Homily
IV.
1 Cor. i. 18–20
1 Cor. i. 18–20
For the word of the cross is to them that perish
foolishness; but to us which are saved it is the power of God.
For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the
prudence of the prudent will I reject. Where is the Wise? Where
is the Scribe? Where is the Disputer of the World?
To
the sick and gasping
even wholesome meats are unpleasant, friends and relations
burdensome; who are often times not even recognized, but are rather
accounted intruders. Much like this often is the case of those
who are perishing in their souls. For the things which tend to
salvation they know not; and those who are careful about them they
consider to be troublesome. Now this ensues not from the nature
of the thing, but from their disease. And just what the insane
do, hating those who take care of them, and besides reviling them,
the same is the case with unbelievers also. But as in the case of
the former, they who are insulted then more than ever compassionate
them, and weep, taking this as the worst symptom of the disease in
its intense form, when they know not their best friends; so also in
the case of the Gentiles let us act; yea more than for our wives
let us wail over them, because they know not the common
salvation. For not so dearly ought a man to love his wife as we
should love all men, and draw them over unto salvation; be a man a
Gentile, or be he what he may. For these then let us weep; for
“the word of the Cross is to them foolishness,” being itself
Wisdom and Power. For, saith he, “the word of the Cross to them
that perish is foolishness.”
For since it was likely that they, the Cross being
derided by the Greeks, would resist and contend by aid of that
wisdom, which came (forsooth) of themselves, as being disturbed by
the expression of the Greeks; Paul comforting them saith, think it
not strange and unaccountable, which is taking place. This is the
nature of the thing, that its power is not recognized by them that
perish. For they are beside themselves, and behave as madmen; and
so they rail and are disgusted at the medicines which bring
health.
[2.] But what sayest thou, O man? Christ became
a slave for thee, “having taken the form of a slave,” (
Phil. ii.
7
.) and was crucified,
and rose again. And when thou oughtest for this reason to adore
Him risen and admire His loving kindness; because what neither
father, nor friend, nor son, did for thee, all this the Lord
wrought for thee, the enemy and offender—when, I say, thou
oughtest to admire Him for these things, callest thou that
foolishness, which is full of so great wisdom? Well, it is
nothing wonderful; for it is a mark of them that perish not to
recognize the things which lead to salvation. Be not troubled,
therefore, for it is no strange nor unaccountable event, that
things truly great are mocked at by those who are beside
themselves. Now such as are in this mind you cannot convince by
human wisdom. Nay, if you want so to convince them, you do but
the contrary. For the things which transcend reasoning require
faith alone. Thus, should we set about convincing men by
reasonings, how God became man, and entered into the Virgin’s
womb, and not commit the matter unto faith, they will but deride
the more. Therefore they who inquire by reasonings, it is they
who perish.
And why speak I of God? for in regard of created
things, should we do this, great derision will ensue. For suppose
a man, wishing to make out all things by reasoning; and let him try
by thy discourse to convince himself how we see the light; and do
thou try to convince him by reasoning. Nay, thou canst not: for
if thou sayest that it suffices to see by opening the eyes, thou
hast not expressed the manner, but the fact. For “why see we
not,” one will say, “by our hearing, and with our eyes hear?
And why hear we not with the nostril, and with the hearing
smell?” If then, he being in doubt about these things, and we
unable to give the explanation of them, he is to begin laughing,
shall not we rather laugh him to scorn? “For since both have
their origin from one brain, since the two members are near
neighbors to each other, why can they not do the same work?”
Now we shall not be able to state the cause nor the method of the
unspeakable and curious operation; and should we make the attempt,
we should be laughed to scorn. Wherefore, leaving this unto
God’s power and boundless wisdom, let us be silent.
Just so with
regard to the things of God; should we desire to explain them by
the wisdom which is from without, great derision will ensue, not
from their infirmity, but from the folly of men. For the great
things of all no language can explain.
[3.] Now observe: when I say, “He was
crucified;” the Greek saith, “And how can this be reasonable?
Himself He helped not when undergoing crucifixion and sore trial at
the moment of the Cross: how then after these things did He rise
again and help others? For if He had been able, before death was
the proper time.” (For this the Jews actually said.) (St.
Matt. xxvii. 41, 42
.) “But He who helped not
Himself, how helped he others? There is no reason in it,” saith
he. True, O man, for indeed it is above reason; and unspeakable
is the power of the Cross. For that being actually in the midst
of horrors, He should have shewn Himself above all horrors; and
being in the enemy’s hold should have overcome; this cometh of
Infinite Power. For as in the case of the Three Children, their
not entering the furnace would not have been so astonishing, as
that having entered in they trampled upon the fire;—and in the
case of Jonah, it was a greater thing by far, after he had been
swallowed by the fish, to suffer no harm from the monster, than if
he had not been swallowed at all;—so also in regard of Christ;
His not dying would not have been so inconceivable, as that having
died He should loose the bands of death. Say not then, “why did
He not help Himself on the Cross?” for He was hastening on to
close conflict with death himself. (See Hooker, E. P. v. 48.
9.) He descended not from the Cross, not because He could not,
but because He would not. For Him Whom the tyranny of death
restrained not, how could the nails of the Cross restrain?
[4.] But these things, though known to us, are not
so as yet to the unbelievers. Wherefore he said that “the word
of the Cross is to them that perish foolishness; but to us who are
saved it is the power of God. For it is written, I will destroy
the wisdom of the wise, and the prudence of the prudent will I
reject.” Nothing from himself which might give offence, does he
advance up to this point; but first he comes to the testimony of
the Scripture, and then furnished with boldness from thence, adopts
more vehement words, and saith,
Ver. 20, 21
. “Hath not God made
foolish the wisdom of this world? Where is the wise? Where the
Scribe? Where the disputer of this world? Hath not God made
foolish the wisdom of this world? For seeing that in the wisdom
of God the world through its wisdom knew God, it was God’s good
pleasure through the foolishness of the preaching to save them that
believe.” Having said, “It is written, I will destroy the
wisdom of the wise,” He subjoins demonstration from facts,
saying, “Where is the wise? where the Scribe?” at the same time
glancing at both Gentiles and Jews. For what sort of philosopher,
which among those who have studied logic, which of those knowing in
Jewish matters, hath saved us and made known the truth? Not
one. It was the fisherman’s work, the whole of it.
Having then drawn the conclusion which he had in
view, and brought down their pride, and said, “Hath not God made
foolish the wisdom of this world?” he states also the reason why
these things were so done. “For seeing that in the wisdom of
God,” saith he, “the world through its wisdom knew not God,”
the Cross appeared. Now what means, “in the wisdom of God?”
The wisdom apparent in those works whereby it was His will to make
Himself known. For to this end did he frame them, and frame them
such as they are, that by a sort of proportion, (
ἀναλόγως
)
from the things which are seen admiration of the Maker might be
learned. Is the heaven great, and the earth boundless? Wonder
then at Him who made them. For this heaven, great as it is, not
only was made by Him, but made with ease; and that boundless earth,
too, was brought into being even as if it had been nothing.
Wherefore of the former He saith, (
Ps. cii. 25
.
τῶν χειρῶν
. LXX.) “The works of Thy fingers are
the heavens,” and concerning the earth, (
Is. xl. 23
. LXX.) “Who hath made the
earth as it were nothing.” Since then by this wisdom the world
was unwilling to discover God, He employed what seemed to be
foolishness, i.e. the Gospel, to persuade men; not by reasoning,
but by faith. It remains that where God’s wisdom is, there is
no longer need of man’s. For before, to infer that He who made
the world such and so great, must in all reason be a God possessed
of a certain uncontrollable, unspeakable power; and by these means
to apprehend Him;—this was the part of human wisdom. But now we
need no more reasonings, but faith alone. For to believe on Him
that was crucified and buried, and to be fully persuaded that this
Person Himself both rose again and sat down on high; this needeth
not wisdom, nor reasonings, but faith. For the Apostles
themselves came in not by wisdom, but by faith, and surpassed the
heathen wise men in wisdom and loftiness, and that so much the
more, as to raise disputings is less than to receive by faith the
things of God. For this transcends all human understanding.
But how did He “destroy wisdom?” Being made
known to us by Paul and others like him, He shewed it to be
unprofitable. For towards
receiving the evangelical proclamation, neither
is the wise profited at all by wisdom, nor the unlearned injured at
all by ignorance. But if one may speak somewhat even wonderful,
ignorance rather than wisdom is a condition suitable for that
impression, and more easily dealt with. For the shepherd and the
rustic will more quickly receive this, once for all both repressing
all doubting thoughts and delivering himself to the Lord. In this
way then He destroyed wisdom. For since she first cast herself
down, she is ever after useful for nothing. Thus when she ought
to have displayed her proper powers, and by the works to have seen
the Lord, she would not. Wherefore though she were now willing to
introduce herself, she is not able. For the matter is not of that
kind; this way of knowing God being far greater than the other.
You see then, faith and simplicity are needed, and this we should
seek every where, and prefer it before the wisdom which is from
without. For “God,” saith he, “hath made wisdom
foolish.”
But what is, “He hath made foolish?” He hath
shewn it foolish in regard of receiving the faith. For since they
prided themselves on it, He lost no time in exposing it. For what
sort of wisdom is it, when it cannot discover the chief of things
that are good? He caused her therefore to appear foolish, after
she had first convicted herself. For if when discoveries might
have been made by reasoning, she proved nothing, now when things
proceed on a larger scale, how will she be able to accomplish
aught? now when there is need of faith alone, and not of
acuteness? You see then, God hath shewn her to be foolish.
It was His good pleasure, too, by the foolishness of
the Gospel to save; foolishness, I say, not real, but appearing to
be such. For that which is more wonderful yet is His having
prevailed by bringing in, not another such wisdom more excellent
than the first, but what seemed to be foolishness. He cast out
Plato for example, not by means of another philosopher of more
skill, but by an unlearned fisherman. For thus the defeat became
greater, and the victory more splendid.
[5.]
Ver. 22–24
. Next, to shew the power of
the Cross, he saith, “For Jews ask for signs and Greeks seek
after wisdom: but we preach Christ crucified, unto Jews a
stumbling-block, and unto Greeks foolishness; but unto them that
are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the Power of God, and the
Wisdom of God.”
Vast is the import of the things here spoken! For
he means to say how by contraries God hath overcome, and how the
Gospel is not of man. What he saith is something of this sort.
When, saith he, we say unto the Jews, Believe; they answer, Raise
the dead, Heal the demoniacs, Shew unto us signs. But instead
thereof what say we? That He was crucified, and died, who is
preached. And this is enough, not only to fail in drawing over
the unwilling, but even to drive away those even who are willing.
Nevertheless, it drives not away, but attracts and holds fast and
overcomes.
Again; the Greeks demand of us a rhetorical style,
and the acuteness of sophistry. But preach we to these also the
Cross: and that which, in the case of the Jews seemed to be
weakness, this in the case of the Greeks is foolishness.
Wherefore, when we not only fail in producing what they demand, but
also produce the very opposites of their demand; (for the Cross has
not merely no appearance of being a sign sought out by reasoning,
but even the very annihilation of a sign;—is not merely deemed no
proof of power, but a conviction of weakness;—not merely no
display of wisdom, but a suggestion of foolishness;)—when
therefore they who seek for signs and wisdom not only receive not
the things which they ask, but even hear the contrary to what they
desire, and then by means of contraries are persuaded;—how is not
the power of Him that is preached unspeakable? As if to some one
tempest-tost and longing for a haven, you were to shew not a haven
but another wilder portion of the sea, and so could make him follow
with thankfulness? Or as if a physician could attract to himself
the man that was wounded and in need of remedies, by promising to
cure him not with drugs, but with burning of him again! For this
is a result of great power indeed. So also the Apostles
prevailed, not simply without a sign, but even by a thing which
seemed contrary to all the known signs. Which thing also Christ
did in the case of the blind man. For when He would heal him, He
took away the blindness by a thing that increased it: i.e. He put
on clay. (St.
John ix.
6
.) As then by means of
clay He healed the blind man, so also by means of the Cross He
brought the world to Himself. That certainly was adding an
offence, not taking an offence away. So did He also in creation,
working out things by their contraries. With sand, for instance,
He walled in the sea, having made the weak a bridle to the
strong. He placed the earth upon water, having taken order that
the heavy and the dense should be borne on the soft and fluid. By
means of the prophets again with a small piece of wood He raised up
iron from the bottom. (
2
Kings vi. 5-7
.) In like
manner also with the Cross He hath drawn the world to Himself.
For as the water beareth up the earth, so also the Cross beareth up
the world. You see now, it is proof of great power and wisdom, to
convince by means of the things which tell
directly against us. Thus the Cross seems to be
matter of offence; and yet far from offending, it even
attracts.
[6.]
Ver. 25
. All these things,
therefore, Paul bearing in mind, and being struck with
astonishment, said that “the foolishness of God is wiser than
men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men;” in relation
to the Cross, speaking of a folly and weakness, not real but
apparent. For he is answering with respect unto the other
party’s opinion. For that which philosophers were not able by
means of reasoning to accomplish, this, what seemed to be
foolishness did excellently well. Which then is the wiser, he
that persuadeth the many, or he that persuadeth few, or rather no
one? He who persuadeth concerning the greatest points, or about
matters which are nothing? (
μηδὲν όντων
Reg.
ms.
μη δεόντων
Bened.) What great labors did Plato endure, and his followers,
discoursing to us about a line, and an angle, and a point, and
about numbers even and odd, and equal unto one another and unequal,
and such-like spiderwebs; (for indeed those webs are not more
useless to man’s life than were these subjects;) and without
doing good to any one great or small by their means, so he made an
end of his life. How greatly did he labor, endeavoring to show
that the soul was immortal! and even as he came he went away,
having spoken nothing with certainty, nor persuaded any hearer.
But the Cross wrought persuasion by means of unlearned men; yea it
persuaded even the whole world: and not about common things, but
in discourse of God, and the godliness which is according to truth,
and the evangelical way of life, and the judgment of the things to
come. And of all men it made philosophers: the very rustics,
the utterly unlearned. Behold how “the foolishness of God is
wiser than men,” and “the weakness stronger?” How
“stronger?” Because it overran the whole world, and took all
by main force, and while men were endeavoring by ten thousands to
extinguish the name of the Crucified, the contrary came to pass:
that flourished and increased more and more, but they perished and
wasted away; and the living at war with the dead, had no power.
So that when the Greek calls me foolish, he shows himself above
measure foolish: since I who am esteemed by him a fool, evidently
appear wiser than the wise. When he calls me weak, then he shows
himself to be weaker. For the noble things which publicans and
fishermen were able to effect by the grace of God, these,
philosophers, and rhetoricians, and tyrants, and in short the whole
world, running ten thousand ways here and there, could not even
form a notion of. For what did not the Cross introduce? The
doctrine concerning the Immortality of the Soul; that concerning
the Resurrection of the Body; that concerning the contempt of
things present; that concerning the desire of things future. Yea,
angels it hath made of men, and all, every where, practice
self-denial, (
φιλοσοφοῦσι
) and
show forth all kinds of fortitude.
[7.] But among them also, it will be said, many
have been found contemners of death. Tell me who? was it he who
drank the hemlock? But if thou wilt, I can bring forward ten
thousand such from within the Church. For had it been lawful when
prosecution befel them to drink hemlock and depart, all had become
more famous than he. And besides, he drank when he was not at
liberty to drink or not to drink; but willing or against his will
he must have undergone it: no effect surely of fortitude, but of
necessity, and nothing more. For even robbers and man-slayers,
having fallen under the condemnation of their judges, have suffered
things more grievous. But with us it is all quite the contrary.
For not against their will did the martyrs endure, but of their
will, and being at liberty not to suffer; shewing forth fortitude
harder than all adamant. This then you see is no great wonder,
that he whom I was mentioning drank hemlock; it being no longer in
his power not to drink, and also when he had arrived at a very
great age. For when he despised life he stated himself to be
seventy years old; if this can be called despising. For I for my
part could not affirm it: nor, what is more, can anyone else.
But show me some one enduring firm in torments for godliness’
sake, as I shew thee ten thousand every where in the world. Who,
while his nails were tearing out, nobly endured? Who, while his
body joints were wrenching (
ἀνασκαπτομένων
) asunder? Who, while his body
was cut in pieces, (
τοῦ σώματος κατὰ μέρος πορθουμένου
;
τῆς
κεφαλῆς
;)
member by member? or his head? Who, while his bones were forced
out by levers? (
ἀναμοχλευομένων
) Who, while placed
without intermission upon frying-pans? Who, when thrown into a
caldron? Show me these instances. For to die by hemlock is all
as one with a man’s continuing in a state of sleep. Nay even
sweeter than sleep is this sort of death, if report say true. But
if certain [of them] did endure torments, yet of these, too, the
praise is gone to nothing. For on some disgraceful occasion they
perished; some for revealing mysteries; some for aspiring to
dominion; others detected in the foulest crimes; others again
rashly, and fruitlessly, and foolishly, there being no reason for
it, made away with themselves. But not so with us. Wherefore of
the deeds of those nothing is said; but these flourish and daily
increase. Which Paul having
in mind said, “The weakness of God is stronger
than all men.”
[8.] For that the Gospel is divine, even from
hence is evident; namely, whence could it have occurred to twelve
ignorant men to attempt such great things? who sojourned in
marshes, in rivers, in deserts; who never at any time perhaps had
entered into a city nor into a forum;—whence did it occur, to set
themselves in array against the whole world? For that they were
timid and unmanly, he shews who wrote of them, not apologizing, nor
enduring to throw their failings into the shade: which indeed of
itself is a very great token of the truth. What then doth he say
about them? That when Christ was apprehended, after ten thousand
wonders, they fled; and he who remained, being the leader of the
rest, denied. Whence was it then that they who when Christ was
alive endured not the attack of the Jews; now that He was dead and
buried, and as ye say, had not risen again, nor had any talk with
them, nor infused courage into them—whence did they set
themselves in array against so great a world? Would they not have
said among themselves, “what meaneth this? Himself He was not
able to save, and will He protect us? Himself He defended not
when alive, and will He stretch out the hand unto us now that he is
dead? Himself, when alive, subdued not even one nation; and are
we to convince the whole world by uttering His Name?” How, I
ask, could all this be reasonable, I will not say, as something to
be done, but even as something to be imagined? From whence it is
plain that had they not seen Him after He was risen, and received
most ample proof of his power, they would not have ventured so
great a cast.
[9.] For suppose they had possessed friends
innumerable; would they not presently have made them all enemies,
disturbing ancient customs, and removing their father’s
landmarks? (
ὅρια
Ms
. Reg.
ἔθη
Ben.) But as it was, they had them
for enemies, all, both their own countrymen and foreigners. For
although they had been recommended to veneration by everything
external, would not all men have abhorred them, introducing a new
polity? But now they were even destitute of everything; and it
was likely that even on that account all would hate and scorn them
at once. For whom will you name? The Jews? Nay, they had
against them an inexpressible hatred on account of the things which
had been done unto the Master. The Greeks then? Why, first of
all, these had rejected one not inferior to them; and no man knew
this so well as the Greeks. For Plato, who wished to strike out a
new form of government, or rather a part of government; and that
not by changing the customs relating to the gods, but merely by
substituting one line of conduct for another; was cast out of
Sicily, and went near to lose his life.
21
This however did not ensue: so
that he lost his liberty alone. And had not a certain Barbarian
been more gentle than the tyrant of Sicily, nothing could have
rescued the philosopher from slavery throughout life in a foreign
land. And yet it is not all one to innovate in affairs of the
kingdom, and in matters of religious worship. For the latter more
than any thing else causes disturbance and troubles men. For to
say, “let such and such an one marry such a woman, and let the
guardians
22
[of the
commonwealth] exercise their guardianship so and so,” is not
enough to cause any great disturbance: and especially when all
this is lodged in a book, and no great anxiety on the part of the
legislator to carry the proposals into practice. On the other
hand, to say, “they be no gods which men worship, but demons; He
who was crucified is God;” ye well know how great wrath it
kindled, how severely men must have paid for it, what a flame of
war it fanned.
For Protagoras, who was one of them, having
dared to say, “I know of no gods,” not going round the world
and proclaiming it, but in a single city, was in the most imminent
peril of his life
23
. And
Diagoras
24
the Milesian
25
, and Theodorus, who was called
Atheist,
26
although they
had friends, and that influence which comes from eloquence, and
were held in admiration because of their philosophy; yet
nevertheless none of these profited them. And
the great Socrates, too, he who
surpassed in philosophy all among them, for this reason drank
hemlock, because in his discourses concerning the gods he was
suspected of moving things a little aside. Now if the suspicion
alone of innovation brought so great danger on philosophers and
wise men, and on those who had attained boundless popularity; and
if they were not only unable to do what they wished, but were
themselves also driven from life and county; how canst thou choose
but be in admiration and astonishment, when thou seest that the
fisherman hath produced such an effect upon the world, and
accomplished his purposes; hath overcome all both Barbarians and
Greeks.
[10.] But they did not, you will say, introduce
strange gods as the others did. Well, and in that you are naming
the very point most to be wondered at; that the innovation is
twofold, both to pull down those which are, and to announce the
Crucified. For from whence came it into their minds to proclaim
such things? whence, to be confident about their event? Whom of
those before them could they perceive to have prospered in any such
attempt? Were not all men worshipping demons? Were not all used
to make gods of the elements? Was not the difference [but] in the
mode of impiety? But nevertheless they attacked all, and
overthrew all, and overran in a short time the whole world, like a
sort of winged beings; making no account of dangers, of deaths, of
the difficulty of the thing, of their own fewness, of the multitude
of the opponents, of the authority, the power, the wisdom of those
at war with them. For they had an ally greater than all these,
the power of Him that had been crucified and was risen again. It
would not have been so wondrous, had they chosen to wage war with
the world in the literal sense, (
πόλεμον αἰσθητόν
) as this which in fact has taken place. For
according to the law of battle they might have stood over against
the enemies, and occupying some adverse ground, have arrayed
themselves accordingly to meet their foes, and have taken their
time for attack and close conflict. But in this case it is not
so. For they had no camp of their own, but were mingled with
their enemies, and thus overcame them. Even in the midst of their
enemies as they went about, they eluded their grasp, (
λαβὰς
Reg.
βλαβὰς
Bened.) and became superior, and
achieved a splendid victory; a victory which fulfils the prophecy
that saith, “Even in the midst of thine enemies thou shalt have
dominion.” (
Ps. cx.
2
.) For this it was,
which was full of all astonishment, that their enemies having them
in their power, and casting them into prison and chains not only
did not vanquish them, but themselves also eventually had to bow
down to them: the scourgers to the scourged, the binders in
chains to those who were bound, the persecutors to the fugitives.
All these things then we could say unto the Greeks, yea much more
than these; for the truth has enough and greatly to spare. (
πολλή τῆς ἀληθείας ἡ περιουσία
.) And if ye will follow
the argument, we will teach you the whole method of fighting
against them. In the meanwhile let us here hold fast two heads;
How did the weak overcome the strong? and, From whence came it into
their thoughts, being such as they were, to form such plans, unless
they enjoyed Divine aid?
[11.] So far then as to what we have to say. But
let us shew forth by our actions all excellencies of conduct, and
kindle abundantly the fire of virtue. For “ye are lights,”
saith he, “shining in the midst of the world.” (
Phil.
ii. 15
.) And unto each
of us God hath committed a greater function than He hath to the
sun: greater than heaven, and earth, and sea; by so much greater,
as spiritual things be more excellent than things sensible. When
then we look unto the solar orb, and admire the beauty, and the
body and the brightness of the luminary, let us consider again that
greater and better is the light which is in us, as indeed the
darkness also is more dreadful unless we take heed. And in fact a
deep night oppresses the whole world. This is what we have to
dispel and dissolve. It is night not among heretics and among
Greeks only, but also in the multitude on our side, in respect of
doctrines and of life. For many entirely disbelieve the
resurrection; many fortify themselves with their horoscope; (
γὲνεσιν ἑαυτοῖς
ἐπιτειχίζουσι
) many adhere to superstitious
observances, and to omens, and auguries, and presages. And some
likewise employ amulets and charms. But to these also we will
speak afterwards, when we have finished what we have to say to the
Greeks.
In the meanwhile hold fast the things which have
been said, and be ye fellow-helpers with me in the battle; by your
way of life attracting them to us and changing them. For, as I am
always saying, He that teaches high morality (
περὶ φιλοσοφίας
) ought first to teach it in his own person, and
be such as his hearers cannot do without. Let us therefore become
such, and make the Greeks feel kindly towards us. And this will
come to pass if we make up our minds not only not to do ill, but
also to suffer ill. Do we not see when little children being
borne in their father’s arms give him that carries them blows on
the cheek, how sweetly the father lets the boy have his fill of
wrath, and when he sees that he has spent his passion, how his
countenance brightens up? In like manner let us also act; and as
fathers with children, so let us discourse with the Greeks.
For all the Greeks are children.
And this, some of their own writers have said, that “that people
are children always, and no Greek is an old man.” Now children
cannot bear to take thought for any thing useful; so also the
Greeks would be for ever at play; and they lie on the ground,
grovelling in posture and in affections. Moreover, children
oftentimes, when we are discoursing about important things, give no
heed to anything that is said, but will even be laughing all the
time: such also are the Greeks. When we discourse of the
Kingdom, they laugh. And as spittle dropping in abundance from an
infant’s mouth, which oftentimes spoils its meat and drink, such
also are the words flowing from the mouth of the Greeks, vain and
unclean. Even if thou art giving children their necessary food,
they keep on vexing those who furnish it with evil speech, and we
must bear with them all the while. (
διαβαστάζεσθαι
). Again, children, when they
see a robber entering and taking away the furniture, far from
resisting, even smile on the designing fellow; but shouldest thou
take away the little basket or the rattle (
σεῖστρα
) or any other of their playthings, they
take it to heart and fret, tear themselves, and stamp on the floor;
just so do the Greeks also: when they behold the devil pilfering
all their patrimony, and even the things which support their life,
they laugh, and run to him as to a friend: but should any one
take away any possession, be it wealth or any childish thing
whatsoever of that kind, they cry, they tear themselves. And as
children expose their limbs unconsciously and blush not for shame;
so the Greeks, wallowing in whoredoms and adulteries, and laying
bare the laws of nature, and introducing unlawful intercourses, are
not abashed.
Ye have given me vehement applause and
acclamation
27
, but with all
your applause have a care lest you be among those of whom these
things are said. Wherefore I beseech you all to become men:
since, so long as we are children, how shall we teach them
manliness? How shall we restrain them from childish folly? Let
us, therefore, become men; that we may arrive at the measure of the
stature which hath been marked out for us by Christ, and may obtain
the good things to come: through the grace and loving-kindness,
etc. etc.
21
Plutarch, in
Dion
. t. v. p. 162. ed. Bryan. “Plato
having been introduced to Dionysius, they discoursed in general
about human virtue; when Plato maintained that any thing might be
credible rather than for tyrants to be truly brave. Then changing
the subject, he argued concerning Justice, that the life of the
just is blessed, of the unjust miserable. The tyrant was not well
pleased with the discourse, understanding it as a reproof: and he
was vexed with the bystanders, who mightily approved the man, and
were taken with his remarks. At last, in anger and bitterness, he
asked him what was his object in coming to Sicily. He said, To
look for a good man. By heaven, he replied, it is clear you have
not found him. Now Dion’s friends thought this had been the end
of his anger, and as Plato was anxious to go, they provided him
with a passage in a galley, in which Pollis the Spartan was sailing
to Greece. But Dionysius secretly besought Pollis, if possible,
to kill him at sea, but at any rate to sell him for a slave, for
that he would never be the worse for it, but just as happy, in that
Justice of his, though he became a slave. Upon which it is said
that Pollis took Plato to Ægina and sold him there, the Æginetæ
being at war with Athens, and having made a decree, that any
Athenian coming there should be sold.”
22
φύλακες
, Plato’s word in the
Republic
for citizens.
23
Cic.
de Nat. Deor
. i. 23. Protagoras of Abdera, a
distinguished Sophist of his time, having opened a certain treatise
with these words, “Concerning the Gods, I cannot speak of them
either as being or as not being;” the Athenians banished him from
Athens and Attica, and burned his books in the Assembly. He
flourished about B.C. 444. Clinton,
Fasti Hellenici
, i.
53.
24
B.C. 466. Clinton, F. H. i. 39. The Scholiast on Aristophanes
calls him “a writer of songs, called an Atheist; a bringer in of
strange gods. Whereupon the Athenians condemned him, voting a
talent of silver to whoever should kill him, and two talents to any
one who should bring him alive: and prevailed on the
Peloponnesians to join with them.” Of Theodorus, Cicero says
that he was threatened with death by Lysimachus, but he does not
say that it was for his “atheism:” this must have been
between B.C. 306–281. Clinton, F.H. i. 174, 184.
25
ὁ Μήλιος
. Schol. in Aristoph.
Ran
.
323.
26
Cic.
de. N. D.
i. 23;
Tusc. Disp
. i.
43.
27
This custom is referred to by St. Chrysostom in many places
as also by St. Augustin and others: the earliest mention of it
appears to be the censure passed on Paul of Samosata in the synod
of Antioch, A.D. 272, for demanding and encouraging such
applause. Vid. Euseb. E. H. vii. 30. St. Chrysostom in his 30th
Hom. on the Acts says, “When I am applauded in my speaking, for
the moment I feel as an infirm human being, (for why should not one
confess the truth?).…but when I am come home, and consider that
those who have been applauding are no wise profited, but rather by
their applause and acclamation have lost what good they might have
attained, I……feel as if I had said all to no purpose..…And
often I have thought of making a law to forbid all signs of
applause, and to enforce listening in silence and with becoming
order……Yea, if you please, let us even now pass such a
law……Why do you applaud at the very moment that I am making a
rule to check that practice? &c.” iv. 784. Ed. Savil. Vid.
Bingham
Antiquit
. xiv. 4. 27; Suicer, v.
κρότος
.