Homilies on John, Homily 52

“Then the officers came to the Chief Priests and Pharisees, who said to them, Why haven’t you brought him? The officers answered, No one has ever spoken like this Man.” [1.] Nothing is clearer or simpler than the truth, if we do not act perversely; just as (on the other hand) nothing is more difficult if we do act perversely. Look at the Scribes and Pharisees, who supposedly were wiser than other people. They were constantly with Christ to plot against Him, saw His miracles, and read the Scriptures, yet gained nothing and were even harmed. Meanwhile, the officers, who could claim none of these privileges, were overcome by a single sermon, and those who had gone out to bind Him came back bound themselves by wonder. We must marvel not only at their understanding, because they needed no signs but were won over by the teaching alone (for they did not say, “No one has ever performed miracles like this,” but, “No one has ever spoken like this”). We must marvel, I say, not merely at their understanding, but also at their courage in speaking this way to those who had sent them—to the Pharisees, His enemies, men who did everything to satisfy their hatred. “The officers,” the Evangelist says, “came, and the Pharisees said to them, Why haven’t you brought him?” To “come” was a much greater act than to have stayed away. In the latter case they would have escaped these men’s harassment, but now they became heralds of Christ’s wisdom and showed even greater courage. They did not say, “We couldn’t because of the crowd, for they listened to Him as a prophet.” What did they say instead? “No one has ever spoken like this Man.” They could have offered that excuse, but they showed their proper attitude. Their words expressed not only admiration for Him but also blame for their masters, because they had sent them to bind someone they should instead have listened to. Yet they had not even heard a long sermon, but a short one; for when the mind is impartial, there is no need for long arguments. Such is the power of truth. What, then, did the Pharisees say? When they should have been cut to the heart, they instead turned the accusation against the officers, saying, Ver. 47. “Have you also been deceived?” They still spoke gently to them and did not use harsh language, fearing that the officers might break with them completely. Nevertheless, they showed signs of anger and kept their words brief. They should have asked what He had said and marveled at His words, but they did not (knowing that they might have been captivated). Instead, they reasoned with them using a very foolish argument; Ver. 48. “Why,” someone says, “has none of the rulers believed in Him?” Tell me, then: do you make this an accusation against Christ, rather than against those who do not believe? Ver. 49. “But the people,” someone says, “who do not know the Law are cursed.” Then the accusation against you is all the more serious, because the people believed and you did not. They acted like people who knew the Law; how, then, are they cursed? You are the ones who are cursed, because you do not keep the Law, not those who obey it. Nor was it right to slander someone on the evidence of those who did not believe in Him, for this is an unjust way to act. For you also did not believe God, as Paul says: “What if some did not believe? Will their unbelief make God’s faithfulness ineffective? Certainly not.” ( Rom. iii. 3, 4.) For the Prophets constantly rebuked them, saying, “Listen, rulers of Sodom”; and, “Your rulers are disobedient” ( Isa. i. 10, 23 ); and again, “Isn’t it your responsibility to know justice?” ( Mic. iii. 1.) Everywhere they attack them fiercely. What, then? Should anyone blame God for this? Put that thought away. The blame belongs to them. And what further proof could anyone offer that you do not know the Law than your failure to obey it? For after they had said, “Has any of the rulers believed in him?” and, “These people who do not know the Law,” Nicodemus quite reasonably rebuked them, saying, Ver. 51. “Does our law judge anyone before hearing him?” He showed that they neither knew the Law nor obeyed it. For if that Law commands that no one be killed without first being heard, and they were eager to do this before hearing Him, they were breaking the Law. And because they said, “None of the rulers has believed in him” ( ver. 50 ), the Evangelist tells us that Nicodemus was “one of them,” to show that even rulers believed in Him. Although they did not yet show the courage they should, they were still becoming attached to Christ. Notice how cautiously he rebuked them. He did not say, “You want to kill him, and you condemn the man as a deceiver without proof.” Instead, he spoke more gently, restraining their extreme violence and their reckless, murderous attitude. That is why he turned his words to the Law, saying, “Unless it hears him carefully and knows what he does.” So a mere “hearing” is not enough; a “careful hearing” is required. For “knows what he does” means “what he intends,” “for what reason,” “for what purpose,” “whether he acts to overthrow the established order and as an enemy.” Embarrassed, then, because they had said, “None of the rulers has believed in him,” they addressed him neither fiercely nor patiently. For tell me: after he had said, “The Law judges no one,” how did it follow that they should say, Ver. 52. “Are you also from Galilee?” [2.] They should have shown that they had not sent to summon Him without first making a judgment, or that it was not right to allow Him to speak. Instead, they responded roughly and angrily. “Search and see: no prophet has arisen from Galilee.” Why, what had the man said? That Christ was a prophet? No; he said that He should not be killed without a trial. But they replied insolently, as though he knew nothing of the Scriptures. It was as if someone had said, “Go and learn,” for that is what “Search and see” means. What, then, did Christ do? Since they kept dwelling on Galilee and “The Prophet,” He said the following to free everyone from this mistaken suspicion and show that He was not one of the prophets, but the Master of the world: Chap. viii. ver. 12. “I am the light of the world.” Not “of Galilee,” nor of Palestine, nor of Judea. What, then, did the Jews say? Ver. 13. “You testify about yourself; your testimony is not true.” What foolishness! He constantly referred them to the Scriptures, and now they said, “You testify about yourself.” What testimony had He given? “I am the light of the world.” A great thing to say—truly great—but it did not astonish them much, because He was not now making Himself equal to the Father, or declaring that He was His Son, or that He was God. For the moment He called Himself “a light.” They wanted to disprove even this, yet this was a much greater claim than saying, “Whoever follows Me will not walk in darkness.” He used the words “light” and “darkness” in a spiritual sense, meaning “does not remain in error.” Here He encouraged Nicodemus and presented him as someone who had spoken very boldly, and He praised the servants who had done the same. For to “cry aloud” is what someone does when he wants them also to hear. At the same time, He hinted at those who were secretly plotting treachery: they were in both darkness and error, but they would not overcome the light. And He reminded Nicodemus of the words He had spoken earlier: “Everyone who does evil hates the light and does not come to the light, so that his deeds will not be exposed.” ( c. iii. 20.) Since they had asserted that none of the rulers had believed in Him, He therefore said that “whoever does evil does not come to the light,” to show that their failure to come arose from their own perverse will, not from any weakness in the light. “They answered and said to Him, Do you testify about yourself?” What, then, did He say? Ver. 14. “Even if I testify about Myself, My testimony is true; for I know where I come from and where I am going, but you cannot tell where I come from.” These men brought up what He had said before as though He had stated it without qualification. What, then, did Christ do? To refute this and show that He had used those expressions to accommodate them and their suspicions, since they supposed Him to be a mere man, He said, “Even if I testify about Myself, My testimony is true, for I know where I come from.” What does this mean? “I am from God, I am God, the Son of God, and God Himself is a faithful witness to Himself. But you do not know Him; you deliberately go astray. You know, yet pretend not to know, and everything you say follows mere human imagination, because you choose to understand nothing beyond what you can see.” Ver. 15. “You judge according to the flesh.” Just as living according to the flesh means living badly, so judging according to the flesh means judging unjustly. “But I judge no one.” Ver. 16. “And yet if I judge, My judgment is true.” This is what He meant: “You judge unjustly.” “And if,” someone says, “we judge unjustly, why don’t You rebuke us? Why don’t You punish us? Why don’t You condemn us?” “Because,” He says, “that is not what I came for.” This is the meaning of “I judge no one; yet if I judge, My judgment is true.” “For if I had chosen to judge, you would have been among the condemned. And I say this without judging you. Yet when I tell you that I say it without judging you, I do not mean that I am unsure whether I would have found you guilty if I had judged you; for if I had judged you, I would necessarily have condemned you justly. But the time of judgment has not yet come.” He also alluded to the judgment to come, saying, “I am not alone, but I and the Father who sent Me.” Here He hinted that He was not the only one who condemned them; the Father did too. Then He concealed this by directing them to His own testimony. Ver. 17. “It is written in your Law that the testimony of two men is true.” [3.] What would the heretics say here? (They would say,) “How is he greater than a man, if we take what he has said at face value? For this rule is established for human beings, because no one is trustworthy on his own. But in God’s case, how can anyone tolerate such a way of speaking? How, then, is the word ‘two’ being used? Is it because they are two, or because they are human beings and therefore count as two? If it is because they are two, why did he not turn to John and say, I testify about myself, and John testifies about me? Why not turn to the angels? Why not to the prophets? For he could have found ten thousand other testimonies.” But He wanted to show not only that there are Two, but also that They are of the same Substance. Ver. 19. “Then they said to Him, Who is your father? Jesus answered, You know neither Me nor My Father.” Because they knew, yet spoke as though they did not know and were testing Him, He did not even consider them worthy of an answer. From then on, He spoke more clearly and boldly about everything, drawing His testimony from signs and from His teaching of those who followed Him, with the Cross also drawing near. For He says, “I know where I come from.” This would not affect them much, but the addition, “and where I am going,” would be more likely to frighten them, since He would not remain in death. But why did He not say, “I know that I am God,” instead of, “I know where I come from”? He always mixed humble words with exalted ones, and even these He veiled. For after saying, “I testify about Myself,” and proving this, He moved to a humbler way of speaking. It was as though He had said, “I know who sent Me and to whom I am returning.” They could have had nothing to say against this when they heard that He had been sent from Him and would return to Him. “I could not have spoken any falsehood,” He says, “since I have come from there and am returning there, to the true God. But you do not know God, and therefore you judge according to the flesh. For if, after hearing so many certain signs and proofs, you still say, ‘your testimony is not true,’ if you consider Moses trustworthy both in what he says about others and in what he says about himself, but do not consider Christ trustworthy, this is judging according to the flesh.” “But I judge no one.” He also says that “the Father judges no one.” ( c. v. 22.) How, then, does He declare here, “If I judge, My judgment is just, for I am not alone”? Again, He speaks in response to their thoughts. “My judgment is the Father’s judgment. When the Father judges, He would judge no differently from Me, and I would judge no differently from the Father.” Why did He mention the Father? Because they would not have thought the Son should be believed unless He received the Father’s testimony. Besides, the saying does not even apply here. For among human beings, when two testify in a matter concerning someone else, their testimony is true (this is what it means for two to testify). But if one testifies for himself, there are no longer two. Do you see that He said this solely to show that He was of the same Substance, needed no other witness, and was in no way inferior to the Father? Notice, at any rate, His independence; Ver. 18. “I am One who testifies about Myself, and the Father who sent Me testifies about Me.” If He had been of an inferior substance, He would not have said this. But so that you will not think the Father is included to make up the number (of two), notice that His power differs in no way (from the Father’s). A person bears witness when he is trustworthy on his own, not when he himself needs testimony—and even then, his testimony concerns someone else. In his own case, however, when he needs someone else’s testimony, he is not trustworthy. But here everything is reversed. For although He testifies in His own case and says that someone else testifies about Him, He declares that He is trustworthy, showing His independence in every way. For after saying, “I am not alone, but I and the Father who sent Me,” and, “The testimony of two men is true,” why did He not stop speaking, instead of adding, “I am One who testifies about Myself”? Clearly, it was to show His independence. And He placed Himself first: “I am One who testifies about Myself.” Here He showed His equality of honor, and that their claim to know God the Father did them no good while they did not know Him. And He said that the cause of this (ignorance) was their unwillingness to know Him. Therefore He told them that it was impossible to know the Father without knowing Him, so that even in this way He might draw them to know Him. For since they passed Him by and even sought to gain knowledge of the Father, He said, “You cannot know the Father without Me.” ( Ver. 19.) So those who blaspheme the Son blaspheme not only the Son, but also Him who begot Him. [4.] Let us avoid this and glorify the Son. If He had not been of the same Nature, He would not have spoken this way. For if He had merely taught, but had been of a different Substance, someone could have failed to know Him and yet known the Father. And conversely, knowing Him would not have meant fully knowing the Father; for knowing a human being does not mean knowing an Angel. “Yes,” someone replies, “whoever knows the creation knows God.” Certainly not. Many people—or rather, I should say, everyone—know the creation (for they see it), but they do not know God. Let us, then, glorify the Son of God, not only with this glory (of words), but also with the glory of our actions. For the first is nothing without the second. “Look,” St. Paul says, “you are called a Jew, rely on the Law, and boast in God—you, then, who teach someone else, do you not teach yourself? You who boast in the Law, do you dishonor God by breaking the Law?” ( Rom. ii. 17, 21, 23.) Let us take care that we too, who boast that our faith is right, do not dishonor God by failing to live in keeping with that faith and causing Him to be blasphemed. For He wants the Christian to be the world’s teacher, its leaven, its salt, its light. And what is that light? A life that shines and has nothing dark in it. Light does not benefit itself, nor does leaven or salt; it shows its usefulness by benefiting others. So we are required to do good not only to ourselves but also to others. For salt that does not salt is not salt. Another thing is also clear: if we are righteous, others will certainly be righteous too; but as long as we are not righteous, we will be unable to help others. Let there be nothing foolish or silly among us. Worldly affairs and the cares of this life are such things. That is why the virgins were called foolish: they were occupied with foolish, worldly affairs, gathering things here but not storing up treasure where they should. There is reason to fear that this may be our case, to fear that we too may depart dressed in filthy clothes for that place where everyone’s clothes are bright and shining. For nothing is filthier or more impure than sin. That is why the Prophet, declaring its nature, cried out, “My wounds stink and fester.” ( Ps. xxxviii. 5.) And if you want to understand fully how foul-smelling sin is, consider it after it has been committed. When you are free of the desire, when the fire no longer troubles you, then you will see what sin is. Consider anger when you are calm; consider greed when you do not feel it. Nothing is more shameful or more cursed than robbery and greed. We say this continually, hoping not to upset you, but to gain some great and wonderful benefit. For someone who has not acted rightly after hearing it once may perhaps do so after hearing it a second time; and someone who ignored it the second time may act rightly after the third. May God grant that, freed from all evil things, we may have the sweet fragrance of Christ; for to Him, with the Father and the Holy Spirit, belongs glory, now and forever, for ages without end. Amen.