Augustine of Hippo

My brethren, this question if solved today would oppress you, I do not doubt, for already have I spoken many words. But know that the question is of such a character that alone it is able to extinguish the party of Donatus. I have said thus much, my beloved, in order to gain your attention, as is my wont; and also in order that you may pray for us, that the Lord may grant to us to speak what is suitable, and that you may be found worthy to receive what is suitable. In the meantime, be pleased to defer the question for to-day. But in the meantime, I say this briefly, until I give a fuller solution: Inquire peacefully, without quarreling, without contention, without altercations, without enmities; both seek by yourselves, and inquire of others, and say, "This question our bishop proposed to us to-day, and he will resolve it at a future time, if the Lord will." But whether it be resolved or not, reckon that I have propounded what appears to me of importance; for it does seem of considerable importance. John says, "I have need to be baptized of Thee," as if he knew Christ. For if he did not know Him by whom he wished to be baptized, he spoke rashly when he said, "I have need to be baptized of Thee." Therefore he knew Him. If he knew Him, what is the meaning of the saying, "I knew Him not: but He that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and abiding upon Him, as a dove, the same is He which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost"? What shall we say? That we do not know when the dove came? Lest perchance they take refuge in this, let the other evangelists be read, who have spoken of this matter more plainly, and we find most evidently that the dove then descended when the Lord came up out of the water. Upon Him baptized the heavens opened, and He saw the Spirit descending. If it was when He was already baptized that John knew Him, how saith he to Him, coming to baptism, "I have need to be baptized of Thee"? Ponder this in the meantime with yourselves, confer upon it, treat of it, one with another. The Lord our God grant that before you hear it from me, the explanation may be revealed to some of you first. Nevertheless, brethren, know this, that by means of the solution of this question, the allegation of the party of Donatus, if they have any sense of shame, will be silenced, and their mouths will be shut regarding the grace of baptism, a matter about which they raise mists to confuse the uninstructed, and spread nets for flying birds.

The dove teaches us. From the head of the Lord she answers, and says, Thou hast baptism, but the charity with which I groan thou hast not. How is this says he, I have baptism, and have not charity? Have I the sacraments, and not charity? Do not shout: show me how can he who divides unity have charity? I, saith he, have baptism. Thou hast; but that baptism, without charity, profits thee nothing; because without charity thou art nothing. The baptism itself, even in him who is nothing, is not nothing. Baptism, indeed, is something, aye, something great, for His sake, of whom it is said, "This is He that baptizeth." But lest thou shouldst fancy that that which is great can profit thee aught, if thou be not in unity, it was after He was baptized that the dove descended, as if intimating, If thou hast baptism, be in the dove, lest what thou hast profit thee not. Come, then, to the dove, we say; not that thou mayest begin to have what thou hadst not before, but that what thou didst have may begin to profit thee. For thou didst have baptism to destruction without; if thou shalt have it within, it begins to profit thee to salvation.

Let us see what follows: "Behold the Lamb of God." This John said, and the two disciples heard him speak, and followed Jesus. Then Jesus turned and saw them following, and saith unto them, "What seek ye?" And they said, "Rabbi (that is to say, being interpreted, Master), where dwellest Thou?" They did not follow Him in such manner as that they should cleave to Him; for it is plain when they cleave unto Him, for He called them from the ship. For one of the two was Andrew, as you have just heard, and Andrew was the brother of Peter; and we know from the Gospel that the Lord called Peter and Andrew from the ship, saying, "Come ye after me, and I will make you fishers of men." And from that time they clave unto Him, so as not to go away. On the present occasion these two followed Him, not as those who were not again to leave Him, but to see where He dwelt, and to fulfill the Scripture: "Let thy foot wear out the threshold of His doors; arise to come to Him continually, and be instructed in His precepts." He showed them where He dwelt: they came and remained with Him. What a blessed day they spent, what a blessed night! Who can make known to us those things which they heard from the Lord? Let us also build in our heart, and make a house into which He may come and teach us, and have converse with us.

"What seek ye?" They said unto Him, "Rabbi (which is to say, being interpreted, Master), where dwellest Thou? He says to them, Come and see. And they came and saw where He dwelt, and abode with Him that day: and it was about the tenth hour." Do we think that it did in no wise pertain to the evangelist to tell us what hour it was? Is it possible that he wished us to give heed to nothing in that, to inquire after nothing? It was the tenth hour. That number signifies the law, because the law was given in ten commandments. But the time had come for the law to be fulfilled by love, because it could not be fulfilled by the Jews by fear. Hence the Lord says, "I am not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill." Suitably, then, at the tenth hour did these two follow Him, at the testimony of the friend of the Bridegroom, and that He at the tenth hour heard "Rabbi (which is interpreted, Master)." If at the tenth hour the Lord heard Rabbi, and the tenth number pertains to the law, the master of the law is no other than the giver of the law. Let no one say that one gave the law, and that another teaches the law: for the same teaches it who gave it; He is the Master of His own law, and teaches it. And mercy is in His tongue therefore mercifully teacheth He the law, as it is said regarding wisdom, "The law and mercy doth she carry in her tongue." Do not fear that thou art not able to fulfill the law, flee to mercy. If thou canst not fulfill the law, make use of that covenant, make use of the bond, make use of the prayers which the heavenly One, skilled in the law, has ordained and composed for you.

The Evangelist John, again, tells us that before Jesus went into Galilee, Peter and Andrew were with him one day. He also tells us that on that occasion the former had this name, Peter, given to him, while before that he was called Simon. Likewise, John tells us that on the day following, when Jesus now wanted to go up to Galilee, he found Philip and told him to follow him. In this way, too, the Evangelist comes to give the narrative about Nathanael. Further, he informs us that on the third day, when he was yet in Galilee, Jesus brought about the miracle of the turning of the water into wine at Cana. All these incidents are left unrecorded by the other Evangelists, who continue their narratives at once with the statement of the return of Jesus into Galilee. From this, we are to understand that there was an interval here of several days during which those incidents took place in the history of the disciples that are inserted at this point by John. Neither is there anything contradictory here to that other passage where Matthew tells us how the Lord said to Peter, “You are Peter, and on this rock will I build my church.” But we are not to understand that that was the time when he first received this name. We are rather to suppose that this took place on the occasion when it was said to him, as John mentions, “You shall be called Cephas, which is, by interpretation, ‘a rock.’ ” Thus the Lord could address him at that later period by this very name when he said, “You are Peter.” For he does not say then, “You shall be called Peter” but “You are Peter,” because on a previous occasion it had already been said, “You shall be called.”

"And he brought him to Jesus; and when Jesus beheld him, He said, Thou art Simon the son of Joannes: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is, by interpretation, Peter." It is not a great thing that the Lord said whose son Peter was. What is great to the Lord? He knew all the names of His own saints, whom He predestinated before the foundation of the world; and dost thou wonder that He said to one man, Thou art the son of this man, and thou shalt be called this or that? Is it a great matter that He changed his name, and converted it from Simon to Peter? Peter is from petra, a rock, but the petra [rock] is the Church; in the name of Peter, then, was the Church figured. And who is safe, unless he who builds upon the rock? And what saith the Lord Himself? "He that heareth these my words, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man building his house upon a rock" (he doth not yield to temptation). "The rain descended, the floods came, the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock. But he that heareth my words, and doeth them not" (now let each one of us fear and beware), "I will liken him to a foolish man, who built his house upon the sand: the rain descended, the floods came, the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it." What profit is it to enter the Church for him who builds upon the sand? For, by hearing and not doing, he builds indeed, but on the sand. For if he hears nothing, he builds nothing; but if he hears, he builds. But we ask, Where? For if he hears and does, he builds upon the rock; if he hears and does not, he builds upon the sand. There are two kinds of builders, those building upon the rock, and those building upon the sand. What, then, are those who do not hear? Are they safe? Does He say that they are safe because they do not build? They are naked beneath the rains, before the winds, before the floods; when these come, they carry away: those persons before they overthrow the houses. It is then the only security, both to build, and to build upon the rock. If thou wilt hear and do not, thou buildest; but thou buildest a ruin: and when temptation comes it overthrows the house, and carries away thee with the ruin. But if thou dost not hear, thou art naked; thou thyself art dragged away by those temptations. Hear, then, and do; it is the only remedy. How many, perchance, on this day, by hearing and not doing, are hurried away on the stream of this festival! For, through hearing and not doing, the flood cometh, this annual festival; the torrent is filled, it will pass away and become dry, but woe to him whom it shall carry away! Know this, then, beloved, that unless a man hears and does, he builds not upon the rock, and he does not belong to that great name which the Lord so commended. For He has called thy attention. For if Simon had been called Peter before, thou wouldest not have so clearly seen the mystery of the rock, and thou wouldest have thought that he was called so by chance, not by the providence of God; therefore God willed that he should be called first something else, that by the very change of name the reality of the sacrament might be commended to our notice.

(Tr. vii. c. 14) There was nothing very great in our Lord saying whose son he was, for our Lord knew the names of all His saints, having predestinated them before the foundation of the world. But it was a great thing for our Lord to change his name from Simon to Peter. Peter is from petra, rock, which rock is the Church: so that the name of Peter represents the Church. And who is safe, unless he build upon a rock? Our Lord here rouses our attention: for had he been called Peter before, we should not have seen the mystery of the Rock, and should have thought that he was called so by chance, and not providentially. God therefore made him to be called by another name before, that the change of that name might give vividness to the mystery.

(de Con. Evang. l. ii. c. 17) The account here of the two disciples on the Jordan, who follow Christ (before he had gone into Galilee) in obedience to John's testimony; viz. of Andrew bringing his brother Simon to Jesus, who gave him, on this occasion, the name of Peter; disagrees considerably with the account of the other Evangelists, viz. that our Lord found these two, Simon and Andrew, fishing in Galilee, and then bid them follow Him: unless we understand that they did not regularly join our Lord when they saw Him on the Jordan; but only discovered who He was, and full of wonder, then returned to their occupations. Nor must we think that Peter first received his name on the occasion mentioned in Matthew, when our Lord says, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build My Church; (Mat. 16:18) but rather when our Lord says, Thou shall be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, A stone.

What do we then, brethren? Ought this man to be the first among the apostles? Not only is Nathanael not found as first among the apostles, but he is neither the middle nor the last among the twelve, although the Son of God bore such testimony to him, saying, "Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile." Is the reason asked for? In so far as the Lord intimates, we find a probable reason. For we ought to understand that Nathanael was learned and skilled in the law; and for that reason was the Lord unwilling to place him among His disciples, because He chose unlearned persons, that He might by them confound the world. Listen to the apostle speaking these things: "For ye see," saith he, "your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called: but God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; and base things of the world, and things that are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, as though they were things that are, to bring to nought things that are." If a learned man had been chosen, perhaps he would have said that he was chosen for the reason that his learning made him worthy of choice. Our Lord Jesus Christ, wishing to break the necks of the proud, did not seek the orator by means of the fisherman, but by the fisherman He gained the emperor. Great was Cyprian as an orator, but before him was Peter the fisherman, by means of whom not only the orator, but also the emperor, should believe. No noble was chosen in the first place, no learned man, because God chose the weak things of the world that He might confound the strong. This man, then, was great and without guile, and for this reason only was not chosen, lest the Lord should seem to any to have chosen the learned. And from this same learning in the law, it came that when he heard "from Nazareth,"--for he had searched the Scripture, and knew that the Saviour was to be expected thence, what the other scribes and Pharisees had difficulty in knowing,--this man, then, very learned in the law, when he heard Philip saying, "We have found Him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph;"--this man, who knew the Scriptures excellently well, when he heard the name "Nazareth," was filled with hope, and said, "From Nazareth something good can come."

"And the day following He would go forth into Galilee, and finding Philip, He saith unto him, Follow me. Now he was of the city of Andrew and Peter. And Philip findeth Nathanael" (Philip who had been already called by the Lord); "and he said unto him, We have found Him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus, the son of Joseph." He was called the son of that man to whom His mother had been espoused. For that He was conceived and born while she was still a virgin, all Christians know well from the Gospel. This Philip said to Nathanael, and he added the place, "from Nazareth." And Nathanael said unto him, "From Nazareth something good can come." What is the meaning, brethren? Not as some read, for it is likewise wont to be read, "Can any good thing come out of Nazareth?" For the words of Philip follow, who says, "Come and see." But the words of Philip can suitably follow both readings, whether you read it thus, as confirming, "From Nazareth something good can come," to which Philip replies, "Come and see;" or whether as doubting, and making the whole a question, "Can any good thing come out of Nazareth? Come and see." Since then, whether read in this manner or in that, the words following are not incompatible, it is for us to inquire which of the two interpretations we shall adopt.

What sort of a man this Nathanael was, we prove by the words which follow. Hear what sort of a man he was; the Lord Himself bears testimony. Great is the Lord, known by the testimony of John; blessed Nathanael, known by the testimony of the truth. Because the Lord, although He had not been commended by the testimony of John, Himself to Himself bore testimony, because the truth is sufficient for its own testimony. But because men were not able to receive the truth, they sought the truth by means of a lamp, and therefore John was sent to show them the Lord. Hear the Lord bearing testimony to Nathanael: "Nathanael said unto him, Can any good thing come out of Nazareth? Philip says to him, Come and see. And Jesus sees Nathanael coming to Him, and says concerning him, Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile." Great testimony! Not of Andrew, nor of Peter, nor of Philip was that said which was said of Nathanael, "Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile."

Wherefore, when the Pharisees, who seemed righteous to themselves, blamed the Lord, because, as physician, he mixed with the sick, and when they said, "Behold with whom he eats, with publicans and sinners," the Physician replied to the madmen, "They that are whole need not a physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners." That is to say, because you call yourselves righteous when you are sinners, because you judge yourselves to be whole when you are languishing, you put away from you the medicine, and do not hold fast health. Hence that Pharisee who had asked the Lord to dinner, was whole in his own eyes; but that sick woman rushed into the house to which she had not been invited, and, made impudent by the desire of health, approached not the head of the Lord, nor the hands, but the feet; washed them with tears, wiped them with her hair, kissed them, anointed them with ointment,--made peace, sinner as she was, with the footprints of the Lord. The Pharisee who sat at meat there, as though whole himself, blamed the Physician, and said within himself, "This man, if he were a prophet, would have known what woman touched his feet." He suspected that He knew not, because He did not repulse her to prevent His being touched with unclean hands; but He did know, He permitted Himself to be touched, that the touch itself might heal. The Lord, seeing the heart of the Pharisee, put forth a parable: "There was a certain creditor, which had two debtors; the one owed five hundred denars, and the other fifty; and when they had nothing to pay, he frankly forgave them both. Which of them loved him most?" He answered, "I suppose, Lord, he to whom he forgave most." And turning to the woman, He said unto Simon, "Seest thou this woman? I entered into thine house, thou gavest me no water for my feet; but she hath washed my feet with tears, and wiped them with the hairs of her head: thou gavest me no kiss; she hath not ceased to kiss my feet: thou gavest me no oil; she hath anointed my feet with ointment. Wherefore, I say unto thee, to her are forgiven many sins, for she loved much; but to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little." That is to say, thou art more sick, but thou thinkest thyself whole; thou thinkest that little is forgiven thee when thou owest more. Well did she, because guile was not in her, deserve medicine. What means, guile was not in her? She confessed her sins. This He also praises in Nathanael, that guile was not in him; for many Pharisees who abounded in sins said that they were righteous, and brought guile with them, which made it impossible for them to be healed.

Let us now see the rest concerning this man. "Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile." What is "in whom is no guile"? Perhaps he had no sin? Perhaps he was not sick? Perhaps he did not need a physician? God forbid. No one is born here in such fashion as not to need that Physician. What, then, is the meaning of the words, "in whom is no guile"? Let us search a little more intently--it will appear presently--in the name of the Lord. The Lord says dolus [guile]; and every one who understands Latin knows that dolus is when one thing is done and another feigned. Give heed, beloved. Dolus (guile) is not dolor (pain). I say this because many brethren, not well skilled in Latin, so speak as to say, Dolus torments him, using it for dolor. Dolus is fraud, it is deceit. When a man conceals one thing in his heart, and speaks another, it is guile, and he has, as it were, two hearts; he has, as it were, one recess of his heart where he sees the truth, and another recess where he conceives falsehood. And that you may know that this is guile, it is said in the Psalms, "Lips of guile." What are "lips of guile"? It follows, "In a heart and in a heart have they spoken evil." What is "in a heart and in a heart," unless in a double heart? If, then, guile was not in Nathanael, the Physician judged him to be curable, not whole. A whole man is one thing, a curable another, an incurable a third: he who is sick, but not hopelessly sick, is called curable; he who is sick hopelessly, incurable; but he who is already whole does not need a physician. The Physician, then, who had come to cure, saw that he was curable, because there was no guile in him. How was guile not in him, if he is a sinner? He confesses that he is a sinner. For if he is a sinner, and says that he is a just man, there is guile in his mouth. Therefore in Nathanael He praised the confession of sin, He did not judge that he was not a sinner.