Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 29
29.1 Chapter VII. 14–18 PL 35, 1628
1. What follows of the Gospel and was read to-day, we must next in order look at, and speak from it as the Lord may grant us. Yesterday it was read thus far, that although they had not seen the Lord Jesus in the temple on the feast-day, yet they were speaking about Him: “And some said, He is a good man: but others said, Nay; but he seduceth the people.” For this was said for the comfort of those who, afterwards preaching God’s word, were to be seducers, and yet true men. For if to seduce is to deceive, neither was Christ a seducer, nor His apostles, nor ought any Christian to be such; but if to seduce (to lead aside) is by persuading to lead one from something to something else, we ought to inquire into the whence and the whither: if from evil to good, the seducer is a good man; if from good to evil, the seducer is a bad man. In that sense, then, in which men are seduced from evil to good, would that all of us both were called, and actually were seducers!
Quod sequitur de Evangelio et hodie lectum est, consequenter et nos videamus; et quod Dominus donaverit, hinc dicamus. Hesterno die huc usque lectum erat, quia licet non vidissent Dominum Jesum in templo per diem festum, loquebantur tamen de illo: Et alii dicebant, Bonus est; alii autem, Non, sed seducit turbas . Dictum enim hoc est ad eorum solatium, qui postea praedicantes verbum Dei, futuri erant ut seductores et veraces . Si enim seducere decipere est; nec Christus seductor, nec Apostoli ejus; nec quisquam seductor debet esse christianus: si autem seducere, aliunde aliquem ad aliud persuadendo ducere est, quaerendum est unde et quo: si a malo ad bonum, bonus seductor est; si a bono ad malum, malus seductor est. In hanc ergo partem qua seducuntur homines de malo ad bonum, utinam omnes seductores et vocemur et simus!
29.2 PL 35, 1628
2. Then afterwards the Lord went up to the feast, “about the middle of the feast, and taught.” “And the Jews marvelled, saying, How knoweth this man letters, having never learned?” He who was in secret taught, He was speaking openly and was not restrained. For that hiding of Himself was for the sake of example; this showing Himself openly was an intimation of His power. But as He taught, “the Jews marvelled;” all indeed, so far as I think, marvelled, but all were not converted. And why this wondering? Because all knew where He was born, where He had been brought up; they had never seen Him learning letters, but they heard Him disputing about the law, bringing forward testimonies of the law, which none could bring forward unless he had read, and none could read unless he had learned letters: and therefore they marvelled. But their marvelling was made an occasion to the Master of insinuating the truth more deeply into their minds. By reason, indeed of their wondering and words, the Lord said something profound, and worthy of being more diligently looked into and discussed. On account of which I would urge you, my beloved, to earnestness, not only in hearing for yourselves, but also in praying for us.
Ascendit ergo postea Dominus ad diem festum, mediante die festo, et docebat. Et mirabantur Judaei dicentes: Quomodo hic litteras scit, cum non didicerit? Ille qui latebat, docebat; et palam loquebatur, et non tenebatur. Illud enim ut lateret, erat causa exempli, hoc potestatis. Sed cum doceret, mirabantur Judaei. Omnes quidem, quantum arbitror, mirabantur; sed non omnes convertebantur. Et unde admiratio? Quia multi noverant ubi natus, quemadmodum fuerit educatus; nunquam eum viderant litteras discentem, audiebant autem de Lege disputantem, Legis testimonia proferentem, quae nemo posset proferre nisi legisset, nemo legere nisi litteras didicisset: et ideo mirabantur. Eorum autem admiratio Magistro facta est insinuandae altius veritatis occasio. Ex eorum quippe admiratione et verbis, dixit Dominus profundum aliquid, et diligentius inspici et discuti dignum. Propter quod intentam facio Charitatem vestram, non solum ad audiendum pro vobis, sed etiam ad orandum pro nobis.
29.3 PL 35, 1629
3. How then did the Lord answer those that were marvelling how He knew letters which He had not learned? “My doctrine,” saith He, “is not mine, but His that sent me.” This is the first profundity. For He seems as if in a few words He had spoken contraries. For He says not, This doctrine is not mine; but, “My doctrine is not mine.” If not Thine, how Thine? If Thine, how not Thine? For Thou sayest both: both, “my doctrines;” and, “not mine.” For if He had said, This doctrine is not mine, there would have been no question. But now, brethren, in the first place, consider well the question, and so in due order expect the solution. For he who sees not the question proposed, how can he understand what is expounded? The subject of inquiry, then, is that which He says, “My, not mine” this appears to be contrary; how “my,” how “not mine”? If we carefully look at what the holy evangelist himself says in the beginning of his Gospel, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God;” thence hangs the solution of this question. What then is the doctrine of the Father, but the Father’s Word? Therefore, Christ Himself is the doctrine of the Father, if He is the Word of the Father. But since the Word cannot be of none, but of some one, He said both “His doctrine,” namely, Himself, and also, “not His own,” because He is the Word of the Father. For what is so much “Thine” as Thyself? And what so much not Thine as Thyself, if that Thou art is of another?
Quid ergo Dominus respondit eis admirantibus quomodo sciret litteras quas non didicerat? Mea, inquit, doctrina non est mea, sed ejus qui misit me. Haec est profunditas prima: videtur enim paucis verbis quasi contraria locutus. Non enim ait, Ista doctrina non est mea; sed, Mea doctrina non est mea. Si non tua, quomodo tua? Si tua, quomodo non tua? Tu enim dicis utrumque: et, mea doctrina; et, non mea. Nam si dixisset, Ista doctrina non est mea, nulla esset quaestio. Nunc vero, fratres, primitus intendite quaestionem, et sic ordine exspectate solutionem. Nam qui non videt quaestionem quae proponitur, quomodo intelligit quod exponitur? Hoc est ergo in quaestione, quod ait, mea non mea: hoc videtur esse contrarium, quomodo mea, quomodo non mea. Si ergo intueamur diligenter quod ipse in exordio dicit sanctus Evangelista, In principio erat Verbum, et Verbum erat apud Deum, et Deus erat verbum ; inde pendet hujus solutio quaestionis. Quae est ergo doctrina Patris, nisi Verbum Patris? Ipse ergo Christus doctrina Patris, si Verbum Patris. Sed quia Verbum non potest esse nullius, sed alicujus: et suam doctrinam dixit, seipsum; et non suam, quia Patris est Verbum. Quid enim tam tuum quam tu? et quid tam non tuum quam tu, si alicujus est quod es?
29.4 PL 35, 1629
4. The Word then is God; and it is also the Word of a stable, unchangeable doctrine, not such as can be sounded by syllables and fleeting, but abiding with the Father, to which abiding doctrine let us be converted, being admonished by the transitory sounds of the voice. For that which is transitory does not so admonish us as to call us to transitory things. We are admonished to love God. All this that I have said were syllables; they smote through the air to reach your sense of hearing, and by sounding passed away: that, however, which I advise you ought not so to pass away, because He whom I exhort you to love passes not away; and when you, exhorted in transient syllables, shall have been converted, you shall not pass away, but shall abide with Him who is abiding. There is therefore in the doctrine this great matter, this deep and eternal thing which is permanent: whither all things that pass away in time call us, when they mean well and are not falsely put forward. For, in fact, all the signs which we produce by sounds do signify something which is not sound. For God is not the two short syllables “Deus,” and it is not the two short syllables that we worship, and it is not the two short syllables that we adore, nor is it to the two short syllables that we desire to come—two syllables which almost cease to sound before they have begun to sound; nor in sounding them is there room for the second until the first has passed away. There remains, then, something great which is called “God,” although the sound does not remain when we say the word “God.” Thus direct your thoughts to the doctrine of Christ, and ye shall arrive at the Word of God; and when you have arrived at the Word of God, consider this, “The Word was God,” and you will see that it was said truly, “my doctrine:” consider also whose the Word is, and you will see that it was rightly said, “is not mine.”
Verbum ergo et Deus est, et doctrinae stabilis Verbum est, non sonabilis per syllabas et volatilis, sed manentis cum Patre, ad quam convertamur manentem, sonis transeuntibus admoniti. Non enim nos ita admonet quod transit, ut ad transitoria vocet. Admonemur ut diligamus Deum. Totum hoc quod dixi, syllabae fuerunt; percussum aerem verberaverunt, ut ad sensum vestrarum aurium pervenirent, sonando transierunt: non tamen illud quod vos admonui, transire debet; quia ille quem vos diligere admonui, non transit; et cum transeuntibus syllabis admoniti, conversi ad eum fueritis, nec vos transibitis, sed cum manente manebitis. Hoc est ergo in doctrina magnum, altum et aeternum quod manet; quo vocant omnia quae temporaliter transeunt, quando bene significant, nec mendaciter proferuntur. Omnia quippe signa quae proferimus sonis, aliquid significant quod non est sonus. Non enim duae breves syllabae Deus est, et duas breves syllabas colimus, et duas breves syllabas adoramus, et ad duas breves syllabas pervenire desideramus: quae pene ante desinunt sonare, quam coeperint; nec in eis secundae locus est, nisi prima transierit. Manet ergo aliquid magnum quod dicitur Deus, quamvis non maneat sonus cum dicitur Deus. Sic intendite doctrinam Christi, et pervenietis ad Verbum Dei: cum autem perveneritis ad Verbum Dei, intendite, Deus erat Verbum; et videbitis verum dictum esse, mea doctrina: intendite etiam cujus est Verbum; et videbitis recte dictum esse, non est mea.
29.5 PL 35, 1630
5. Therefore, to speak briefly, beloved, it seems to me that the Lord Jesus Christ said, “My doctrine is not mine,” meaning the same thing as if He said, “I am not from myself.” For although we say and believe that the Son is equal to the Father, and that there is not any diversity of nature and substance in them, that there has not intervened any interval of time between Him that begets and Him that is begotten, nevertheless we say these things, while keeping and guarding this, that the one is the Father, the other the Son. But Father He is not if He have not a Son, and Son He is not if He have not a Father: but yet the Son is God from the Father; and the Father is God, but not from the Son. The Father of the Son, not God from the Son: but the other is Son of the Father, and God from the Father. For the Lord Christ is called Light from Light. The Light then which is not from Light, and the equal Light which is from Light, are together one Light not two Lights.
Breviter ergo dico Charitati vestrae; hoc videtur mihi dixisse Dominus Jesus Christus, Mea doctrina non est mea, ac si diceret, Ego non sum a meipso. Quamvis enim Filium Patri dicamus et credamus aequalem, nec ullam in eis esse naturae substantiaeque distantiam, nec inter generantem atque generatum aliquod interfuisse temporis intervallum; tamen hoc servato et custodito ista dicimus, quod ille Pater est, ille Filius. Pater autem non est, si non habeat Filium; et Filius non est, si non habeat Patrem: sed tamen Filius Deus de Patre; Pater autem Deus, sed non de Filio. Pater Filii, non Deus de Filio: ille autem Filius Patris, et Deus de Patre. Dominus enim Christus dicitur Lumen ex Lumine. Lumen ergo quod non ex lumine, et Lumen aequale quod ex Lumine, simul unum Lumen, non duo lumina.
29.6 PL 35, 1630
6. If we have understood this, thanks be to God; but if any has not sufficiently understood, man has done as far as he could: as for the rest, let him see whence he may hope to understand. As laborers outside, we can plant and water; but it is of God to give the increase. “My doctrine,” saith He, “is not mine, but His that sent me.” Let him who says he has not yet understood hear counsel. For since it was a great and profound matter that had been spoken, the Lord Christ Himself did certainly see that all would not understand this so profound a matter, and He gave counsel in the sequel. Dost thou wish to understand? Believe. For God has said by the prophet: “Except ye believe, ye shall not understand.” To the same purpose what the Lord here also added as He went on—“If any man is willing to do His will, he shall know concerning the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak from myself.” What is the meaning of this, “If any man be willing to do His will”? But I had said, if any man believe; and I gave this counsel: If thou hast not understood, said I, believe. For understanding is the reward of faith. Therefore do not seek to understand in order to believe, but believe that thou mayest understand; since, “except ye believe, ye shall not understand.” Therefore when I would counsel the obedience of believing toward the possibility of understanding, and say that our Lord Jesus Christ has added this very thing in the following sentence, we find Him to have said, “If any man be willing to do His will, he shall know of the doctrine.” What is “he shall know”? It is the same thing as “he shall understand.” But what is “If any man be willing to do His will”? It is the same thing as to believe. All men indeed perceive that “shall know” is the same thing as “shall understand:” but that the saying, “If any man be willing to do His will,” refers to believing, all do not perceive; to perceive this more accurately, we need the Lord Himself for expounder, to show us whether the doing of the Father’s will does in reality refer to believing. But who does not know that this is to do the will of God, to work the work of God; that is, to work that work which is pleasing to Him? But the Lord Himself says openly in another place: “This is the work of God, that ye believe on Him whom He has sent.” “That ye believe on Him,” not, that ye believe Him. But if ye believe on Him, ye believe Him; yet he that believes Him does not necessarily believe on Him. For even the devils believed Him, but they did not believe on Him. Again, moreover, of His apostles we can say, we believe Paul; but not, we believe on Paul: we believe Peter; but not, we believe on Peter. For, “to him that believeth on Him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted unto him for righteousness.” What then is “to believe on Him”? By believing to love Him, by believing to esteem highly, by believing to go into Him and to be incorporated in His members. It is faith itself then that God exacts from us: and He finds not that which He exacts, unless He has bestowed what He may find. What faith, but that which the apostle has most amply defined in another place, saying, “Neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but faith that worketh by love?” Not any faith of what kind soever, but “faith that worketh by love:” let this faith be in thee, and thou shall understand concerning the doctrine. What indeed shall thou understand? That “this doctrine is not mine, but His that sent me;” that is, thou shall understand that Christ the Son of God, who is the doctrine of the Father, is not from Himself, but is the Son of the Father.
Si intelleximus, Deo gratias: si quis autem parum intellexit, fecit homo quo usque potuit, caetera videat unde speret. Forinsecus ut operarii possumus plantare et rigare, sed Dei est incrementum dare . Mea, inquit, doctrina non est mea, sed ejus qui misit me. Audiat consilium, qui dicit, Nondum intellexi. Magna quippe res et profunda cum fuisset dicta, vidit utique ipse Dominus Christus hoc tam profundum non omnes intellecturos, et in consequenti dedit consilium. Intelligere vis? crede. Deus enim per prophetam dixit: Nisi credideritis, non intelligetis . Ad hoc pertinet quod etiam hic Dominus secutus adjunxit: Si quis voluerit voluntatem ejus facere, cognoscet de doctrina, utrum ex Deo sit, an ego a meipso loquar. Quid est hoc, Si quis voluerit voluntatem ejus facere? Sed ego dixeram, Si quis crediderit; et hoc consilium dederam. Si non intellexisti, inquam, crede. Intellectus enim merces est fidei. Ergo noli quaerere intelligere ut credas, sed crede ut intelligas; quoniam nisi credideritis, non intelligetis. Cum ergo ad possibilitatem intelligendi consilium dederim obedientiam credendi, et dixerim Dominum Jesum Christum hoc ipsum adjunxisse in consequenti sententia, invenimus eum dixisse, Si quis voluerit voluntatem ejus facere, cognoscet de doctrina. Quid est, cognoscet? Hoc est intelliget. Quod est autem, Si quis voluerit voluntatem ejus facere, hoc est credere. Sed quia cognoscet, hoc est intelliget, omnes intelligunt: quia vero quod ait, Si quis voluerit voluntatem ejus facere, hoc pertinet ad credere, ut diligentius intelligatur, opus est nobis ipso Domino nostro expositore, ut indicet nobis utrum revera ad credere pertineat facere voluntatem Patris ejus. Quis nesciat hoc esse facere voluntatem Dei, operari opus ejus, id est, quod illi placet? Ipse autem Dominus aperte alio loco dicit: Hoc est opus Dei, ut credatis in eum quem ille misit . Ut credatis in eum; non, ut credatis ei. Sed si creditis in eum, creditis ei: non autem continuo qui credit ei, credit in eum. Nam et daemones credebant ei, et non credebant in eum. Rursus etiam de Apostolis ipsius possumus dicere, Credimus Paulo; sed non, Credimus in Paulum: Credimus Petro; sed non, Credimus in Petrum. Credenti enim in eum qui justificat impium, deputatur fides ejus ad justitiam . Quid est ergo credere in eum? Credendo amare, credendo diligere, credendo in eum ire, et ejus membris incorporari. Ipsa est ergo fides quam de nobis exigit Deus: et non invenit quod exigat, nisi donaverit quod inveniat. Quae fides, nisi quam definivit alio loco Apostolus plenissime dicens: Neque circumcisio aliquid valet, neque praeputium, sed fides quae per dilectionem operatur ? Non qualiscumque fides, sed fides quae per dilectionem operatur: haec in te sit, et intelliges de doctrina. Quid enim intelliges? Quia doctrina ista non est mea, sed ejus qui misit me: id est, intelliges quia Christus Filius Dei, qui est doctrina Patris, non est ex seipso, sed Filius est Patris.
29.7 PL 35, 1631
7. This sentence overthrows the Sabellian heresy. The Sabellians have dared to affirm that the Son is the very same as He who is also the Father: that the names are two, but the reality one. If the names were two and reality one, it would not be said, “My doctrine is not mine.” Anyhow, if Thy doctrine is not Thine, O Lord, whose is it, unless there be another whose it is? The Sabellians understand not what Thou saidst; for they see not the trinity, but follow the error of their own heart. Let us worshippers of the trinity and unity of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and one God, understand concerning Christ’s doctrine, how it is not His. And He said that He spoke not from Himself for this reason, because Christ is the Son of the Father, and the Father is the Father of Christ; and the Son is from God the Father, God, but God the Father is God not from God the Son.
Sabellianam haeresim sententia ista dissolvit. Sabelliani enim dicere ausi sunt ipsum esse Filium qui est et Pater; duo esse nomina, sed unam rem. Si duo essent nomina, et res una, non diceretur, Mea doctrina non est mea. Utique si tua doctrina non est tua, o Domine, cujus est, nisi alius sit cujus sit? Quod dixisti, Sabelliani non intelligunt: non enim Trinitatem viderunt, sed sui cordis errorem secuti sunt. Nos cultores Trinitatis et unitatis Patris et Filii et Spiritus sancti, et unius Dei, intelligamus de doctrina Christi, quoniam non est ejus. Et ideo dixit non se a seipso loqui, quoniam Christus Patris est Filius, et Pater Christi est Pater, et Filius de Deo Patre Deus est: Pater autem Deus, non de Filio Deo Deus est.
29.8 PL 35, 1631
8. “He that speaketh of himself seeketh his own glory: ‘This will be he who is called Antichrist,’ exalting himself,” as the apostle says, “above all that is called God, and that is worshipped.” The Lord, declaring that this same it is that will seek his own glory, not the glory of the Father, says to the Jews: “I am come in my Father’s name, and ye have not received me; another will come in his own name, him ye will receive.” He intimated that they would receive Antichrist, who will seek the glory of his own name, puffed up, not solid; and therefore not stable, but assuredly ruinous. But our Lord Jesus Christ has shown us a great example of humility: for doubtless He is equal with the Father, for “in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God;” yea, doubtless, He Himself said, and most truly said, “Am I so long time with you, and ye have not known me, Philip? He that hath seen me hath seen the Father.” Yea, doubtless, Himself said, and most truly said, “I and the Father are one.” If, therefore, He is one with the Father, equal to the Father, God from God, God with God, coeternal, immortal, alike unchangeable, alike without time, alike Creator and disposer of times; and yet because He came in time, and took the form of a servant, and in condition was found as a man, He seeks the glory of the Father, not His own; what oughtest thou to do, O man, who, when thou doest anything good, seekest thy own glory; but when thou doest anything ill, dost meditate calumny against God? Consider thyself: thou art a creature, acknowledge thy Creator: thou art a servant, despise not thy Lord: thou art adopted, not for thy own merits; seek His glory from whom thou hast this grace, that thou art a man adopted; His, whose glory He sought who is from Him, the Only-begotten. “But He that seeketh His glory that sent Him, the same is true, and no unrighteousness is in Him.” In Antichrist, however, there is unrighteousness, and he is not true; because he will seek his own glory, not His by whom he was sent: for, indeed, he was not sent, but only permitted to come. Let us all, therefore, that belong to the body of Christ, seek not our own glory, that we be not led into the snares of Antichrist. But if Christ sought His glory that sent Him, how much more ought we to seek the glory of Him who made us?
Qui a semetipso loquitur, gloriam propriam quaerit. Hoc erit ille qui vocatur Antichristus, extollens se, sicut Apostolus ait, supra omne quod dicitur Deus, et quod colitur . Ipsum quippe annuntians Dominus gloriam suam quaesiturum, non gloriam Patris, ait ad Judaeos: Ego veni in nomine Patris mei, et non suscepistis me: alius veniet in nomine suo, hunc suscipietis . Significavit eos Antichristum suscepturos, qui gloriam nominis sui quaesiturus est, inflatus, non solidus; et ideo non stabilis, sed utique ruinosus. Dominus autem noster Jesus Christus magnum exemplum nobis praebuit humilitatis: nempe aequalis est Patri, nempe in principio erat Verbum, et Verbum erat apud Deum, et Deus erat Verbum; nempe ipse dixit, et verissime dixit, Tanto tempore vobiscum sum, et non cognovistis me? Philippe, qui vidit me, vidit et Patrem ; nempe ipse dixit, et verissime dixit, Ego et Pater unum sumus . Si ergo ille cum Patre unum, aequalis Patri, Deus de Deo, Deus apud Deum, coaeternus, immortalis, pariter incommutabilis, pariter sine tempore, pariter creator et dispositor temporum; tamen quia venit in tempore, et formam servi accepit, et habitu est inventus ut homo , quaerit gloriam Patris, non suam: quid tu, homo, facere debes, qui quando aliquid boni facis, gloriam tuam quaeris; quando autem aliquid mali facis, Deo calumniam meditaris? Intende tibi; creatura es, agnosce Creatorem: servus es, ne contemnas Dominum: adoptatus es, sed non meritis tuis; quaere ejus gloriam, a quo habes hanc gratiam, homo adoptatus, cujus gloriam quaesivit qui est ab illo unicus natus. Qui autem quaerit gloriam ejus qui misit illum, hic verax est, et injustitia in illo non est. In Antichristo autem injustitia est, et verax non est; quia gloriam suam quaesiturus est, non ejus a quo missus est: non enim est missus, sed venire permissus. Omnes ergo pertinentes ad corpus Christi, ne inducamur in laqueos Antichristi, non quaeramus gloriam nostram. Sed si ille quaesivit gloriam ejus qui eum misit, quanto magis nos ejus qui nos fecit?