Homilies on John 4.1–4.4

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God.” With children who are just being introduced to their lessons, teachers do not lay many burdens on them in succession, nor all at once; they din into them short pieces, and the same ones many times over, so that what is said may lodge easily in their minds, and so that they may not, by being discouraged at the outset by the quantity and by the difficulty of retaining it, become more sluggish in gathering what is given them, as a kind of numbness comes over them from the difficulty. I too, wishing to achieve this and to make your labor light, take a little at a time from this divine table and so put it into your souls. That is why I shall touch on the same words again, not to say the same things again, but only to add what is lacking. Come, then, let us bring the discourse back to the opening. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God.”

Why is it that, while all the other evangelists began from the economy (for Matthew says, “The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David”; Luke at the beginning tells us what concerns Mary; and Mark likewise dwells on the same matters, weaving from there the story of the Baptist), John hinted at this briefly and only later, saying, “And the Word became flesh,” but passing over everything else, the conception, the birth, the upbringing, the growth, tells us at once of the eternal begetting? What the reason for this is, I shall now tell you. Since the other evangelists had dwelt for the most part on the accounts concerning the flesh, there was a fear that some, being earthbound, might for this reason remain in these doctrines alone, as happened to Paul of Samosata. So, to lead up out of this groveling those who were about to fall into it and to draw them up to heaven, he naturally makes the beginning of his narrative from above and from the eternal existence. For while Matthew entered on his narrative from Herod the king, Luke from Tiberius Caesar, and Mark from the baptism of John, he leaves all these and goes up above all time and age, launching the minds of his hearers up there, to “In the beginning was,” not allowing them to stop anywhere, nor setting a limit, as they did with Herod, Tiberius, and John. And what is especially worth admiring along with this is that neither did he, in giving himself to the loftier discourse, neglect the economy, nor did they, though eager to narrate it, keep silent about the existence before the ages; and very reasonably. For it was one Spirit that moved the souls of all; that is why they showed great agreement in their proclamation.

But you, beloved, when you hear “Word,” never tolerate those who say that he is a work, nor even those who think that he is simply a word. For there are many words of God, which the angels too perform; but none of those words is God; all of them are prophecies and commands (for Scripture is accustomed to call the laws of God, his injunctions, and his prophecies, “words”; that is why it says of the angels, “mighty in strength, performing his word”). But this Word is a being that subsists in its own right, proceeding from the Father himself without passion. This, as I said before, he showed by the name “Word.” As, then, “In the beginning was the Word” shows his eternity, so “He was in the beginning with God” has shown us his co-eternity. For lest, on hearing that “In the beginning was the Word,” you should think him eternal but suppose the Father’s life to be older by some interval and a longer age, and so give the Only-begotten a beginning, he added that “He was in the beginning with God”: as eternal as the Father himself; for the Father was never without the Word, but God was always with God, though in his own hypostasis.

“How then,” someone says, “did he say, He was in the world, if he was with God?” Because he was both with God and in the world. For neither the Father nor the Son is bounded anywhere. For if “there is no limit to his greatness” and “there is no number to his understanding,” it is plain that there is no beginning in time to his essence either. You heard that “In the beginning God made the heaven and the earth”? What do you understand by this beginning? Plainly, that they came into being before all visible things. So also, hearing of the Only-begotten that “In the beginning he was,” understand him to be before all intelligible things and before the ages. And if anyone should say, “How can he be Son and not be younger than the Father? For what is from someone must necessarily be later than that from which it is,” we shall say that, properly speaking, these are reasonings of men; whoever inquires into this will inquire into other things more absurd still, and such things ought not even to be admitted to the hearing. For our discourse now is about God, not about the nature of men, which is subject to the sequence and necessity of these reasonings. Nevertheless, for the assurance of the weaker, we shall speak to these points too.

For tell me, does the radiance of the sun spring from the very nature of the sun, or from somewhere else? Anyone whose senses are not maimed must confess that it comes from the sun itself. And yet, though the radiance is from the sun itself, we would never say that it is later than the sun’s nature, since the sun has never appeared without its radiance. If, then, in these visible and sensible bodies something has been shown to be from something else and yet not later than that from which it is, why do you disbelieve it in the case of the invisible and ineffable nature? The same thing holds there, in the way that befits that essence. This is why Paul too called him so, presenting both that he is from him and that he is co-eternal with him. What then? Tell me, were not all the ages and every interval made through him? Anyone not out of his mind must confess it. So there is nothing between the Son and the Father. And if nothing, he is not later but co-eternal. For “before” and “after” are notions that indicate times; without an age or time no one could conceive of these words; but God is above times and ages. And if you say that the Son received a beginning at all, see that you are not forced by this argument and reasoning to bring the Father too under a beginning, an older one, but a beginning nonetheless. For tell me, do you not assign a limit and beginning to the Son, and then, proceeding upward from it, say that the Father existed before him? Plainly so. Tell me, then, by how much does the Father pre-exist? Whether you say the interval is small or great, you have brought the Father under a beginning. For plainly it is by measuring the interval that you will say it is small or great; and it cannot be measured unless there is a beginning at both ends. So you have given the Father too a beginning, as far as it depends on you, and on your view not even the Father will any longer be without beginning. Do you see that what the Savior said is true, and that the saying shows its power everywhere? What saying is that? “He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father.”

I know that what has been said is beyond the grasp of many; that is why in many places we put off raising arguments drawn from reasoning, because the rest of the people could not follow them, and even if they followed, [human] conceptions have nothing firm and secure. But I would gladly ask those who contradict us this as well: what is the meaning of what is said in the prophet, “Before me there was no God, and after me there is none”? For if the Son is younger than the Father, how does he say, “After me there is none”? Will you then do away with the very essence of the Only-begotten? For you must either dare this or accept one Godhead in the proper hypostasis of Father and Son. And how at all is “All things came into being through him” true? For if there is an age older than he, how could what was before him have come into being through him? Do you see into what daring their argument has led them once the truth was disturbed? For why did the evangelist not say that he came into being out of what was not, as Paul declares of all things when he says, “who calls the things that are not as though they were,” but says, “In the beginning was”? This is the opposite of that, and very reasonably. For God neither comes into being nor has anything older than himself; those are the words of the Greeks. Tell me this too: would you not say that the creator surpasses his works beyond comparison? When, then, he is like them in being out of what was not, where is the surpassing beyond comparison? And what at all is the meaning of, “I am first, and I am after these things,” and, “Before me there was no God”? For if the Son is not of the same essence, he is another God; if he is not co-eternal, he is after him; and if he did not proceed from the essence, it is plain that he came into being.

And if they should say that these things were said to mark a contrast with the idols, why do they not grant that “the only true God” is said to mark a contrast with the idols? And if this was said in contrast with the idols, how will you interpret the whole saying? For “After me,” he says, “there is no other God.” He says this not to exclude the Son, but meaning that there is no idol-god after me, not that there is no Son. “Yes,” he says. What then? Will you take “Before me there was no other God” in the same way too, that no idol-god came into being, but a Son nevertheless came into being before him? And what demon would say this? I do not think even the devil himself would say it. Besides, if he is not co-eternal with the Father, how will you call his life infinite? For if it has a beginning from above, even if it is without end, it is still not infinite; for the infinite must be infinite in both directions. This is what Paul showed when he said, “having neither beginning of days nor end of life,” showing by this that he is both without beginning and without end. For as the one has no limit, neither has the other; there is no end on this side and no beginning on that.

And how, being life, was there ever a time when he was not? For all would confess that life is always, and is without beginning and without end, if it is truly life, as indeed it is. But if there is a time when it is not, how could it be the life of others, when it itself at one time was not? “How then,” someone says, “did John set a beginning, saying, In the beginning was?” Tell me, you attended to “In the beginning” and to “was”; do you not consider “the Word was” as well? What, then, when the prophet says of the Father, “From everlasting to everlasting you are,” does he say it to set limits to him? Not at all, but to show his eternity. Understand it so here too. He did not say this to set limits. For he did not say, “He had a beginning,” but, “In the beginning he was,” by the word “was” directing you to understand the Son as without beginning.

“But see,” someone says, “the Father is spoken of with the addition of the article, but the Son without it.” What then, when the Apostle says, “of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ,” and again, “who is God over all”? See, here he mentioned the Son without the article. And he does this with the Father too. Writing to the Philippians, at any rate, he says, “who, being in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped”; and again to the Romans, “Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.” Besides, it was superfluous to add it here, since it had been added continually above to “the Word.” For as when he speaks of the Father he says, “God is spirit,” and we do not deny God’s incorporeality because the article is not attached to “spirit,” so here too, even if the article is not attached to the Son, the Son is not for that reason a lesser God. Why so? Because in saying “God” and “God,” he shows us no difference in this Godhead, but the contrary. For having said beforehand, “And the Word was God,” lest anyone should think the Godhead of the Son to be lesser, he at once sets down the marks of genuine Godhead: he takes up eternity again (“He was,” he says, “in the beginning with God”) and adds the work of creating (“All things came into being through him, and without him nothing came into being that has come into being”), which the Father himself everywhere, through the prophets, declares to be above all the mark of his own essence. And the prophets constantly return to this form of proof, and not simply so, but in contending against the false glory of the idols. “Let the gods,” it says, “who did not make the heaven and the earth perish”; and again, “I stretched out the heaven with my hand”; and showing that this indicates Godhead, he sets it down everywhere. The evangelist himself was not content even with these words, but called him also life and light. If, then, he was always with the Father, if he himself created all things, if he himself brought all things into being and holds them together (this is what he hinted at by “life”), if he enlightens all things, who is so foolish as to say that the evangelist was eager through these words to bring in an inferiority of Godhead, through the very words by which equality and exact likeness can best be shown? Let us not confuse the creation with the creator, lest we too should hear, “They worshiped the creature rather than the Creator.” For even if they say this was said about the heavens, still, in speaking of them, he entirely forbade the worship of the creation, as being a pagan thing.

Let us not, then, put ourselves under this curse. This is why the Son of God came: to free us from this worship. This is why he took the form of a servant: to set us free from this slavery. This is why he was spat upon, why he was struck, why he endured a shameful death. Let us not make all these things useless, nor go back again to our former impiety, or rather to one far worse. For it is not the same thing to worship the creation and to bring the creator himself down to the meanness of a creature, as far as it depends on us. For he himself remains as he is: “You are the same,” it says, “and your years will not fail.” Let us glorify him, then, as we received it from the fathers; let us glorify him both by faith and by works. For sound doctrines are of no use to us for salvation if our life is corrupt. So let us order our life according to what pleases God, putting ourselves far from all shamefulness, injustice, and greed, as strangers and sojourners, and aliens to the things here. Even if someone has much money and property, let him use them as a sojourner who will soon leave them, willing or unwilling. If someone has been wronged by another, let him not be angry forever, or rather not even for a time. For the Apostle has not given us more than one day to indulge our anger: “Do not let the sun go down,” he says, “on your anger.” And rightly; for we must be content if nothing unpleasant happens even in so short a time. But if night overtakes it, what has happened becomes more serious, as memory gathers it up ten thousandfold and we examine it more bitterly at our leisure. Before we take hold of that ruinous leisure, then, let us check and quench the evil. For the passion of anger is swift, swifter than any flame. That is why we need great speed to forestall the flame and not let it rise high. For this disease becomes the cause of so many evils. It has overturned whole houses, broken up old friendships, and in a short and brief time wrought tragedies past consoling. “For the sway of his anger,” it says, “is his fall.” Let us not leave the beast unbridled, then, but put a strong muzzle on it on every side: the fear of the judgment to come. When a friend grieves you, or one of your household provokes you, consider your sins against God, and that by gentleness toward that man you make that judgment seat milder for yourself (“Forgive,” he says, “and you will be forgiven”), and the passion will quickly run away. Consider this too: whether you ever mastered yourself when you were carried away to savagery, and whether you were ever swept away by the passion; compare the two occasions, and from this you will gain much correction. For tell me, when did you praise yourself, when you were overcome or when you prevailed? Is it not when we are overcome that we blame ourselves severely and are ashamed, even with no one to reproach us, and that great repentance comes over us for words and deeds alike; whereas when we prevail, [we are glad and take pride in it]? For victory over anger is not to retaliate in kind (that is the worst defeat), but to bear meekly being ill-treated and ill-spoken of. For this is to get the better: not to do evil but to suffer it. Do not say, then, when you are angry, “I will certainly pay him back, I will certainly take him to court; I will not put up with so-and-so going off laughing at me.” He will never laugh at you except when you retaliate; and if he laughs even then, it is as a fool that he will do it. Do not seek, when you win, glory from fools; consider it enough to have it from those who have sense. But why do I set before you a small and mean theater, making it up of men? Look up at once to God; he will praise you. And the man who is admired by him ought not to look for honor from men. For theirs is often given to curry favor and out of hatred for others, and has brought no gain; but the verdict that comes from God is free from this inconsistency and brings great benefit to the one admired. Let us pursue this praise, then.

[5.] Do you want to learn how great an evil it is to be angry? Stand by when others are fighting in the marketplace. In yourself you will not easily be able to see the ugliness, while your reason is darkened and drunk; but when you are clear of the passion, then observe your own conduct in others, when your judgment is not corrupted. Look, I ask you, at those who rage and disgrace themselves in public. For when anger boils and grows wild in the breast, the mouth breathes fire, the eyes send out fire, the whole face swells, the hands leap wildly at those who hold them back, and they differ in nothing from madmen, being insensible to all this, nor even from wild asses, kicking and biting. Truly, “a hot-tempered man is not seemly.” Then, after all this absurdity, when they have gone home and come to themselves, they suffer greater pain and great fear, wondering who was present when they were angry. For like madmen who do not recognize those present, when they come to their senses they then reckon: “Were they friends who saw us, or adversaries and enemies?” For they are afraid of both alike: of the one as [likely to condemn them], of the other as likely to gloat. And if they happened to have come to blows with one another, the fear is worse, lest something very serious happen to the one who was hurt, or a fever follow and bring on death, or a swelling arise that is hard to cure and bring him into mortal danger. And: “What need had I of a fight? Of insults and quarreling? Curse this and that!” And they curse all these perishable things and those who started it. The more irrational blame wicked demons and an evil hour for what has happened. But it is not the work of an evil hour, for there is no such thing as an evil hour; nor is it the work of a wicked demon, but of the wickedness of those who have been caught. For they themselves draw the demons on and bring all the evils upon themselves.

“But the heart swells,” someone says, “and is stung by insults.” I know it too; that is why I admire those who master this terrible beast. For if we wish, it is possible to beat off the passion. For why is it that when rulers insult us we do not suffer this? Is it not because [fear of them restrains the passion, cutting off our angry] thoughts and not letting it spring up at all? And why do servants, insulted by us ten thousand times, bear everything in silence? Is it not because they too have the same bond laid upon them? But you, consider not only the fear of God, but that it is God himself who is then insulting you, he who commands you to keep silent, and you will bear everything meekly. And say to the one who attacks you, “What can I do to you? Another restrains my right hand and my tongue”; and the saying will become a lesson in wisdom both for you and for him. As it is, for men’s sake we bear even the unbearable, and often say to those who have insulted us, “So-and-so insulted me, not you”; and in God’s case shall we not have even this reverence? And what pardon shall we have? Let us say to our own soul too: “It is God who is insulting us now, he who restrains our hands; let us not kick out, and let not God be held in less honor than men.” Did you shudder at the word? But I want you to shudder not only at words but at the deed. For God has commanded those who are struck not only to bear it but also to offer themselves to suffer something worse. But we oppose him with such vehemence that we not only do not offer ourselves to suffer ill, but even retaliate, and often begin unjust violence ourselves, and think we are losers if we do not do the same. And the terrible thing is that we even think we are winning, and while we are defeated with the worst defeat and lie on the ground, taking ten thousand blows from the devil, we think we are mastering him. So, I beg you, let us learn what the manner of this victory is, and pursue this form of it. For to suffer ill is to be crowned. If, then, we too wish to be proclaimed victors by God, let us keep in these wrestling matches not the law of outside contests but the law of God, and bear all things with [long-suffering]. For so [we shall obtain] the good things both here and those that are promised, by the grace and loving-kindness of our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom and with whom be glory, might, and honor to the Father together with the Holy Spirit, now and to the ages of ages. Amen.