Gennadius testifies that St. Maximus wrote concerning avarice, and to that subject the two following discourses pertain. The copyists, who do not disagree with Gennadius in designating the author, exhibit a differing title for the homily. The most ancient Ambrosian codex inscribes it: 'A homily on the unity of charity,' just as does codex 99 of Holy Cross in Jerusalem, homily 62, and the fourth Laurentian codex, Plut. XX, page 252 on the reverse, which attributes the same to St. Ambrose. Three other codices, putting forward Maximus as author—namely the St. Gall codex, homily 15; codex 90 of Holy Cross in Jerusalem, homily 15; and the Laurentian, Plut. XIV, page 302—have it thus: 'Here begins the discourse on that which is written: They had all things in common.' Codex 90 of Holy Cross adds 'and on Cain, and on Ananias.'
Diversustamenabhisomnibusesttituluspræfixussermonisubnum. Cpositoinappendiceserm. S. Augustini: DeverbisAct. IV: Nemoquidquamexeoquodpossidebatsuumpropriumdicebat. Benedictinimonachicongreg. S. MauricensoresoptimiscribunthuncsermonemolimfuisseedituminterAugustinianosnum. 15 Detempore, sedsanctodoctorisuppositumagnoscunt; cumqueAmbrosioetMaximoattributuminvenerint, adnotaruntinfrontesermonisVindingumpostLovaniensescenscreMaximiadjudicandum. ProfectoeorumjudiciumauctoritatiGennadiiinnititur, necnontestimoniistriumcodicumvetustiorum, quosMuratoriusetMabilloDiusplurimifaciunt, nempeAmbrosiani, Sangallensis, et 90 S.
Nevertheless, differing from all these is the title prefixed to the sermon placed under number 100 in the appendix to the sermons of St. Augustine: 'On the words of Acts 4: No one said that anything of what he possessed was his own.' The Benedictine monks of the congregation of St. Maur, most excellent critics, write that this sermon was once published among the Augustinian ones as number 15, 'On the season,' but they recognize it as falsely ascribed to the holy doctor; and since they had found it attributed to Ambrose and to Maximus, they noted at the head of the sermon that Vindingus, after the Louvain critics, judged that it should be adjudged to Maximus. Truly their judgment rests upon the authority of Gennadius, and also upon the testimonies of three older codices which Muratori and Mabillon esteem most highly, namely the Ambrosian, the St. Gall, and codex 90 of Holy Cross.
[Codex 90] of Holy Cross in Jerusalem. By manifest error, therefore, Gillotius is convicted, who published this as number 9 of the sermons of St. Ambrose. We have used the epigraph common among the editors, which seems to have been received from the better codices. This is used by Gymnicus, page 276; Galesinius, page 173; Raynaudus, page 244; Margarinus in the Bibliotheca Maxima, volume IX, page 45.—We read in the book which is entitled the Acts of the Apostles that under the aforementioned men so great was the devotion of the people, and thus the Christian people knew such first-fruits, that after receiving the faith no one defended his own house, and no one claimed anything of his own as his own, but by the right of brotherhood all things were common to them; namely, that those who were bound by the same fellowship of religion should also enjoy the same fellowship of livelihood;
that is, that those who had one faith might also have one substance; and those to whom Christ was common might have their expenses in common too. For those religious men thought it a sacrilege not to take as a partner in substance one who was a partner in grace, and therefore by the charity of brotherhood they used all things in common—save that the brotherhood of Christ was greater than that of blood; for the brotherhood of blood reflects only a likeness of body, whereas the brotherhood of Christ shows a oneness of heart, as it is written: 'And the multitude of believers had one heart and one soul' (Acts 4). Truly, therefore, he is a brother who is kin not so much by body as by oneness of spirit;
a true brother, I say, is he whose spirit and will is the same as that in his brother; the brotherhood of Christ, therefore, is better, as I have said, than that of blood. The brotherhood of blood is at times hostile to itself, but the brotherhood of Christ is peaceful without interruption; the former divides even common things among themselves with rivalry, the latter shares even its own possessions with rejoicing; the former often despises a kinsman in partnership, the latter frequently takes in a stranger. So great, therefore, as I have said, was the devotion of the Christian people in that time, that no one called his own house his own, no one claimed anything as his own property, as St. Luke says: 'And no one said that anything of what he possessed was his own, but all things were common to them' (ibid.);
for no one, I say, was needy among them. Blessed therefore is that people which, while it had many rich in Christ, had none in the world in want; and which, while it thought upon eternal riches, drove away temporal poverty from its brethren. For they were selling, as Scripture says (ibid.), their lands and houses, and bringing the prices of the things sold and laying them before the feet of the apostles, that distribution might be made to each as anyone had need. See the faith of those holy men, how for Christ's sake they were despoiled of their whole patrimony, and left nothing over for themselves; for they were not afraid lest they themselves should go hungry, while they feared lest another should carry it off. This, then, was the devotion in the people under the apostles; now, what like it do we find?
And certainly the same Christ indeed is in us, but the same mind is not in us; the same faith is in the people, but that same generosity is not in the people; so that one takes no thought of another's want, so that there results what the Apostle says: 'One indeed is hungry, but another is drunk' (1 Cor. 11). For most Christians not only do not distribute their own goods, but even plunder the goods of others; not only, I say, do they not, gathering their money, bring it to the feet of the apostles, but they even drag away their fleeing brethren from the feet of the priests. Now is that time which the blessed Apostle describes, saying: 'In the last days the iniquity of many shall abound, and charity shall grow cold' (Matt. 24:12);
for now the iniquity of avarice abounds, which formerly ceased through the goodness of generosity; and the charity of brotherhood grows cold, which before was fervent with the love of Christ. For so great under the apostles was the love of brotherhood that in their assembly no want came in; but now so great is the dissimilarity of Christianity, that in our assembly you would scarcely find one who is well-off; and I say that you can scarcely find one well-off, not so much in resources as in works; for the Apostle says: 'Let them be rich in good works' (1 Tim. 6). For he willed that one to be understood as well-off in the Church who is rich in Christ;
for there too, in that he says none was needy under the apostles, he shows assuredly that they were endowed with such grace of faith that all abounded in the bounty of heavenly riches. Rarely, therefore, in this time do we find among the Christian people one who is well-off; and though most are rich in gold in their houses, yet in the Church they are beggars in righteousness; for while they do not work toward the poor according to what they are able, neither is that acceptable which they offer, nor that satisfying which they keep back. The Lord says to Cain, when he offered gifts: 'If you offer rightly, but do not divide rightly, you have sinned' (Gen. 4). So you too, O Christian, do not divide rightly, who from so much gold of yours keep back for mammon a greater part than you bestow on the Lord;
for thus Ananias in the Acts of the Apostles, while he thinks he is offering rightly and does not divide rightly, both lost the money which he offered and lost that which he kept at home; the money, I say, he lost alike, and his salvation. For while he withdrew a part of that which he had promised, he is condemned at once of sacrilege and of fraud: of sacrilege, because he deceived God in his promise; of fraud, because he thought a certain portion should be withdrawn from the whole gifts; for the apostle Peter says: 'You have not lied to men, but to God' (Acts 5). If then, brethren, Ananias is condemned because he did not give the whole of what he himself had promised out of his own, what do we suppose concerning him who is unwilling to render back what another has promised?
See therefore, you also, brethren, what you have promised to God when first you received his grace. Behold, there abound in our city guests and strangers: do what you have promised, lest it be said to you too what was said to Ananias: 'You have not lied to men, but to God.'