Sermons & Tracts 6 part 9/11

as for the most part it has already been done, and we see it being done daily. But to what end are these things done? That he may deliver up the kingdom to God and the Father, that is, that he may lead those nourished by faith in his incarnation to the appearance whereby he is equal to the Father. For he was already speaking to those who had believed, when he said: 'If you continue in my word, you are truly my disciples; and you shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free' (John 8:31-32). For he will deliver up the kingdom to the Father when through that whereby he is equal to the Father he shall reign in those who contemplate the truth, and through himself, the Only-begotten, he will cause the Father to be seen through appearance. For now he reigns in believers through that whereby he emptied himself, taking the form of a servant (Phil. 2:7).

But then he will deliver up the kingdom to God and the Father, when he shall have brought to nought all principality, and power, and virtue. Whereby will he bring it to nought, except by humility, and patience, and weakness? For what principality is not brought to nought, since the Son of God reigns in believers for this reason, that the princes of the world judged him? What power is not brought to nought, since he through whom all things were made reigns in believers for this reason, that he was so subjected to the powers that he said to a man, 'You would have no power over me, unless it were given you from above' (John 19:11)? What virtue is not brought to nought, since he through whom the heavens were made firm reigns in believers for this reason, that he was made weak even unto the cross and death?

But in this manner the Son properly reigns in the faith of believers. For the Father cannot be said or believed to be either incarnate, or judged, or crucified. But through the appearance whereby he is equal to the Father, he reigns with the Father in those who contemplate the truth. But that he will deliver up the kingdom to God and the Father, leading those who now believe in him from faith in his incarnation to the appearance of his deity, he himself does not lose it, but each offers himself as one for the enjoyment of those who contemplate.

But so long as it is needful, in men not yet able to behold the equality of the Father and the Son with the clear light of the mind, that Christ reign through this which they are able to grasp, and which he properly assumed, that is, the humility of the incarnation, until he puts all his enemies under his feet: that is, until all worldly pride be subjected to the humility of his incarnation. 10. Truly, as to what was said, 'Then shall the Son himself also be subject to him who subjected all things to him'—although it is said according to the assumption of manhood, since it is from this that the question arose, when he was treating of the resurrection of the dead—yet it is rightly asked whether it was said according to him alone who is the head of the Church (Eph. 5:23),

or according to the whole Christ, his body and members being numbered with him. For when he says to the Galatians, 'He does not say, And to seeds, as in many; but as in one, And to your seed, which is Christ,' lest we should understand in this place Christ alone, who was born of the Virgin Mary, he afterward says, 'For you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ's, then are you Abraham's seed' (Gal. 3:16, 28-29). And to the Corinthians, when he was speaking of charity, drawing a likeness from the members of the body: 'For as the body is one,' he says, 'and has many members, but all the members of the body, though they are many, are one body: so also is Christ.' He did not say, 'so also are the members of Christ';

but, 'so also is Christ,' showing that the whole is rightly called Christ, that is, the head with his body, which is the Church. And in many places of the Scriptures we find Christ called also in this manner, so that he is understood together with all his members, to whom it was said, 'You are the body of Christ and members' (1 Cor. 12:12,27). Not absurdly, therefore, do we thus understand: 'Then shall the Son himself also be subject to him who subjected all things to him'; so that we understand the Son to be not only the head of the Church, but also all the saints together with him, who are one in Christ, one seed of Abraham: and subjected according to the contemplation of everlasting truth, for the obtaining of blessedness, with no movement of soul, no part of the body resisting;

so that in that life, no one loving his own power, God may be all in all. LXX. On that which the Apostle says: 'Death is swallowed up in victory. Where, O death, is your contention? Where, O death, is your sting? But the sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is indeed the law' (1 Cor. 15:54-56). By 'death' I judge to be signified in this place the carnal habit which resists the good will by the delight of temporal things to be enjoyed. For it would not be said, 'Where, O death, is your contention?' unless it had resisted and fought back. Its contention is also described in that place: 'The flesh lusts against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh. For these are contrary one to another, so that you do not the things that you would' (Gal.

5:17). It comes about, therefore, through perfect sanctification, that every carnal appetite is subjected to our spirit, illumined and quickened, that is, to the good will. And just as we now see that we lack many childish delights which, when we were children, tormented us most bitterly if they were denied us: so it is to be believed will come to pass concerning every carnal delight, when perfect holiness shall have repaired the whole man. But now, so long as there is in us that which resists the good will, we need the help of God through good men and good Angels, that until our wound be healed, it may not so molest us as to destroy even the good will.

But this death we have deserved by sin, which sin was formerly wholly in free choice, when in paradise no pain of denied delight resisted the good will of man, as it does now. For example, if there be anyone whom hunting has never delighted, he is wholly free whether he will hunt or not, nor does anyone who forbids this torment him. But if, having misused this liberty, he should hunt against the command of him who forbids, the delight creeping in little by little mortifies the soul, so that if he should wish to abstain, he cannot do so without molestation and anguish, whereas before, in full health, he did not do it. Therefore the sting of death is sin;

because by sin came into being the delight which can now resist the good will, and be restrained only with pain. Which delight, because it is in the defect of a weakened and worn-out soul, we rightly call death. But the strength of sin is the law; because far more wickedly and shamefully are those things committed which the law forbids, than if they were forbidden by no law. Then, therefore, will death be swallowed up in victory, when, through sanctification perfected in every part of man by the perfect delight of spiritual things, carnal delight shall be overwhelmed. LXXI. On that which is written: 'Bear one another's burdens, and so you will fulfill the law of Christ' (Gal. 6:2). 1.

Because the keeping of the Old Testament had fear, the gift of the New Testament could not be openly signified to be charity, which in this place, where the Apostle says, 'Bear one another's burdens, and so you will fulfill the law of Christ.' For this is understood to call the law of Christ, whereby the Lord himself commanded that we love one another, placing in that sentence so great a weight of precept that he said: 'By this shall it be known that you are my disciples, if you love one another' (John 13:34-35). But the office of this is to bear one another's burdens. But this office, which is not everlasting, will assuredly lead to eternal blessedness, in which there will be none of our burdens which we are commanded to bear for one another.

But now, since we are in this life, that is, in this weakness, let us bear one another's burdens, that we may be able to attain to that life which is free from every burden. For as certain students of such matters have written concerning stags, when they cross a strait to an island for the sake of pasture, they so arrange themselves that they carry upon one another the burdens of their heads which they bear in their antlers, so that the one behind lays its head, thrown forward upon its neck, over the one before it. And because it is necessary that there be one who, going before all the rest, does not have before himself one upon whom to rest that head, this is done by turns; so that when the one who goes in front is wearied by the burden of his own head, he withdraws behind all the others, and there succeeds him the one whose head he had been carrying, since he himself went before.

Thus, bearing one another's burdens in turn, they cross the strait, until they come to the stability of dry land. Perhaps it was this nature of stags that Solomon had in mind when he said: Let the stag of friendship and the fawn of thy graces converse with thee. For nothing so proves a friend as the bearing of a friend's burden. Nor indeed could we bear one another's burdens in this way, if there were one and the same time of infirmity for both who sustain their burdens, or one kind of infirmity; but differing times and differing kinds of infirmity make it possible for us to bear one another's burdens. For example, you will bear your brother's anger at that time when you yourself are not angry against him;

so that, in turn, at the time when anger has seized upon you, he may support you by his own gentleness and tranquillity. This example pertains to the case in which the times of those bearing their burdens are different, although the infirmity itself is not different: for in both the anger is borne by the other. But for a different kind of infirmity another example must be considered: as if someone had conquered talkativeness in himself, but had not yet conquered obstinacy, while another was still talkative, but was no longer obstinate; the one ought to bear the other's talkativeness, and the other the former's obstinacy, in charity, until the one be healed in the one and the other in the other. For if an equal infirmity befall two men at one and the same time, they are not able to tolerate one another, when it is directed against each other.

For against some third party even two who are angry with each other come to agreement, and tolerate one another: though they ought not so much to be said to tolerate one another as rather to console one another. Just as those who are sad over one and the same matter bear one another gently and, as it were, lean upon each other, more than if one were sad and the other rejoiced: but if they are sad against each other, they are utterly unable to tolerate one another. And therefore in affections of this kind that very sickness must be taken up in some measure, from which you wish another to be delivered through you; and it must be so taken up as to avail for aid, not for equality of misery: just as one who stretches out his hand to another lying prostrate bends himself down. For he does not cast himself down, that both may lie prostrate; but he only stoops, in order to raise up the one lying there.

Nor does any consideration make this dutiful labour of bearing the burdens of others be willingly undertaken, except when we consider how much the Lord has borne for our sake. For hence the Apostle, admonishing us, says: Have this mind in you, which was also in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God; but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men, and found in fashion as a man: he humbled himself, being made obedient even unto death, yea, the death of the cross. For above he had said: Each one not looking to the things that are his own, but to the things of others. To this sentiment he joined that which has been quoted; for so it follows:

Have this mind in you, which was also in Christ Jesus. So far, at least, that as He, in that the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us, and though He was without sin, took upon Himself our sins, not regarding His own but ours; so too may we willingly, in imitation of Him, bear one another's burdens. To this thought is added also that thought, that He took upon Himself man, whereas we are men: and we ought to consider that the sickness, whether of soul or of body, which we see in another man, we too could have had, or can have.

Let us therefore show to him whose infirmity we wish to bear that which we would wish to be shown to us by him, if by chance we were in that state and he were not. To this pertains what the Apostle himself says: I became all things to all men, that I might gain all: reckoning, that is, that he too could have been in that same vice, from which he desired to deliver another. For he did this rather by compassion, not by lying, as some suspect, and especially those who, in defending their own lies which they cannot deny, seek the patronage of some great example. Then also this must be considered, that there is no man who cannot have some good which you do not yet have, even if it be hidden.

in which without doubt he can be superior to you. This consideration avails to crush and tame pride, lest you should think that, because certain goods of yours stand out and appear, therefore the other has none that lie hidden, and perhaps goods of greater weight, by which he surpasses you without your knowing it. For the Apostle bids us not to be deceived, nor rather to use flattery, when he says: Doing nothing through strife or through vainglory, but in humility of mind esteeming one another better than yourselves. We ought not so to esteem this as not really to esteem it, but only to feign that we esteem it;

but let us truly esteem that something hidden can be in another, whereby he is superior to us, even though the good of ours whereby we seem superior to him be not hidden. These considerations, which depress pride and sharpen charity, cause the burdens of the brethren to be borne by one another, not only with an even mind, but even most willingly. But in no way is judgment to be passed upon any unknown man: and no one is known except through friendship. And therefore we more firmly endure the faults of friends, because their good qualities delight and hold us. And so the friendship of no one who offers himself for the joining of friendship is to be rejected; not that he should at once be received, but that he should be desired for receiving, and so treated that he may be able to be received.

For we can say that he has been received into friendship to whom we would dare to pour out all our counsels. And if there is anyone who does not dare to offer himself for the making of friendship, being held back by some temporal honour or dignity of ours, we must come down to him, and offer to him, with a certain courtesy and lowliness of mind, that which he does not himself dare to ask. Yet, though more rarely, it nevertheless sometimes happens that of him whom we wish to receive into friendship, his evils become known to us before his goods, and, offended and in a manner struck back by them, we abandon him, and do not arrive at the investigation of his good qualities, which are perhaps more hidden.

The Lord Jesus Christ therefore admonishes us, He who wishes us to be made imitators of Himself, that we should tolerate His infirmities, so that we may be brought, through the toleration of charity, to certain sound things in the delight of which we may find rest. For He says: They that are whole need not a physician, but they that are sick. And therefore, if for the sake of the charity of Christ we ought not to repel from our soul even him who perhaps is sick in every part, since he can be healed through the Word of God; how much less him who can seem to us wholly sick for this reason only, that we were unwilling to bear certain wounds of his at the first entrance of friendship, and — what is a grievous thing — with offence of mind concerning the whole man

we utter a rash sentence of prejudgment, not fearing what has been said: Judge not, that ye be not judged; and, With what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. But those things which are good appear first: in which too a rash judgment of good will must be guarded against, lest, when you have thought the whole to be good, those things which afterwards appear evil may find you secure and unprepared, and offend you more grievously; so that you may more bitterly hate the one whom you had rashly loved — which is unlawful. For even if none of his good qualities went before, and these evils which afterwards appeared stood out first, they were nevertheless to be tolerated, until you should transact with him all those things by which such faults are wont to be healed:

how much more when those goods went before, which, as it were as pledges, ought to constrain us to the tolerating of later things? This, then, is the very law of Christ, that we bear one another's burdens. And by loving Christ we easily endure another's infirmity, even one whom we do not yet love for the sake of his own goods. For we consider that the Lord died for the sake of him whom we love. This charity the Apostle Paul pressed upon us, when he said: And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died! Wherefore, if we love that weak one less on account of the vice by which he is weak, let us consider him in that One who died for him.

But not to love Christ is not infirmity, but death. Wherefore, with immense care and having implored the mercy of God, it must be considered lest we neglect Christ on account of the weak, when we ought to love the weak on account of Christ. LXXII. On eternal times. It can be asked how it was said by the Apostle Paul himself: Before eternal times. For if times, how eternal? Unless perhaps he wished it to be understood as before all times. For if he had said 'before times,' and had not added 'eternal,' it could be taken as 'before certain times,' which had other times before themselves. But he preferred to say 'eternal' rather than 'all,' perhaps for this reason, because time did not begin from time. Or did 'eternal times' signify eternity;

between which and time this is the difference, that eternity is stable, but time is changeable. LXXIII. On that which is written: And in fashion found as a man. We speak of 'fashion' (habitus) in many ways: either the fashion of the mind, such as is the perception of any discipline, strengthened and confirmed by use; or the fashion of the body, according to which we say that one man is more full-bodied and robust than another, which is more properly wont to be called constitution (habitudo); or the fashion of those things which are fitted to our members from without, according to which we say clothed, shod, armed, and if there be anything of this kind.

In all which kinds (since indeed this noun is derived from that verb which is 'to have'), it is manifest that fashion is said of that which befalls someone, in such a way that he could also not have it. For both doctrine befalls the mind, and vigour and strength the body; and clothing and arms, there is no doubt, befall our members: so that a mind can also be untrained, if doctrine did not befall it; and a body slight and languid, without the vigour of the inward parts and strength; and a man can be naked without clothing, and unarmed without arms, and bare-footed without shoes. Fashion, therefore, is said of that which befalls us so as to be had.

Nevertheless, this is the difference, that certain of those things which befall us, so as to constitute a fashion, are not changed by us, but they themselves change us into themselves, they remaining whole and unshaken: as wisdom, when it befalls a man, is not itself changed, but changes the man, whom from foolish it makes wise. But certain things befall us in such a way that they both change and are changed: as food itself, losing its own appearance, is turned into our body; and we, refreshed by food, are transformed from thinness and languor into strength and vigour. But there is a third kind, when the very things which befall us are changed so as to make a fashion, and are in a manner formed by those which they make a fashion for, as is clothing:

for when it is laid aside or cast off, it does not have that form which it takes when it is put on and fitted to the members. Therefore, when put on, it receives a form which it did not have when taken off; while the members themselves, both when they are unclothed and when they are clothed, remain in their own state. There can be also a fourth kind, when there are things that befall so as to make a fashion, and they neither change those to which they befall, nor are themselves changed by them: as a ring on a finger, if it be not too subtly considered. Yet this kind is either none at all, if you discuss it diligently, or altogether most rare.

When, therefore, the Apostle was speaking of the only-begotten Son of God, as far as pertains to His divinity, according to that whereby He is most truly God, he said that He was equal to the Father, which He did not seize as it were as robbery, that is, as it were coveting what was another's, if, remaining ever in that equality, He were unwilling to be clothed with man, and to appear as a man to men: but He emptied Himself, not changing His own form, but taking the form of a servant; neither converted nor transmuted into man, with the loss of His immutable stability, but rather, by taking up one man, He Himself the taker, being made in the likeness of men, not for Himself, but for those to whom He appeared in man, was found in fashion as a man;

that is, by having man, He was found as a man. For God could not be found by those who had an unclean heart, and could not see the Word with the Father, except by His taking up that which they were able to see, and through which they might be led to that inner light. But this fashion is not of the first kind; for the nature of man, remaining in itself, did not change the nature of God: nor of the second; for man did not both change God, and was changed by Him: nor of the fourth; for man was not so assumed that neither did he himself change God, nor was he changed by Him: but rather of the third;

for he was so assumed that he was changed for the better, and was formed by Him ineffably more excellently and more closely joined than clothing when it is put on by a man. This, then, by the name of 'fashion,' the Apostle sufficiently signified in what manner he said, made in the likeness of men; because it was not by transfiguration into man, but by fashion, that He was made, when He was clothed with man, whom, in a manner uniting to and conforming to Himself, He might associate to immortality and eternity. But that fashion which is in the perception of wisdom and discipline, the Greeks call hexis (ἕξιν); this precedes that other, according to which we say clothed or armed, which they rather call schema (σχῆμα). From which it is understood that the Apostle spoke of this kind of fashion;

since indeed in the Greek copies it is written schemati (σχήματι), which we in the Latin have as 'habitu' (in fashion). By which name it behoves us to understand that the Word was not changed by the assumption of man, just as neither are the members changed when clothed with a garment: although that assumption ineffably united the assumed to the assumer: but, as far as human words can be fitted to ineffable things, that God is understood, by the assumption of human frailty, to be unchanged, it was chosen that in Greek it should be called schema, and in Latin that assumption should be called 'habitus.' LXXIV. On that which is written in the Epistle of Paul to the Colossians: In whom we have redemption and the remission of sins, who is the image of the invisible God.

Image and equality and likeness must be distinguished. For where there is image, there follows at once likeness, but not at once equality: where there is equality, there follows at once likeness, but not at once image: where there is likeness, there is not at once image, nor at once equality. Where there is image, there follows at once likeness, but not at once equality: as in a mirror there is the image of a man, because it is expressed from him; there is of necessity likeness, yet not equality, because many things are lacking to the image which nevertheless are present in that thing from which it is expressed. Where there is equality, there follows at once likeness, but not at once image: as in two equal eggs, because there is equality, there is also likeness; for whatever things are present in the one, are present in the other;

yet there is no image, because neither is expressed from the other. Where there is likeness, there is not at once image, nor at once equality; for every egg is like every egg, in so far as it is an egg; but the egg of a partridge, although in so far as it is an egg it is like the egg of a hen, is nevertheless not the image of it, because it is not expressed from it; nor equal, because it is smaller, and of another kind of animal. But where it is said 'not at once,' it is of course understood that it can sometimes be. There can therefore be some image in which there is also equality: so that in parents and children there would be found image and equality and likeness, if the interval of time had been lacking;

for the likeness of the son is expressed from the parent, so that it is rightly called image, and it can be so great that it may rightly also be called equality, except that the parent preceded in time. From which it is understood that sometimes equality has not only likeness, but also image; which is manifest in the above example. Sometimes there can also be likeness and equality, although there is not image: as was said of the two equal eggs. There can also be likeness and image, although there is not equality; as we showed in the mirror. There can also be likeness where there is both equality and image; as we mentioned concerning sons, except for the time by which the parents precede.

For thus we call a syllable equal to a syllable; although one precedes and the other follows. But in God, since the condition of time is absent — for God cannot rightly be seen to have begotten the Son in time, through whom He founded the times — it follows that He is not only His image, because He is from Him, and likeness, because image; but also so great an equality that not even an interval of time is any hindrance. LXXV. On the inheritance of God. As the Apostle says to the Hebrews: A testament is confirmed by the death of the testator; therefore, Christ having died for us, he asserts that the New Testament was confirmed: of which the Old Testament was a likeness, in which the death of the testator was prefigured by a victim.