Fragments on John 16–35

… in what follows it is said: “On the next day he sees Jesus coming toward him” … “stands,” John bearing witness about the light. For he knew that he was also God the Word; and this Word is present to every rational being. And since some suppose that the thinking part, which some call the ruling part, is in the very middle of us, and there is the Word by whom we are rational, he being the image of God according to which man was made after the image of God, showing that the Word of God is the one who is to come to be baptized by him, he says: “Among you stands” one unknown to you. And he is unknown to you for this reason: because, when you ought to do what is fitting with him in your midst, you keep him quiet and, so to speak, inactive within yourselves, doing nothing (according to him) nor thinking rationally. Having said this about the essence of the Word, he next joins also what concerns his coming, saying: “He who comes after me,” after the law and the prophets; for I am the symbol and end of those. And he comes after me fulfilling all the things prophesied about him. For the one prophesied comes after and following the things proclaimed beforehand; “but among you he stands,” as already … “the thong of the sandal”: you will understand it thus. The Word of God, in what he dispenses toward men, does not work with naked divinity, but taking the form of a slave, so that his going in the working of the economy is covered. This, at any rate, is said of him in the Psalms too: “And he bowed the heavens and came down, and darkness was under his feet,” [something dark about his going, because of its being obscure]. The thong of his sandal, then, that is, of the darkness about his feet, is the account of its incomprehensibility, binding and holding together the sandal about his feet; so that to loose the thong is to make clear and to present in reason in what manner God took up a body, covering and hiding his power that goes forth to the economy. Since, then, it is possible for no man to show a demonstration of the manner of the union, rightly he who has more than a prophet, than whom no one is greater among those born of women, confesses that he is not able to loose the thong of his sandal.

And it is well said, “who takes away the sin,” not “who took away” or “who will take away.” For he is always at work taking away the sin of those who flee to him. We show from this, then, that he both took away and takes away and will take away, “taking away” being fitted to each time.

“And I did not know him.” I who teach, he says, did not say these things about Christ by nature, nor according to the common notion of men; for I did not know him; but I said them when the Holy Spirit and the Father had made manifest to me the testimonies about him. For I was sent to bear witness about the light, receiving the beginning of the knowledge of the one witnessed to at the time when I was sent. But one must also try to solve the question in another way. It is possible for him to know him in one respect and not to know him in another. Even if, then, he says of the Savior, “And I,” … it is shown by the expression that he did not know him before, but now knows this very one, God having made him manifest to him. And this is shown from what is said immediately after. For again John himself says that he beheld the Spirit coming down in the form of a dove upon the Lord. “And I did not know him,” he says, “but he who sent me to baptize with water said to me: He on whom you see the Spirit descending … this is my Son. And I have seen and have borne witness.” If, then, even before the descent of the Spirit (he knew him as) the lamb and the man and the prophet and the Christ and the light of God, … knowledge, and that he is the one who baptizes with the Holy Spirit, (a knowledge) which he had when the sign that was given was seen. These things being so, we must inquire how John says he beheld the Spirit; for it is not lawful to think that the Spirit, which has an intelligible existence, is seen sensibly. Together with the present passage, then, the question being made general, the things said in like manner in the prophecies will be examined. For many of the prophets, and in general of the holy men, are recorded to have beheld appearances and visions. For since elsewhere too seeing and beholding is divided in two ways, into sense and understanding, it is impossible that the holy men saw God sensibly, or in general the Trinity or the things under it that have an intelligible existence; it remains that they beheld them according to understanding, by means of some analogy. Indeed, since the Holy Spirit has no shape or form or any appearance at all, he receives the notion of a dove; and though the Holy Spirit does not move from place to place, he sees his descent taking place from heaven upon Jesus who was being baptized. And that the apprehension of none of these is sensible, what follows shows: “For he on whom you see,” he says, “(the Spirit) descending and remaining upon him.” For one can see the descent of something even with the senses, when a body has come down upon that on which it has come down; but sense is not able to apprehend things that remain, so as to confirm this vision. And by another proof too it must be said that the other evangelists say that the descent of the Spirit upon the Son was seen by John, who saw the heavens also opened or split. But it is not possible to see sensibly an opening or splitting of the heavens, since not even of the denser bodies, I mean water and air, and let us say ether too, if it is something besides the heavens. For the things that pass through them (pass) … the opening and passage coming about from elsewhere. For the things passing through open them, and they are united again after the passage of those that have passed through. At any rate, it is not possible to see divisions of water without a more solid body being thrown in. And if this is so, an opening of the heavens would not fall under sight; for neither is the Holy Spirit who came down from there a body. These things, then, were beheld by the Baptist intelligibly. And attention must be paid also to the Holy Spirit's having remained on Jesus alone. For if, having come down, he had remained on another too, it would not have been a sign showing the one who baptizes in the Holy Spirit. And this must be demonstrated thus: the Holy Spirit (comes) to undefiled and pure souls; “the holy spirit of discipline will flee deceit, and will rise up and depart from foolish thoughts.” And David, having fallen into a sin, entreats God, saying: “Take not your Holy Spirit from me.” Since, then, Jesus alone did no sin, nor was deceit found in his mouth (for of him alone it is said, “him who knew no sin”), rightly the Holy Spirit, having come down upon him, remained. But all these things, I mean the Spirit's coming down from heaven upon Jesus and remaining on him, are written for the sake of the economy, not as a historical narrative, but as intelligible contemplation, as has already been said. For the Holy Spirit is inseparable from the Son; for neither is the Son in a place, nor again the Father, so that the Holy Spirit too should pass from the Father to the Son by moving from place to place. For in general the things concerning the divinity must be taken intelligibly, even if they are said in human fashion, such as standing and sitting and going up [and all that is written of the divinity similar to these].

It is worth inquiring how here Andrew, on the second day after the baptism of Jesus, at once finds his own brother Peter, while elsewhere, according to Matthew, Jesus, many days after the baptism, finds Peter and Andrew his brother. It is likely, then, that Andrew first brought Peter to Jesus and he was benefited a little by the teacher; then, after his brother had been benefited, he withdrew to attend to his own affairs; and Jesus, after the first call, called them to follow him continually, having authority to fish for men, through the teaching he gave them. “Come,” he says, “and see”: perhaps by “come” summoning them to the practical (life), and by “see” indicating that the contemplation that follows the achievement of good actions will surely come to those who wish, coming about as they persevere in them.

And he said that he would be called Peter, named from the rock, which is Christ; so that, as one is wise from wisdom and holy from holiness, so too Peter is from the rock. And this is shown from what the Savior said to the one so named: “You are,” he says, “Peter, and on this rock I will build my church.”

… being said ambiguously, it shows sometimes that Andrew was the one who went out, … having gone out into Galilee and found Philip. To this Philip, found by Andrew, Jesus says: “Follow me.” And to follow Jesus is to follow the Word … in wisdom, righteousness, acting and thinking rightly. And Bethsaida is translated into the Greek tongue as “House of hunters,” … (of) men. Concerning such hunters, as sent by God, a prophecy in Jeremiah is spoken in the person of God, running thus: “And behold, I send to you many hunters, who will hunt you.”

He does not mean to say this, that the prophets wrote thus: “Joseph's son, the one from Nazareth”; but we have found this one to be that one.

Can so great a good come out of Nazareth? Or he says confidently: the one who has been found really is from Nazareth and is truly good. To him Philip says: “Come and see” the Jesus who has been found, wishing rather to convince him by sight than by hearsay about the one who has been found.

And what was said by Nathanael to Jesus he rendered thus: “You are the Son of God; you are king of Israel, the race that sees clearly.” For to see the heart and know who has deceit in himself and who has not belongs to a Son of God, and not to one of the many sons, but to the Only-begotten, who is king …

(He says:) “You saw me then when I was under the fig tree, before I was called by Philip.” Hearing this, Jesus says: “Because I said to you that I saw you under the fig tree, do you believe? You will see greater things than these.” After the clarification according to the letter, the allegorical meaning must be stated. Philip, from following Jesus, who is the Word of God and the Wisdom of God, has become a hunter of the souls given by God to those who are able to benefit them. For Nathanael is interpreted “gift of the Lord.” To this disciple given to him, the things concerning the divinity of the Son of God are not at once imparted, but the things concerning his incarnation, saying: The one whom all we Hebrews read in common as coming in the writings of Moses and the prophets we have found, Jesus, born of the Virgin without the casting of a man's seed, who is called the son of Joseph, who was betrothed to Mary, having his origin locally from Nazareth; for Nazareth is the city of the Virgin. Having received these things from Philip, who has now become his teacher, the disciple Nathanael says to the one who taught him: “If what has been found is from Nazareth, is it good?” To him Philip at once, calling him to the very sight of the thing, (says) “Come …” … not to have, but to be a beholder of the truth, hastening after the hearing of words to contemplation. Jesus, seeing Nathanael coming not only by walking but also by progress toward contemplation, bears witness about him as one so eager for the understanding of the truth, and says to those with him: Do you see this one who is coming? Not only sensibly and according to the flesh is he an Israelite, but also according to the spirit and understanding. For he has a mind that sees God; for he is truly an Israelite and not falsely named, since, being pure of all deceit, he is a friend of the truth.

When the third day had already come since Jesus was baptized, a wedding took place in Cana of Galilee, and the mother (of Jesus) was there … Jesus, being the maker of the man and the woman, does not refuse to be invited to a wedding, being himself the one who, after forming Eve, brought her to Adam. Therefore in the gospel too he says concerning the union: “What God has joined together, let man not separate.” Let them be ashamed … and his mother being there. And the Manichaeans too must be refuted, who say that Mary was not the mother of Jesus, since the evangelist bears witness that Jesus had a mother.

One can observe the exactness of the evangelist from this narrative too. For since he knew that the willfully malicious and crafty among the Jews were ready to speak ill of the mighty works of Jesus, … someone pleading for the text will say in respect of this passage too (that he records him) giving orders to the servants of the banquet about drawing the water (since the slanderers would have said, if the disciples of Jesus had drawn the water, that they filled the jars with wine while pretending to have filled them with water; in this sequence lies also “They filled the jars up to the brim”), and so as to leave no pretext for sophistry, [lest, the jars not having been filled with water, wine poured in should have seemed to make people think that the whole had come from water].

“They believed” is said instead of “they were confirmed.” For he speaks of faith for the most part rather in the sense of confirmation. To these, then, he manifested his glory the more. For to change an essence belongs to the creator and not to a creature. For water becoming wine is a change not simply of quality but of essence.

“And after this he went down to Capernaum, he and his mother and his brothers and his disciples.” [It is asked by many concerning the brothers of Jesus how he had them, since Mary remained a virgin until death.] … having brothers from Joseph. By law, then, they were called his brothers, being sons of Joseph by a wife who had died before; and since … by agreement Mary was called his wife. [For this is what the law of Moses teaches, bringing the punishment of adultery against one who lies with a betrothed virgin; for it adds: “Because he humbled his neighbor's wife, he shall die.” If, then, the law (calls) the virgin pledged to Joseph his wife,] those from Joseph (are his brothers), even if he himself is not from him.

[Of the three public feasts handed down to the Hebrews by the great hierophant Moses, one was that called Pascha, surpassing the other two as showing forth the salvation from Egypt and the passage to the holy land. To this festival, at any rate, the whole nation of the Jews hastened from all the cities and villages to Jerusalem; for in this city alone was the Pascha handed down by the law to be sacrificed. And the three feasts were named after God, who legislated them. But since the Jews no longer (kept) the feasts according to (the law), the evangelist speaks not of the Pascha of God but of the Jews. For they no longer came to Jerusalem for the sake of worship but for luxury. For these things were brought into it from all the surrounding places for feasting, and were sold in the house of God; for the evangelist said that oxen and sheep and doves were sold there as in a market. But since it happened that those coming to the feast did not bring so much silver, some money-changers devised to set up tables there and to change money, that is, to lend, taking gold from those who needed silver, for those who had come to drink and live luxuriously rather than to keep the feast. When, then, the whole nation of the Jews was there and given over to drunkenness, Jesus, entering the house of God, drove them all out from there, having only a whip of cords. And (no one else) would have done this. For he drove out of the house not only the rest of the crowd but also those who were selling the things for the feasting. And let no one think this less than the other miracles. For it was not possible without divine working for one man to drive out so great a crowd, especially when they were enraged and murderous against him. And indeed the Jews themselves, astounded at what he had dared, say to him in what follows: “What sign do you show us, that you do these things?”, saying: How great are you in power, and what piety are you able to perform, that you do such things, daring alone to drive out a whole populous nation!]

… but have knowledge neither firm nor perfect, about whom it was said earlier too, but able to fall away most easily. Hence he did not entrust himself to them, because he knew these things not superficially but from the depth of the mind. For to know people from their actions and words is possible even for a mere man. But Jesus, not being a mere man but God become man, knows all things, grasping the hidden part of the mind. [For of God alone it is said, “he who knows hidden things and knows all things before they come to be.” And since Jesus, being God, knows what is hidden in the heart, he has no need to receive testimony from man, knowing what is in man. For it is not said that he knows man simply, but what is in man. And since he knew that they would not abide in the faith they had in his name, he did not entrust himself to them. For they had believed from signs, but not from understanding about God. Therefore they could quickly fall away, deceived by themselves or by others who would argue sophistically that the signs had not really or not rightly taken place. But the one who believes in him, having his conception (of him) from God, is not easily deceived.]

Among the many who had believed in the name of Jesus we must place Nicodemus too, who was one of the Pharisees and a ruler of the Jews. Indeed, (that he held) Jesus to be a teacher (his) words show, when he said: “You have come from God as a teacher”; and, as adding the truth of his knowledge about the teacher, he says next: “For no one can do these signs that you do, unless God is with him.” Hence the evangelist consistently recorded that his approach took place at night, since he came at such a time as he would escape the notice of the many Pharisees, of whom he was one. Or rather, which is indisputable, he came by night for this reason: because, being ignorant of the God to whom he was coming, he had not yet been enlightened. For the sun of righteousness, the maker of the intelligible day, had not yet risen for him; a day which Abraham too, having received a longing for it, had been prepared to see, and having seen it rejoiced. And the Pharisees are men who follow the leading order and sect in Judaism, professing a strenuous life and exactness in the law and the prophets. Therefore for the most part they are bold and arrogant. Hence too they got this name; for “Phares” among the Hebrews means “the one separated.” Since, then, these too separate themselves from the whole nation of the Jews, as excelling in prudence and life, they wish to be named from “Phares.”

… “he who comes from above is above all,” and sometimes “again,” as in “to which you wish to be slaves again (ἄνωθεν),” that is, again. And the birth from above, which the Savior teaches, comes about from taking up virtue and keeping his commandments. For he says to the disciples: “(Love your enemies …) so that you may become sons of your Father who is in heaven.” Yet, even if Nicodemus answered mistakenly what was said, still what he said has something true, even if he himself did not understand it. For truly no one who remains in being a man, so as to grow old in the human condition, can receive the birth according to the Spirit and from above. For as no one remaining unrighteous and faithless can be born according to righteousness and faith, so no one remaining in human things and growing old in them is able to receive the renewing birth. Hence the teacher of the truth writes to those eager to come to the divine birth to put off the old man with his deeds, so that, this being cast off, they may put on “the new man, created according to God in righteousness,” to whom it will follow, as one born from above, to walk in newness of life. Urging his disciples on to this birth, Jesus said: “Unless you turn and become like children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven.” Note the exactness of this too. Children do not retaliate against those who have wronged them, are not grieved at the loss of pleasant things, do not cling firmly to what is agreeable. He wishes, then, that we be such by disposition as children are by age. For they are such not by reason; but those who, by Jesus' command, are to become like them hasten by reason and the best habit to be found so disposed. Even if, then, Nicodemus spoke the words in ignorance, still something true lying in his words was unknown to him.

Interpreting the manner of how it is possible to be born from above, the Savior says: Since what lies before us is to enter the kingdom of God, and it is impossible to attain this without having been born of water and Spirit, being born from above follows upon being born of water and Spirit. And he is born of the Spirit who has been made according to it, becoming holy and spiritual from it. Then, since the one who enters the kingdom of God is born not of the Spirit alone but also of water, it follows that we should hunt out something about the water too from Scripture. And see whether (water and Spirit differ) only in concept and not in reality: “He who believes in me, as the scripture said, rivers of living water will flow from his belly. And this he said about the Spirit, which those who believed in him were to receive.” For if it is said of the Spirit as living water going out like rivers from the believer, the water will differ from the Spirit in concept only. As, then, one is born of the Savior wise from wisdom, so too of the Spirit holy and spiritual; and being cleansed by the water and watered for bearing fruit, one is born of water and Spirit. But someone else will say that “water” here means the teaching that cleanses the soul, which also itself contributes to being born from above. Of this cleansing, which comes about from divine instruction, the psalmist said to God: “You will wash me, and I shall be made whiter than snow.” [And Jeremiah says to the multitude of Israel: “Wash your heart from wickedness, Jerusalem, that you may be saved; how long will the thoughts of your toils remain in you?”, calling “the thoughts of her toils” those done in wickedness, for which she will be punished unless she washes herself by the instruction of the Scriptures.] Then, since not the soul alone is called to salvation but also the body itself, which it uses as an instrument for its activities, rightly this too must be sanctified through what is called in the divine teaching “the washing of regeneration,” which is also named divine baptism, no longer mere water; for it is sanctified by a certain mystical invocation. And see of what kind (is the order handed down by the Savior) … to his disciples in the mystagogy. For he says: “Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe,” and so on. For if one must first be made a disciple, receiving the doctrines of the truth, then keep what he commanded them concerning the moral virtues, and so be baptized into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, how can the water that is received together with these still be mere water, having shared, as far as it can, in the power of the holy Trinity, and joined with moral and intellectual virtue? And consider its greatness by attending to the purpose for which it is received. For if it is for the sake of entering the kingdom of God, and this surpasses by its pre-eminence, how is the cause of entering it not great? And the kingdom of God must be said to be the condition of those who live in order according to his laws. And this will have its abode also in its proper place (I mean the one in the heavens). But since here it is called the kingdom of God, and in Matthew the kingdom of heaven, we must say that Matthew named it from those who are ruled, or from the places in which they are, but John and Luke from God who rules; as when we too, saying “kingdom of the Romans,” signify it through those who are ruled, showing it either from the place or when we announce it as of the land or the inhabited world.

These words show a meaning such as this. The Holy Spirit visits only the earnest, being far from the base. [But “far” and “near” must not be understood locally,] but as it is possible to understand them of incorporeal things. [For such expressions, often written also of God the Father, do not signify local distances.] Since, then, the Spirit, being estranged from the base, fills those who have faith and virtue, it is rightly said: “The Spirit blows where it wills.” And this also signifies that the Spirit is an essence. For it is not, as some think, an activity of God, having in their view no distinct property of existence. [And the apostle too, having enumerated the gifts of the Spirit, at once added: “All these are worked by one and the same Spirit, dividing to each individually as he wills.” And if he wills and works and divides, he is an active essence, and not an activity. And the saying in the Acts too, “It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us,” is not far from willing and wishing. Besides this, words of his are recorded in the divine scriptures, especially in the Acts of the Apostles: “For while they were fasting and ministering to the Lord, the Holy Spirit said: Set apart for me Paul and Barnabas for the work to which I have called them.” (And Agabus) says: “Thus says the Holy Spirit: The man whose belt this is they will so bind,” and so on.] Yet, even if the Spirit blows where it wills, Nicodemus, not having it in himself, because he had not believed in Jesus as he ought, hearing only its voice, does not know where it goes and whence it comes. And he hears only its voice who reads the scriptures of the Spirit without understanding them; … everyone who attends to the reading and searches the scriptures, in understanding them, knows whence the way of the Spirit comes and where it ends, which it travels through the instruction of the divine oracles. For one who knows the cause … for what end the teaching of the Spirit has been given to men, having contemplated it, knows where it goes and comes to rest.