Sermon 133

SERMO 133

OF THE WORDS OF THE GOSPEL OF JOHN (7, 2-10),
Where Jesus said He would not go up to the feast,
And yet he ascended.

Explanation of the Gospel reading.

We have set out, with the help of the Lord, to discuss this most recent chapter of the Gospel. It is no small matter, lest the truth be endangered and falsehood boast. However, the truth cannot perish, nor can falsehood prevail. But what question this reading contains, receive briefly; and being attentive through the proposed question, pray that we may be sufficient for the solution. It was the festival of the Jews called the Feast of Tabernacles: these are the days, as it appears, which they observe even today, when they call them booths. For this feast is about the making of tabernacles; because the tabernacle is called σχηνή, the making of the tabernacle is scenopegia. These festive days were celebrated among the Jews: and one day was called a festival not because it took place on one day, but because it was performed in continuous celebration; like the feast day of Passover, like the feast day of Unleavened Bread, and yet, as is evident, that feast day is celebrated over several days. Therefore, this festivity was in Judaea; the Lord Jesus was in Galilee, where he was also brought up, where he also had relatives and kinfolk, whom the Scripture calls brothers. Thus, they said to him, as we heard read: his brothers: "Depart from here and go to Judaea, so that your disciples also may see the works you are doing. For no one does anything in secret while he himself seeks to be known openly. If you do these things, show yourself to the world." The Evangelist then adds: "For neither did his brothers believe in him." So if they did not believe in him, they spoke enviously. Jesus responded to them: "My time has not yet come; your time is always ready. The world cannot hate you, but it hates me because I testify about it that its works are evil. You go up to this feast. I am not going up to this feast because my time has not yet fully come." Then the Evangelist follows: “When he had said these things, he remained in Galilee. But when his brothers had gone up, then he also went up to the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret." The question extends up to this point, the rest is clear.

Christ did not lie in that place.

What then is being sought? What is moving? What is at risk? Lest the Lord, or rather to speak more openly, lest Truth itself be believed to have lied. For if we are willing to think it lied, the authority of lying will be received as weak. We have heard it said that it lied. For those who think it lied, say this: He said he would not go up to the feast, and he did go up. First, therefore, as far as we can in a short time, let us see whether he lies, who says something and does not do it. For example, I said to a friend: I will see you tomorrow; a greater necessity occurs, which prevents; I did not therefore speak falsely. For when I promised, I felt what I was saying. But when something greater occurs, which hindered the fulfillment of my promise, I did not wish to lie, but I was not able to fulfill the promise. Behold, as far as I think, I have not labored to persuade, but only reminded your prudence, that he who promises something and does not do it is not lying, if something else occurs to prevent him from doing so, which impedes his promise, not what proves falsehood.

To lie is worse than to be deceived.

But he who listens to me says: Can you say this about Christ, that he was either unable to fulfill what he wanted or did not know the future? You act well, you suggest well, you rightly remind: but, O man, share the concern with me. Do we dare to call him less powerful, we dare to call him a liar? As for me, as far as I can judge according to my weakness, I choose that a man is deceived in something rather than that he lies in something. For to be deceived pertains to weakness, to lie pertains to iniquity. "You hate, O Lord," he says, "all who work iniquity." And immediately, "You will destroy all who speak lies." Either iniquity and lying are equally strong; or it is more: you will destroy, than you hated. For he who is hated is not immediately punished with destruction. Let that question be true, whether at some time it is necessary to lie; for I do not examine that now: it is intricate, it has many folds; it is not convenient to cut all and reach to life. Therefore, its treatment is deferred to another time; perhaps it will be healed without our discourse by divine succor. But what I delayed, what I want to discuss today, pay attention and distinguish. Whether at some time it is necessary to lie, I said this difficult and most intricate question, I defer this. But whether Christ lied, whether Truth said something false, this today we have undertaken, admonished from the evangelical reading.

How being deceived and lying differ.

But what is the difference between being deceived and lying, I will briefly say. One is deceived who thinks that what he says is true, and because he thinks it is true, therefore he says it. However, if what he says is true, he would not be deceived: if it were not only true but also known by him to be true, he would not be lying. Therefore, he is deceived because what he thinks is true is false; yet he speaks only because he thinks it is true. Error is in human weakness but it is not in the health of the conscience. But whoever thinks that something is false and asserts it as true, he is lying. See, my brothers, distinguish as those who are nurtured in the Church, taught in the Scriptures of the Lord, not unlearned, not rustic, not ignoramuses. For there are among you learned and educated men and those moderately instructed in whatever letters: and if you have not learned those letters which are called liberal, it is more that you have been nourished in the word of God. If I labor in explaining what I think, help me both by your attention in listening and your prudence in thinking. Nor will you help, unless you are helped. Therefore, let us pray for each other, and await the common aid together. One is deceived, who, when it is false, thinks what he says is true: but one lies, who thinks something is false, and asserts it as true, whether it is true or false. Observe what I have added. Whether it is true or false, yet he who thinks it is false and asserts it as true, lies: he desires to deceive. For what good is it to him that it is true? Meanwhile, he himself thinks it is false, and says it as if it is true. What he says is true in itself, in itself it is true: with him it is false, his conscience does not hold what he speaks; he thinks something to be true within himself, but asserts another thing outwardly as truth. It is a double heart, not a simple one; it does not express what it holds inside. A double heart has long been condemned. Deceitful lips have spoken evil in heart and heart. It would suffice if he said: They have spoken evil in heart; where are the deceitful lips? What is deceit? When one thing is done, another is pretended. Deceitful lips, not a simple heart; and because it is not a simple heart, therefore it is in heart and heart; therefore twice in heart, because it is a double heart.

Christ cannot be deceived, nor can He lie.

Do we then consider that the Lord Jesus Christ lied? If it is less grievous to be mistaken than to lie, do we dare to say that He lied, whom we dare not say was mistaken? Indeed, He is neither mistaken nor does He lie: but entirely, as it is written (it is understood about Him, it should be understood about Him): Nothing false is said to the king, and no falsehood will come out of his mouth. If He called any man a king, let us place Christ the King above any human king. But if, as is more rightly understood, Christ is the one of whom it was said (nothing false is said to Him because He is not mistaken; no falsehood comes from His mouth because He does not lie); let us seek to understand the Gospel passage, and not build a pit of falsehood as if by heavenly authority. It is indeed more absurd to seek to explain the truth and prepare a place for a lie. What are you teaching me, I ask you, who explain this passage to me? What do you want to teach me? I do not know whether you dare to say: Falsehood. For if you dare to say this, I will turn my ears away, and stop them with thorns, so that if you attempt to force me, I will depart pricked, without the exposition of the Gospel. Tell me what you want to teach me, and you solve the question. Tell me, I pray you: behold, I am here; my ears are open, my heart is ready, teach me. But what am I asking? I am not going through many attempts. What are you going to teach? Whatever doctrine you are going to explain, whatever strong arguments apply in the discussion, say this only, I ask you one of two things: Are you going to teach me truth, or falsehood? What do we suppose he will answer, that I may not leave; so as not to leave him gaping and trying to express words? What will he promise, but the truth? I listen, I stand, I wait, I most attentively wait. Behold, he who promised to teach me the truth, insinuates falsehoods about Christ. How then will you teach the truth, when you say that Christ is a liar? If Christ lies, can I hope that you will tell me the truth?

From the truth of the Gospel itself, Christ was defended against falsehood.

Behold another thing. What does it say? Christ has lied. Where, I ask you? Where did he say: I am not going up to this feast, and went up? Indeed, I would like to investigate this passage carefully, lest perhaps Christ did not lie. Rather, because I do not doubt that Christ did not lie, I will either investigate and understand this passage or, not understanding it, I will defer. However, I will not say Christ lied. Let me admit that I did not understand: I will depart ignorant. For it is better to be ignorant with piety than to judge with madness. Nevertheless, let us try to discuss, so that perhaps with his assistance who is the Truth, we might find something, and also be found by something, and that this ‘something’ shall not be false in the truth. For if I find falsehood in my search, I find nothing, not something. Therefore, let us seek where you say Christ lied. Because he said, you say: I am not going up to this feast, and went up. How do you know he said it? What if I, or rather another—not I, for I would not say such a thing—what if another says: Christ did not say this? How will you refute it? How will you prove it? You will open the book, find the reading, demonstrate it to a person, or even, with great confidence in your chest, strike the book against a resistant person: Hold, attend, read, you bear the Gospel. What then, I beg you, what disturbs you a little? Do not press, speak more clearly, more calmly. Behold, I carry the Gospel, and what of that? He says: The Gospel speaks that Christ said what you deny. And will you believe that Christ said this because the Gospel speaks it? Certainly, he says. I greatly marvel how you say Christ lies and the Gospel does not lie. But perhaps, when I say Gospel, you attend to the book, think of the parchment and ink as the Gospel—consider what the Greek name says: The Gospel is “good news” or “good announcement.” Therefore, does the messenger not lie but he who sent him lies? This messenger, evidently the Evangelist, even naming him, this John who wrote this, did he lie about Christ or tell the truth? Choose what you will, I am ready to hear you in either case. If he lied, there is no proof that Christ said those things. If he told the truth, truth does not flow from the source of falsehood. Who is the source? Christ: let John be the rivulet. The rivulet comes to me, and you tell me: Drink securely; and while you frighten me from the very source, claiming he in the source is false, you say: Drink securely. What do I drink? What did John say? That Christ lied? From where did John come? From Christ. Will he tell me truth who came from him, while he who sent him lied? I indeed read in the Gospel: John reclined on the breast of the Lord; but I think because he drank the truth. What did he drink? What, if not what he belched forth? In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God; this was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was made nothing. What was made, in him is life, and the life was the light of men, and the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not overcome it; yet it shines, and if perhaps I have some darkness and cannot grasp it perfectly, it shines. There was a man sent from God, whose name was John; he came to bear witness about the light, that all might believe through him. He was not the light: who? John; who? John the Baptist. Concerning him the Evangelist John says: He was not the light; of whom the Lord says: He was a burning and shining lamp. But a lamp can be both lit and extinguished. What therefore? From what place do you distinguish? From which passage do you seek? To whom did the lamp bear witness? He was the true light. Where John added: true, there you seek falsehood. Still, listen to the Evangelist John belching forth what he drank: And we have seen, he says, his glory. What did he see? What glory did he see? The glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. Therefore, see to it, lest perhaps we should restrain weak or rash disputes, and presume nothing false about the truth, give the Lord what is owed; give glory to the fountain, so that we may be filled securely. But God is true; every man is a liar. What does this mean? God is full; every man is empty; if he wishes to be filled, let him come to the full. Come to him and be enlightened. Furthermore, if man is empty because he is a liar, and seeks to be filled, and with haste and eagerness runs to the fountain, he wishes to be filled, he is empty. But you say: Beware of the fountain, there is falsehood. What else do you say than: There is poison?

Solution to the question.

Now, he said, you have said everything, now you have restrained me, now you have corrected me. Tell me how he did not lie who said: “I am not going up,” and yet went up? I will tell you, if I can; consider it trivial that, although I have not placed you in the truth, I have at least forbidden you from rashness. However, I will tell you what, if you remember the words I commended, I think you already recognize. These very words resolve the question. That feast day was conducted over many days. To that specific day, he said, festively, to that specific day when they were expecting him, he did not go up; but went when he chose. Pay attention to what follows: After saying this, he himself stayed in Galilee. Therefore, he did not go up to that specific feast day. For his brothers wanted him to go first; that is why they had said: “Leave here and go to Judea.” They did not say: “Let us go,” as if they would be his companions; or: “Follow us to Judea,” as if they would go ahead; but as if they were to send him ahead. He wanted them to go ahead: he avoided this, commending human infirmity, hiding divinity; he avoided this just as when he fled to Egypt. It was not from weakness: but it was also of truth, to give an example of caution; lest any of his servants should say: “I do not flee because it is shameful,” when perhaps it would be expedient to flee. Speaking to his own: “When they persecute you in this city, flee to another,” he himself provided this example. For when he wished, he was apprehended; when he wished, he was born. Therefore, so that they would not go ahead and announce he was coming, and prepare ambushes: “I am not going up,” he said, to the feast day. He said: “I am not going up,” to hide himself; he added: “to this,” lest he lie. He added something, he subtracted something, he delayed something; yet he said nothing false, because nothing false proceeds from his mouth. Therefore, after he said these things: When his brothers had gone up, the Gospel speaks; pay attention, read what you offered to me; see if the very reading resolves the question, see if I derived what to say from elsewhere. Therefore the Lord awaited this, that they go up first, so they would not announce he was coming. After his brothers had gone up, he also then went up to the feast day, not openly, but as if in secret. What does “as if in secret” mean? It means acting as if in secret. What: as if in secret? Because even this was not entirely in secret. For he did not truly try to hide, who had the power over when he would be apprehended. But in that concealment, as I said, he provided an example of avoiding the plots of enemies to weak disciples, who did not have the power, when they did not wish to be apprehended. For he also went up openly afterward, and taught them in the temple, and some said: “Look, he is here, and teaching.” Certainly, our leaders said, wanting to apprehend him: “Look, he speaks openly, and no one lays hands on him.”

Another solution.

Now indeed, if we attend to ourselves, if we consider his body, because he is also ourselves. For even if we were not himself, it would not be true: "Whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me." If we were not himself, it would not be true: "Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?" Therefore, we also are himself, because we are his members, because we are his body, because he is our head, because the whole Christ is head and body. Perhaps he foresaw that we would not be observing the Jewish feast days, and this is it: "I am not going up to this festival." Behold, neither Christ, nor the Evangelist lied: if it is necessary to choose one of the two, the Evangelist would forgive me, I would by no means prefer the prophet to the prophet himself; I would not prefer the one sent to the one who sent him. But thanks be to God, as much as I judge, it has been revealed what was obscure. Your piety will assist towards God. Behold, as I could, I have solved the question, both in Christ and in the Evangelist. Hold the truth with me, friend, embrace charity without contention.