De serpente homilia

A discourse concerning the serpent of Moses, which he crucified in the desert; and concerning the holy Trinity. Yesterday our discourse devoted itself both to the heretical struggle and to the contests on behalf of the glory of the Only-Begotten, not in order to make known what is hidden, but to gratefully acknowledge the grace. For Christ is not magnified by what we utter, but we, having been magnified, gratefully proclaim the benefaction. Indeed, it would be most absurd to enjoy benefits in deed and to repay the benefaction with silence, especially when the prophet David exhorts and says, as you have just heard: "Let the whole earth worship you and sing to you." We hymn God not by investing him with honor, but by acquiring honor for ourselves. We glorify God not by bestowing glory upon him, but by clothing ourselves in immortal glory. For he says, "Those who glorify me, I will glorify; and those who despise me will be despised." The discourse taught, through what it contended to the best of its ability, that it is not permitted to transgress the boundaries of the glory of God—not for men on earth, not for angels in heaven, not for archangels, not for principalities, not for the cherubim, not for the seraphim. And you remember, I well know, those of the hearers who are fond of learning, how our discourse on these matters was completed. But since today, brothers, both the king of glory himself has pre-announced his own cross, and the apostle, following the royal voice of the Savior, has philosophized concerning the cross. For the Lord said to the disciples: "Behold, we go up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man is delivered into the hands of enemies.

Paul, rebuking the Galatians, wrote: "Who has bewitched you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was depicted crucified among you?" Since both the royal voice of the Lord and the teaching of his faithful servant followed in the royal footsteps, I think it necessary that we too, to the best of our ability, speak appropriately concerning the Lord's cross—not to attain its worth, but to pay the debt of our ability. What then does the Savior say? "Behold, we go up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man is betrayed." The conqueror of death foretells his passion. He who dissolves death by the cross proclaims the cross beforehand. He announces the struggle in advance to herald the victory. Here again, apply yourself to understanding the Lord's voice. See with how much authority he says: "Behold, we go up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man is betrayed to be crucified." He who foretells these things, when he is in the contest itself, changes the quality of his authority and denies the dignity of his divinity, saying: "Father, if possible, let the cup pass from me." Do you not see the discrepancy? Understand the economy. But let us return to the matter at hand. He says to the disciples: "Behold, we go up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man is betrayed." See how he uses a guarded expression. Where he proclaims the passion, he indicates the human nature. "The Son of Man is betrayed." For the visible body suffers, while the perceived dignity of the divinity gives life. And, brothers, the form of the body is dissolved by death, but the power of the one dwelling within raises what is dissolved.

He himself was the one being dissolved in body, the one raising what was dissolved in spirit. "For destroy this temple," he says, "and in three days I will raise it." Behold, we go up to Jerusalem. For those following Christ, there is nowhere to go down, but always to go up. Moreover, in a perceptible way the road from Jericho to Jerusalem was an ascent, and in a spiritual way the passion led to the ascent of the resurrection. For Adam, who had fallen into Hades, was being called back to heaven, and the image lying on the ground was raised to the heights. We go up to Jerusalem. Where God is, there is an ascent of virtue; where wickedness is, there is a descent of lawlessness. For this reason David says concerning those who live according to virtue: "Blessed are all who dwell in your house; for ever and ever they will praise you. Blessed is the man who has support from you; your ascents are in his heart." Your ascents, that is, the pious and elevated thoughts, which lead those who think rightly about God to the heights. There is, then, a road of temperance leading to the heights, a road of justice leading to the heights; and every road of piety, so to speak, guides the God-loving person to that height, concerning which those from the nations said: "Come, let us go to the mountain of the Lord and to the house of the God of Jacob." Where there is a word of piety, there is also an ascent; but where there is wickedness, there is a manifest descent. And the prophet David bears witness, saying: "Deliver me from those who descend into the pit"; and again: "The one who raises me from the gates of death." So the phrase "we go up" is not superfluous. Behold, we go up.

And yet he alone goes to the passion. Why then do we go up together? Because the passion is mine, but the salvation of all people is common. For this reason the divine apostle uttered that noble and wonder-filled cry, which you have just heard: "I have been crucified with Christ. I live, but it is no longer I; Christ lives in me." Moreover, wishing to demonstrate also the fruit of the cross, he immediately added through the following: "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us. For it is written: 'Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree.'" Here pay close attention to the meaning, lest the quarry of truth escape you. For the Jews will immediately object, concerning whom Paul says: "The enemies of the cross of Christ, whose end is destruction," and they will sometimes say to the simple: "If the one who hangs is cursed, how do you expect blessing to be given to you from the cursed one? How do you await life from one who has succumbed to death?" The apparent fact, as our teacher Paul himself says, he acknowledged, is a curse: "For it is written: 'Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree.'" If, then, it is written and testified, how is blessing given from the cursed one to those who venerate the cross? These things the Jew, the enemy of the cross of Christ, always proposes and says. Therefore, if he says to you: "How does the cursed one give blessing?" say to him: "How in the desert did the serpents bite your ancestors, and Moses, having made a bronze image of a serpent, hung it up and said: 'Let everyone bitten by the serpent look to the serpent and be saved'?

And what, he says, is this to the matter at hand? But it is exceedingly pertinent. Have you not heard God saying, "Cursed are you above all the beasts of the earth"? How then did the image of the accursed one bring life to your ancestors? I take up the word to establish the meaning. If it seems impossible to you that blessing should spring from the accursed—for every one hung on wood is accursed—how did the image of the serpent, the accursed one who heard, "Cursed are you above all the beasts," bring salvation to the people lying in calamity? Was it not more credible to say, "If any of you is bitten, let him look up to the heaven above, to God, and he will be saved"? But to omit looking to heaven, could he not have said, "If anyone is bitten, let him look to the lampstand of light and be saved"? Or look to the table of the prothesis of the holy bread and be saved? Or to the altar, or to the veil, or to the ark, or to the image of the cherubim, or to the mercy seat? But none of these did the great lawgiver introduce; he set up only the image of the cross, and that through the accursed serpent. Why then, O Jew, does Moses do these things? Why does he cast a serpent, he who says through the law, "You shall not make a graven image nor a molten one"? But why do I speak these things to the ungrateful one? I ask the lawgiver himself: Tell me, O most faithful servant of God, do you do what you forbid? Do you prepare what you overturn? You who say, "You shall not make a graven image nor a molten one," do you cast and carve a serpent?

But those things I legislated," he says, "in order to cut off the materials of impiety and to lead this people away from all idolatry. But now I cast the serpent, in order to prefigure the image of the economy of the cross. I smooth the path for the apostles; I pre-exercise that great and strange symbol of the cross. And that this argument is not forced, hear the Lord confirming that ancient image and taking it up into himself. For, conversing with Nicodemus, a certain ruler of the Jews, as a teacher of the people and one capable of understanding the contemplation of the economy, he says: 'And just as Moses raised up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be raised up, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish, but have eternal life.' Tell me, then, O senseless Jew, was that not bronze? Dead matter having power to conquer death, having the form of the cross. And is the truth of the cross itself not believed? And this after the conversion of the world, after the shining forth in the whole world of the establishment of piety, after the faith of the nations, after the raising up of the churches, after so much struggle, after so much asceticism, after such an increase of angelic conduct? But it has been clearly demonstrated how the enemies of the cross are prevented from reproaching us with the form of the accursed one. And these things are addressed to them. But we, the faithful, let us examine among ourselves and scrutinize the precision of the words. Why did the Lord make the image of that economy not through something else, but through a serpent?

For against the struggles of the adversaries, the example of the accursed serpent is sufficient; but to persuade the sons of piety why the form of the accursed serpent became an image of the worshiped Christ, therefore we must speak with zeal and you must listen with eagerness. It was an image, brothers, of the economy of the cross, the type of the serpent. And in the same way, just as that type of the serpent had the image and appearance of a serpent but had no venom or wickedness of a serpent, so also the Savior, according to the divine apostle, having appeared in a likeness of flesh of sin, was free from all sin; just as the blessed Isaiah, speaking in harmony with the blessed Paul, says: "Who committed no sin, nor was deceit found in his mouth." According to Isaiah, you have one image. Come now to another image. See the truth shining through the types. The serpents were biting the sons of Israel when the people fell into destruction. Moses beseeches God to give a remedy for salvation. God shows his servant a remedy of beneficence and says: "Make a bronze serpent and fix it before the tent of testimony." What does the example intend? Different are the serpents that bite, and another is crucified on their behalf. What does the riddle intend? What does the shadow of the mystery promise? Just as there, he says, the type—while other serpents bite, the one that neither bites nor strikes is nailed to the wood—so also, while other men sin, Jesus the sinless one is about to suffer on behalf of all. On behalf of the biting serpents, a sinless serpent is crucified.

For us who are subject to death, the one not subject to sin is nailed up. This, along with other things, Isaiah well proclaimed beforehand, speaking thus: “For the sins of the people he came to death,” and “The Lord gave himself for our sins.” It is necessary again to bear witness to the account of the mystery. Just as there some are the biters and another is the one fixed, so also here all who have sinned and one who is crucified for all. You have a second image. Consider for me also a third image: on the testimony of two or three witnesses every word will be established. Why is a bronze serpent crucified? So that the bites of serpents might be rendered inoperative. Therefore, the one crucified is one thing, and those rendered inoperative are another. Do you not see the force of the truth? Do you not see, as in a hidden letter, the power of the economy? “A serpent was crucified,” it says, “so that the bites of the biters might be rendered inoperative.” Christ was crucified so that the energies of the demons might be rendered inoperative. The serpent that is fixed is one, and the dragons rendered inoperative are others. Christ on the cross is one, and the demons rendered inoperative are others. And just as there the image of the visible serpent rendered the bites of serpents inoperative, so also here the death of Christ has become a death of death and a destruction of demons. Fittingly, then, the Savior, adapting the image to himself, said: “And just as Moses raised up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be raised up, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish, but have eternal life.” You have, brother, the blessed Moses also in another form depicting the cross. And hear how.

For when speaking about the cross, it is necessary to set forth many aspects of the mystery. Once, foreigners attacked the Israelites in the desert. The name of the foreigners was Amalek. Moses sends Joshua son of Nun to command his fellow tribesmen, and he arms his own successor, but he himself remains on the mountain stretching out his hands. For Moses, it is said, went up the mountain and spread out his hands; and it happened that whenever Moses stretched out his hands, Israel was victorious, and whenever he lowered his hands, overcome by bodily weight, Amalek was victorious. What does this posture signify? The Jew immediately fears that the glory of the cross of Christ might shine through the image. Nothing, he says, does this type have in common with the things you mythologize. That posture was a type of prayer, not an image, as you suspect. And why, if truly the victory was the fruit of prayer, did the account not attribute the victory to prayer? For Scripture did not say, "Whenever Moses prayed." That would have been the mark of one truly recognizing that the victory was not the fruit of prayer. But rather, it attributed it to the image and the posture of the hands? For when Moses lowered his hands, Israel was defeated; when he spread them, Amalek was defeated. For if the work were of prayer, it would have been necessary to say, "And whenever Moses prayed, he was victorious." But, as I said earlier, inserting prayer—not as useless, but as obliged to yield to the image of the cross—the account attributes the victory to the type and the sign. For when Moses spread out his hands, Israel was victorious. What does a spread hand signify?

Picture in your mind outstretched hands, so that you may see the image of the venerable cross shining. But Moses grew weary, it is said, for his hands could not sustain the image, overcome as they were by bodily weight. What then? Lest the image be dissolved and the victory be lost, Aaron and Hur stood and supported his hands, so that the image of the cross, passing away and ceasing, might not extinguish the victory. And why do Aaron and Hur support his hands at all? Aaron, brothers, held the priestly office, while Hur was of the royal tribe by kinship. Thus priesthood and kingship attend the image of the cross. And just as when the Lord was transfigured on the mountain, Moses and Elijah appeared on the right and on the left to attend the royal image of Christ, so here Aaron, holding the order of the priesthood, attends the cross, and Hur likewise, holding the first flower of the royal line, attends the cross. These things have been said by me to show how the image was introduced and the type of the economy honored among those ancient fathers of piety. If those who proclaimed beforehand thus gloriously heralded, thus honorably prefigured, with what and how many and how great mouths shall we proclaim the cross and the divine economy of the Lord? I know that you have a great desire for doctrinal discourses and for the proclamations of theology, but what has now been said is akin to those. For it is of the same thought both to proclaim the cross and to exalt the only-begotten God Word.

Therefore, whether you hymn the divinity of the Only-Begotten or honor the economy, it has one and the same demonstration of piety. But when you hear "cross," when you hear "economy of the body," lift your mind to the height of the Only-Begotten's authority. Let not the form that came to be for your sake humble your thought, but let the philanthropy of the one who saved you raise your mind. For the cross is for your sake, but the dignity of God is for its own sake. The dignity of God is not exalted by words, nor is it diminished by words. But those who diminish it work their own diminishment, while those who exalt it raise their own lowliness to a height. Just as we said earlier, that both the one who hymns the economy and the one who hymns the theology hold to the same intention. But since in what we exercised yesterday something was lacking for the purpose that they might know you, the only true God and Lord Jesus Christ, and since the prophecies and testimonies were demonstrated for the Son as the only true God, I think it necessary to examine also that aspect of the wording. Yet the heretic says: "What do you have to say again about 'the one who was sent'? It is explicitly written: 'And whom you sent, Jesus Christ.' Does not the one who sent have equal rank with the one sent?" If you read these things while being a slave to the wording, often, as we have said before, you will truly find much contradiction against us, and the things well written but badly understood will not agree with the same reasoning.

If you take up the meaning toward the truth itself, the eye of your mind will nowhere be turned to contradiction, guided by the Holy Spirit himself to precise understanding. For the phrases "was sent" and "sent" bear human words but proclaim divine meanings. For neither did the sender send from place to place, nor did the one sent come from place to place. But the Father sent the Son into the world, it says, as one not present to the world to which he was sent. How does Scripture say concerning the Lord himself: "He was in the world, and the world was made through him"? How then did the one present come, the one hidden appear? But if you truly understand "sent" as you hear it, it is absolutely necessary that the one sent arrived in those places where he was not yet present, and that the sender sent him there where he is not present. How then did the Evangelist say: "All things were made through him, and without him not one thing was made. He was in the world, and the world was made through him"? If, then, he was in the world, how is he sent into the world? Did you not hear him saying: "I fill heaven and earth," says the Lord? What then does "was sent" mean? Instead of "appeared"; instead of "shone through flesh." For the sending does not signify a transition from place to place, but from invisible divinity to manifest presence. For neither, when he sojourned on earth according to the human economy, did he empty the heavens of his own worth, nor now, having been taken up according to the assumption of the flesh, has he left the earth bereft of his own oversight.

If, according to the literal wording, brothers, the Father sent the Son into the world, it is clear that the sender is separated from the one sent in terms of their own position. For if he is with him, "sent" is superfluous; but if he sent, it is necessary that they be separated, according to the force of the wording. But we must not be slaves to the wording, but adhere to the faith. And what testimony will a word give us that, while appearing on earth, he was in the heavens? And what testimony will a word give us that, though sent from the Father, he was not separated from the Father? If he was sent into the world, according to the wording, if the sender is separated from the one sent, how did he say, "I am in the Father and the Father is in me"? And how again did he say, "And the Father who sent me is with me"? You see that the nature is not separated; the economy indicates the form of the sending. What then does "I ascend to my Father" mean? For if the Father is with him, why does he ascend? The ascent interprets the economy, the assumption of the body, not the separation of the divinity. Do you wish to learn that, just as when he sojourned on earth he did not abandon the heavens, nor was he separated from the Father, so also when he was taken up into the heavens he did not leave the earth desolate? He who said to his disciples, "And behold, I am with you, but I ascend whence I came down, to my Father," the same again says to them, "And behold, I am with you all the days until the end of the age." Therefore, "so that they may know you as the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you sent" has a double meaning and a double-edged sword.

one arming itself against idolatry, the other arrayed against Jewish disobedience. For it says "only true God" in order to brand the dead idols, and "sent Jesus Christ" in order to silence those who deny the economy. So interpret the words according to the meaning, and do not insult the dignity because of the expression. And that you may learn precisely that being sent from God does not signify a change from place to place, but the revelation of the economy, the Gospel says concerning John the Baptist, who was from the earth: "There was a man sent from God." Was John then sent from the heavens? Did he come from above? How then did he come? So a man who is sent does not move from place to place, but is entrusted with the economy. And the divine Word, who fills all things, if he calls himself sent, did he insult his nature and indicate the economy? Look at him, brother, both fulfilling the economy of the flesh and not diminishing the dignity of his divine power. And the priestly form: "I go up to my father and will entreat him, and he will send you the Paraclete, the Spirit of truth." If you go up above and entreat, and by entreating you prevail, and after the entreaty you send the Spirit—for you said, "I entreat and I send"—why do you dissolve the authority of the Father before the ascent?

If you do not exercise authority according to divine dignity, but wait to ascend to the Father in heaven and offer supplication and entreaty, and thus receive the grace of the Spirit and send it out to the whole world, why, before you ascend, before you entreat, do you display authority as your own? Why, before the ascension, after rising from the dead, did you breathe upon the faces of the apostles and say, "Receive the Holy Spirit"? What you ask from the Father, you give before entreating the Father. So then, are you mocking the request? "I am not mocking," he says. For there is no mockery in truth. But one thing is suited to dignity, the other befits the economy. Why then did you breathe upon the faces of the apostles? "It was necessary for me," says the Savior, "after rising from the dead, to bestow the firstfruits of life upon the world." For since Adam, when formed, received a breath of life—for God breathed upon the face of Adam, and it became a living soul—what that one received and lost, I now recall. I raise the fallen, I renew the corrupted, I give life to the dead. The prophet also bears witness to my economy, proclaiming my breathing. And who is the prophet who cries out and foretells this holy breathing? "Listen," he says, "to the prophet speaking among the Twelve, whose name is Nahum. 'Celebrate, Judah, your feasts; pay your vows to God; they shall no more come to renewal. It is finished.'" The first part says: "They shall no more come to renewal." It announces the new grace, that the old has ceased, the new flourishes. "Celebrate your feasts.

Why does he say "celebrate your feasts"? Because at the feast of Passover the resurrection was about to blossom. "Celebrate your feasts, Judas," he says, "pay your vows to God. No longer shall they come to renewal. It is completed, it is removed," that is, the former things have an end. And why do the former things have an end? For the one who breathes upon your face and delivers you from affliction has ascended from the earth. But let us take it up again. "Celebrate your feasts, Judas, pay your vows to God. No longer shall they come to renewal." What are the feasts? For those were the old ones bearing the image of the new. The first day of Unleavened Bread, being an image of the Passion for those who examine precisely. After this, the day of Pentecost, itself being an image of the visitation of the holy and venerable Spirit. And the Feast of Tabernacles was itself an image of the heavenly tabernacles. The Lord, indicating such things, since those were temporary, wishing to show that those tabernacles are a type of the future tabernacles, said to those who are wealthy in the world: "Make for yourselves friends from the mammon of injustice, so that when you pass away, they may receive you into the eternal tabernacles." So the temporary tabernacles were a type of the eternal tabernacles. Since, therefore, the economy of Christ fulfilled the old types while causing the new grace to blossom, the prophet rightly proclaims beforehand, saying: "Celebrate your feasts, Judas, pay your vows to God." The phrase "no longer shall they come to renewal" signifies that the old have been renewed through grace. "It is completed, it is removed.

For he rose up from the earth, the one who breathes into your face and delivers you from affliction. But the prophet Nahum presented to you plainly the Lord who inspired the holy grace. Isaiah also, in a different manner, pre-announces the one who rose from the dead and bestows the Holy Spirit upon his own, saying: "He remembered eternal days, the one who brought up from the earth the shepherd of the sheep." And instead of "he breathed into his face," he immediately added: "The one who placed in them the Holy Spirit." The divine dignity, the divine appellation, the royal office, the undefiled glory, and the incomprehensible power—that which is glorified together with the Father and co-reigns with the Son, and which activates all things and distributes the divine gifts to each as it wills. These things, I well know, strengthen the members of the Church, but bite and tear apart the enemies, especially the enemies of piety, those who refuse to glorify the Holy Spirit together with the Father and the Son. Oh, the wretchedness! They do not even deign to grant to the Holy Spirit what they have obtained. But the apostle said concerning himself and those like him: "If we suffer together, we shall also be glorified together." Paul is glorified together with God, and the whole is not glorified together? The mortal nature is raised so high as to be glorified together with Christ, and the worshipful Spirit will not share with us the same advantages? And concerning men, the same apostle says: "If we endure, we shall also co-reign." Does not the Holy Spirit co-reign with Christ? Oh, the great ingratitude! Oh, the great and unbearable madness! Oh, the godless opinion and boundless blasphemy and incurable wound!

Do we anticipate co-reigning and relegate the Holy Spirit to the rank of a servant? We say these things, brothers, not because the Holy Spirit ought to be glorified together with Christ in a manner similar to us, but because we are exposing the impiety of those who cannot bear to grant even that much. May you be merciful to us, Lord, for what is being said. For even if we merely repeat the words of the impious, even to the point of a superficial and surface-level expression, yet let no one, brothers, think that repeating their insults is an insult to the Holy Spirit. For we bring them forward and speak them, not sharing in the impiety, but exposing the error and walling off the companions of piety from the wicked doctrines. For the apostles, loving the Lord and seeing his worth, did not hesitate to include in the holy Gospels the insults from the Jews. For it is written what they dared to say about Christ, both that he is a sinner and that he is not of God. And to his face they did not hesitate: "You are a Samaritan and have a demon." But the matter accuses not those who wrote, but those who blasphemed. Listen to the energy of the Spirit; listen to the doxology of the apostles; follow their teachings; adhere to the steps of the saints; do not lead yourself astray by the tracks of the profane. Worship the Trinity; glorify the Trinity; proclaim the Trinity. Thus the prophets think, thus the apostles proclaim, thus the martyrs believe. Listen to Paul proclaiming the Trinity: "Distributions of gifts, but the same Spirit; distributions of ministries, but the same Lord.

divisions of activities, but the same God is the one who energizes all things in all. Why does he not begin from the Father? Does he not first proclaim him, and then the Son, and after him the Holy Spirit? Are you altering the order, O Paul? Are you rearranging the sequence? When the Savior handed down the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit, are you dissolving the ordinance of theology? But may it never be that we think these things about Paul. For that holy and marvelous herald saw precisely that even if he mentions the Spirit first, he preserves theology inviolate; he does not insult the unconfused nature; he does not divide the undivided dignity. He mentions the Spirit first in order to show that writing the Spirit last does not make it last and final. For those men misinterpret wickedly, not co-numbering but sub-numbering the Son to the Father and the Holy Spirit to the Son. For they say the Father is first, the Son second, the Holy Spirit third, not understanding the well-ordered sequence of knowledge of the venerable Trinity, but with a perverted soul attacking the purity of theology. Naturally Paul reverses the order of the names, in order to show the power of the truth and to dissolve the supposition of the wicked. But I know, he says, that he mentioned the Son and the Spirit superficially, but when he came to the Father, he raised theology to a height. For concerning the Spirit he said: "The same Spirit"; concerning the Son: "The same Lord"; but when he came to the Father he said: "The one who energizes all things in all.

What then does the phrase "to energize all things in all" signify to him? Authority, he says. And does it proclaim a surpassing preeminence? Yes, he says. I accept your admissions, if you abide by the agreements. Let us then see what the vessel of election, guided by the Holy Spirit, more clearly sets forth concerning this very inquiry. To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for what is beneficial. For to one is given a word of wisdom according to the same Spirit; to another a word of knowledge in that same Spirit; to another gifts of healings according to the same Spirit; to another prophecy; to another interpretation of tongues; to another faith; to another gifts. All these things. Pay close attention. Observe the harmony of expression and power. The one who said through the first things, "The same God energizes all things in all," when coming to the Spirit, attests this power to the Spirit: "All these things," he says, "the one and the same Spirit energizes, distributing to each individually as it wills." Thus the harmony of the doxology is not dissolved when any of the names of the Holy Trinity is placed first or second or third. For first and second and third do not indicate a difference of nature, but an unconfused path of theology. Again, the same apostle, in order to show that he has everywhere indifferently employed the order of names, while approaching the divine proclamation in an orderly and secure manner, says, writing to the Thessalonians: "Our Lord Jesus Christ himself and our God the Father." First, Paul, do you proclaim the Son and then the Father? For you have cast the first into second place, he says. If I say first and second, I understand the nature as undivided.

Rather, I do not suppose, but I proclaim securely. Do not, therefore, insult the divine oracles, nor calumniate the heavenly doctrines. You find such an image also in the Old Testament. For just as here Paul, beginning from the Spirit, came to the Son, and from the Son again to the Father, and made the third in the order of names first, not altering the order of the proclamation, but indicating the undifferentiated knowledge of theology, so also in the Old Testament you will find the same type shining forth in advance as in an image. Who among us does not know, brothers, that Scripture places Abraham first, Isaac second, and Jacob third? "I am the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob." And fittingly, Scripture proclaims first the begetter, then the begotten, then the one from him. But since the nature was indivisible, even if it was divided in time for the sake of sequence, God did not hesitate to change the order, in order to reveal the confession. For he says in the—I also mention the passage, so that you may not calumniate what is said—: "But if the sons of Israel sin, I will deliver them to a foreign nation, and they will go there and serve other gods." Foreshadowing the captivity in Babylon, he says: "And they will go there and serve other gods. Then their uncircumcised heart will be ashamed." And shortly after: "And they will remember the covenant of Jacob and the covenant of Isaac and the covenant of Abraham.

I will repeat the saying. For the noise covered the subject. There it says, "Their uncircumcised heart will be ashamed, and they will return to me, and I will heal them." Not yet a threat, and it promises reconciliation. "And I will lead them into the land of their fathers, and I will remember the covenant of Jacob and the covenant of Isaac and the covenant of Abraham." Do you see how it changes the order, in order to show the equality of honor? For it did not place Jacob first in time, but used indifference to show the equality of honor. But in the case of the patriarchs, time separates the fruits from the root. For nature is mortal, both of the plants and of those who have given birth. But of the holy and immortal and worshipful Trinity, reason does not cut nature, time does not divide it, ages do not separate it. For there is nothing between Father and Son and Holy Spirit. The maker of the ages is the only-begotten. Listen to the divine and noble herald who has said something here about the Father: "Having spoken in many ways and in many forms long ago to the fathers through the prophets, in these last days he has spoken to us through the Son, whom he appointed heir of all, through whom he also made the ages." Therefore there is nothing between Father and Son and Holy Spirit. No time or interval of time. Before the ages, Father; before the ages, Son. For he himself made the ages. Before the ages, the Holy Spirit. Nowhere is the nature split; nowhere is the power divided. Pay close attention. The Father reigns, the Son reigns, the Holy Spirit reigns. I know that I have used this demonstration.

But it is not burdensome for me to repeat the same things, and it is safe for you. The Father reigns, according to "Our God is king forever." The Son reigns: "For the Lord will give him the throne of David his father, and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever." The Holy Spirit reigns. For Isaiah said: "And I saw the king, Lord Sabaoth, with my own eyes, sitting on a high and lofty throne. And he said to me: 'Go, tell this people: You will hear with your hearing and not understand, and you will see with your seeing and not perceive,'" and so on. And the apostle interprets the prophet's theology as referring to the Holy Spirit. Since he said, "I saw the king, Lord Sabaoth, and he said to me: 'Go, tell this people,'" Paul, interpreting "king, Lord Sabaoth" as the Holy Spirit, says when disputing with the Jews in Rome: "Rightly did the Holy Spirit say to our fathers through the prophet Isaiah, saying: 'Go, tell this people: You will hear with your hearing and not understand,'" and so on. Isaiah said: "I saw the king Sabaoth, and he said to me: 'Tell this people.'" And Paul attributed the authority to the Holy Spirit. Therefore, the Holy Spirit is king and Lord Sabaoth, who said to Isaiah: "Go, tell this people: You will hear with your hearing and not understand, and you will see with your seeing and not perceive," and so on. For I heard the voice of the Lord saying: "Go, tell this people." The Father is Lord, the Son is Lord: For the Lord said to my Lord: "Sit at my right hand." The Holy Spirit is Lord. For the Lord is the Spirit.

Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. Let no one think that the name "first God" is greater, and the name "Lord" is second. For in the case of the immortal nature, both "Lord" and "God," even if the word does not have the same force, proclaim the same dignity. What then? Is "God" the first name? And if "Lord" is second, would not Moses have used the second as the first, saying, "Lord your God, Lord is one"? For it would have been necessary, if indeed, to mention the first first and say, "Your God is one Lord." But in order to show the indifference of the names, he said "Lord" first, then "God." But let us return to the matter at hand. The Lord is the Spirit. Therefore, the Father is Lord, the Son is Lord, the Holy Spirit is Lord. But Paul says, "One Lord." If there is one Lord, how is it Lord and Lord? Clearly, the lordship is one. Thus also "one God," says Paul. For us, there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things. So then, he calls the Father God, and the Son Lord. Let us see, brothers, let us see, I beg, whether "Lord" is a second name of the divine dignity and not truly first and fitting and attested by holy Scripture. For it is truly necessary both for us to speak with zeal and for you to hear with eagerness and for those others to be instructed with truth. What word, then, will testify for us that the name "Lord" is both first and proper to the magnificent glory? Listen to the prophet David: "Let them be ashamed and troubled forever and ever; and let them be put to shame and perish.

And let them know that your name is Lord. It is possible for the enemy to say concerning the Savior Word: for the name of Christ is Lord; the name of the Father is God. Again I demand a definition of the matters at hand. Do you abide by the terms of the argument? Do you adhere to the agreements? For I fear your fickleness. When you are refuted even by this truth, you flee to another theory, and if you are caught there, you flee to another element of ignorance, when you ought not to flee from the truth that shines and illuminates. For it does not drive away when it illuminates, but the impious man flees though no one pursues. But let us return to the matter at hand. Let them know that your name is Lord. If he is speaking of the Father, then learn that the name of the Father is Lord. And if the name of the Father is Lord, Paul says: One Lord Jesus Christ. But the Father is Lord, the Son is Lord. Therefore, as a sharer of the name, he is also a sharer of the dignity. But the Jew refuses to say that he spoke concerning the Father, so that by assigning the title Lord to the Son, he may preserve the title God for the Father. I accept the definition and the agreement. I do not divide the dignity of the names, as I have often said before, of the worshipful Trinity, because the Church holds its glory undivided. But I condescend to your wretchedness, and I say: Let it be granted; let them know that your name is Lord. What then do you do with the following phrase: You alone are the highest over all the earth? Therefore, according to your weakness and according to your teaching, the Father is no longer the highest, because the Son alone is the highest. Here, brothers, there are not waves of the sea to drown, but waves of love to sanctify.

But while Christ is being spoken of and proclaimed, let this God-beloved vessel be brought in silence. For it is absurd that the sea, having seen the tracks of the master and heard "Be silent, be still," should respect the authority, while the church is not persuaded by her own bridegroom as he utters the words of life and truly has divine grace upon his lips—for grace was poured out upon your lips. But let us return to the matter at hand. Let them know that your name is Lord. Choose whichever you wish, not as if the choice lies in your authority. For not even when Joshua the son of Nun said to the people, "Choose for yourselves today whom you will serve, either the gods whom your fathers served or the Lord our God," did he give the choice entirely to the authority of men, but to show that piety follows the intention of those who love God. And elsewhere the same man says, "You are witnesses against yourselves that you chose to serve the Lord." Just as there the choice did not insult the dignity of God but demonstrated the intention of the pious, so also now, if I grant the choice to intention, I do not insult the dignity but test the intention. The phrase "Let them know that your name is Lord"—is it spoken concerning the Father or concerning the Son? For if it is concerning the Father and the name of the Father is Lord, then the name of the Son is also Lord. For there is one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things. Therefore, just as the rank is common, so too is the name. But the name of the Son is Lord. Thus the Son alone is Lord. For you alone are the highest over all the earth.

Therefore, when the Son is one and only Lord, is the Father alien to lordship? Far from it. For neither, when the Father is proclaimed as the one and only God, is the Son cast out of divinity. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. So then, the Father being God does not separate the Son from divinity. For the Word is God. Nor does the Son, when he is called one Lord, show the Father to be alien to lordship. For the Lord said to my Lord: Sit at my right hand. Therefore the Father is Lord, the Son is Lord, the Holy Spirit is Lord. For the Spirit is Lord. But again the heretic, having surfaced and heard that the Holy Spirit is Lord, is provoked and bursts. And how, he says, is the whole Lord, when through the prophet David the Spirit, speaking, hymns the Son, saying: The Lord said to my Lord? Do you see, he says, that the Spirit speaking through the prophet confesses both the Father and the Son as his Lord? What then, brothers? Lest the phrase, if further extended, become ambiguous to the hearers, I will come directly to the examination of the passage and unfold for you the entire contemplation of the phrase.

The Savior, once conversing with the synagogue of the Jews and testing the opinion and conception which the many held about him, says to them: Whom do you say the Christ is? Whose son is he? The scribes and Pharisees say: Of David. Then the Lord, opposing their supposition, added again: And how does David in the Holy Spirit call him Lord? For the Lord said to my Lord: Sit at my right hand. And he added “in the Holy Spirit” not in order to show that the Spirit is a servant of the proclaimed Christ, but in order to make clear that the prophet, foreseeing the future in the Holy Spirit, confesses as Lord in truth the one who was to be a son according to the flesh. For the Lord, when being examined, was not concerned about the Holy Spirit, but about himself. Does David have the Lord as son or as master? At any rate, the Lord himself, forestalling the calumny of the heretics and preserving intact the dignity of the Holy Spirit, resolves the dispute by the sequel. What then does he say? If then David calls him Lord, how is he his son? He did not say: If then the Holy Spirit calls him Lord, but: If David calls him Lord. Why then did he add “in the Holy Spirit he calls him Lord”? Because to speak about Christ before the coming of Christ was not the act of a body seeing, but of the Holy Spirit pointing out beforehand. For David did not proclaim what he saw, but what the Holy Spirit suggested, these things were struck through the spiritual lyre. For this reason the Lord added: How then does David in the Holy Spirit call him Lord?

But so that the heretic might not drag the blasphemy toward the Holy Spirit, he added again, as we said earlier: "If then David calls him Lord, how is he his son? Therefore David, in the Holy Spirit, calls the Christ Lord." But let us first consider this: that every prophet speaks fittingly from the Holy Spirit. For we all agree that the prophets spoke in the Holy Spirit, as the apostle also testifies, saying: "The Holy Spirit spoke well to your fathers through the prophet." And again, God says universally: "I will pour out from my Spirit upon every flesh, and they will prophesy." And Moses: "Who will give that all the people be prophets, when the Lord gives his Holy Spirit upon them?" Here let us attend carefully to how the divinity of the Holy Spirit is shown, not exalted by us, but proclaimed by its own worth. And allow me a little to shape the matter at hand through question and answer. For by such oppositions the resolution of difficulties becomes easier. Let us ask, then: Do they agree that the Holy Spirit spoke through the prophets, or do they still disbelieve and doubt? If they doubt, let us remind them of what was said earlier, how God himself testifies, saying: "I will pour out from my Spirit upon every flesh, and they will prophesy." For it is the Spirit that activates the prophetic power. As the wonderful Moses again, wishing to show that prophecy is constituted from the Holy Spirit, uttered that great and marvelous cry.

And who will grant that all the people of the Lord be prophets, by the Lord giving his Holy Spirit upon them? But if they truly confess, as indeed it is true, that the Holy Spirit spoke in the prophets, listen how the blessed and wondrous Zacharias, the father of the Forerunner, calls the Holy Spirit that spoke through the prophets God: "Blessed is the Lord, the God of Israel, because he visited and made redemption for his people, and raised up a horn of salvation for us in the house of David his servant, as he spoke through the mouth of his holy prophets from of old." If, then, that which spoke through the mouth of the prophets is God, and the Holy Spirit spoke in the prophets, as David says in the book of Kings: "For the Spirit of the Lord spoke in me," therefore the Holy Spirit that uttered through the prophets is God and Lord. Now take from me a clear proof of what is said. The divine apostle, wishing to show the Holy Spirit by the prophetic voice, says in the [epistle]: "If all of you prophesy, and some layman or unbeliever enters, he is refuted by all, examined by all, the secrets of his heart become manifest, and thus falling on his face he will worship, declaring that truly God is among you." Do you see that the teacher of piety has expressly proclaimed the Spirit in those who prophesy to be God?

Why then are you scandalized concerning piety, heretic? Why do you slander the dignity of the Spirit? Why do you transgress the confession of faith? Read your covenants at the mysteries, how you said: I believe in Father and Son and Holy Spirit. Have you undone what you believed? Have you overturned what you confessed? Have you muddled impiously what you clearly set forth? Do you wage war against peace? Do you fight against your covenants? Have you denied the faith and introduced inquiries? Was the gift delivered to you as a believer and confessor, and after the gift is faith banished and debate introduced? Do not insult the dignity of grace. Do not counterfeit the covenants of that fearful and awe-inspiring initiation. In the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit you confessed to believe; you were baptized likewise into Father and Son and Holy Spirit. The blessing likewise in the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit. Are the gifts from grace to us, and blasphemy against grace from you? Is freedom from the Holy Spirit to us, and servitude to the Spirit from you? O the madness! O the ingratitude! Either deny the new grace or respect the old covenant, or everywhere maintain the equal honor of the holy Trinity, as we have often demonstrated to you through many written testimonies. To these I wish to add yet another demonstration. For it has been proclaimed beforehand, as I have often said, that the new things are in the old. What then does God command Moses, saying: Speak to Aaron and his sons: Thus you shall bless the sons of Israel. Pay close attention.

Lest someone, having taken it simply, should think it is well, he commanded the "thus," so that no one might bring the blessings according to their own authority, but do everything according to the rule of scripture. He says: "Thus," he says, "bless." "Thus": how? "May the Lord bless you and guard you." And note how everywhere he mystically introduces the Trinity, through which the blessings are also tripled: "May the Lord bless you and guard you. May the Lord reveal his face upon you and bless you. May the Lord lift his face upon you and give you peace." See the Trinity explicitly hymned. What grace is not from the Holy Spirit? What gift is not from that one? What good without that one? What even supermundane thing can be manifested to men without the Holy Spirit? Search the scriptures and observe how, when scripture wishes to indicate or show something of the things accomplished beyond nature, it ascribes the whole to the authority of the Spirit. For example, Samson, that noble hero, when he displayed those great and extraordinary exploits of courage, scripture everywhere, showing it, placed the Holy Spirit before the exploits. "They came," it says, "the Philistines against Samson, many and countless. And he was alone, and not only this, but also bound. What then is the release for the bound one? What salvation for the one who is trapped? How does one overcome the many? The Spirit of the Lord came upon Samson and leaped upon the Philistines, and finding a jawbone of a donkey, he dispatched a thousand men." And see the wisdom of divine scripture.

Since the saying was unbelievable to those inexperienced in the man—that the bound one conquered the unbound and the one alone prevailed over the many—he therefore set it forth well: "And the spirit of the Lord came upon Samson, and he took the jawbone of a donkey and slew a thousand," so that when it is disbelieved because of human nature, it may be believed because of the power of the spirit. Therefore Moses spoke well: "How will one pursue a thousand, and two move tens of thousands, unless the Lord delivered them and God sold them?" Read the scriptures and you will find in each exploit the authority of the spirit set before it. The Philistines came, and the spirit of the Lord came upon Samson. A lion sprang, and he tore the lion apart like a kid. He was bound with iron chains, and the woman came to him: "The Philistines are upon Samson." But again the scripture: "And the spirit of the Lord came upon Samson, and the bonds were loosened, as when tow catches the scent of fire." Nowhere did it introduce any feat without setting before it the energy of the spirit. Then, when he was finally stripped of the power, pay close attention to what the divine scripture has handed down, everywhere saying that when he commanded and conquered, the spirit of the Lord came upon Samson. When he shaved his head, betraying the pledge of grace, it immediately wrote: "And the Lord departed from Samson." When the Philistines came: "And the spirit of the Lord came upon him." When he withdrew, it says: "And the Lord departed from him." And fittingly. For the Lord is the spirit. And not only in the Old Testament will you find this theory, but also in the apostles.

When the divine oracles proclaim some great and surpassing power, they everywhere set forth the authority of the Spirit. They introduce Paul in Cyprus punishing by word that accursed Elymas the magician, who was campaigning against the truth; and since he was about to relate an extraordinary event—behold, eyes being extinguished by a word—he says: "Behold, the hand of the Lord is upon you, and you will be blind, not seeing the sun." This exceeded the nature of Paul and of all men, I mean the ability to destroy eyes by a human word. A human word, then, does not change nature nor blind the sight. So that one might not, looking to the human words, be astonished at the events and, thinking the saying to be erroneous, the scripture again sets forth the authority of the Spirit. Then, it says, Paul, filled with the Holy Spirit, spoke to him. You have another proof of the Spirit, if a layman speaks beyond his capacity. But again the scripture attributes the action to the Spirit. For example: Peter and John address the multitude of the Jews; and then it says that Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to the people: "Whether it is just before God for you to listen to yourselves rather than to God, judge." Why then "filled with the Holy Spirit"? Because the boldness exceeded a layman, so that no one, looking to the fisherman, might disbelieve the boldness of the holy word; it set forth the wisdom of the Holy Spirit beforehand, so that you might not marvel at the provision. Let us consider, if you please, another example, so that confirmation may shine more fully upon what has been said. Heaven is opened to the saints, but without the Holy Spirit it is not opened.

For the heaven that opens is not seen by the eyes of the flesh, but by the energy of the Holy Spirit. Stephen saw the heavens opened, but, as the Scripture says, being full of the Holy Spirit, he saw. Nowhere, then, brothers, is it possible to see heaven opened without the Spirit, nor to put on the authority of teaching, nor to display the power of miracles without the Holy and Adorable Spirit. For one and the same Spirit energizes all things, distributing to each individually as he wills. To him is the glory unto the ages of ages. Amen.