Homilies on Hebrews 3.1–3.5

“… let all the angels of God worship him.” And of the angels … “… a flame of fire”; but of the Son, “Your throne, O God …” Our Lord Jesus Christ calls his coming in the flesh a going out, as when he says, “The sower went out to sow,” and again, “I came out from my Father, and I have come”; and one may see this in many places. But Paul calls it a bringing in, saying, “And when again he brings the firstborn into the world,” calling the taking of the flesh this bringing in. Why then do they use different words about him, and in what sense is each said? It is clear from the very things signified. Christ rightly calls his own coming a going out, for we were outside, away from God. And just as in palaces the prisoners and those who have offended the king stand outside, and the one who wishes to reconcile them does not bring them inside, but goes out himself and speaks with them outside, until, having made them worthy of the king’s sight, he brings them in; so Christ too did. For he came out to us, that is, took flesh, and spoke to us the king’s message, and so brought us in, having both cleansed us of our sins and reconciled us. That is why he calls it a going out. But Paul names it a bringing in, by a metaphor from those who inherit and take possession of an estate or some property. For to say, “And when again he brings the firstborn into the world,” is the language of one showing “when he puts the world into his hands”; for then he gained possession of it all, when he also became known. And he says these things not about God the Word, but about Christ according to the flesh; and rightly. For if he was in the world, according to John, and the world came into being through him, how could he have been brought in otherwise than in the flesh? “And let all the angels of God,” he says, “worship him.” When he is about to say something great and lofty, he prepares the way for it beforehand and makes it easy to accept by making the Father the one who brings in the Son. And consider: he said above that he spoke to us not through prophets but through the Son; he showed that the Son is better than angels, establishing this both from the name and from the Father’s bringing in the Son. Here now he establishes it from another thing too. What is that? From the worship; and this also shows by how much he is better: by as much as a master is better than a slave. Therefore, just as when someone brings a person into a king’s house he at once orders those in charge of it to bow down to him, so he too does, speaking of the bringing into the world of what is according to the flesh, and adding for this reason, “And let all the angels of God worship him.” Is it angels only, then, and not the other powers too? Away with the thought! Hear what follows: “And of his angels he says, Who makes his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire; but of the Son, Your throne, O God, is forever and ever.” See the greatest difference: that they are created, but he is uncreated. And why does he say of his angels, “who makes,” but of the Son why did he not say “who makes”? And yet one could have stated the difference this way: of his angels he says, “Who makes his angels spirits,” but of the Son, “The Lord created me,” and again, “God has made him both Lord and Christ.” But neither was that said of the Son as God, nor this of God the Word, but of what is according to the flesh. For where he showed the true difference, he no longer included angels only, but also the whole ministering power above. Do you see how he distinguishes, and with what clarity, creatures and Creator, ministers and Master, the heir and genuine Son and slaves? “But of the Son he says, Your throne, O God, is forever and ever.” See a symbol of kingship. “A scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom.” See again another symbol of kingship. Then again to what is according to the flesh: “You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; therefore God, your God, has anointed you.” What is “your God”? Since he had uttered something great, he again softens it. Here he has struck down the Jews, and the followers of Paul of Samosata, and the Arians, and Marcellus and Sabellius, and Marcion. How? The Jews, by showing that the same one is two things, both God and man; the others, I mean those of Paul of Samosata, by discoursing on his eternal existence and uncreated essence; for in contrast to “I made” he has set “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever.” Against the Arians, both this same thing again and that he is not a slave; but if he is a creature, he is a slave. Against Marcellus and the others, that these are two persons, distinct in hypostasis; and against the Marcionites, that it is not the Godhead that is anointed, but the humanity. Then he says, “beyond your fellows.” And who are the fellows, if not men? That is, [he received] the Spirit not by measure …

Do you see how he always joins the account of the dispensation to that of the uncreated nature? What is clearer than this? Have you seen that a creature and an offspring are not the same? For otherwise he would not have distinguished them, and in contrast to “he made” added, “But to the Son he said, Your throne, O God, is forever and ever”; nor would he have called the name “Son” a more excellent name, if it were a sign of the same thing. For what is the difference? If creature and offspring are the same, and they were made, what is more excellent? See again “God” with the article. And again he says, “In the beginning, Lord, you founded the earth, and the heavens are the works of your hands. They will perish, but you remain; and they will all grow old like a garment, and like a cloak you will roll them up, and they will be changed; but you are the same, and your years will not fail.” So that you may not, on hearing, “And when he brings the firstborn into the world,” think it a gift given to him later, he corrects this by saying, “In the beginning”: not now, but from of old. See again, he strikes both Paul of Samosata and Arius a deadly blow, fitting to the Son what belongs to the Father. And besides this he hinted at something else in passing, and greater than this; for he indicated the transformation of the world, saying, “They will grow old like a garment, and like a cloak you will roll them up, and they will be changed”; which he says in the Epistle to the Romans too, that he will transform the world. And showing the ease of it, he added, “you will roll up.” For just as someone might roll up a cloak, so he will both roll up and change the world. And if he works the transformation and making for the better and the greater so easily, did he need another for the lesser making? How long will you not be ashamed? At the same time this is also the greatest consolation, to know that things will not stay as they are, but all things will receive a change, and all things will be altered, while he remains forever living, and living without end: “And your years,” he says, “will not fail.” “But to which of the angels has he ever said, Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet?” See, again he encourages them, if indeed their enemies were going to be defeated; and their enemies are the same as Christ’s. This again belongs to kingship, to equality of honor, to honor, not to weakness: that the Father is angered over what is done to the Son; this is a sign of great love and genuineness, as of a father toward a son. For he who is angered on his behalf, how is he a stranger to him? “Until I make your enemies.” As he says in the second psalm too: “He who dwells in heaven will laugh at them, and the Lord will mock them. Then he will speak to them in his anger, and in his wrath he will trouble them.” And again he himself says, “Those who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here before me and slay them.” For that the words are his, hear what he says elsewhere too: “How often I wished to gather your children together, and you would not! See, your house is left to you desolate.” And again, “The kingdom will be taken from you and given to a nation producing its fruits”; and again, “Whoever falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; but on whomever it falls, it will crush him.” Besides, he who is going to judge them there, much more exacted the penalty here for their outrage against him. So “until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet” belongs only to the honor paid to the Son. “Are they not all ministering spirits, sent out for service for the sake of those who are to inherit salvation?” What wonder is it, he says, if they minister to the Son, when they minister even for our salvation? See how he lifts up their minds, and shows the great honor of God toward us, since he has appointed angels, who are above us, to have this ministry on our behalf. As one might say, For this he uses them, he says; this is the angels’ service, to minister to God for our salvation. So this is the work of angels, to do everything for the salvation of the brothers; or rather it is the work of Christ himself; for he saves as Master, they as servants. And we, though servants, are fellow servants of angels. Why do you gape at the angels, he says? They are servants of the Son of God, and they are sent in many places on our account and minister for our salvation; so they are our fellow servants. Consider how he does not make much difference among creatures; and yet the distance between angels and men is great; but nevertheless he brings them down near us, all but saying: they toil for us, they run about on our account, they serve us, as one might say. This is their ministry, to be sent everywhere for our sake.

3. And the Old Testament is full of these examples, and the New is full too. For when angels bring good news to shepherds, when to Mary, when to Joseph, when they sit at the tomb, when they are sent to say to the disciples, “Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into heaven?”, when they release Peter from prison, when they … to Philip, how do they not serve us? Consider, then, how great the honor is, when God sends the angels as servants as to friends; when an angel appears to Cornelius, when an angel brings all the apostles out of the prison and says, “Go, stand and speak in the temple to the people all the words of this life.” Why do I speak of the others? An angel appears even to Paul himself. Do you see them ministering to us for God’s sake, and ministering in the greatest matters? That is why Paul says, “All things are yours, whether life or death or the world, or things present or things to come.” The Son too was sent, but not as a servant, nor as a minister, but as Son and Only-begotten, and willing the same things as the Father. Or rather, he was not even sent; for he did not pass from place to place, but took flesh; whereas these change places, and leaving the former ones where they are, so come to others where they were not. And again he says this to encourage them: Why are you afraid? Angels minister to us. And having spoken of the Son, of what concerns the dispensation, the creation and the kingdom, and having shown his equality of honor, and that he rules as Master not only over men but also over the powers above, he then exhorts them, having prepared his argument, so that we may give heed to what has been heard, and says, “Therefore we must give heed the more abundantly to what we have heard.” Here, though he wished to say that one must give heed more abundantly than to the law, he kept silent about it, yet he made it plain all the same by the argument, not by advice or by exhortation; for so it was better. “For if the word spoken through angels,” he says, “proved firm, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompense … neglect so great a salvation? Which, having at the first begun to be spoken by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those who heard.” Why must we give heed more abundantly to what we have heard? Are not both those things and these of God? He says, then, either “more abundantly than to the law,” or “greatly”; not comparing, God forbid. For since because of the long time they held the Old [Covenant] in great esteem, while these things, as being new, were still despised, he shows with abundant force that one must give heed to these more. How? All but saying that both these and those are of God, but not in the same way. And this he shows us later; for the present he establishes it more on the surface, later more plainly, saying, “For if that first had been faultless”; and again, “What is becoming old and growing aged is near to vanishing away”; and many other such things. But he does not yet dare to say anything of this kind in the opening, until he has prepared and held fast the hearer with more preliminary arguments. Tell me, why then must we give heed more abundantly? “Lest,” he says, “we drift away”; that is, lest we perish, lest we fall away. And here he shows the grievousness of falling away, that it is difficult for what has drifted away to come back again, since it happened through carelessness. He took the word from the Proverbs: “My son,” it says, “do not drift away”; showing both the ease of the slip and the grievousness of the destruction; that is, disobedience is not without danger for us. And by the argument he shows that the punishment is greater; but he leaves it again in the inquiry, and not in the conclusion. For this is to make one’s discourse inoffensive: not to pronounce the judgment everywhere by bringing it in oneself, but to leave the hearer master, so that he himself may cast the vote; which also made them more reasonable. The prophet Nathan does this too in the Old [Testament], and Christ in Matthew, saying, “What will he do to those tenants of the vineyard?” and compelling them to bring in the verdict themselves; for this is the greatest victory. Then, having said, “For if the word spoken through angels proved firm,” he did not add, “much more the word through Christ”; he let this be, and said the lesser thing: “How shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation?” And see how he makes the comparison. “For if the word spoken through angels,” he says. There “through angels,” here “through the Lord”; and there “a word,” here “salvation.” Then, so that no one may say, “What then? Are the things you say, Paul, Christ’s?”, he anticipates and shows that they are trustworthy. He shows their trustworthiness both by his having heard them from those who heard Christ, and by their being spoken now by God, not by a voice simply borne along, as in Moses’ case, but with signs taking place and deeds bearing witness.

And what is, “For if the word spoken through angels proved firm”? In the Epistle to the Galatians too he says something like this: “ordained through angels by the hand of a mediator”; and again, “You received the law as ordained by angels, and did not keep it”; and everywhere he says that it was given through angels. Some, then, say that he hints at Moses; but this is unreasonable; for here he speaks of many angels. And by angels here he means those in heaven. What, then, can one say? Either he means the Ten Commandments only (for there Moses spoke and God answered), or that angels were present while God gave the ordinance; or he says these things about everything said and done in the Old [Testament], as angels having taken part in them. But how does he say elsewhere, “The law was given through Moses,” and here “through angels”? For it says, “And God came down in the thick darkness.” “For if the word spoken through angels proved firm.” What is “firm”? True, as one might say, and trustworthy, because everything that was said came to pass at the proper time; either he means this, or that it prevailed, and the threats came to fulfillment; or by “word” he means the commands. For angels sent from God gave many commands apart from the law: for example, at the Place of Weeping, in the time of the Judges, in the case of Samson. For this reason he did not say “law,” but “word.” And perhaps he seems to me to say this, meaning rather the things administered through the angels. What then shall we say? That the angels to whom the nation had been entrusted were present then, and they themselves made the trumpets and the other things, the fire, the thick darkness. “And every transgression,” he says, “and disobedience received a just recompense.” Not one did and another did not, but every one. “Recompense,” instead of “punishment.” And why did he speak so? It is Paul’s custom not to make much account of words, but to use words of ill sound for good things indifferently, as elsewhere he says, “taking every thought captive to the obedience of Christ.” And again elsewhere he has put “recompense” for punishment, and here he calls punishment a “wage.” “If indeed it is just with God,” he says, “to repay with affliction those who afflict you, and with rest you who are afflicted.” That is, justice was not destroyed, but God followed it up and turned the penalty back on those who had sinned; and yet not all sins become manifest unless the ordinances are transgressed. “How then shall we,” he says, “escape if we neglect so great a salvation?” By this he made plain that that salvation was not a great one. And he rightly added “so great.” For not from wars, he says, will he save us now, nor will he give the land and the good things in the land, but there will be the destruction of death, the ruin of the devil, the kingdom of heaven, eternal life. For he showed all these things in brief by saying, “if we neglect so great a salvation.” Then he adds its trustworthiness too: “which, having at the first begun to be spoken by the Lord”; that is, it had its beginning from the very fountain; no man ferried it across to earth, no created power, but the Only-begotten himself. “It was confirmed to us by those who heard.” What is “was confirmed”? It was believed, or it came to pass. “For we have the pledge,” he says; that is, it was not quenched, it did not cease, but it prevails and overcomes. And the cause is that the divine power works. What is “by those who heard”? That is, those who heard from the Lord confirmed us themselves. This is a great and trustworthy thing. As Luke too says at the beginning of the Gospel: “Just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us.” How then was it confirmed? What then, he says, if those who heard made it up? Doing away with this, then, and showing that the grace is not human, he added, “God also bearing witness with them.” For if they had made it up, God would not have borne witness to them. They bear witness, and God too bears witness. How does he bear witness? Not by word, nor by voice (though this too would have been trustworthy), but how? “By signs and wonders and various powers.” He rightly put “various powers,” showing the abundance of the gifts; which did not happen in the case of those of earlier times, neither so many signs nor so varied. That is, we did not believe them simply, but through signs and wonders. So it is not them we believe, but God himself. “And by distributions of the Holy Spirit according to his will.” What then of the fact that sorcerers too do signs, and the Jews said that he cast out demons by Beelzebul? But they do not do such signs; that is why he said, “by various powers.” For those are not power, but weakness and illusion and empty things. That is why he said, “by distributions of the Holy Spirit according to his will.”

Here he seems to me to hint at something else too. For it is likely that there were not many there who had gifts, and that these had failed, since they had become more sluggish. So, to console them in this too, and not let them fall down, he referred everything to the will of God. He himself knows, he says, what is profitable for each, and so he distributes the grace; which he does in the Epistle to the Corinthians too, saying, “God has placed each one of us as he willed”; and again, “To each the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good, according to his will.” He shows that the gift is according to the Father’s will. And often many did not receive a gift because of an impure and sluggish life; and sometimes those who had a good and pure life did not receive one. Why? So that they might not become careless, so that they might not be lifted up further. For if even without a gift the very consciousness of a pure life is enough to lift one up, much more when grace is added. So it was given rather to the lowly and the simple, and especially to the simple; for “in simplicity,” it says, “and gladness of heart.” And indeed by this he urged them on the more, and if they were rather careless, he pricked their conscience. For the lowly man who does not imagine great things about himself becomes more … when he receives a gift, as having received it beyond his desert and judging himself not worthy; but the one who thinks he has achieved something considers the thing a debt and is puffed up. So God arranges this matter for our profit. And one may see this happening in the church too: one has the word of teaching, another cannot even open his mouth. Let no one, then, be grieved at this; “for to each the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good.” For if a man who is master of a house knows what to entrust to whom, much more does God, who knows the mind of men, who knows all things before they come to be. One thing only is worth grieving over, sinning, and nothing else. Do not say, “Why do I not have money?” or, “If I had it, I would have given to the poor.” You do not know, if you had it, whether you would not rather be covetous. Now you say these things, but when put to the test you would be another person. For when we are well fed, we think we can fast; but when we go a little without, another thought comes over us. Again, when we are free of drunkenness, we think we can overcome the passion; but when we are caught by it, no longer. Do not say, “Why did I not receive the gift of teaching?” or, “If I had it, I would have built up countless people.” You do not know, if you had it, whether it would not have turned to your condemnation, whether envy, whether sloth would not have led you to hide the talent. Now you are free of all these things, and if you do not give out the measure of grain, you are not accused; but then you would be answerable for countless things. And besides, not even now are you without the gift. Show in the little what you would be if you had that; for “if you are not faithful in the little,” he says, “who will give you the great?” Show it as the widow did: she had two lepta, and she put in all that she possessed. Do you seek money? Show that you despise the little, so that I may believe you about the much too; but if you do not despise even this, much less would you despise that. Again, in the matter of speech, show that you have used exhortation and counsel as you should. You do not have the eloquence from outside? You do not have an abundance of ideas? Yet you know these common things. You have a child, you have a neighbor, you have a friend, you have a brother, you have relatives; even if you cannot deliver a long discourse publicly in the church, you can exhort these privately. Here there is no need of rhetoric, nor of a long discourse; show in these that, if you had the gift of speech, you would not have neglected it. But if you are not diligent in the little, how am I to believe you about the great? For that each one can do this, hear how Paul entrusted it even to lay people: “Build one another up,” he says, “as indeed you are doing”; and, “Comfort one another with these words.” God knows how to distribute to each. Are you better than Moses? Hear how he complains: “Am I able,” he says, “to carry them, because you said to me, Carry them, as a nurse carries the suckling child?” What then did God do? He took from his spirit and gave it to the others, showing that even when he was carrying them, this gift was not his, but the Spirit’s. If you had the gift, you would often have been lifted up, often turned aside; you do not know yourself as God knows you. Let us not say, “To what end is this? And why this?” When God arranges things, let us not demand an account of him; for this belongs to the extreme of impiety and madness. We are slaves, and slaves far removed from the Master, not knowing even what lies at our feet. Let us not, then, busy ourselves with God’s counsel, but let us guard what he has given, even if it is small, even if it is the least, and we shall certainly be approved. Or rather, none of God’s gifts is small. Are you pained because you do not have the gift of teaching? Tell me, then, which seems greater to you, the gift of teaching or the gift of healing? Surely the latter. And what of this: does not giving sight to the blind seem greater to you than driving away diseases? Does not raising the dead seem greater? And what, tell me? Does not doing this by shadows and handkerchiefs seem greater to you than doing it by a word? Which then do you want, tell me: to raise the dead by shadows and handkerchiefs, or to have the gift of teaching? Surely the former, you will say, to raise the dead by shadows and handkerchiefs.