Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| Homily I on Acts i. 1, 2. PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP
Homily I.
Acts I. 1, 2
“The former treatise have
I made, O Theophilus, concerning all things which Jesus began both to
do and to teach, until the day on which, having given charge to the
Apostles, whom He had chosen, by the Holy Spirit, He was taken
up.”
To many
persons this Book is so little known, both it and its author, that they
are not even aware that there is such a book in existence.3
3 St.
Chrys. had made the same complaint at Antioch in the Homilies
(a.d. 387) in Principium Actorum, etc.
t. iii. p. 54. “We are about to set before you a strange and new
dish.…strange, I say, and not strange. Not strange; for it
belongs to the order of Holy Scripture: and yet strange; because
peradventure your ears are not accustomed to such a subject. Certainly,
there are many to whom this Book is not even known (πολλοῖς
γοῦν τὸ
βιβλίον
τοῦτο οὐδὲ
γνώριμόν
ἐστι) and many again think
it so plain, that they slight it: thus to some men their knowledge, to
some their ignorance, is the cause of their neglect……We are
to enquire then who wrote it, and when, and on what subject: and why it
is ordered (νενομοθέτηται) to be read at this festival. For peradventure you do not
hear this Book read [at other times] from year’s end to
year’s end.” | For this reason especially I have taken this
narrative for my subject, that I may draw to it such as do not know it,
and not let such a treasure as this remain hidden out of sight. For
indeed it may profit us no less than even the Gospels; so replete is it
with Christian wisdom and sound doctrine, especially in what is said
concerning the Holy Ghost. Then let us not hastily pass by it, but
examine it closely. Thus, the predictions which in the Gospels Christ
utters, here we may see these actually come to pass; and note in the
very facts the bright evidence of Truth which shines in them, and the
mighty change which is taking place in the disciples now that the
Spirit has come upon them. For example, they heard Christ say,
“Whoso believeth on Me, the works that I do shall he do also, and
greater works than these shall he do” (John xiv. 12): and again, when
He foretold to the disciples, that they should be brought before rulers
and kings, and in their synagogues they should scourge them, and that
they should suffer grievous things, and overcome all (Matt. x.
18):
and that the Gospel should be preached in all the world (Ib. xxiv. 14): now all this, how it
came to pass exactly as it was said, may be seen in this Book, and more
besides, which He told them while yet with them. Here again you will
see the Apostles themselves, speeding their way as on wings over land
and sea; and those same men, once so timorous and void of
understanding, on the sudden become quite other than they were; men
despising wealth, and raised above glory and passion and concupiscence,
and in short all such affections: moreover, what unanimity there is
among them now; nowhere any envying as there was before, nor any of the
old hankering after the preeminence, but all virtue brought in them to
its last finish, and shining through all, with surpassing lustre, that
charity, concerning which the Lord had given so many charges saying,
“In this shall all men know that ye are My disciples, if ye love
one another.” (John xiii. 35.) And then,
besides, there are doctrines to be found here, which we could not have
known so surely as we now do, if this Book had not existed, but the
very crowning point of our salvation would be hidden, alike for
practice of life and for doctrine.
The greater part, however, of
this work is occupied with the acts of Paul, who “laboured more
abundantly than they all.” (1 Cor. xv. 10.) And the reason
is, that the author of this Book, that is, the blessed Luke, was his
companion: a man, whose high qualities, sufficiently visible in many
other instances, are especially shown in his firm adherence to his
Teacher, whom he constantly followed.4
4 The two
reasons which Chrysostom urges for the study of the Acts are also the
two chief grounds upon which modern criticism depends for establishing
not only the general trust-worthiness of the book, but also its
authorship by Luke. They are in substance, (1) The continuity of the
history as connected with the gospels and, particularly, coincidences
of style, matter and diction with the third gospel, and (2) The
remarkable undesigned coincidences of statement between the Acts and
Pauline Epistles which exclude the possibility of inter-dependence.
From Col. i. 11, 14; Philem. 24; 2 Tim. iv. 11, we learn that Luke was
a close companion of Paul. In the part of the Book of Acts which treats
especially of the work of Paul, the writer frequently refers to himself
in the use of the first person plural as an associate of the apostle
(vid. xvi. 10; xx. 6 sq.;
xxi. 1 sq.; xxvii. 1). These considerations
demonstrate the fitness of Luke to prepare such a treatise as the Acts
and render the supposition of his authorship plausible. When they are
combined with those mentioned under (1) and when the dedication of both
books to a certain Theophilus is considered, the argument becomes very
cogent and complete.—G.B.S. | Thus at a time when
all had forsaken him, one gone into Galatia, another into Dalmatia,
hear what he says of this disciple: “Only Luke is with me.”
(2 Tim. iv. 10.) And giving the Corinthians a charge concerning him, he
says, “Whose praise is in the Gospel throughout all the
Churches.” (2 Cor. viii. 18.) Again, when he says,
“He was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve,” and,
“according to the Gospel which ye received” (1 Cor. xv. 5; 1),
he means the Gospel of this Luke.5 So that there can be no
mistake in attributing this work to him: and when I say, to him, I
mean, to Christ.6
6 Hom. in
Princip. Act. p. 54. “First we must
see who wrote the Book.…whether a man, or God: and if man, let us
reject it; for, ‘Call no man master upon earth:’ but if
God, let us receive it.” | And why then did he not relate every
thing, seeing he was with Paul to the end? We may answer, that what is
here written, was sufficient for those who would attend, and that the
sacred writers ever addressed themselves to the matter of immediate
importance, whatever it might be at the time: it was no object with
them to be writers of books: in fact, there are many things which they
have delivered by unwritten tradition. Now while all that is contained
in this Book is worthy of admiration, so is especially the way the
Apostles have of coming down to the wants of their hearers: a
condescension suggested by the Spirit who has so ordered it, that the
subject on which they chiefly dwell is that which pertains to Christ as
man. For so it is, that while they discourse so much about Christ, they
have spoken but little concerning His Godhead; it was mostly of the
Manhood that they discoursed, and of the Passion, and the Resurrection,
and the Ascension. For the thing required in the first instance was
this, that it should be believed that He was risen, and ascended into
heaven. As then the point on which Christ himself most insisted was, to
have it known that He was come from the Father, so is it this
writer’s principal object to declare, that Christ was risen from
the dead, and was received up into Heaven, and that He went to God, and
came from God. For, if the fact of His coming from God were not first
believed, much more, with the Resurrection and Ascension added thereto,
would the Jews have found the entire doctrine incredible. Wherefore
gently and by degrees he leads them on to higher truths. Nay, at Athens
Paul even calls Him man simply, without saying more (Acts xvii. 31).
For if, when Christ Himself spoke of His equality with the Father, they
often attempted to stone Him, and called Him a blasphemer for this
reason, it was little to be expected that they would receive this
doctrine from the fishermen, and that too, with the Cross coming before
it.
But why speak of the Jews,
seeing that even the disciples often upon hearing the more sublime
doctrines were troubled and offended? Therefore also He told them,
“I have many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them
now.” (John xvi. 12.) If those could not,
who had been so long time with Him, and had been admitted to so many
secrets, and had seen so many wonders, how was it to be expected that
men, but newly dragged away from altars, and idols, and sacrifices, and
cats, and crocodiles (for such did the Gentiles worship), and from the
rest of their evil ways, should all at once receive the more sublime
matters of doctrine? And how in particular should Jews, hearing as they
did every day of their lives, and having it ever sounded in their ears,
“The Lord thy God is one Lord, and beside Him is none
other” (Deut. vi. 4): who also had seen Him
hanging nailed on the Cross, nay, had themselves crucified and buried
Him, and not seen Him even risen: when they were told that this same
person was God and equal with the Father, how should they, of all men,
be otherwise than shocked and revolted? Therefore it is that gently and
little by little they carry them on, with much consideration and
forbearance letting themselves down to their low attainments,
themselves the while enjoying in more plentiful measure the grace of
the Spirit, and doing greater works in Christ’s name than Christ
Himself did, that they may at once raise them up from their grovelling
apprehensions, and confirm the saying, that Christ was raised from the
dead. For this, in fact, is just what this Book is: a Demonstration of
the Resurrection:7
7 Hom.
cur in Pentec. Acta legantur, t. iii. p.
89. E. “The demonstration of the Resurrection is, the Apostolic
miracles: and of the Apostolic miracles this Book is the
school.” | 8
8 The
statement that the Acts is a “Demonstration of the
Resurrection” has a certain profound truth, but is incorrect if
intending to assert that such was the conscious purpose of the author.
The resurrection of Jesus is a prominent theme in the Apostolic
discourses but the book is no more designed primarily to prove the
resurrection than are the Epistles to the Romans and Corinthians. The
immediate purpose of the book is to record the labors and triumphs of
the Apostolic Church as supplementary to the narrative of the teaching
and work of Jesus (i. 1,
2).
The events narrated presuppose the resurrection and would have been
impossible without it.—G.B.S. | this being once
believed, the rest would come in due course. The subject then and
entire scope of this Book, in the main, is just what I have said. And
now let us hear the Preface itself.
“The former treatise have
I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and to
teach.” (v.
1)
Why does he put him in mind of the Gospel? To intimate how strictly he
may be depended upon. For at the outset of the former work he says,
“It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of
all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order.”
(Luke i. 3.) Neither is he content with his own testimony, but refers the
whole matter to the Apostles, saying, “Even as they delivered
them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers
of the word.” (Luke i. 2.) Having then
accredited his account in the former instance, he has no need to put
forth his credentials afresh for this treatise, seeing his disciple has
been once for all satisfied, and by the mention of that former work he
has reminded him of the strict reliance to be placed in him for the
truth. For if a person has shown himself competent and trustworthy to
write of things which he has heard, and moreover has obtained our
confidence, much more will he have a right to our confidence when he
has composed an account, not of things which he has received from
others, but of things which he has seen and heard. For thou didst
receive what relates to Christ; much more wilt thou receive what
concerns the Apostles.
What then, (it may be asked), is
it a question only of history, with which the Holy Spirit has nothing
to do? Not so. For, if “those delivered it unto us, who from the
beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word;” then,
what he says, is theirs. And why did he not say, ‘As they
who were counted worthy of the Holy Spirit delivered them unto
us;’ but “Those who were eyewitnesses?” Because, in
matter of belief, the very thing that gives one a right to be believed,
is the having learned from eyewitnesses: whereas the other appears to
foolish persons mere parade and pretension. And therefore John also
speaks thus: “I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of
God.” (John. i. 34.) And Christ expresses
Himself in the same way to Nicodemus, while he was dull of
apprehension, “We speak that we do know, and testify that we have
seen; and no one receiveth our witness.” (Ib. iii. 11.) Accordingly, He gave
them leave to rest their testimony in many particulars on the fact of
their having seen them, when He said, “And do ye bear witness
concerning Me, because ye have been with Me from the beginning.”
(John xv. 27.) The Apostles themselves also often speak in a similar manner;
“We are witnesses, and the Holy Spirit which God hath given to
those that obey Him.” (Acts ii. 32); and on a
subsequent occasion, Peter, still giving assurance of the Resurrection,
said, “Seeing we did eat and drink with Him.” (Acts x. 41.)
For they more readily received the testimony of persons who had been
His companions, because the notion of the Spirit was as yet very much
beyond them. Therefore John also at that time, in his Gospel, speaking
of the blood and water, said, he himself saw it, making the fact
of his having seen it equivalent, for them, to the highest testimony,
although the witness of the Spirit is more certain than the evidence of
sight, but not so with unbelievers. Now that Luke was a partaker of the
Spirit, is abundantly clear, both from the miracles which even now take
place; and from the fact that in those times even ordinary persons were
gifted with the Holy Ghost; and again from the testimony of Paul, in
these words, “Whose praise is in the Gospel” (2 Cor. viii. 18);
and from the appointment to which he was chosen: for having said this,
the Apostle adds, “But also appointed of the Churches to travel
with us with this grace which is administered by us.”9
Now mark how unassuming he is.
He does not say, The former Gospel which I preached, but, “The
former treatise have I made;” accounting the title of Gospel to
be too great for him; although it is on the score of this that the
Apostle dignifies him: “Whose praise,” he says, “is
in the Gospel.” But he himself modestly says, “The former
treatise have I made—O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both
to do and to teach:” not simply “of all,” but from
the beginning to the end; “until the day,” he says,
“in which He was taken up.” And yet John says, that it was
not possible to write all: for “were they written, I
suppose,” says he, “that even the world itself could not
contain the books written.” (John xxi. 25.) How then does
the Evangelist here say, “Of all?” He does not say
“all,” but “of all,” as much as to say,
“in a summary way, and in the gross;” and “of all
that is mainly and pressingly important.” Then he tells us in
what sense he says all, when he adds, “Which Jesus began
both to do and to teach;” meaning His miracles and teaching; and
not only so, but implying that His doing was also a
teaching.
But now consider the benevolent
and Apostolic feelings of the writer: that for the sake of a single
individual he took such pains as to write for him an entire Gospel.
“That thou mightest have,” he says, “the certainty of
those things, wherein thou hast been instructed.” (Luke i. 4.)
In truth, he had heard Christ say, “It is not the will of My
Father that one of these little ones should perish.”
(Matt.
xviii. 14.) And why did he not make one book of it, to send to one man
Theophilus, but has divided it into two subjects? For clearness, and to
give the brother a pause for rest. Besides, the two treatises are
distinct in their subject-matter.
But consider how Christ
accredited his words by His deeds. Thus He saith, “Learn of Me,
for I am meek and lowly in heart.” (Ib. xi. 29.) He taught men to be
poor,10
10 Ms. C. has οἰκτίρμονας, merciful; the rest, ἀκτήμονας, without possessions, which is certainly the true
reading. Thus in the Sermon de futuræ Vitæ deliciis,
where Chrys. discourses largely on the harmony of Christ’s
teaching and actions, he says, Πάλιν
ἀκτημοσύνην
παιδεύων, ὅρα
πῶς διὰ τῶν
ἔργων αὐτὴν
ἐπιδείκνυται,
λέγων, Αἱ
ἀλώπεκες, κ. τ.
λ. | 11
11 “He
taught them to be poor.” Here we have a tinge of asceticism. Even
if we suppose that the beatitude of the poor refers to literal poverty
(Luke vi. 20) as well as to poverty in spirit (Matt. v. 3), it is still
incorrect to say that Jesus taught his disciples that poverty was in
itself a virtue. The ascetic principle is of heathen, not of Christian
origin. It is noticeable that Chrys. quotes no passage to sustain his
statement.—G.B.S. | and exhibited this by
His actions: “For the Son of Man,” He says, “hath not
where to lay His head.” (Ib. viii.
20.)
Again, He charged men to love their enemies; and He taught the same
lesson on the Cross, when He prayed for those who were crucifying Him.
He said, “If any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy
coat, let him have thy cloak also” (Ib. v. 40): now He not
only gave His garments, but even His blood. In this way He bade others
teach. Wherefore Paul also said, “So as ye have us for an
example.” (Philip. iii. 17.) For nothing is more
frigid than a teacher who shows his philosophy only in words: this is
to act the part not of a teacher, but of a hypocrite. Therefore the
Apostles first taught by their conduct, and then by their words; nay
rather they had no need of words, when their deeds spoke so loud. Nor
is it wrong to speak of Christ’s Passion as action, for in
suffering all He performed that great and wonderful act, by which He
destroyed death, and effected all else that He did for us.
“Until the day in which He
was taken up, after that He, through the Holy Spirit, had given
commandments unto the Apostles whom He had chosen. After He had given
commandments through the Spirit” (v. 2); i.e. they were spiritual words that He spake unto them,
nothing human; either this is the meaning, or, that it was by the
Spirit that He gave them commandments.12 Do you observe in
what low terms he still speaks of Christ, as in fact Christ had spoken
of Himself? “But if I by the Spirit of God cast out devils”
(Matt.
xii. 28); for indeed the Holy Ghost wrought in that Temple. Well, what
did He command? “Go ye therefore,” He says, “make
disciples of all the nations, baptizing them into the Name of the
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; teaching them to observe
all things whatsoever I have commanded you.” (Ib. xxviii. 19, 20.) A high encomium this
for the Apostles; to have such a charge entrusted to them, I mean, the
salvation of the world! words full of the Spirit! And this the writer
hints at in the expression, “through the Holy Ghost” (and,
“the words which I spake unto you,” saith the Lord,
“are Spirit”) (John vi. 63); thus leading
the hearer on to a desire of learning what the commands were, and
establishing the authority of the Apostles, seeing it is the words of
the Spirit they are about to speak, and the commandments of Christ.
“After He had given commandments,” he says, “He was
taken up.” He does not say, ‘ascended;’ he still
speaks as concerning a man. It appears then that He also taught the
Disciples after His resurrection, but of this space of time no one has
related to us the whole in detail. St. John indeed, as also does the
present writer, dwells at greater length on this subject than the
others; but none has clearly related every thing (for they hastened to
something else); however, we have learnt these things through the
Apostles, for what they heard, that did they tell. “To whom also
He shewed Himself alive.” Having first spoken of the Ascension,
he adverts to the Resurrection; for since thou hast been told that
“He was taken up,” therefore, lest thou shouldest suppose
Him to have been taken up by others13
13 i.e. as
Œcumenius explains in l. ίνα
μή τις νομίσῃ
ἐτέρου
ουνάμει
τοῦτο
γενέσθαι, lest any should suppose this to have been done by the power of
another, he adds, to show that it was His own act, To whom also,
etc. | , he adds,
“To whom He shewed Himself alive.” For if He shewed Himself
in the greater, surely He did in the minor circumstance. Seest thou,
how casually and unperceived he drops by the way the seeds of these
great doctrines?14
14 It is
more than doubtful whether the mention of the resurrection is
introduced (i. 3 sq.) for the purpose of
meeting sceptical objections. The writer will rather make it the point
of departure for his subsequent narrative. He has mentioned the
ascension; the resurrection is the other great event and he will
introduce a resumé of the more important circumstances which
happened during the period between these two events and which have an
important bearing upon the history about to be
related.—G.B.S. |
“Being seen of them during
forty days.” He was not always with them now, as He was before
the Resurrection. For the writer does not say “forty days,”
but, “during forty days.” He came, and again disappeared;
by this leading them on to higher conceptions, and no longer permitting
them to stand affected towards Him in the same way as before, but
taking effectual measures to secure both these objects, that the fact
of His Resurrection should be believed, and that He Himself should be
ever after apprehended to be greater than man. At the same time, these
were two opposite things; for in order to the belief in His
Resurrection, much was to be done of a human character, and for the
other object, just the reverse. Nevertheless, both results have been
effected, each when the fitting time arrived.
But why did He appear not to
all, but to the Apostles only?15 Because to the many it
would have seemed a mere apparition, inasmuch as they understood not
the secret of the mystery. For if the disciples themselves were at
first incredulous and were troubled, and needed the evidence of actual
touch with the hand, and of His eating with them, how would it have
fared in all likelihood with the multitude? For this reason therefore
by the miracles [wrought by the Apostles] He renders the evidence of
His Resurrection unequivocal, so that not only the men of those
times—this is what would come of the ocular proof—but also
all men thereafter, should be certain of the fact, that He was risen.
Upon this ground also we argue with unbelievers. For if He did not rise
again, but remains dead, how did the Apostles perform miracles in His
name? But they did not, say you, perform miracles? How then was our
religion (ἔθνος) instituted? For this certainly they will
not controvert nor impugn what we see with our eyes: so that when they
say that no miracles took place, they inflict a worse stab16
16 Περιπείρουσι, ms. C. and Cat. (see
1 Tim. vi. 9,
pierced themselves through with many sorrows), and in this sense
Hom. in Matt. 455 B. 463 A. The word is used as here, ibid. 831
C. where several mss. have πανταχοῦ
ἡ πλάνη
ἑαυτὴν
περιπείρει, for ἑαυτῇ
περιπίπτει. | upon themselves. For this would be the
greatest of miracles, that without any miracles, the whole world should
have eagerly come to be taken in the nets of twelve poor and illiterate
men. For not by wealth of money, not by wisdom of words, not by any
thing else of this kind, did the fishermen prevail; so that objectors
must even against their will acknowledge that there was in these men a
Divine power, for no human strength could ever possibly effect such
great results. For this He then remained forty days on earth,
furnishing in this length of time the sure evidence of their seeing Him
in His own proper Person, that they might not suppose that what they
saw was a phantom. And not content with this, He added also the
evidence of eating with them at their board: as to signify this, the
writer adds, “And being at table17
17 Συναλιζόμενος. In the margin of E.V. “Eating together with
them.” The Catena here and below, had pr. man. the other
reading, συναυλιζόμενος, but corrected in both places. St. Chrys. so takes the
word, Hom. in Princip. Act. §11.767 E. in Joann. 522
D. Œcumen. in 1. explains it, τουτέστι
κοινωνῶν
ἁλῶν,
κοινωνῶν
τραπέζης, “Partaking of the salt, partaking of the
table.” | with them, He
commanded.”18
18 Chrys.
here follows the interpretation which derives συναλιζόμενος
(i. 4) from σύν and ἅλς (salt) hence, eating
together. So several ancient authorities as Vulgate
(convesceus) and even modern, as Meyer. But the preferable
derivation is from σύν and ἁλής (crowded), hence to
be assembled, to meet with (sc. ἀυτοῖς). So
Olshausen, Hackett, Lechler, Thayer’s Lex. and most modern
authorities.—G.B.S. | (v. 4.) And this circumstance the Apostles themselves always put
forth as an fallible token of the Resurrection; as where they say,
“Who did eat and drink with Him.” (Acts x. 41.)
And what did He, when appearing
unto them those forty days? Why, He conversed with them, says the
writer, “concerning the kingdom of God.” (v. 3.) For, since the disciples both had been distressed and
troubled at the things which already had taken place, and were about to
go forth to encounter great difficulties, He recovered them by His
discourses concerning the future. “He commanded them that they
should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the
Father.” (v.
4.)
First, He led them out to Galilee, afraid and trembling, in order that
they might listen to His words in security. Afterwards, when they had
heard, and had passed forty days with Him, “He commanded them
that they should not depart from Jerusalem.” Wherefore? Just as
when soldiers are to charge a multitude, no one thinks of letting them
issue forth until they have armed themselves, or as horses are not
suffered to start from the barriers until they have got their
charioteer; so Christ did not suffer these to appear in the field
before the descent of the Spirit, that they might not be in a condition
to be easily defeated and taken captive by the many. Nor was this the
only reason, but also there were many in Jerusalem who should believe.
And then again that it might not be said, that leaving their own
acquaintance, they had gone to make a parade among strangers, therefore
among those very men who had put Christ to death do they exhibit the
proofs of His Resurrection, among those who had crucified and buried
Him, in the very town in which the iniquitous deed had been
perpetrated; thereby stopping the mouths of all foreign objectors. For
when those even who had crucified Him appear as believers, clearly this
proved both the fact of the crucifixion and the iniquity of the deed,
and afforded a mighty evidence of the Resurrection. Furthermore, lest
the Apostles should say, How shall it be possible for us to live among
wicked and bloody men, they so many in number, we so few and
contemptible, observe how He does away their fear and distress, by
these words, “But wait for the promise of the Father, which ye
have heard of Me.” (v.
4.)
You will say, When had they heard this? When He said, “It is
expedient for you that I go away; for if I go not away, the Comforter
will not come unto you.” (John xvi. 7.) And again,
“I will pray the Father, and He shall send you another Comforter,
that He may abide with you.” (ib. xiv. 16.)
But why did the Holy Ghost come
to them, not while Christ was present, nor even immediately after his
departure, but, whereas Christ ascended on the fortieth day, the Spirit
descended “when the day of Pentecost,” that is, the
fiftieth, “was fully come?” (Acts ii. 1.) And how was it,
if the Spirit had not yet come, that He said, “Receive ye the
Holy Ghost?” (John xx. 22.) In order to
render them capable and meet for the reception of Him. For if Daniel
fainted at the sight of an Angel (Dan. viii. 17), much more would
these when about to receive so great a grace. Either this then is to be
said, or else that Christ spoke of what was to come, as if come
already; as when He said, “Tread ye upon serpents and scorpions,
and over all the power of the devil.” (Luke x. 19.) But why had the
Holy Ghost not yet come? It was fit that they should first be brought
to have a longing desire for that event, and so receive the grace. For
this reason Christ Himself departed, and then the Spirit descended. For
had He Himself been there, they would not have expected the Spirit so
earnestly as they did. On this account neither did He come immediately
after Christ’s Ascension, but after eight or nine days. It is the
same with us also; for our desires towards God are then most raised,
when we stand in need. Accordingly, John chose that time to send his
disciples to Christ when they were likely to feel their need of Jesus,
during his own imprisonment. Besides, it was fit that our nature should
be seen in heaven, and that the reconciliation should be perfected, and
then the Spirit should come, and the joy should be unalloyed. For, if
the Spirit being already come, Christ had then departed, and the Spirit
remained; the consolation would not have been so great as it was. For
in fact they clung to Him, and could not bear to part with Him;
wherefore also to comfort them He said, “It is expedient for you
that I go away.” (John xvi. 7.) On this account
He also waits during those intermediate days, that they might first
despond for awhile, and be made, as I said, to feel their need of Him.
and then reap a full and unalloyed delight. But if the Spirit were
inferior to the Son, the consolation would not have been adequate; and
how could He have said, “It is expedient for you?” For this
reason the greater matters of teaching were reserved for the Spirit,
that the disciples might not imagine Him inferior.
Consider also how necessary He
made it for them to abide in Jerusalem, by promising that the Spirit
should be granted them. For lest they should again flee away after His
Ascension, by this expectation, as by a bond, He keeps them to that
spot. But having said, “Wait for the promise of the Father, which
ye have heard of Me,” He then adds, “For John truly
baptized with water, but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not
many days hence.” (v. 4,
5.)
For now indeed He gives them to see the difference there was betwixt
Him and John, plainly, and not as heretofore in obscure hints; for in
fact He had spoken very obscurely, when He said,
“Notwithstanding, he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is
greater than he:” but now He says plainly, “John baptized
with water, but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.”
(Matt.
xi. 11.) And he no longer uses the testimony, but merely adverts to the
person of John, reminding the disciples of what he had said, and shows
them that they are now become greater than John; seeing they too are to
baptize with the Spirit. Again, He did not say, I baptize you with the
Holy Ghost, but, “Ye shall be baptized:” teaching us
humility. For this was plain enough from the testimonyof John, that it
was Christ Himself Who should baptize: “He it is that shall
baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire” (Luke iii. 16.);
wherefore also He made mention of John.19
19 So mss. C. F. D. and the Catena. The others have
μόνου
αὐτοῦ, “of him
(John) alone,” not of his testimony. |
The Gospels, then, are a history
of what Christ did and said; but the Acts, of what that “other
Comforter” said and did. Not but that the Spirit did many things
in the Gospels also; even as Christ here in the Acts still works in men
as He did in the Gospels: only then the Spirit wrought through the
Temple, now through the Apostles: then, He came into the Virgin’s
womb, and fashioned the Temple; now, into Apostolic souls: then in the
likeness of a dove; now, in the likeness of fire. And wherefore?
Showing there the gentleness of the Lord, but here His taking vengeance
also, He now puts them in mind of the judgment likewise. For, when need
was to forgive, need was there of much gentleness; but now we have
obtained the gift, it is henceforth a time for judgment and
examination.
But why does Christ say,
“Ye shall be baptized,” when in fact there was no water in
the upper room? Because the more essential part of Baptism is the
Spirit, through Whom indeed the water has its operation; in the same
manner our Lord also is said to be anointed, not that He had ever been
anointed with oil, but because He had received the Spirit. Besides, we
do in fact find them receiving a baptism with water [and a baptism with
the Spirit], and these at different moments. In our case both take
place under one act, but then they were divided. For in the beginning
they were baptized by John; since, if harlots and publicans went to
that baptism, much rather would they who thereafter were to be baptized
by the Holy Ghost. Then, that the Apostles might not say, that they
were always having it held out to them in promises (John xiv. 15, 16),
(for indeed Christ had already discoursed much to them concerning the
Spirit, that they should not imagine It to be an impersonal Energy or
Operation, (ἐνέργειαν
ἀνυπόστατον) that they might not say this, then, He adds, “not
many days hence.” And He did not explain when, that they might
always watch: but, that it would soon take place, He told them, that
they might not faint; yet the exact time He refrained from adding, that
they might always be vigilant. Nor does He assure them by this alone; I
mean, by the shortness of the time, but withal by saying, “The
promise which ye have heard of Me.” For this is not, saith He,
the only time I have told you, but already I have promised what I shall
certainly perform. What wonder then that He does not signify the day of
the final consummation, when this day which was so near He did not
choose to reveal? And with good reason; to the end they may be ever
wakeful, and in a state of expectation and earnest heed.
For it cannot, it cannot be,
that a man should enjoy the benefit of grace except he watch. Seest
thou not what Elias saith to his disciple? “If thou see me when I
am taken up” (2 Kings ii. 10),
this that thou askest shall be done for thee. Christ also was ever wont
to say unto those that came unto Him, “Believest thou?” For
if we be not appropriated and made over to the thing given,20
20 ᾽Εὰν
γὰρ μὴ
οἰκειωθῶμεν
πρὸς τὸ
διδόμενον. Erasm. Nisi rei datæ addicti
fuerimus. | neither do we greatly feel the benefit. So it
was also in the case of Paul; grace did not come to him immediately,
but three days intervened, during which he was blind; purified the
while, and prepared by fear. For as those who dye the purple first
season with other ingredients the cloth that is to receive the dye,
that the bloom may not be fleeting;21
21 Οἱ τὴν
ἁλουργίδα
βάπτοντες.…ἵνα
μὴ ἐξίτηλον
γένηται τὸ
ἄνθος. Comp. Plat.
Republ. iv. vol. i. p. 289. Stallb. Οὐκοῦν
οἶσθα, ἦν δ᾽
ἐγὼ, ὅτι οἱ
βαφεῖς,
ἐπειδὰν
βουληθῶσι
βάψαι ἔρια
ὥστ᾽ εἶναι
ἁλούργα,
πρῶτον μὲν
ἐκλέγονται
ἐκ τοσούτων
χρωμάτων
μίαν φύσιν
τὴν τῶν
λευκῶν,
ἔπειτα
προπαρασκευάζουσι
οὐκ ὀλίγῃ
παρα σκεύ& 219·
θεραπεύσαντες
ὅπως δέξεται
ὅτι μάλιστα
τὸ ἄνθος, καὶ
οὕτω δὴ
βάπτουσι. | so in this
instance God first takes order that the soul shall be thoroughly in
earnest, and then pours forth His grace. On this account also, neither
did He immediately send the Spirit, but on the fiftieth day. Now if any
one ask, why we also do not baptize at that season of Pentecost? we may
answer, that grace is the same now as then;22
22 The
question, fully expressed, is, ‘Why do we baptize, not at
Pentecost, but on Easter Eve?’ And the answer is,
‘Because the lenten fast forms a meet preparation for the
reception of baptism. And moreover, there is a reason which weighed
with our fathers, in respect of this season of the fifty days, the time
of the Church’s great festivity. The baptism newly received would
restrain the neophytes from giving loose to carnal lusts; having
prepared them to keep the feast with a holy and awful gladness.’
It should be borne in mind, that these Homilies were commenced during
the Πεντηκοστὴ, i.e. the period of fifty days between Easter and
Pentecost; at which season the Book of Acts was usually read in the
Churches. | but
the mind becomes more elevated now, by being prepared through fasting.
And the season too of Pentecost furnishes a not unlikely reason. What
may that be? Our fathers held Baptism to be just the proper curb upon
evil concupiscence, and a powerful lesson for teaching to be
sober-minded even in a time of delights.
As if then we were banquetting
with Christ Himself, and partaking of His table, let us do nothing at
random, but let us pass our time in fastings, and prayers, and much
sobriety of mind. For if a man who is destined to enter upon some
temporal government, prepares himself all his life long, and that he
may obtain some dignity, lays out his money, spends his time, and
submits to endless troubles; what shall we deserve, who draw near to
the kingdom of heaven with such negligence, and both show no
earnestness before we have received, and after having received are
again negligent? Nay, this is the very reason why we are negligent
after having received, that we did not watch before we had received.
Therefore many, after they have received, immediately have returned to
their former vomit, and have become more wicked, and drawn upon
themselves a more severe punishment; when having been delivered from
their former sins, herein they have more grievously provoked the Judge,
that having been delivered from so great a disease, still they did not
learn sobriety, but that has happened unto them, which Christ
threatened to the paralytic man, saying, “Behold thou art made
whole: sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee”
(John v. 14): and which He also predicted of the Jews, that “the last
state shall be worse than the first.” (Matt. xii. 45.) For if,
saith He, showing that by their ingratitude they should bring upon them
the worst of evils, “if I had not come, and spoken unto them,
they had not had sin” (John xv. 22); so that the
guilt of sins committed after these benefits is doubled and quadrupled,
in that, after the honour put upon us, we show ourselves ungrateful and
wicked. And the Laver of Baptism helps not a whit to procure for us a
milder punishment. And consider: a man has gotten grievous sins by
committing murder or adultery, or some other crime: these were
remitted through Baptism. For there is no sin, no impiety, which does
not yield and give place to this gift; for the Grace is Divine. A man
has again committed adultery and murder; the former adultery is indeed
done away, the murder forgiven, and not brought up again to his charge,
“for the gifts and calling of God are without repentance”
(Rom. xi. 29); but for those committed after Baptism he suffers a punishment
as great as he would if both the former sins were brought up again, and
many worse than these. For the guilt is no longer simply equal, but
doubled and tripled.23
23 This
view, that baptism cleansed from all sin, and that, therefore, sin
after baptism was far more heinous and hard to be forgiven, held wide
sway in the early church and operated as a powerful motive for the
delay of baptism. The reception of the grace of baptism involves this
increased liability to deadlier sin. For this reason Tertullian had
urged its postponement. “And so according to the circumstances
and disposition, and even age, of each individual, the delay of baptism
is preferable; principally, however, in the case of little
children.” “If any understand the weighty import of
baptism, they will fear its reception more than its delay,” etc.
De Baptismo, xviii. Chrys. did not carry the idea to this
length.—G.B.S. | Look: in proof that
the penalty of these sins is greater, hear what St. Paul says:
“He that despised Moses’ law died without mercy, under two
or three witnesses: of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he
be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath
counted the blood of the covenant an unholy thing, and hath done
despite unto the Spirit of grace?” (Heb. x. 28, 29.)
Perhaps we have now deterred
many from receiving baptism. Not however with this intention have we so
spoken, but on purpose that having received it, they may continue in
temperance and much moderation. ‘But I am afraid,’ says
one. If thou wert afraid, thou wouldest have received and guarded it.
‘Nay,’ saith he, ‘but this is the very reason why I
do not receive it,—that I am frightened.’ And art thou not
afraid to depart thus? ‘God is merciful,’ saith he. Receive
baptism then, because He is merciful and ready to help. But thou, where
to be in earnest is the thing required, dost not allege this
mercifulness; thou thinkest of this only where thou hast a mind to do
so. And yet that was the time to resort to God’s mercy, and we
shall then be surest of obtaining it, when we do our part. For he that
has cast the whole matter upon God, and, after his baptism, sins, as
being man it is likely, he may, and repents, shall obtain mercy;
whereas he that prevaricates with God’s mercy, and departs this
life with no portion in that grace, shall have his punishment without a
word to be said for him. ‘But how if he depart,’ say you,
‘after having had the grace vouchsafed to him?’ He will
depart empty again of all good works.24
24 Τί οὖν ἃν
καταξιωθείς
φησιν
ἀπελεύσεται
πάλιν κενὸς
κατορθωμάτων, Cod. C, and so A, but with ἀπελεύσῃ In the latter recension this
sentence is omitted, and instead of it, we have, Τί δὲ ταῦτα
κατὰ τῆς
σεαυτοῦ
σωτηρίας
προβάλλῃ; ‘But why dost thou put forth such pretences against thine
own salvation?’ Chrys. had just said, ἀπελθὼν
ἄμοιρος τῆς
χάριτος
ἀπαιραίτητον
ἕξει τὴν
τιμωρίον. The objector (with the usual prevaricating formula, τί οὖν ἐ&
129·ν τὸ καὶ
τό; Hom. in Matt. 229 D.)
says: τί
οὖν ἂν
καταξιωθεὶς, sc. τῆς
χαριτὸς
ἀπέλθῃ; to
which Chrys. answers: ᾽Απελεύσεται
πάλιν κενὸς
κατορθωμάτων: He will depart as empty of good works as he was before
his baptism: adding, For it is, I think, utterly impossible that such
an one [though he should live ever so long after baptism] would have
wrought out his own salvation. | For it is
impossible, yes, it is in my opinion impossible, that the man who upon
such hopes dallied with baptism should have effected ought generous and
good. And why dost thou harbor such fear, and presume upon the
uncertain chance of the future? Why not convert this fear into labor
and earnestness, and thou shalt be great and admirable? Which is best,
to fear or to labor? Suppose some one to have placed thee, having
nothing to do, in a tottering house, saying, Look for the decaying roof
to fall upon thy head: for perhaps it will fall, perhaps not; but if
thou hadst rather it should not, then work and inhabit the more secure
apartment: which wouldest thou have rather chosen, that idle condition
accompanied with fear, or this labor with confidence? Why then, act now
in the same way. For the uncertain future is like a decayed house, ever
threatening to fall; but this work, laborious though it be, ensures
safety.
Now God forbid that it should
happen to us to fall into so great straits as to sin after baptism.
However, even if aught such should happen, God is merciful, and has
given us many ways of obtaining remission even after this. But just as
those who sin after baptism are punished for this reason more severely
than the Catechumens, so again, those who know that there are medicines
in repentance, and yet will not make use of them, will undergo a more
grievous chastisement. For by how much the mercy of God is enlarged, by
so much does the punishment increase, if we do not duly profit by that
mercy. What sayest thou, O man? When thou wast full of such grievous
evils, and given over, suddenly thou becamest a friend, and wast
exalted to the highest honor, not by labors of thine own, but by the
gift of God: thou didst again return to thy former misconduct; and
though thou didst deserve to be sorely punished, nevertheless, God did
not turn away, but gave unnumbered opportunities of salvation, whereby
thou mayest yet become a friend: yet for all this, thou hast not the
will to labor. What forgiveness canst thou deserve henceforth? Will not
the Gentiles with good reason deride thee as a worthless drone? For if
there be power in that doctrine of yours, say they, what means this
multitude of uninitiated persons? If the mysteries be excellent and
desirable, let none receive baptism at his last gasp. For that is not
the time for giving of mysteries but for making of wills; the time for
mysteries is in health of mind and soundness of soul. For, if a man
would not prefer to make his will in such a condition; and if he does
so make it, he gives a handle for subsequent litigation (and this is
the reason why testators premise these words: “Alive, in my
senses, and in health, I make this disposal of my property:”),
how should it be possible for a person who is no longer master of his
senses to go through the right course of preparation for the sacred
mysteries?25
25 Μετὰ
ἀκριβείας
μυσταγωγεῖσθαι: alluding to the κατήχησις
μυσταγωγική, i.e. the course of instruction by which the catechumens
were prepared for baptism. See the Catechetical Discourses of St. Cyril
of Jerusalem. | For if in the affairs of this life, the
laws of the world would not permit a man who was not perfectly sound in
mind to make a will, although it be in his own affairs that he would
lay down the law; how, when thou art receiving instruction concerning
the kingdom of heaven, and the unspeakable riches of that world, shall
it be possible for thee to learn all clearly, when very likely too thou
art beside thyself through the violence of thy malady? And when wilt
thou say those words26
26 Τὰ ῥ& 208·ματα
ἐκεῖνα: i.e.
not (as Ben. seems to interpret) “Buried with Christ;” as
if this were part of the form of words put into the mouth of the person
to be baptized; but the words, “I renounce thee, O Satan, and all
thy angels, and all thy service, and all thy pomp: and I enlist myself
with Thee, O Christ.” St. Chrysost. Serm. ad pop. Antioch,
xxi. p. 244. The words, “buried with Him,” serve to show
more clearly the absurdity of such delay: “we are ‘buried
with Christ in His death,’ that we may rise again to newness of
life, not that we should pass at once from the spiritual burial to the
literal.” | to Christ, in the act
of being buried with Him when at the point to depart hence? For indeed
both by works and by words must we show our good will towards Him.
(Rom. vi. 4.) Now what thou art doing is all one, as if a man should want to
be enlisted as a soldier, when the war is just about to break up; or to
strip for the contest in the arena, just when the spectators have risen
from their seats. For thou hast thine arms given thee, not that thou
shouldest straightway depart hence, but that being equipped therewith,
thou mayest raise a trophy over the enemy. Let no one think that it is
out of season to discourse on this subject, because it is not Lent now.
Nay, this it is that vexes me, that ye look to a set time in such
matters. Whereas that Eunuch, barbarian as he was and on a journey, yea
on the very highway, he did not seek for a set time (Acts viii. 27);
no, nor the jailer, though he was in the midst of a set of prisoners,
and the teacher he saw before him was a man scourged and in chains, and
whom he was still to have in his custody. (ib. xvi. 29.) But here, not being
inmates of a jail, nor out on a journey, many are putting off their
baptism even to their last breath.
Now if thou still questionest
that Christ is God, stand away from the Church: be not here, even as a
hearer of the Divine Word, and as one of the catechumens:27
27 The
catechumens were allowed to be present at the first part of the service
(Missa catechumenorum); and were dismissed after the Sermon,
before the proper Prayers of the Church, or Missa
Fidelium. | but if thou art sure of this, and knowest
clearly this truth, why delay? Why shrink back and hesitate? For fear,
say you, lest I should sin. But dost thou not fear what is worse, to
depart for the next world with such a heavy burden? For it is not
equally excusable, not to have gotten a grace set before you, and to
have failed in attempting to live uprightly. If thou be called to
account, Why didst thou not come for it? what wilt thou answer? In the
other case thou mayest allege the burden of thy passions, and the
difficulty of a virtuous life: but nothing of the kind here. For here
is grace, freely conveying liberty. But thou fearest lest thou
shouldest sin? Let this be thy language after Baptism: and then
entertain this fear, in order to hold fast the liberty thou hast
received; not now, to prevent thy receiving such a gift. Whereas now
thou art wary before baptism, and negligent after it. But thou art
waiting for Lent: and why? Has that season any advantage? Nay, it was
not at the Passover that the Apostles received28
28 Κατηξιώθησαν
τῆς
χάριτος, as
above, p. 8, note 1, τί
οὖν ἄν
καταξιωθείς; | the
grace, but at another season; and then three thousand (Luke says,) and
five thousand were baptized: (ch.
ii. 41; iv. 4, and ch. x.) and again Cornelius.
Let us then not wait for a set time, lest by hesitating and putting off
we depart empty, and destitute of so great gifts. What do you suppose
is my anguish when I hear that any person has been taken away
unbaptized, while I reflect upon the intolerable punishments of that
life, the inexorable doom! Again, how I am grieved to behold others
drawing near to their last gasp, and not brought to their right mind
even then. Hence too it is that scenes take place quite unworthy of
this gift. For whereas there ought to be joy, and dancing, and
exultation, and wearing of garlands, when another is christened; the
wife of the sick man has no sooner heard that the physician has ordered
this, than she is overcome with grief, as if it were some dire
calamity; she sets up the greatest lamentation, and nothing is heard
all over the house but crying and wailing, just as it is when condemned
criminals are led away to their doom. The sick man again is then more
sorely grieved; and if he recovers from his illness, is as vexed as if
some great harm had been done to him. For since he had not been
prepared for a virtuous life, he has no heart for the conflicts which
are to follow, and shrinks at the thought of them. Do you see what
devices the devil contrives, what shame, what ridicule? Let us rid
ourselves of this disgrace; let us live as Christ has enjoined. He gave
us Baptism, not that we should receive and depart, but that we should
show the fruits of it in our after life. How can one say to him who is
departing and broken down, Bear fruit? Hast thou not heard that
“the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace?”
(Gal. v. 22.) How comes it then that the very contrary takes place here? For
the wife stands there mourning, when she ought to rejoice; the children
weeping, when they ought to be glad together; the sick man himself lies
there in darkness, and surrounded by noise and tumult, when he ought to
be keeping high festival; full of exceeding despondency at the thought
of leaving his children orphans, his wife a widow, his house desolate.
Is this a state in which to draw near unto mysteries? answer me; is
this a state in which to approach the sacred table?29
Are such scenes to be tolerated? Should the Emperor send letters and
release the prisoners in the jails, there is joy and gladness: God
sends down the Holy Ghost from Heaven to remit not arrears of money,
but a whole mass of sins, and do ye all bewail and lament? Why, how
grossly unsuitable is this! Not to mention that sometimes it is upon
the dead that the water has been poured, and holy mysteries flung upon
the ground. However, not we are to blame for this, but men who are so
perverse. I exhort you then to leave all, and turn and draw near to
Baptism with all alacrity, that having given proof of great earnestness
at this present time, we may obtain confidence for that which is to
come; whereunto that we may attain, may it be granted unto us all by
the grace and mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ, to Whom be glory and
power for ever and ever. Amen.E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|