anyone on hand that day could have verified. Instead, theology affirms that the one who was crucified is the Son of God; this is a confession of faith, and one, moreover, that the disciples were able to make only once the risen Christ opened the Scriptures to them.

And as a confession, it also makes demands upon those who profess their belief: the affirmation that, as St Athanasius put it,

“the one who ascended the cross is the Word of God,”

is only truly demonstrated by those who “put on the faith of the cross” and, by their death in baptism and manner of living thereafter, become the body of Christ born again in the Virgin Mother, the Church.

Transformative Word

Having considered briefly how theological language developed—what is its starting point and mode of operation—we also gain an insight into how theology speaks, and what it does.

The fourth-century assertion that the Son is “consubstantial” with the Father, for instance, should not be taken as an attempt to define how two persons relate to each other “out there,” in the articulation of a “Trinitarian theology,” but as an affirmation that what we see in Christ, as proclaimed by the apostles, is what it is to be God, yet other than the one he calls Father, and that this is known only in and through the Spirit, who is therefore also what it is to be God.

Likewise, the Chalcedonian Definition is not an attempt to articulate a better metaphysics of personhood, but the affirmation that divinity and humanity are found together with the same “face,” in the same “being”: that is, that we do not have to look to this to see what it is to be God, and to that to see what it is to be human—both are revealed to us in one and the same, as the Definition puts it,

“without confusion, change, division or separation.”

And this fact—that Christ reveals to us his Father and shows us what it is to be divine, by an action, death, which is all-too-human—is what makes all theology a transformative, and truly pastoral, discourse. The one who before the Passion was known by the disciples as human, after the Passion is recognized by them (through the opening of the Scriptures) to be divine—the very same one! This means, to express it as forcefully as I can, that it is in and through the action that expresses all the weakness, impotence and futility of our created human nature—our subjection to death—in and through this, Christ shows himself to be truly divine, voluntarily taking this upon himself.

As one tries to comprehend this, one is simply lost for words.

It is perhaps not surprising that our all-too-human response to the revelation of God in the crucified and exalted Christ, understood through the Scriptures by the power of the Spirit, is to talk about something else—to make theology into an abstract discourse, or, like Peter before the Passion, to try to separate Christ from the cross. In one way or another, all the various heresies, against which the Fathers fought, attempted to dissolve the apparent paradox of Christ showing us what it is to be God through how he lived and died as human—or rather, died and lived, for it is his death which then enables the disciples to understand what he did before.

The Docetists denied that he was truly human, claiming that he only appeared to be such. Arius denied that he was truly divine, for how can one who is as divine as the Father, suffer in such a manner? Dioodore, Theodore and Nestorius, though affirming his full humanity in a manner palatable to today’s taste, do so at the expense of separating his divinity from his humanity: Christ no longer shows us what it is to be divine in the way that he is human, and so we remain, once again, separated from God.

The clear testimony of Scripture is that

“Man shall not see God and live” (Ex 33.20).

Even in the case of the Incarnate Word, Jesus Christ, our recognition of him coincides, as we saw, with his disappearance from sight. What we are left to contemplate is his activity, that which St Gregory of Nyssa describes as

“the transcendent power of divinity.”

And as God is the creator of all, this transcendent power can only be manifest in that which is other than he. In fact, St Gregory continues, this is the central mystery of the apostolic proclamation:

All who preach the Word point out the marvel of the mystery in this respect: that

‘God was manifested in the flesh’ (1 Tim 3.16),

that

‘the Word was made flesh’ (Jn 1.14),

that

‘the Light shone in the darkness’ ([Jn 1.5),

‘the Life tasted death’ (Heb 2.9),

and all such declarations which the heralds of the faith announce, whereby is increased the marvel of him who manifested the superabundance of his power by means external to his own nature.

What is beheld in the revelation of God in Jesus Christ is the transcendent power of divinity manifested in that which is not divine—in flesh, in darkness and in death. Yet this manifestation is simultaneously their transformation: the darkness no longer remains dark but is illumined; Christ’s death becomes the source of life to all who take up their cross to die to the world and sin; and human flesh is now flesh of the divine Word of God, and becomes Word, for we perceive the Incarnate Word in the apostolic proclamation of the crucified and exalted Christ, while the place where the Word becomes incarnate is now those who confess him, who are his body.

This transformative power of the Word of God is at work now in the confession of Christ. When the disciples finally come to confess Christ, they must also confess their own complicity in his death. Responding to his threefold denial of Christ, Peter must affirm three times that he loves Christ. And in both events he is standing by a charcoal fire (Jn 18.18, 21.9)—an allusion to the vision of Isaiah, who, after seeing the Lord enthroned in his heavenly temple, cried out:

“Woe is me! For I am a man of unclean lips and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips; for my eyes have seen the King, the Lord of Hosts,”

but then saw a seraphim place in his mouth a burning coal taken from the altar, with the words

“Behold this has touched your lips, your guilt is taken away and your sins forgiven” (Is 6.1-7).

Likewise before the persecutor Saul becomes the apostle Paul, he is confronted by the Lord asking

“Why do you persecute me?”

and is converted, recovering his sight and receiving baptism and the Holy Spirit through one of the persecuted members of the body of Christ (Acts 9.1-19). Whereas previously Paul held that while persecuting the Church he was

“blameless as to righteousness under the law” (Phil 3.6),

now persuaded that Christ is indeed the savior of all, the only conclusion he could draw was that all stood in need of salvation. Only now could he contrast Adam, through whose disobedience sin and death entered the world, with Christ, whose righteousness has become the means of life (Rom 5.12-14). The solution comes first, and then the problem is discerned.

The transforming vision that the encounter with Christ effects with respect to the comprehension of the Scriptures, brings about a similar transformation in our own lives. Before the encounter with the Christ proclaimed according to the Scriptures, we do not understand that—and how—we are sinful. We might know that we have some problems, but we usually think that we can overcome them, should we want to (through the means offered us by various therapies and counseling, should we need them). It is also clear to us that the world is beset by problems; but if we are honest, we would probably say that, if only everyone were to agree with us, most of these problems would be resolved. That we are sinful, broken and subject to death, to the very core of our being, is something that we can only begin to comprehend in the light of Christ, a light which simultaneously forgives, redeems and recreates. When we think about ourselves, we think of all the various experiences that we have had, told from the vantage point of the present, and that past acting in the present in ways of which we are largely unaware, and so to which we are subject unknowingly and involuntarily.

But the encounter with Christ provides a new, and yet eternal, vantage point from which to understand one’s own past: we are invited to see our own past retold as nothing less than our own “salvation history.” In this nothing is left aside or glossed over, as being too shameful or painful, something that we would prefer to forget, but which even as “forgotten” continues to act negatively in the present. Rather, just as it was in and through that which is all-too-human, his death, that Christ shows himself to be God, so also it is in and through our sinfulness and brokenness that we come to know the transforming and loving power of God, not that we should thereby sin some more, as Paul warns (Rom 6.1-2), but to see ever more clearly how deep our brokenness extends.

“It is,” St Isaac of Syria affirmed, “a spiritual gift of God to be able to perceive one’s own sins,”

and such a one is greater than those who see angels or raise the dead by their prayers.

To plumb the depth of our fallenness is to scale the heights of divine love. The more we are given the grace to see in this way, the more we begin to understand how everything is encompassed within the divine works of God: standing in the light of Christ, we can see him as having led us through our whole past, preparing us to encounter him. He alone knows the reason why he has led each of us on our particular path, for we walk by faith not by sight (2 Cor 5.7), but it is a faith that all things are in the hands of Christ, and that

“in everything God works for good with those who love him” (Rom 8.28).

In this way, then, such theology is not merely words about God, but a living and active word. It does not merely report what happened in the past, nor pretend to describe, objectively and in an uninvolved manner, a God who is “out there” and his dealings with creation. It is nothing less than the proclamation of the Word of God to this world, allowing it to be at work through us here and now.

Such are some of the things that are implied by St John’s attention to words as the tools of the priest, when his words convey the Word of God, such that the Word is dynamically effective even now, transforming the vision, understanding, and reality of those willing to hear.

© 2011, admin. All rights reserved.

Our father among the saints, John (347-407), Archbishop of Constantinople, was a notable Christian bishop and preacher from the fourth and fifth centuries in Syria and Constantinople. He is famous for eloquence in public speaking and his denunciation of abuse of authority in the Church and in the Roman Empire of the time. He had notable ascetic sensibilities.

1. Just as a chorus seeks the chorus leader, and a crew of sailors the helmsman, so also the assembly of these priests today seeks the high-priest and common-father. But in the case of the chorus and the ship frequently the absence of those in charge wrenches them away from good-order and stability; but it is not so in this case. For even if he[1] is not present in the flesh, he is present rather in the spirit, and now is with us, though sitting at home, just as we also are with him there, though standing here. For such is the power of love, it is accustomed to bring together and bind those who are divided by a great distance. At any rate if we love someone who is spending time in a foreign place and separated from us by vast seas, we imagine them each day, so then when we are ill-disposed to someone, neither do we think it good to often see him near at hand. Thus when there is love, there is no harm from the division of place, but when love is absent, there is no gain from the nearness of place. Lately, when we were praising the blessed Paul, you so were prancing about, as if seeing him present; though his body lies in regal Rome, but his soul in the hands of God:

For the souls of the just are in the hand of God, and torment will never touch them.[2]

Nonetheless the power of love placed him before your eyes. And I was planning to enter into the same subject again today, but the message moves us to other things pressing upon us, the sins committed today by the entire city. For they ought first to have been emulators of Paul’s virtue, and worthy of such a lecture, those who are listening to the praises of Paul. Since then the father[3] is not present to us, come – let us cleave to his teaching, relying on his prayers. For even Moses, not being present in the body with the combatants, contributed to that battle, not less than those fighting, but more by far even, urging on the actions of his men by the outstretching of his hands, and making them dreadful to their opponents.[4] For just as the power of love is not separated by a division of place, so neither is the efficacy of prayer, but just as the former binds those removed from one another, so also the latter is able to greatly benefit those far off.

Having confidence therefore let us proceed. For the war is begun for us, not with the coming of the Amelikites, as then, nor with some other overrunning Barbarians, but with demons leading a procession in the forum. For the diabolical night-festivities that occur today, the jests, the abuse, and the nocturnal dances, and this comedy, absurd and worse than every enemy, took our city captive; and it is necessary to be restrained[5] in these matters, to mourn, to be overcome with shame, both those having sinned and those not having sinned, those for whom they sinned, and those for whom they saw [their] brothers doing shameful things[6]; and our city has become exceedingly glad and joyful, and crowned, as a woman fond of adornment and extravagant, so the forum lavishly decked itself out today, putting on gold, and extravagant clothing, and sandals, and other such things, as of those in workplaces, each by the display of  his own works surpassing his fellow worker in rivalry.[7] But this is ambition, even if childish of thought, and imagining nothing great or lofty in mind, but nevertheless it does not attract such harm, but is a certain thoughtless eagerness, pouring down laughter on those eager for such things. For if one wishes to adorn oneself: [let it be] not the workshop, but his own soul; not the forum, but the intellect; so that the angels marvel, and the archangels approve the thing, and the Master of the Angels repay you with gifts from himself; as the example itself, now the event, brings both laughter and jealousy, laughter from the understanding of the loftier, jealousy and much envy from those suffering the same things.

2. But, as I said, ambition itself is not worthy of such accusations; those who happen today to game in the taverns, these cause especial pain, and are full of much profligacy and impiety; [full] of impiety, because those doing these things observe days[8], consult auguries, and think that if one celebrates the new moon of this month with pleasure and happiness, then the whole length of the year will hold the same; of profligacy, because men and women having filled bowls and cups drink unmixed wine until dawn. These things are unworthy of our philosophy[9], whether you do them, or you permit others to do them, whether servants, or friends, or neighbours. Have you not heard Paul saying, “You keep days and months and seasons and years; I fear lest I have laboured in vain for you”?[10] Otherwise it is of the most extreme folly that from one day, if it be fortunate[11], to expect this from the whole year; but it is not of folly alone, rather this is the judgment of diabolical activity, not to entrust the things of our life to our own haste and eagerness, but to cycles of the days. The whole year will be fortunate for you, not if you are drunk on the new-moon, but if both on the new-moon, and each day, you do those things approved by God. For days come wicked and good, not from their own nature; for a day differs nothing from another day, but from our zeal and sluggishness. If you perform righteousness, then the day becomes good to you; if you perform sin, then it will be evil and full of retribution. If you contemplate these things, and are so disposed, you will consider the whole year favourable, performing prayers and charity every day; but if you are careless of virtue for yourself, and you entrust the contentment of your soul to beginnings of months and numbers of days, you will be desolate of everything good unto yourself.

Which then the Devil perceiving, and hastening to make an end of our labours in virtue, and to extinguish our willingness of mind, taught success and failures to be inscribed on the days. For the one persuading himself that a day is evil and good, will neither have a care for good deeds on the evil day, as if performing all things in vain, and benefiting nothing on account of the necessity of the day; nor again on the good day will he do this, as if from his own idleness causing no harm, again on account of the good fortune of the day; and thus from each he promotes his own wellbeing[12]; and sometimes doing profitless things, sometimes superfluous things, he will pass his life in leisure and wickedness. Knowing which, he must flee from the wiles of the devil, and cast out this influence of thought, and observe not the days, neither to hate one nor to love one. For that wicked demon does contrive these things, not only in order to cast us into idleness, but also to revile the works of God, wishing to draw down our souls both into impiety and idleness at the same time.

But we are obliged to resist, and to know clearly, that nothing is evil but sin alone, and nothing good but virtue alone, and to please God always. Strong drink does not produce delight, but spiritual prayer; not wine, but a learned word; Wine effects a storm, but the Word effects calm; the former transports in an uproar, the latter expels disturbance; the former darkens the understanding, the latter lightens the darkened; the former imports despondencies that are non-existent, the latter drives away those there were[13]. For nothing is so accustomed to produce contentment and delight, as the teachings of [our] philosophy, [which is] to despise  present affairs, to yearn for the things to come, to consider nothing of human affairs to be secure, and if you behold some rich man not to be bitten with envy, and if you fall into poverty not to be downcast by that poverty. Thus you are always able to celebrate festivals. For the Christian ought to hold feasts not for months, nor new moons, nor Lord’s days, but continually through life to conduct a feast befitting him. What is the feast that befits him? Let us listen to Paul speaking, “Therefore let us celebrate the feast, not in the old leaven, nor by leaven of evil and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.”[14] If then you have a clean conscience, you hold a feast continually, nourished with good hopes, and revelling in the delight of the good things to come; then just as if you conducted yourself lacking boldness, and you were liable from many sins, and if there be ten thousand feasts and holy-days, you would be in no better state than those grieving. For what is the benefit to me of bright days, if my soul is darkened in its conscience? If then one wishes to gain some benefit from the new moon, do this. When you see the year ending, thank the Lord, because he had led you into this cycle of years. Stab the heart[15], reckon up the time of your life, say to oneself: “The days run and pass by, the years fill-up, we have progressed much of the way; What good is there for us to do? Will we not depart from here, empty and deserted of all righteousness, the judgment at the doors, the rest of life leads us to our old age.”

3. These things, from the new moon, contemplate, these from the circuit of the years, recollect: let us reckon the future day, no longer something spoken to us that, which was said to the Jews by the prophet, “Their days slipped away in vanity, and their years with haste”[16] This is the feast which I mentioned, the continual one, and the one not delayed by the passage of years, not limited by days, both the rich and the poor will be able to celebrate in the same manner: For here there is no want of wealth, nor provision, but only of virtue. Do you not have wealth? But you have the fear of God, a treasure more fruitful than all wealth, not consumed, not changed, not spent-up. Look to heaven, and to the heaven of heavens, the earth, the sea, the air, the kinds of the animals, the manifold plants, the whole nature of human-beings; consider the angels, archangels, the powers above; recall that these are all creations of your Master. It is thus not poverty to be the slave of the providential Master, if you have him as your propitious Lord. The observation of days is not of Christian philosophy, but of Hellenic error.

Into the city above you are enrolled[17], into the polity[18] there you are reckoned, you will mingle with the angels; where light does not give way to darkness, nor day fulfilled to night, but is always day, always light. To these therefore let us look continually.

“For seek”, he says, “the things above, where Christ is seated at God’s right hand.”[19]

You have nothing in common with the earth, where the courses of the sun are, and circuits, and days; but if you live rightly, the night will be day for you; just as then for those living in licentiousness and drunkenness and intemperance, their day is turned into the darkness of night, not with the sun’s extinction, but the darkening of their mind by inebriation. To be passionately excited towards these days, and to receive greater pleasure in them, and to kindle lights in the forum, and to weave wreaths, is of childish folly. But you have been freed from this weakness, and come into adulthood, and been enrolled in the polity of the heavens. Do not therefore kindle sensate fire in the forum, but kindle spiritual light in your mind. “For let”, he said, “your light shine before men, so they may see your good works, and they will glorify our Father in the heavens.”[20] This light brings you much recompense. Do not crown the door of the house, but display such a way of life[21], so that you will receive the crown of righteousness on your head from the hand of Christ. Let nothing be done rashly, nor simply; thus Paul enjoins that all things be done for the glory of God.

“For whether you eat,” he said, “or drink, or do whatever, do all for the glory of God”[22]

And what is it, he says, to eat and drink for God’s glory? Call the poor man, make Christ a participant of the table, and you eat and drink for God’s glory. But not this alone does he enjoin us to do for God’s glory, but all the rest as well, as to go into the forum, and to remain at home; let these both be done for God’s sake[23]. And how are these both to be done for God’s sake? Whenever you come into church, whenever you partake of prayer, whenever of spiritual teaching, the advance has occurred for God’s glory. Again, it is to remain at home for God’s sake. And how this?[24] Whenever you hear disturbances, disorderly and diabolical processions, the forum filled with wicked and undisciplined men, remain at home, free from this disorder, and you remain for God’s glory. Just as spending time at home and going-out is able to be done for God’s sake, thus also of praise and censure. And what is it to praise something for God’s glory, he says, and to accuse? You sit frequently in workplaces, you see evil and wicked men passing by, raising the eyebrows[25], puffed up, trailing many parasites and flatterers, wearing expensive clothes, surrounded with some mystique, seizing all things, avaricious. If you hear someone saying, “Is he not enviable, is he not blessed?” Rebuke, accuse, silence, pity, weep; this is what it means to censure for God’s sake.

Censure is teaching of philosophy to those meeting together and is so strong of virtue[26], so as to no longer long[27] for the things of everyday life. Say to the one saying these things: Why is this man blessed? Because he has a marvellous horse and a golden bridle, and possesses many servants, and wears bright clothing, and bursts[28] each day in drunkenness and luxury? But for this reason he would be wretched and cursed, and worthy of a thousand tears. I see then that you are able to praise nothing of him, but all things external to him, the horse, the bridle, the clothing, of which nothing is his. What then, tell me, is more pitiable than this, when his horse, and the horse’s bridle, and the beauty of his clothes, and the bodily vigour of his servants are marvelled, but he passes by unpraised? Who then could be poorer than this man, having nothing good of his own, nor anything which he is able to carry away from here, but is adorned entirely by external things? For adornment and riches are properly our own, not servants and clothing and horses, but virtue of soul, and wealth of good deeds, and confidence towards God.

4. Again, you see another man, a pauper, rejected, despised and passing his life in poverty and virtue, considered unhappy by his companions: commend this man, and the praise of this man as he passes by is exhortation and counsel of a useful and good way of life[29]. If they say, “He is wretched and miserable,” say that this one is the most blessed of all, having God as his friend, passing life in virtue, possessing a wealth never failing, having a pure conscience. For what harm is there to him from the lack of possessions, when he is going to inherit heaven and the good things in heaven? And if you yourself philosophise in this manner, and instruct others, you will receive a great reward from both censure and from praises, doing both for God’s glory. And that I do not allure you vainly saying these things, but that a certain great recompense exists with the God of all things for those whose intellect is thus disposed, and that the thing has been considered a certain virtue, [that is] the resolving to do such things, hear what the prophet says concerning those so living, and how he places things in an order of perfections, the despising of those doing wickedness, and the glorifying of those fearing God. For after recounting the other virtue of the one who will be honoured by God, also he says, of what sort one must be to dwell in the holy tabernacle, that is blameless, and performing righteousness, and wicked-less, and this he adds: For saying, “Who did not deceive with his tongue, and did no harm to his neighbour”[30] he adds,

“The one doing evil is set at nought before him, but those fearing the Lord he glorifies”[31]

showing that this is one of those perfections, that is to despise the wicked, and to praise and bless the good. And again elsewhere this same thing he makes plain, saying, “Your friends were exceedingly honourable to me, God, their beginnings[32] became very strong.”[33] Whom God praises, do not censure: he praises the one living in righteousness, even if he be poor; whom God turns away, do not praise: he turns away the one living in wickedness, even if he be surrounded by much wealth. But if you praise, and if you censure, do both as God wishes. For there is even accusing unto the glory of God. How? Frequently we are vexed with our servants. How then is there accusing for God’s sake? If you see someone drunk, or stealing, whether servant, or friend, or some other of those related to you, whether running into the theatre, or having no concern for their soul, or swearing[34], or perjuring[35], or lying: be angry[36], punish, turn them back, correct; and you did all these things for God’s sake. And if you see someone sinning against you, and omitting something of their service toward you, pardon them, and you are forgiven for God’s sake. But now many do the opposite, both to their friends, and to their servants. For when they sin against them, they become bitter and unforgiving judges; but when they insult God, and ruin their own souls, they produce no rationale. Again, is it necessary to make friends? Make them, for God’s sake. Is it necessary to make enemies?

Make them, for God’s sake. And by what means does one make friends and enemies for God’s sake? If we do not attract those friends, whence money is taken, whence sharing of a table, whence obtaining of human patronage, but pursue and make those friends, those able always to order our soul, counsel necessities, rebuke sinners, expose trespassers, restore those fallen, and aiding by counsel and prayers to lead to God. Again, it is permitted to make enemies for God’s sake. If you see someone undisciplined, abominable, full of wickedness, replete with unclean teachings, tripping you up and harming you, stand apart and turn away, just as also Christ commanded, saying, “If your right eye trips you up, pluck it out and cast it from you”[37] commanding those friends, those being desirable in the rank of eyes[38], and necessary in the things of everyday life, to cut off, and to cast out, if they harm you with regard to the salvation of the soul. If you share in their meetings, and you prolong your speech, do even this for God’s sake, and if you keep silent, keep silent for God’s sake.

And what is it to participate in the meeting for God’s sake? If you are seated with someone, converse nothing concerning daily affairs, nor of simple things even vainly and nothing of those related to you, but concerning our philosophy, concerning Hell, concerning the Kingdom of the Heavens, but not superfluities and unprofitable things, such as, “Who entered authority?[39] Who lost power? For what reason was so-and-so injured[40]? Whence did so-and-so profit and become better off? What did so-and-so dying leave behind to such-and-such? How did so-and-so miss out, expecting to be listed among the foremost of the heirs?” And many other such things. Let us not then discuss such things, nor bear others discussing [them]; but let us consider what-doing or what-saying is to please God. Again, it is to keep silent for God’s sake, being maltreated, abused, suffering a thousand evils, if you bear them nobly, and emit no blasphemous word against the one doing these things to you. Not to praise and to censure alone, nor to remain indoors and to go out, not to utter and to keep silent, but also to weep and mourn, and to enjoy and delight is to God’s glory.

For when you see either a brother sinning, or yourself falling into a transgression, [if] then you groan and mourn[41], then you gain from the grief a salvation without regret, just as Paul says, “For grief according to God produces a salvation without regret”[42] If you see another person being highly esteemed, then do not disparage him, but as for one’s own goods give thanks to God, to the one making your brother illustrious, and you receive a great reward from this joy.

5. What then, tell me, is more pitiable than the envious, when it is permitted both to rejoice and to profit through joy, and they prefer rather to grieve upon the advantages of others, and with the grief to yet also attract a punishment from God, an unendurable retribution. And what need is there to speak of praise, and of blame, and of pain, and of joy, when indeed even from the least of these things and from the meanest[43] events the greatest things are to be profited, if we do them for God’s sake?

For what is more lowly than to be shorn? But even this is to be done for God’s sake. For when you do not arrange your hair, nor adorn you appearance, nor decorate yourself for an enticement and beguilement of onlookers, but simply and as it happens and as much as necessity alone demands, you do this for God’s sake, you will in all ways have your reward, because you have checked evil desire, and beaten into shape inopportune ambition. For if one giving only a cup of water for God’s sake will inherit the Kingdom of Heaven, let the one doing all things for God’s sake consider how great the recompense he will enjoy. There is also to walk for God’s sake, and to look for God’s sake. What is it to look for God’s sake, and to walk? When you do not run towards wickedness, when you do not busy yourself with other’s beauty, when seeing a woman by chance[44], you curb your eye, you fortify the visage with the fear of God, then you have done this for God’s sake; when clothes not extravagant and making you soft, but able to cover you, let us wear these alone. And it is even up to the shoes that this law leads. For many have slipped to this point of slackness and wastefulness, as to adorn even their shoes, and to embellish them from every side, not less than others their faces: which is of an unclean and corrupted soul. For if even this seems to be small, but it is an evidence and proof of great ruination, both in men and women. Therefore it is lawful even to use shoes for God’s sake, when we seek their use everywhere, and we make this the measure of their employment. And that both through walking and through clothing [we] are to glorify God, hear what a certain wise man says, “clothing of a man, and laughter of teeth, and step of foot, declare things concerning him.”[45] For when we appear, clothed and august, and full of reverence, and exhibiting much chastity on all sides: from the bare occurrence, the unbeliever, and the licentious, and the tumultuous, seeing this kind of thing will be amazed, even if he be unaware of everything. And if we marry a woman, let us do this for God’s sake, so that we may be chaste, not so that we might acquire[46] a more resourceful property[47], [but] so that we might seek nobility of soul, not abundance of possessions, nor distinction of ancestors, but excellence and reasonableness of customs. Let us take a companion for life, not a business associate.

And why is it necessary to recount all things in detail? For it is permissible finally for you, from the things spoken, to methodically work through each of the things that occurs or is done, and to do for God’s sake. And just as the merchants sailing the sea, and bringing to safe anchorage in cities, do not first depart the shore, nor go up into the marketplace, until they learn that there is some profit from the things laid up there. Thus also you nothing, neither do, nor say, unless it hold some profit regarding God. And do not say to me that it is not possible to do all things for God’s sake. For when putting on your shoes, and [hair], and dressing of garments, and travelling, and appearance, and words, and meetings, both enterings and exitings, both gibes and praises, both censures and approvals, both friendships and enmities are able to happen for God’s sake, what is left which is not able to happen for God’s sake, if we desire it?

What is worse than a jailer? Does not [that] life seem altogether to be the worst? But it is permitted to the one wishing to profit even from there, when he spares the enchained, when he cares for those unjustly incarcerated, when he does not make business from others’ misfortunes, when he sets before all prisoners a common threshold. Thus was the jailer, in Paul’s case, saved[48]: Whence it is clear that in all things, if we wish it, we are able to be profitable.

6. What is worse than murder, tell me? But this shameless-deed was one able to birth righteousness for the one who did it: so great is doing something for God’s sake whatever one does. And how was murder able to produce righteousness? The Midianites were once wishing to provoke God to war with the Jews, and by this expecting to be [superior] to them, if they might deprive them of the Lord’s goodwill, beautifying girls and standing them before the camp, they enticed them and lead them into fornication, then from there into impiety. Phinehas, seeing this, having taken in hand a sword, and seizing two [people] fornicating, pierced them both in their sin, and checked the anger of God from his judgment. And the thing that happened was murder, but the outcome of that was the salvation of all who were being destroyed, whence also it brought righteousness to the one who did it.[49]

And not only did it not defile his hands, but that murder made them even more pure, and very rightly so: for not hating those he killed, but sparing the rest, he did this: he killed the two, and saves unlimited myriads. For just as doctors do, cutting off the putrefied parts of the members, they save the body whole and sound; thus also did he do. On this account the Psalmist says, “Phinehas stood and propitiated, and the slaughter abated, and it was reckoned to him for righteousness unto generation and generation, until eternity.”[50] Immortal then remains the memory of deed rightly done.

Again, another prayed, and offended God: so great a thing is it not to do something for God’s sake: I mention the Pharisee[51]. But just as Phinehas committing murder was approved [by God], thus also this man, not from his prayer, but from his disposition with which he prayed, fell into offence. Thus when something is done not for God’s sake, even if the matter be spiritual, it causes great harm; just as then when something is done for God’s sake, even if it be carnal[52], it benefits greatly the one doing it with a God-loving disposition. For what is worse and harsher than murder? But nevertheless it made righteous him who dared it.

What sort of defence will we have, saying that it is not possible to profit in everything, and to do all things for God’s sake, when some profit was found even from murder? If we wish to pay attention, we will traffic in this spiritual profit, through all of life, whether buying something, or needing to sell; such as, when we do not ask for more than the customary price, when we do not observe the times of difficulty, and then give a share to those in need.[53] “The one raising the price of grain is cursed by the people”, he says.[54] And what need is there to review each, to gather the whole from one example is needed? For just as builders, whenever they are about to raise a wall, stretching a small cord from corner to corner, thus construct the edifice, so that its appearance be not uneven; thus also we, in place of a small cord, stretching this word that was spoken,

“Whether you eat, whether you drink, whether you do some other thing, do all for the glory of God.”[55]

If we pray, if we fast, if we accuse, if we pardon, if we praise, if we censure, if we enter, if we exit, if we sell, if we buy, if we are silent, if we converse, if we do any thing else whatsoever, let us do all for the glory of God, and if something be not for the glory of God, neither let it be done, nor be spoken by us; but in place of a great staff, in place of arms and safeguard, in place of unspeakable treasures, wherever we might be, let us carry around this word with us, having inscribed it upon our understanding, so that doing and speaking and trafficking all things for the glory of God, we shall obtain the glory that is from him both in this world and after  the journey here[56]. “For those that glorified me”, he says, “I will glorify”[57]. Not therefore with words, but also through deeds let us glorify him continually with Christ our God, because all glory befits him, honour and worship, now and always unto the ages of ages. Amen.

© 2010, admin. All rights reserved.