Search a Bible verse · Source library · Sources and text rights
Homily 18
10 complete historical source paragraphs and 4 editorial footnotes. Author and edition credits are shown for each record; original wording is retained.
English translation and editorial credits: Thomas Keble, John Keble, Dr. Barrow, Frederic Gardiner.
Read the original source · Text reuse terms
St. Chrys. seems to refer to some place where it is said that God desired (ἐ πεθύμησε) the death of the wicked. It does not appear what passage he had in view.
Editorial footnote · Homilies on the Epistle to the Hebrews, Homily 18, editorial note cite_note-8 · Original source
How then did He Himself enjoin it? In condescension. For as Paul says, “I would that all men were even as I myself” ( 1 Cor. vii. 7 ), in respect of continence, and again says, “I will that the younger women marry, bear children” ( 1 Tim. v. 14 ); and lays down two wills, yet the two are not his own, although he commands; but the one indeed is his own, and therefore he lays it down without reasons; while the other is not his own, though he wishes it, and therefore it is added with a reason. For having previously accused them, because “they had waxed wanton against Christ” ( 1 Tim. v. 11 ), he then says, “I will that the younger women marry, bear children.” ( 1 Tim. v. 14.) So in this place also it was not His leading will that the sacrifices should be offered. For, as He says, “I wish not the death of the sinner, as that he should turn unto [Me] and live” ( Ezek. xxxiii. 11 ): and in another place He says that He not only wished, but even desired this: and yet these are contrary to each other: for intense wishing is desire. How then dost Thou “not wish”? how dost Thou in another place “desire,” which is a sign of vehement wishing? So is it in this case also.
[The English editor supplies this ellipsis with the words “to whom he wrote.” The reference seems rather to be to “the enemies,” and such was apparently the understanding of Mutianus and of the Benedictine editor.—F.G.]
Editorial footnote · Homilies on the Epistle to the Hebrews, Homily 18, editorial note cite_note-10 · Original source
“He sat down on the right hand of God, from henceforth expecting.” Why the delay? “that His enemies be put under His feet. For by one offering He hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.” But perhaps some one might say; Wherefore did He not put them under at once? For the sake of the faithful who should afterwards be brought forth and born. Whence then [does it appear] that they shall be put under? By the saying “He sat down.” He called to mind again that testimony which saith, “until I put the enemies under His feet.” (See above, i. 13.) But His enemies are the Jews. Then since he had said, “Till His enemies be put under His feet,” and they [these enemies] were vehemently urgent, therefore he introduces all his discourse concerning faith after this. But who are the enemies? All unbelievers: the dæmons. And intimating the greatness of their subjection, he said not “are subjected,” but “are put under His feet.”
And he shows over and above that they cease not now [only], but at the very coming of the Messiah, nay rather, even before His coming: and how it was that Christ did not abolish them at the last, but they were abolished first, and then He came; first they were made to cease, and then He appeared. That they might not say, Even without this sacrifice, and by means of those, we could have been well pleasing unto God, He waited for these sacrifices to be convicted [of weakness], and then He appeared; for (He says) “sacrifice and offering Thou wouldest not.” Hereby He took all away; and having spoken generally, He says also particularly, “In burnt-offerings and [sacrifice] for sin Thou hadst no pleasure.” But “the offering” was everything except the sacrifice. “Then said I, Lo! I come.” Of whom was this spoken? of none other than the Christ.
Complete source paragraph · Homilies on the Epistle to the Hebrews, Homily 18, source paragraph 5 · Original source
Here he does not blame those who offer, showing that it is not because of their wickednesses that He does not accept them, as He says elsewhere, but because the thing itself has been convicted for the future and shown to have no strength, nor any suitableness to the times. What then has this to do with the “sacrifices” being offered “oftentimes”? Not only from their being “oftentimes” [offered] (he means) is it manifest that they are weak, and that they effected nothing; but also from God’s not accepting them, as being unprofitable and useless. And in another place it is said, “If Thou hadst desired sacrifice I would have given it.” ( Ps. li. 16.) Therefore by this also he makes it plain that He does not desire it. Therefore sacrifices are not God’s will, but the abolition of sacrifices. Wherefore they sacrifice contrary to His will.
Complete source paragraph · Homilies on the Epistle to the Hebrews, Homily 18, source paragraph 6 · Original source
What is “To do Thy will”? To give up Myself, He means: This is the will of God. “By which Will we are sanctified.” Or he even means something still further, that the sacrifices do not make men clean, but the Will of God. Therefore to offer sacrifice is not the will of God.
Complete source paragraph · Homilies on the Epistle to the Hebrews, Homily 18, source paragraph 7 · Original source
“By the which will we are sanctified,” he says. How sanctified? “by the offering of the Body of Jesus Christ once for all.”
Complete source paragraph · Homilies on the Epistle to the Hebrews, Homily 18, source paragraph 10 · Original source
[3.] “And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifice.” (To stand therefore is a sign of ministering; accordingly to sit, is a sign of being ministered unto.) “But this [man] after He had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God, from henceforth expecting till His enemies be made His footstool.” ( Ver. 14, 15 ) “For by one offering He hath perfected forever them that are sanctified. Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us.” He had said that those [sacrifices] are not offered; he reasoned from what is written, [and] from what is not written; moreover also he put forward the prophetic word which says, “sacrifice and offering Thou wouldest not.” He had said that He had forgiven their sins. Again this also He proves from the testimony of what is written, for “the Holy Ghost” (he says) “is a witness to us: for after that He had said,” ( ver. 16–18 ) “This is the covenant, that I will make with them, after those days, saith the Lord: I will put My laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them, and their sins and iniquities will I remember no more. Now where remission of these is there is no more offering for sin.” So then He forgave their sins, when He gave the Covenant, and He gave the Covenant by sacrifice. If therefore He forgave the sins through the one sacrifice, there is no longer need of a second.
Complete source paragraph · Homilies on the Epistle to the Hebrews, Homily 18, source paragraph 11 · Original source
Let us then cast out carnal minds. But what are carnal? Whatever makes the body flourish and do well, but injures the soul: as for instance, wealth, luxury, glory (all these things are of the flesh), carnal love. Let us not then love gain, but ever follow after poverty: for this is a great good.
Complete source paragraph · Homilies on the Epistle to the Hebrews, Homily 18, source paragraph 14 · Original source
Let no man then be humiliated on account of his poverty: It is not poverty which humiliates, but wealth, which compels us to have need of many, and forces us to be under obligations to many?
Complete source paragraph · Homilies on the Epistle to the Hebrews, Homily 18, source paragraph 18 · Original source
But (you say) I have need of many [things], and am unwilling to receive a favor from any. Nevertheless, even in this respect the rich man is inferior to thee; for thou perhaps askest the favor for thy support, but he shamelessly [asks] for ten thousand things for covetousness’ sake. So that it is the rich that are in need of many [persons], yea oftentimes those who are unworthy of them. For instance, they often stand in need of those who are in the rank of soldiers, or of slaves: but the poor man has no need even of the Emperor himself, and if he should need him, he is admired because he has brought himself down to this, when he might have been rich.
Complete source paragraph · Homilies on the Epistle to the Hebrews, Homily 18, source paragraph 21 · Original source
Perhaps some of those who hear me, avoid it as a thing of ill omen. I do not doubt it. For this disease is great among most men, and such is the tyranny of wealth, that they cannot even as far as words endure the renunciation of it, but avoid it as of ill omen. Far be this from the Christian’s soul: for nothing is richer than he who chooses poverty of his own accord, and with a ready mind.
Complete source paragraph · Homilies on the Epistle to the Hebrews, Homily 18, source paragraph 23 · Original source
[6.] How? I will tell you, and if you please, I will prove that he who chooses poverty of his own accord is richer even than the king himself. For he indeed needs many [things], and is in anxiety, and fears lest the supplies for the army should fail him; but the other has enough of everything, and fears about nothing, and if he fears, it is not about so great matters. Who then, tell me, is the rich man? he who is daily asking, and earnestly laboring to gather much together, and fears lest at any time he should fall short, or he who gathers nothing together, and is in great abundance and hath need of no one? For it is virtue and the fear of God, and not possessions which give confidence. For these even enslave. For it is said, “Gifts and presents blind the eyes of the wise, and like a muzzle on the mouth turn away reproofs.” ( Ecclus. xx. 29.)
Complete source paragraph · Homilies on the Epistle to the Hebrews, Homily 18, source paragraph 24 · Original source
That is from other arguments than the words of the Old Testament.
Editorial footnote · Homilies on the Epistle to the Hebrews, Homily 18, editorial note cite_note-9 · Original source
[3.] “And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifice.” (To stand therefore is a sign of ministering; accordingly to sit, is a sign of being ministered unto.) “But this [man] after He had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God, from henceforth expecting till His enemies be made His footstool.” ( Ver. 14, 15 ) “For by one offering He hath perfected forever them that are sanctified. Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us.” He had said that those [sacrifices] are not offered; he reasoned from what is written, [and] from what is not written; moreover also he put forward the prophetic word which says, “sacrifice and offering Thou wouldest not.” He had said that He had forgiven their sins. Again this also He proves from the testimony of what is written, for “the Holy Ghost” (he says) “is a witness to us: for after that He had said,” ( ver. 16–18 ) “This is the covenant, that I will make with them, after those days, saith the Lord: I will put My laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them, and their sins and iniquities will I remember no more. Now where remission of these is there is no more offering for sin.” So then He forgave their sins, when He gave the Covenant, and He gave the Covenant by sacrifice. If therefore He forgave the sins through the one sacrifice, there is no longer need of a second.
The words of the LXX. are “He took me out of the furnace of poverty.”
Editorial footnote · Homilies on the Epistle to the Hebrews, Homily 18, editorial note cite_note-11 · Original source
But, one says, “the wisdom of the poor man is despised.” ( Eccles. ix. 16.) And again another says, “Give me neither riches nor poverty” ( Prov. xxx. 8 ), and, “Deliver me from the furnace of poverty.” (See Isa. xlviii. 10.) And again, if riches and poverty are from the Lord, how can either poverty or riches be an evil? Why then were these things said? They were said under the Old [Covenant], where there was much account made of wealth, where there was great contempt of poverty, where the one was a curse and the other a blessing. But now it is no longer so.