Homilies on Numbers 11.1–11.5

The law commands that the firstfruits of all crops and of all cattle be offered to the priests: so that everyone who owns a field, or a vineyard, or an olive grove, or even a garden, or whatever is worked on the land, and also anyone who raises livestock of any kind, should offer to God from them all that comes first, that is, bring it to the priests. For what is given to the priests is said to be offered to God. And this is what we learn from the law: that no one may lawfully or rightly use the fruits the earth has produced, or the young that the animals of the flock have borne, unless firstfruits from each of them are offered to God, that is, to the priests. I think, then, that this law must be observed even according to the letter, as some others must too. For there are some commands of the law which the disciples of the New Testament also keep with necessary observance. And, if you please, let us first discuss those things which are written in the law but are nevertheless to be observed in the Gospels; and when these have become clear, we shall then look for what should also be understood spiritually in them. For there are some who say: if anything at all is to be observed according to the letter, why should not everything be kept? But if what the law contains is to be referred to spiritual understanding, nothing at all should be discerned according to the letter, but everything spiritually. We, however, tempering the extravagance of both assertions, will try to set out from the authority of the divine Scriptures what rule is to be observed in sayings of the law of this kind. It is written in the eighteenth psalm: “The law of the Lord is irreproachable, converting souls; the testimony of the Lord is faithful, giving wisdom to little ones. The commandment of the Lord is bright, enlightening the eyes. The fear of the Lord is pure, enduring for ever and ever. The righteous ordinances of the Lord are right, rejoicing hearts; the judgments of the Lord are true, justified in themselves, more desirable than gold and much precious stone, and sweeter than honey and the honeycomb.” Unless these were each different from one another, the divine Scripture would certainly never have given each its own distinguishing mark, saying one thing of the law of the Lord, another of the commandment, another of the ordinances, another of the judgments. So, as we have shown from these words, the law is one thing, the precept another, the testimony another, the ordinance another, the judgment another. And in the law itself the difference between these is indicated still more clearly, where it is said: “This is the law, and the commandments, and the ordinances, and the precepts, and the testimonies, and the judgments, which the Lord commanded Moses.” Since, then, it is confirmed by the testimonies of the law itself that these things are so and differ from one another by distinctions, we must attend more carefully to what is read in the law: for wherever it is written, for example, that this is a commandment, the law is not at once to be taken as commandment; or wherever it is written, “these are the ordinances,” they are not at once to be thought ordinances, or law, or commandment. Likewise wherever “testimony” or “judgments” is written, each is to be understood not as one confused with the rest but as different from the others. If, then, we read it written that the law has a shadow of the good things to come, we must not at once believe that the commandment too, or the ordinances, or the judgments, of which this is not written, are shadows of the good things to come. Indeed, to give one example of many, it is not written, “This is the commandment of the Passover,” but, “This is the law of the Passover.” And since the law is a shadow of good things to come, the law of the Passover is doubtless a shadow of good things to come. When, then, I come to the passage written about the Passover, I must understand that in that bodily lamb there is a shadow of the good to come, and perceive that “Christ our Passover has been sacrificed.” In a similar way you will find it written about the unleavened bread and the other observances of feast days. Since, then, all these things are written in the law under the title of law, because the law designates the good things to come through a present shadow, I must ask what the unleavened bread of the good things to come is, and I find the Apostle telling me that we should keep the feast “not with the old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.” And about circumcision too it is written: “This is the law of circumcision.” Since, then, circumcision too is classed under the title of law, and the law is a shadow, I ask what good things to come the shadow of circumcision contains, lest Paul say to me, if I am placed in the shadow of circumcision: “If you are circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing.” “For it is not the circumcision that is outward in the flesh that is circumcision, nor is he a Jew who is one outwardly in the flesh, but he who is a Jew inwardly; and circumcision is of the heart, in the spirit, not in the letter; its praise is not from men but from God.” These particular things, then, which the Apostle says are by no means to be observed wholly according to the letter, you will find almost all designated in Moses under the title of law. But where he says, “You shall not kill, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal,” and the rest of this kind, you will not find that he has prefixed to them the title of law; rather, these appear to be commandments, and therefore this writing is not emptied among the disciples of the Gospel but fulfilled; because, as I said, it is not the commandment but the law that is said to have a shadow of good things to come; and therefore these things are to be kept by us according to the letter. Again, elsewhere: “Justly,” it says, “pursue what is just.” What need is there to look for allegory in these, when even the letter edifies? We have shown, then, that there are some things that are not to be kept at all according to the letter of the law, and that there are some which allegory ought not to change at all, but which are to be observed in every way just as the Scriptures contain them. Now I ask whether there are some things which can indeed stand according to the letter, but in which allegory must nevertheless also be sought. And see whether we can support this with apostolic and evangelical authority. It is written in the law: “For this reason a man shall leave father and mother and cleave to his wife, and the two shall be in one flesh.” That this contains allegorical mysteries Paul declares, when he had set down this very example in his letter, saying: “This mystery is great; but I speak of Christ and the church.” But that this must also be kept according to the letter the Lord and Saviour himself teaches, saying: “It is written, For this reason a man shall leave father and mother and cleave to his wife, and the two shall be in one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let man not separate.” And he certainly shows that these words are to be observed according to the letter too, when he adds: “What therefore God has joined together, let man not separate.” And in other places, where the Apostle says that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and one by the free woman, who doubts that these things must stand according to the letter? For it is certain that both Isaac by Sarah and Ishmael by Hagar were sons of Abraham. Yet the Apostle adds to these and says: “Now these things are allegorical,” and he turns them into the two testaments, calling Sarah's offspring children of the New Testament, which bears into freedom, and naming Hagar's the children of the earthly Jerusalem, which bears into slavery. We have shown, I think, by the authority of divine Scripture, that of the things written in the law some are to be entirely avoided and guarded against, lest they be observed according to the letter by the disciples of the Gospel; some are to be held in every way as they are written; and others have their truth according to the letter, yet also usefully and necessarily receive an allegorical sense.

It will be the part, then, of the wise scribe instructed in the kingdom of God, who knows how to bring forth from these treasures things new and old, to know how in each place of Scripture he should either wholly reject the letter that kills and seek the life-giving spirit, or confirm the teaching of the letter in every way and prove it useful and necessary, or, while the literal account remains, introduce the mystical sense as well, fittingly and becomingly. This, I think, is how it stands in the passage we have in hand; for it is fitting and useful that firstfruits be offered to the priests of the Gospel too. For so the Lord too has arranged, that those who proclaim the Gospel should live from the Gospel, and those who serve the altar should share in the altar. And just as this is worthy and fitting, so on the contrary I consider it unfitting, unworthy, and impious that one who worships God and enters the church of God, who knows that the priests and ministers stand at the altar and serve either the word of God or the ministry of the church, should not offer the priests firstfruits of the fruits of the earth which God gives by bringing forth his sun and supplying his rains. Such a soul does not seem to me to have any remembrance of God, nor to think or believe that God gave the fruits it has received, which it stores away as if they were foreign to God. For if it believed they were given it by God, it would surely know to honor God by honoring the priests from his gifts and bounty. And so that people may be taught still more fully from the Lord's own words that these things are to be observed even according to the letter, we shall add this. The Lord says in the Gospels: “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, who tithe mint,” that is, give a tithe of mint, “and cumin and dill, and neglect the weightier things of the law. Hypocrites, these you ought to have done, and not to have left the others undone.” See, then, more carefully how the Lord's word wants the weightier things of the law to be done in every way, yet does not want these things that are indicated according to the letter to be omitted. And if you say that he said this to the Pharisees, not to the disciples, hear him again saying to the disciples: “Unless your righteousness exceeds that of the Pharisees and scribes, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven.” What he wants done by the Pharisees, then, he wants fulfilled much more, and with greater abundance, by the disciples; but what he wants done by the disciples, he does not command the Pharisees to do. And that he wants more done by the disciples than the Pharisees do he declares where he says: “It was said to those of old: You shall not kill.” This the Pharisees also observe. But to the disciples he says: “But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother shall be liable to judgment.” Likewise, concerning what is written, “You shall not commit adultery,” he wants the righteousness of his disciples to exceed in this, that they do not even look at a woman to desire her. So, from these few things we have brought forward, any who are studious in the divine Scriptures will very easily be able to gather the distinctions of the rest also. For the wise man, it says, if he hears a word, will not only praise it but will add to it. What will he add? That he should examine and discern in each chapter of the law where the letter of the law is to be shunned, where it is to be embraced, and where the narrative of the literal account agrees with a mystical exposition. For Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law; he did not redeem us from the curse of the commandment, nor from the curse of the testimony, nor from the curse of the judgments, but from the curse of the law, that is, so that we should not be subject to circumcision of the flesh, nor to the observance of sabbaths, and other things like these, which are to be said to be contained not in the commandments but in the law. How, then, does our righteousness exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees, if they do not dare to taste the fruits of their land before they offer firstfruits to the priests and set apart tithes for the Levites, while I, doing none of these things, so misuse the fruits of the earth that the priest does not know, the Levite is unaware, and the divine altar does not feel it? This must certainly be pointed out: that “law” is said in two ways. In general, all these, that is, commandment, ordinances, testimonies, judgments, are called law; but specifically some part of what is written in the law is called law, such as the things we discussed above. The general law is meant, for example, when it is said of the Saviour that “he did not come to abolish the law but to fulfill it.” And again elsewhere: “Love, then, is the fulfillment of the law.” In this he certainly named everything written in the law together as the law. We have said these things in asserting that the command about the firstfruits of crops or cattle must stand even according to the letter.

Now let us see how it also admits an allegorical, that is, a spiritual, understanding. Let us look, then, for any place in the Scriptures besides those spoken of above where we find firstfruits named; for here he said: “All the firstfruits of oil and wine and grain, the firstfruits of all these which are offered to God, I have given them to you.” I ask, then, where firstfruits are named besides these. For if all firstfruits belong to the high priest, we must necessarily look also for the high priest to whom those firstfruits too must belong which we find set down in other places of Scripture. And first of all we read it written of the Lord Christ himself that he is the firstfruits of the dead. He too, then, is in some respect firstfruits. And again we find it said by the Apostle of some that they are the firstfruits of Asia, and of others that they are the firstfruits of Achaia. Hence it follows that in each church some of the believers, whom however the apostolic spirit has approved, are named firstfruits. Among them I think is that Cornelius who, with those with whom he was found worthy to receive the Holy Spirit, is rightly called the firstfruits of the church of Caesarea. And not only of this church, but perhaps Cornelius should be called the firstfruits of all the Gentiles; for he was the first of the Gentiles to believe, and the first to be filled with the Holy Spirit. And therefore he will rightly be called the firstfruits of the Gentiles. But perhaps you ask who offers these firstfruits to God, or who is the high priest to whose account they go. I think that, according to the Lord's word, this world is called the field. And the field is understood to be not only land but human hearts; and the angels of God have taken up this field to cultivate it. They themselves possess and hold the fruits of their cultivation, namely those who live under guardians and stewards and have not yet come to the full age of perfection. But if the hearts of any have been carefully cultivated and brought to perfection, these, as chosen and outstanding among the rest, they offer as firstfruits to the great high priest. Indeed we find that Cornelius himself, before he received the teaching of the word of God or the grace of baptism from Peter, heard from an angel that his prayers and alms had gone up to God; hence Cornelius seems to have been offered to God as firstfruits through that very angel. And we can say of Peter and Paul and the other apostles too that they themselves offer the firstfruits of those who believed through them, as the Apostle says that from Jerusalem and round about as far as Illyricum he has filled up the Gospel of Christ, and has preached the Gospel not where Christ was named, lest he build on another's foundation. Look, then, at Paul offering as his fruits all those he taught, to whom he preached, who advanced in faith through him, and seeking daily new fields to cultivate and new lands to sow, and for this reason saying to some: “For I long to come to you, that I may have some fruit among you also, as among the other Gentiles.” Look, I say, at him marking out the choicest from all these fruits, and saying of some, as we said above, that they are the firstfruits of Asia, and of others that they are the firstfruits of Achaia, and choosing firstfruits from each of the churches and offering them to God. And perhaps he also has some firstborn. And I believe he also has some lower than these, whom he can offer not as firstborn but as tithes. And I think that each of the teachers too, because he teaches, preaches, and instructs his hearers, is seen to cultivate the field of the church he teaches, that is, the hearts of the believers. He too, then, has the fruit of his cultivation, and among all these fruits he doubtless finds someone chosen and outstanding whom he may offer as firstfruits; he finds some also as firstborn, and others as tithes. And if it does not seem rash to venture into such matters, perhaps those may truly be called firstborn of whom it is written that they did not defile themselves with women, for they remained virgins; or it may also seem to be said of the martyrs. And the virgins of the church can no less be understood as firstfruits; and the tithes, those who after marriage have lived continently and chastely.

But since the discourse began from the firstfruits of the angels, which we had said are offered by those same cultivators of the human race, and we were then led on to the apostles, and from there to each of the teachers, let us return to the starting point of what we began to discuss. Each of the angels, then, will be present at the judgment at the consummation of the age, bringing with him those over whom he presided, whom he helped, whom he instructed, for whom he always saw the face of the Father who is in heaven. And I think there will also be an inquiry there, not indeed whether the angel failed in the cultivation of men, but whether human sloth failed to respond worthily to the angels' cultivation. There will be God's judgment on this too: whether so many falls in human life come from some negligence of the ministering spirits who are sent to minister and help for the sake of those who inherit salvation, or from the idleness of those who are helped by them. And if this is so, there will also be God's judgment between angels and men; and perhaps some will be judged together with Paul and compared with his labors and with the fruits that come from the multitude of believers; and perhaps he will be found superior in labors even to some angels, and that no doubt is why he said: “Or do you not know that we shall judge angels?” Not that Paul himself judges angels, but that the work of Paul which he did in the Gospel and toward the souls of believers will judge some, not all, but some of the angels. And perhaps for this reason Peter too, responding to these things, said: “Into which even angels long to look”; although the apostles themselves also have angels as helpers in fulfilling the task of their preaching and accomplishing the work of the Gospel; for so it was said in the Acts of the Apostles that it was Peter's angel who knocked at the door. Similarly, then, it is understood that there is also another angel of Paul, as there is of Peter, and another of another apostle, and of each in order, or according to merit; and these, in the labors and teaching of the apostles or of the teachers after them, must have the first share both in the souls that advanced through them and in carrying the fruit, together with those through whom they worked, to the Lord's threshing floor. In the gathering of the fruits, then, that is, in the choosing of the believers, one who was, for example, outstanding and exceptional in a given church will be its firstfruits, and one superior even to him will be the firstborn of that church, offered, for example, by that angel. And so everything that is foreshadowed in the law, since the law has a shadow of the good things to come, will in some way be fulfilled through the ministries of angels in the truth of the good things to come: so that what was prefigured in that Israel which is called Israel according to the flesh may be fulfilled in the true and heavenly Israelites. For the name Israel reaches as far as the angelic orders, [all the more] since they will be called Israel much more truly, as they are more truly a mind that sees God; for this is what “Israel” is interpreted to mean. For I think that, just as we see certain names of nations or princes set in the Scriptures which without any doubt refer to evil angels and opposing powers, as for example Pharaoh king of Egypt, and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon and Assyria, so too what is written of holy men and of a religious nation we ought to refer to holy angels and benign powers. And that the king of an impious nation is referred by the Scripture to some malign power, hear how Isaiah speaks of Nebuchadnezzar: “And I will bring,” he says, “a sword upon a great nation, upon the prince of the Assyrians. For he says: By my strength I will do it, and by the wisdom of my understanding I will destroy the borders of the nations, and I will plunder their strength.” And again elsewhere, speaking as of the prince of some nation, he says: “How has Lucifer fallen from heaven, who rose in the morning?” If, then, the reasoning of truth compels us to refer all these things to certain angels of a malign power, will not the same consistency require that what is written of good princes or nations be referred, as we said above, to the angels and ministers of good powers? And what we read written in Genesis, that God, speaking to his angels, says, “Come, let us confound their tongues”: what else are we to think but that different angels produced different tongues and speech in men? So that, for example, there was some one angel who then impressed the Babylonian tongue on one man, another the Egyptian on another, another the Greek, and so perhaps they themselves became the authors of the different nations; while the tongue first given through Adam, which we think was Hebrew, remained in that part of mankind which was not made the portion of any angel or prince but remained God's portion. Meanwhile, as we began to say, the angels too offer firstfruits, each, I believe, of his own nation, and again each of his own church. To these angels John too seems to write in the Apocalypse, for example to the angel of the church of the Ephesians, or of the Smyrnaeans, or of the Laodiceans, and the others that are written. Each of the angels, then, offers the firstfruits either of the church or of the nation which has been committed to him to govern. Or perhaps there are also other angels besides, who gather the faithful from all nations. And let us consider whether perhaps, just as in some city, for example, where Christians have not yet been born, if someone comes and begins to teach, labors, instructs, and leads people to faith, and afterward himself becomes leader and bishop of those he taught, so too the holy angels may themselves become princes, in the future too, of those whom they have gathered from different nations and made to advance by their labor and ministry: so that Christ is called not merely king but King of kings, and not merely Lord but Lord of lords. For if these become kings of those whom they rule and make to advance, they will offer some to the high priest, some to the sons of the high priest, that is, to the higher powers and archangels, and some also to the Levites, that is, to those a little lower, if indeed it seems consistent that the angelic orders too are distinguished in some such pattern as the Israelite ones, since the Israelites are said to serve a shadow and copy of heavenly things. We can say, then, that perhaps in the future, when all the fruits are gathered to the threshing floor, some will be the portion of the high priest, but of that true high priest, Christ. And others will be the portion of the Levites, as we already said above, set apart for the archangels or other heavenly powers. And I think some will also be the portion of men, but only of those who in this life were prudent and faithful stewards of the word of God. For I think this is indicated by the Lord in the Gospels, where he says to the one to whom he had entrusted five minas and who had made ten from them: “Have authority over ten cities”; and to the one to whom he had entrusted one and who had made five from it: “Have authority over five cities.” For what is to be understood here by authority over cities but the governance of souls? Hence it seems to me that it is not without cause that among the angels themselves some hold authority and rule over others, while others are subject and obey authority; just as not even the one to whom authority over ten cities is given, or the one to whom authority over five cities is given, came to such authority without … . For with God all things happen by reason and judgment, and it is not by favor but according to merit that one is set as ruler over many and another is made subject to rule. We may perhaps seem to have wandered off in too long a digression, but in expounding the firstfruits it was necessary to discuss these things too, since this name is held in such honor in the divine Scriptures that Christ himself was named firstfruits, and the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. And just as he is King of kings and Lord of lords and Shepherd of shepherds and High Priest of high priests, so consistently he will also be called the firstfruits of firstfruits. And these firstfruits are offered no longer to a high priest but to God, in that he offered himself as a victim to God and, rising from the dead, sat down at the right hand of God. And he is called both the firstfruits and the firstborn of all creation; whether this should be understood with respect to each kind of creature in the way he is called and understood to be the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep among men, or by some loftier and more divine understanding, it is not for the present time to pursue.

Let us return, then, to the account of the firstfruits which we said are offered by the angels, gathered from the fields of this world. And the fields of the angels are our hearts. Each of them, then, offers firstfruits to God from the field he cultivates. And if today I were worthy to bring forth some great meaning, worthy of the high priest, such that of all the things we say it would be bound to please the priest, it might perhaps happen that the angel who presides over the church would choose something from all our words and offer it to the Lord as firstfruits from the little field of my heart. But I know that I am not worthy, nor am I conscious that any such meaning is found in me which the angel who cultivates us would judge worthy to offer to the Lord as firstfruits or as firstborn. And would that what we say and teach were such that we might not deserve to be condemned for our words; that grace would be enough for us. The angels, then, offer firstfruits from among us, and each cultivates those whom by his zeal and diligence he has turned from the errors of the Gentiles to God; and each person is in the portion or care of that angel. And as at the beginning of this age, when God scattered the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the nations according to the number of the angels of God, and each nation came under that angel, while one nation, Israel, was chosen, which was the Lord's portion and the cord of his inheritance: so I believe it will be at the end of this world and the beginning of another age, that the Most High will again divide the sons of Adam; and those who could not be so pure in heart as to see the Lord himself and to be the Lord's portion will see the holy angels and be according to the number of the angels of God. But blessed is he who has been found worthy in that life to be the Lord's portion, his people Jacob, and Israel the cord of his inheritance. It is desirable, then, as we said, that each should so advance as to deserve to be chosen among the firstfruits or the firstborn, to be offered to God, and to be the Lord's portion; just as, on the contrary, we must greatly fear lest we be found among those of whom it is written: “They shall go into the lower parts of the earth; they shall be given over to the hands of the sword; they shall be portions for foxes.” You see, then, that at the time of the resurrection, when the Most High begins to divide the nations and to scatter the sons of Adam according to their merits, there will be some who go into the lower parts of the earth and become portions for foxes, that is, portions for demons. For these are the foxes that destroy the vineyards, of whom Herod too was one, of whom it is said: “Go and tell that fox.” Let us flee, then, earthly deeds and earthly understanding, lest, weighed down by earthly thoughts, we be said to go into the lower parts of the earth and to become portions for foxes. For they too go into the lower parts of the earth who take the law of God and the good things of the promises with the understanding of earthly thought, and do not rouse the souls of their hearers to the expectation of heavenly things and the contemplation of things above, though the Apostle clearly says: “If you have been raised with Christ, seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God, not the things that are on earth.” The Apostle said this, surely, to those who, keeping earthly observances, said of earthly things, “Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle,” to which he adds: “These all perish by their very use, according to the commandments and teachings of men.”