Homilies on John 52.1–52.4

“Then the officers came to the chief priests and Pharisees, and they said to them, ‘Why did you not bring him?’ The officers answered, ‘No man ever spoke like this man.’” Nothing is clearer than the truth, nothing simpler, unless we ourselves act with malice. [Just as, if we act with malice, nothing is harder.] So the Pharisees and the scribes, who supposedly were wiser, being always with Christ for the sake of plotting, and seeing miracles and reading the Scriptures, gained nothing, but were even harmed; while the officers, who could say none of these things, were overcome by a single discourse, and having gone to bind him, came back bound by wonder. And one may admire not only their understanding, in that they needed no signs but were captured by the teaching alone (for they did not say, “No man ever worked wonders like this,” but what? “No man ever spoke like this”); one may admire not only their understanding but also their boldness, in that they said this to those who had sent them, to the Pharisees, to those who were at war with him and doing everything to that end. [“Then] the Pharisees [said] to them, ‘Why did you not bring him?’” To come back was much greater than to stay away; for then they would have been rid of the annoyance of these men, but now they become heralds of Christ’s wisdom and show their boldness the more. And they do not say, “We could not, because of the crowd, since they gave heed to him as a prophet,” but what? “No man ever spoke like this.” Yet they could have made that excuse; but they show their own right judgment. For this was the word not only of people who admired him, but also of people who accused these men, because they had sent them to bind one to whom they ought to have listened. And yet they had heard no long discourse, but a short one; for when the mind is unbiased, there is no need of long speeches. Such is the truth. What then do the Pharisees do? When they ought to have been pricked to the heart, they do the opposite and accuse them in turn, saying, “Have you also been deceived?” They still [speak gently to them], fearing that they might break away altogether; but they show their anger, and yet speak with restraint. For when they ought to have asked what he had said and to have admired what was spoken, they do not do this, for they feared that they might be won over; but they reason with them from a very foolish argument: “Why,” it says, “has none of the rulers believed in him?” Tell me, do you charge this against Christ, and not against those who disbelieved? “But this crowd,” it says, “[which does not know the law, is accursed].” [Yet] this is the greater charge against you, that the crowd believed and you disbelieved. And indeed they were doing what those who know the law do; how then are they accursed? You are accursed, you who do not keep the law, not they who obey the law. And you ought not to discredit the one who is disbelieved on the strength of those who disbelieve; this is not a right method. For you too disbelieved God, as Paul says: “What if some disbelieved? Will their unbelief nullify the faithfulness of God? By no means.” For the prophets too always accused them, saying, “Hear, you rulers of Sodom,” and, “Your rulers are disobedient,” and again, “Is it not for you to know judgment?” And everywhere they attack them more sharply. What then? Will anyone accuse God on this account? Far from it; this charge belongs to them. And what other sign could one give of your not knowing the law than your not obeying it? Since they had said, “Has any of the rulers believed in him?” and, “who do not know the law,” Nicodemus fittingly takes hold of them, saying, “Does our law judge a man without first hearing from him?” For he shows that they neither know the law nor keep it. For if the law commands that no one be put to death without first being heard, and these men rushed to this before hearing him, they are transgressors of the law. And since they had said, “And none of the rulers has believed in him,” for this reason the evangelist notes that he was “one of them,” showing that rulers too believed in him. For they did not yet show the boldness that was fitting, but they were attached to Christ. And see how gently he brings his rebuke. For he did not say, “You wish to kill him, and you condemn the man out of hand as a deceiver”; he did not speak so, but more mildly, checking their reckless impulse, their thoughtlessness and murderousness. That is why he turns his discourse to the law, saying, “unless it first hears him exactly and knows what he does.” So there is need not of a bare hearing but of an exact one; for this is the meaning of “and knows what he does”: what he intends, and why, and to what end, whether for the overthrow of the commonwealth and as an enemy. Being at a loss, then, since they had said, “None of the rulers has believed in him,” they addressed him neither harshly nor with restraint.

For tell me, what consistency is there, when he said, “Our law judges no one,” in saying, “Are you also from Galilee?” When they ought to have shown that they had not sent to summon him without a trial, or that he ought not to be given a hearing, they make their reply more boorishly and angrily: “Search and see that no prophet arises from Galilee.” For what had the man said? That he is a prophet? He said that one must not be killed without trial. But they insultingly, as to one who knew nothing about the Scriptures, added this, as if someone were to say, “Go and learn”; for that is the meaning of “Search and see.” What then does Christ do? Since they kept turning over Galilee and the prophet, to free them all from this strange suspicion, and to show that he is not one of the prophets but the Master of the world, he says, “I am the light of the world”: not of Galilee, not of Palestine, nor of Judea. What then do the Jews say? “You testify about yourself; your testimony is not true.” What folly! He had referred them to the Scriptures again and again, and they say, “You testify about yourself.” And what had he testified? “I am the light of the world.” A great saying, and truly great; but it did not strike them very much, since he does not now make himself equal to the Father, nor did he say that he was his Son or God, but for the present only “light.” They wished, then, to overturn this too; and yet this is much greater than to say, “Whoever follows me will not walk in darkness,” where he speaks of light and darkness spiritually, that is, “he does not remain in error.” Here he draws Nicodemus too, and praises those who had done this. For to cry out belongs to one who wishes to make his point so that they too may hear; and at the same time he hints at the men themselves, who were secretly weaving plots and were in darkness and error, but would not prevail over the light. And he [reminds] Nicodemus of those words which he had said earlier: “Everyone who does evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works be exposed.” For since they said that none of the rulers had believed in him, he therefore says, “Whoever does evil does not come to the light,” showing that their not coming was due not to any weakness of the light but to their own perverted will. “They answered and said to him, ‘You testify about yourself?’” What then does he say? “Even if I testify about myself, my testimony is true, for I know where I came from and where I am going; but you do not know where I come from.” What he had said before by way of anticipation, these men put forward as though it had been said as his main point. What then does Christ do? Overturning it, and showing that he had said those things with reference to them and to their supposition, since they suspected him to be a mere man, he says, “Even if I testify about myself, my testimony is true, for I know where I came from.” What is this? “I am from God, and am God, and the Son of God; and God is himself a trustworthy witness to himself. But you do not know. You are wilfully wicked,” he says, “and though you know, you pretend not to know; you speak everything from a human mind, wishing to understand nothing beyond what appears.” “You judge according to the flesh.” As to live according to the flesh is to live wickedly, so to judge according to the flesh is to judge unjustly. “I judge no one; and even if I judge, my judgment is just.” What he means is this: “You judge unjustly.” “And if we judge unjustly,” they might say, “why do you not accuse us? Why not punish us? Why not condemn us?” “Because I did not come for this,” he says. For this is the meaning of “I judge no one; and even if I do judge, my judgment is true.” “For if I had wished to judge, you would be among the condemned. And I say this not as judging you,” he says. He did not say, “I say this not as judging,” as though he lacked confidence that if he judged he would convict them (for if he judged, he would justly condemn them), but because now is not the time of judgment. He hinted at the judgment to come too, saying, “For I am not alone, but I and the Father who sent me.” Here he hinted that not he alone condemns them, but the Father also. Then he veiled this, [turning it] to the testimony. [A passage of the scan repeats, in fuller form, what was said above: they wished to overturn this too, though it is much greater to say, “In me is the light of the world”; and in saying, “Whoever follows me will not walk in darkness,” he speaks of light and darkness spiritually, that is, “he does not remain in error.” Here he draws Nicodemus and leads him to speak with great boldness, and praises the officers for having done so; and at the same time he hints at the Pharisees themselves, who were secretly weaving plots and were in darkness and error, but would not prevail over the light.] … bringing in his testimony: “In your law too it is written that the testimony of two men is true.”

What then would the heretics say here? “What advantage has he over men, if we take the saying simply as it stands?” For among men this was laid down because a person is not trustworthy by himself; but in the case of God, how could this make sense? How then is “two” said? Is it because they are two, or because they are men that there are two? For if it is because they are two, why did he not take refuge in John and say, “I testify about myself, and John testifies about me”? Why not in the angel? Why not in the prophets? For he could have found countless other testimonies. But he wishes to show not only that they are two, but that they are of the same essence. “They said to him, ‘Who is your Father?’” Then he says, “You know neither me nor my Father.” For since they spoke as though they did not know, though they knew, and in order to test him, he does not even deem them worthy of an answer. That is why from now on he says everything more plainly and with greater boldness, having received the testimony from the signs and from the teaching of those who followed him, and because the cross was near. “For I know,” he says, “where I come from.” This would not have touched them much; but the addition, “and where I am going,” would have frightened them more, since he was not going to remain in death. And why did he not say, “I know that I am God,” but “I know where I come from”? He always mixes the lowly with the lofty, and veils even these. For having said, “I testify about myself,” and having shown this, he came to the humbler expression, as if he were saying, “I know by whom I have been sent and to whom I am going.” For in this way they would have had nothing to say against him, on hearing that he had been sent by him and was going to him. “For I would not say anything false,” he says, “having come from there and going there, to the true God. But you do not know God; that is why you judge according to the flesh.” For after hearing so many proofs and refutations, you still say, “He is not true”; and you consider Moses trustworthy both in what he says about others and in what he says about himself, but Christ no longer. This is to judge according to the flesh. “But I judge no one.” And yet he says, “The Father judges no one.” How then does he say here, “And even if I judge, my judgment is just, for I am not alone”? Again he speaks with reference to their supposition; that is, “My judgment is the Father’s; the Father would not judge otherwise than as I do, nor I otherwise than as the Father.” And why did he mention the Father too? Because they did not think the Son trustworthy unless he added the Father’s testimony; and otherwise the saying does not even stand. For among men, when two testify about someone else’s matter, then the testimony is true; for that is two testifying. But if someone is to testify about himself, there are no longer two. Do you see that he said this for no other reason than to show that he is of the same essence, and again to show by himself that he needs no other testimony, and to show that he has nothing less than the Father? See, at any rate, his authority: “I am the one who testifies about myself, and the Father who sent me testifies about me.” He would not have put it so if he were of a lesser essence. But as it is, so that you may not think he is taken along merely to make up the number, see that his authority [has] nothing different. A man testifies when he is trustworthy by himself, not when he needs testimony, and that in someone else’s matter; but in his own matter, when he needs testimony from another, he is no longer trustworthy. But here it is entirely the opposite. For though he testifies in his own matter and says he is testified to by another, he says he is trustworthy, showing his authority on every side. For why, having said, “I am not alone, but I and the Father who sent me,” and, “The testimony of two men is true,” did he not stop there, but added, “I am the one who testifies about myself”? Clearly to show his authority. And first he put himself: “I am the one who testifies about myself.” He shows here an equality of honor, and that they gain nothing by saying they know God as Father while not knowing him. And he says the cause is their not wishing to know him. So he says that it is not possible to know his Father without him, so that even in this way he may draw them to the knowledge of himself. For since, leaving him aside, they were always seeking to learn about the Father, he says, “You cannot know the Father without me.” So those who blaspheme the Son blaspheme not him alone, but also the one who begot him.

Let us flee these things, and glorify the Son. And indeed, if he were not of the same nature, he would not have spoken thus. For if he only taught but were of a different essence, it would be possible to know the Father while not knowing him; and again, it would not follow that one who knew him would certainly know the Father. For one who knows a man does not know an angel. “Yes,” someone says, “for one who knows the creation knows God.” By no means. For there are many who know the creation, or rather all men (for they see it), and yet do not know God. Let us glorify the Son of God, then, not only with this glory, but also with that which comes through works; for the one without the other is nothing. “Look,” he says, “you call yourself a Jew and rely on the law and boast in God. You then who teach another, do you not teach yourself? You who boast in the law, do you dishonor God by breaking the law?” Let us take care that we too, while boasting in the correctness of our faith, do not dishonor God by showing a life that does not agree with our faith, and cause him to be blasphemed. For he wishes the Christian to be the teacher of the world, and leaven, and light, and salt. And what is the light? A shining life that has nothing darkened in it. Light is not useful to itself, nor salt, nor leaven, but shows its benefit to others. So we are required to seek not only our own benefit but also that of others. For if salt does not salt, it is not salt. And he shows something else too: that if we ourselves do right, others certainly will too; but as long as we ourselves do not do right, we shall not be able to help others either. Let there be nothing foolish, nothing empty among us. For such are worldly affairs, such are the cares of this life. That is why the virgins were called foolish, because they were busy about foolish things, worldly affairs, gathering here, and not laying up there, where they should have. There is fear, then, that we too may suffer the same; fear that we too may depart clothed in filthy garments, where all have bright and splendid ones. Nothing [is more filthy, nothing more foul-smelling than sin]. That is why the prophet, describing its nature, cried out, “My wounds have grown foul and festered.” And if you wish to learn the foul smell of sin, consider it after it has been done, when you are freed from the desire, when the fire no longer troubles you, and then you will see what sin is. Consider anger when you are calm; consider greed when you are outside the passion. Nothing is more shameful, nothing more defiled than robbery and greed. We say these things continually, not wishing to annoy you, but to gain something great and wonderful. For one who has not done right after hearing once will perhaps do it after hearing a second time; and one who has passed it by a second time will set himself right after the third. May we all, freed from all evils, have the sweet fragrance of Christ, for to him be glory with the Father, together with the Holy Spirit, now and always and to the ages of ages. Amen.