Homilies on John, Homily 40

“If I bear witness about Myself, My witness is not true; there is another who bears witness about Me, and I know that the witness he gives about Me is true.” [1.] If someone with no experience in mining tries to work a mine, he will get no gold. Instead, by mixing everything together at random, he will do work that is useless and harmful. In the same way, those who do not understand how Holy Scripture works or examine its distinctive features and rules, but go through all its passages carelessly and in the same way, will mix the gold with dirt and never discover the treasure stored in it. I say this now because the passage before us contains much gold, though it is not out in plain sight but covered by much obscurity. So we must dig and refine it to reach its proper meaning. For who would not immediately be troubled to hear Christ say, “If I testify about Myself, My witness is not true,” since He often appears to have testified about Himself? For example, when speaking with the Samaritan woman, He said, “I Am, the One speaking to you”; and likewise to the blind man, “It is He who is talking with you” ( c. ix. 37 ); and when rebuking the Jews, “You say, you are blaspheming, because I said I am the Son of God.” ( c. x. 36.) And He does this in many other places as well. Now if all these statements are false, what hope of salvation will we have? And where will we find truth when Truth Itself declares, “My witness is not true”? Nor does this appear to be the only contradiction; there is another just as great. He says later, “Though I bear witness about Myself, My witness is still true” ( c. viii. 14 ). Tell me, then, which am I to accept, and which should I consider false? If we take them out like this [from the context], simply as they are spoken, without carefully considering whom they are addressed to, why they are spoken, or any other circumstances of this kind, both will be falsehoods. For if His witness is “not true,” then this statement is not true either—not merely the second, but the first as well. What, then, does it mean? We need great care, or rather the grace of God, so that we do not stop at the words alone. For this is how heretics go wrong: they do not investigate the speaker’s purpose or the listeners’ disposition. Unless we also take these and other points into account, such as times, places, and the listeners’ opinions, many absurd consequences will follow. What, then, does it mean? The Jews were about to object to Him, “If you bear witness about yourself, your witness is not true” ( c. viii. 13 ). So He spoke these words in anticipation, as though He had said, “You will certainly say to Me, we do not believe you, for people do not readily trust anyone who bears witness about himself.” So “is not true” must not be read as an absolute statement, but in relation to their suspicions, as though He had said, “to you it is not true.” Thus He spoke these words with their secret thoughts in view, rather than His own dignity. When He says, “My witness is not true,” He rebukes their opinion of Him and the objection they are about to raise against Him. But when He says, “Though I bear witness about Myself, My witness is true” ( c. viii. 14 ), He states the actual nature of the matter: since He is God, they ought to consider Him trustworthy even when He speaks about Himself. For He had spoken about the resurrection of the dead and the judgment, and said that whoever believes in Him is not judged but comes into life, that He will sit to demand an account from everyone, and that He has the same Authority and Power as the Father. Since He was about to prove these things again in another way, He necessarily presented their objection first. “I told you,” He says, “that ‘as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so the Son gives life to whomever He wills’; I told you that ‘the Father judges no one, but has entrusted all judgment to the Son’; I told you that people must ‘honor the Son as they honor the Father’; I told you that ‘whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father’; I told you that ‘whoever hears My words and believes them will not see death, but has passed from death into life’ ( v. 24 ; not exactly quoted); that My voice will raise the dead, some now, some in the future; that I will demand an account from everyone for their transgressions, that I will judge justly and reward those who have lived uprightly.” Now since all these were assertions, since the matters asserted were important, and since the Jews had so far been given no clear proof of them, but only a rather indistinct one, He presents their objection first as He prepares to establish His assertions. He speaks somewhat like this, though not in these exact words: “Perhaps you will say, you assert all this, but you are not a credible witness, since you testify about yourself.” First, then, He checks their argumentative spirit by stating what they would say, showing that He knew the secrets of their hearts, and giving this first proof of His power. After stating the objection, He supplies other clear and indisputable proofs, bringing forward three witnesses to what He said: the works He performed, the witness of the Father, and John’s preaching. And He puts John’s less important witness first. For after saying, “There is another who bears witness about Me, and I know that his witness is true,” He adds, Ver. 33. “You sent to John, and he bore witness to the truth.” Yet if Your witness is not true, how can You say, “I know that John’s testimony is true, and that he has borne witness to the truth”? And do you see (O man) how clear this makes it that the expression “My witness is not true” was directed at their secret thoughts? [2.] “But what,” someone says, “if John’s witness was biased?” To keep the Jews from asserting this, see how He removes the suspicion. For He did not say, “John testified about Me,” but, “You first sent to John, and you would not have sent if you had not considered him trustworthy.” More than that, they had sent to ask him about himself, not about Christ; and the man they considered trustworthy in matters concerning himself they would consider even more trustworthy in matters concerning someone else. For it is, so to speak, natural for all of us to give less credit to those who speak about themselves than to those who speak about others. Yet they considered him so trustworthy that they required no other testimony even about himself. For those who were sent did not say, “What do you say about Christ?” but, “Who are you? What do you say about yourself?” That was how greatly they admired the man. Christ alluded to all this by saying, “You sent to John.” And that is why the Evangelist has not simply reported that they sent, but specifies exactly who was sent: they were Priests and Pharisees, not ordinary or lowly people, or people who could be bribed or deceived, but men capable of understanding exactly what he said. Ver. 34. “But I do not receive testimony from man.” “Why, then, have You brought forward John’s testimony?” His testimony was not the “testimony of man,” for he says, “He who sent me to baptize with water, He said to me.” ( c. i. 33.) So John’s testimony was God’s testimony, for he said what he did because he had learned it from Him. But to keep anyone from asking, “How is it clear that he learned from God?” and stopping there, He thoroughly silences them by continuing to address their thoughts. For it was unlikely that many would know these things. Up to then, they had listened to John as someone speaking on his own authority, and so Christ says, “I do not receive testimony from man.” And to keep the Jews from asking, “And if You were not going to receive human testimony and use it to support Yourself, why have You brought forward this man’s testimony?” see how He resolves this contradiction with what He adds. For after saying, “I do not receive testimony from man,” He adds, “But I say these things so that you may be saved.” What He says amounts to this: “As God, I did not need John’s witness, which is human witness. Yet because you paid more attention to him, considered him more trustworthy than anyone, and ran to him as to a prophet, (for the whole city poured out to the Jordan,) while you have not believed in Me even when I work miracles, I remind you of his witness.” Ver. 35. “He was a burning and shining light, and for a time you were willing to rejoice in his light.” To keep them from replying, “What if he did speak, but we did not accept him?” He shows that they did accept John’s words. For they sent priests and Pharisees, not ordinary men, and were willing to rejoice. They admired the man so much, and at the same time had nothing to say against his words. But “for a time” points out their fickleness and the fact that they soon turned away from him. Ver. 36. “But I have greater witness than John’s.” “For if you had been willing to come to faith as the (natural) consequence of the facts, I would have won you over more by My works than he would have by his words. But since you are unwilling, I bring you to John, because I do everything ‘so that you may be saved,’ not because I need his testimony. For I have greater witness than John’s, namely, the witness of My works. Yet I consider not only how credible evidence may make Me acceptable to you, but also how the testimony (of persons) you know and admire may do so.” Then, in a pointed reference to them, by saying that they rejoiced for a time in his (John’s) light, He declared that their zeal was only temporary and unsteady. He called John a torch, indicating that he had no light of his own, but received it by the grace of the Spirit. But He did not yet state what marked the absolute distinction between Himself and John: that He was the Sun of righteousness. Instead, merely hinting at this for now, He sharply rebuked them by showing that the same disposition that led them to despise John also kept them from believing in Christ. For even the man they did admire won their admiration only for a time; and if they had not acted this way, he would soon have led them by the hand to Jesus. Having thus proved them wholly undeserving of forgiveness, He went on to say, “I have greater witness than John’s.” “What is that?” It is the witness of His works. “For the works,” He says, “which the Father has given Me to finish, the very works I do bear witness about Me that the Father sent Me.” By this He reminded them of the paralyzed man who had been healed, and of many other things. One of them might perhaps have claimed that the words were mere boasting, spoken because of John’s friendship with Him, (though in fact they could not say even this about John, a man who lived fully according to wisdom, and whom they admired for that very reason). But the works could not be open to this suspicion even among the most deranged of them. So He added this second testimony, saying, “The works which the Father has given Me to finish, the very works I do bear witness about Me that the Father sent Me.” [3.] Here He also answers the accusation about breaking the Sabbath. For since those people argued, “How can he be from God, since he does not keep the Sabbath?” ( c. ix. 16 ), He says, “Which My Father has given Me.” In truth, He acted with absolute power, but to show as fully as possible that He does nothing contrary to the Father, He used this expression of great inferiority. For why did He not say, “The works which the Father has given Me testify that I am equal to the Father”? Both truths could be learned from the works: that He did nothing contrary to the Father, and that He was equal to Him who begot Him. He establishes this point elsewhere, where He says, “If you do not believe Me, believe the works, so that you may know and believe that I am in the Father and the Father in Me.” ( c. x. 38.) In both respects, then, the works bore witness to Him: that He was equal to the Father, and that He did nothing contrary to Him. Why, then, did He not say so, instead of leaving out the greater point and presenting this one? Because establishing this was His first aim. For although having people believe that He came from God was a far lesser thing than having them believe that God was equal with Him, (for the former applied to the Prophets too, but the latter never did,) He still takes great pains over the lesser point, knowing that once this was admitted, the other would afterward be readily accepted. So, without mentioning the more important part of the testimony, He presents its lesser function, so that through this they may accept the other as well. Having accomplished this, He adds, Ver. 37. “And the Father Himself, who sent Me, has borne witness about Me.” Where did He “bear witness about” Him? At the Jordan: “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased” ( Matt. iii. 17 ); listen to Him. Yet even this needed proof. John’s testimony was clear, for they themselves had sent to him and could not deny it. The testimony of the miracles was likewise clear, for they had seen them performed, had heard from the man who was healed, and had believed; this was also the basis of their accusation. So it remained to establish the Father’s testimony. Next, to accomplish this, He added, “You have never heard His voice”: How, then, does Moses say, “The Lord spoke, and Moses answered”? ( Ex. xix. 19 ); and David, “He had heard a language he did not know” ( Ps. lxxxi. 5 ); and Moses again, “Is there any people like this who have ‘heard the voice of God’?” ( Deut. iv. 33.) “Nor seen His shape.” Yet Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and many others are said to have seen Him. What, then, does Christ mean here? He leads them step by step toward a philosophical teaching, showing that God has neither voice nor shape, but is above forms and sounds like these. For when He says, “You have not heard His voice,” He does not mean that God produces a voice that cannot be heard. Likewise, when He says, “Nor seen His shape,” He does not mean that God has a shape, though an invisible one, but that neither of these things belongs to God. And to keep them from saying, “You are bragging; God spoke only to Moses”; (they did, at least, say this: “We know that God spoke with Moses; as for this fellow, we do not know where He comes from”— c. ix. 29 ;) He spoke as He did to show that God has neither voice nor shape. “But why,” He says, “do I mention these things? Not only have you ‘neither heard His voice nor seen His shape,’ but you cannot even claim what you boast of most and are all most firmly convinced of: that you have received and keep His commandments.” So He adds, Ver. 38. “And you do not have His word remaining in you.” That is, the ordinances, the commandments, the Law, and the Prophets. For even though God established these, they are still not with you, since you do not believe in Me. For if the Scriptures everywhere say that you must listen to Me, and yet you do not believe, it is quite clear that His word has been removed from you. So again He adds, “For you do not believe Him whom He sent.” Then, to keep them from arguing, “How has He testified to You if we have not heard His voice?” He says, Ver. 39. “Search the Scriptures, for they are what testify about Me.” For through these the Father gave His testimony. He also gave it at the Jordan and on the mountain, but Christ does not bring forward those voices. Perhaps He would not have been believed if He had done so. For they did not hear one of them, the voice on the mountain; and though they did hear the other, they paid no attention. For this reason He directs them to the Scriptures, showing that the Father’s testimony comes from them, after first taking away their old grounds for boasting that they had either seen God or heard His voice. For they were likely to disbelieve His voice and picture to themselves what happened on Sinai. So, after first correcting their suspicions on these points and showing that what had happened was an accommodation to human limitations, He then directs them to the testimony of the Scriptures. [4.] Let us also arm and fortify ourselves from these when we fight against heretics. For “all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is useful for teaching, for rebuke, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, so that the man of God may be perfect, fully equipped for every good work” ( 2 Tim. iii. 16, 17 ); not so that he may have some good works and lack others, for such a man is not “perfect.” For tell me, what good is it if a man prays continually but does not give generously to the poor? Or if he gives generously to the poor but is greedy or violent? Or if he is neither greedy nor violent, but (is liberal) to put on a show before others and win the praise of those who see him? Or if he gives to the poor with scrupulous care and as God desires, yet becomes puffed up and proud because of this very thing? Or if he is humble and steadfast in fasting, but greedy, hungry for profit, nailed to the earth, and bringing the mother of wickedness into his soul? For the love of money is the root of all evils. Let us shudder at this behavior; let us flee this sin. It has laid the world waste, thrown everything into confusion, and lured us away from the most blessed service of Christ. “It is not possible,” He says, “to serve God and mammon.” For mammon gives commands that contradict Christ’s. One says, “Give to those in need”; the other, “Plunder the possessions of the needy.” Christ says, “Forgive those who wrong you”; the other, “Set traps for those who do you no wrong.” Christ says, “Be merciful and kind”; mammon says, “Be savage and cruel, and count the tears of the poor as nothing,” so that he may make the Judge stern toward us on that day. For then all our actions will come before our eyes, along with those we have injured and stripped of their possessions, leaving us without any excuse. For if Lazarus, who suffered no wrong from Dives but simply had no share in his good things, stood there at that time as a fierce accuser and prevented him from obtaining any pardon, tell me, what excuse will those have who not only give nothing of their own possessions to the poor, but seize other people’s and ruin orphans’ households? If those who did not feed Christ when He was hungry have brought such fire down on their heads, what comfort will those find who plunder things that do not belong to them at all, contrive ten thousand lawsuits, and unjustly seize everyone’s property? Let us cast out this desire. And we will cast it out if we think of those before us who did wrong, who were greedy and are gone. Do not others enjoy their wealth and the fruits of their labor while they lie in punishment, retribution, and unbearable suffering? And how can it be anything but extreme folly to exhaust and torment ourselves, straining ourselves with work while we live and undergoing unbearable punishment and retribution when we leave this life, when we could have enjoyed ourselves here, (for nothing gives so much pleasure as the awareness that we have given to the poor,) and, on departing for that place, could have been freed from all our suffering and received ten thousand blessings? For just as wickedness punishes those who pursue it even before (they arrive at) the pit, so virtue, even before the (gift of) the Kingdom, provides delight for those who practice it here, keeping them in the company of good hopes and continual pleasure. So, to obtain this both here and in the life to come, let us hold firmly to good works. In this way we will win the future crown. May we all attain it through the grace and loving kindness of our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom and with whom, to the Father and the Holy Spirit, be glory, now and always, forever and ever. Amen.