{"author":null,"canonical_references":[],"database_sha256":"8cfbe7284c6936871d57c02dc6aa63ebbdfd4722422d539dd9f716e46e91112e","date_end":null,"date_start":null,"edition_year":null,"id":"sermonindex-ecf-462","native_reference":{"book_number":690,"chapter_from":1,"chapter_to":1,"system":"MyBible module coordinates (mapping unverified)","verse_from":1,"verse_to":1},"public_import_allowed":false,"record_kind":"verse-keyed-module-record","review_required":["English edition and exact text","author/work attribution","dating","verse mapping and citation kind","reuse and attribution","split author quotations and deduplicate"],"review_status":"unreviewed","source_html":"<p><b>Augustine of Hippo</b>: Who is he that with hands doth handle the Word, except because \"The Word was made flesh, and dwelt in us\"? Now this Word which was made flesh that it might be handled, began to be flesh, of the Virgin Mary: but not then began the Word, for the Apostle saith, \"That which was from the beginning.\" See whether his epistle does not bear witness to his gospel, where ye lately heard, \"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God.\" Perchance, \"Concerning the word of life\" one may take as a sort of expression concerning Christ, not the very body of Christ which was handled with hands. See what follows: \"And the Life was manifested.\" Christ therefore is \"the word of life.\" And whereby manifested? For it was \"from the beginning,\" only not manifested to men: but it was manifested to angels, who saw it and fed on it as their bread. But what saith the Scripture? \"Man did eat angels' bread.\" Well then \"the Life was manifested\" in the flesh; because it exhibited in manifestation, that that which can be seen by the heart only, should be seen by the eyes also, that it might heal the hearts. For only by the heart is the Word seen: but the flesh is seen by the bodily eyes also. We had wherewith to see the flesh, but had not wherewith to see the Word: \"the Word was made flesh,\" which we might see, that so that in us might be healed wherewith we might see the Word.<br/><i>— Ten Homilies on 1 John 1</i></p><p><b>Bede</b>: The disciples were with Jesus from the beginning, and so they could preach what they had seen and heard in his presence without any ambiguity.<br/><i>— Homilies on the Gospels 2.16</i></p><p><b>Bede</b>: That which we have seen and our hands have touched concerning the Word of life. For not only did they see the Lord with their physical eyes like the others, but they also perceived His divine power with their spiritual eyes. Especially those who saw Him transfigured on the mount, among whom was John himself. And when he says, \"and our hands have touched concerning the Word of life,\" he refutes the madness of the Manichaeans, who deny that the Lord assumed true flesh; the apostles could not doubt the truth of this flesh, as they attested not only by seeing but also by touching; especially John himself who, accustomed to recline on His bosom at supper, touched His limbs more freely the closer he was. And even after His resurrection from the dead, their hands touched concerning the Word of life, as they understood without any doubt that He had taken on true flesh, though now incorruptible, hearing Him say: \"Touch and see, because a spirit does not have flesh and bones, as you see that I have\" (Luke 24). It is well said, \"and our hands have touched concerning the Word of life,\" because as they proved the truth of His resurrected flesh by touching with their hands, they more surely knew Him to be the Word of life, that is, the true God. Hence Thomas, who was specially ordered to touch Him, immediately upon touching the flesh, confessed Him to be God, saying, \"My Lord and my God\" (John 20).<br/><i>— Commentary on the Catholic Epistles</i></p><p><b>Caius Presbyter of Rome</b>: And hence, although different points are taught us in the several books of the Gospels, there is no difference as regards the faith of believers, inasmuch as in all of them all things are related under one imperial Spirit, which concern the Lord's nativity, His passion, His resurrection, His conversation with His disciples, and His twofold advent,-the first in the humiliation of rejection, which is now past, and the second in the glory of royal power, which is yet in the future. What marvel is it, then, that John brings forward these several things so constantly in his epistles also, saying in his own person, \"What we have seen with our eyes, and heard with our ears, and our hands have handled, that have we written.\" For thus he professes himself to be not only the eye-witness, but also the hearer; and besides that, the historian of all the wondrous facts concerning the Lord in their order.<br/><i>— Fragments of Caius, Canon Muratorianus</i></p><p><b>Clement of Alexandria ((as quoted by Cassiodorus))</b>: \"That which was from the beginning; which we have seen with our eyes; which we have heard.\"</p><p>Following the Gospel according to John, and in accordance with it, this Epistle also contains the spiritual principle.</p><p>What therefore he says, \"from the beginning,\" the Presbyter explained to this effect, that the beginning of generation is not separated from the beginning of the Creator. For when he says, \"That which was from the beginning,\" he touches upon the generation without beginning of the Son, who is co-existent with the Father. There was; then, a Word importing an unbeginning eternity; as also the Word itself, that is, the Son of God, who being, by equality of substance, one with the Father, is eternal and uncreate. That He was always the Word, is signified by saying, \"In the beginning was the Word.\" But by the expression, \"we have seen with our eyes,\" he signifies the Lord's presence in the flesh, \"and our hands have handled,\" he says, \"of the Word of life.\" He means not only His flesh, but the virtues of the Son, like the sunbeam which penetrates to the lowest places,-this sunbeam coming in the flesh became palpable to the disciples. It is accordingly related in traditions, that John, touching the outward body itself, sent his hand deep down into it, and that the solidity of the flesh offered no obstacle, but gave way to the hand of the disciple.</p><p>\"And our hands have handled of the Word of life; \"that is, He who came in the flesh became capable of being touched.<br/><i>— From the Latin Translation of Cassiodorus</i></p><p><b>Didymus the Blind</b>: Many think that these words apply to the postresurrection appearances of Jesus and say that John is speaking of himself and the other disciples who first of all heard that the Lord had risen and afterwards saw him with their own eyes, to the point where they touched his feet, his hands and his side and felt the imprint of the nails. For even if Thomas was the only one who actually made physical contact with him, he was representative of the others, for the Savior told them all to touch him and see for themselves. But others take these words in a deeper sense, noting that they do not simply speak about touching but also about handling the \"word of life which was from the beginning.\" Who can this refer to, other than to the one who said: \"I am that I am\"? Another interpretation is that we have now seen openly with our own eyes the one who was in the beginning, of whom the law and the prophets spoke, saying that he would come. He has indeed come and was seen in the flesh, and after much handling of the scriptural texts which bear witness to him, this is what we believe about the Word of life.<br/><i>— COMMENTARY ON 1 JOHN</i></p><p><b>Dionysius of Alexandria</b>: But the writer of the Revelation puts himself forward at once in the very beginning, for he says: \"The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which He gave to him to show to His servants quickly; and He sent and signified it by His angel to His servant John, who bare record of the Word of God, and of his testimony, and of all things that he saw.\" And then he writes also an epistle, in which he says: \"John to the seven churches which are in Asia, grace be unto you, and peace.\" The evangelist, on the other hand, has not prefixed his name even to the catholic epistle; but without any circumlocution, he has commenced at once with the mystery of the divine revelation itself in these terms: \"That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes.\" And on the ground of such a revelation as that the Lord pronounced Peter blessed, when He said: \"Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona; for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.\"<br/><i>— Containing Various Sections of the Works</i></p><p><b>Dionysius of Alexandria</b>: For the Gospel and the Epistle agree with each other, and both commence in the same way. For the one opens thus, \"In the beginning was the Word;\" while the other opens thus, \"That which was from the beginning.\" The one says: \"And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us; and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the Only-begotten of the Father.\" The other says the same things, with a slight alteration: \"That which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life: and the life was manifested.\" For these things are introduced by way of prelude, and in opposition, as he has shown in the subsequent parts, to those who deny that the Lord is come in the flesh. For which reason he has also been careful to add these words: \"And that which we have seen we testify, and show unto you that eternal life which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us: that which we have seen and heard declare we unto you.\"<br/><i>— Containing Various Sections of the Works</i></p><p><b>Ishodad of Merv</b>: About this epistle many have erred, supposing that it was written by the apostle John, yet if they had investigated the matter they would have seen that the thought, shape and authority of this letter are greatly inferior to the sound words of the Evangelist.<br/><i>— COMMENTARIES</i></p><p><b>Oecumenius</b>: This is directed towards Jews and Greeks, who also slander our mystery as being more recent. It shows therefore that it is also ancient, because from the beginning, that is, at the same time as the conceived [ἐννοηθείσῃ] beginning. Or that it is not only by law, but also of the visible creation itself, that this is more inspiring: for the former had a beginning, but this was even before that beginning. Therefore, when the mysteries of the Greeks arose yesterday or the day before, what can anyone say? Those things that are praised in the self-indulgence of the mind have received a substance that barely withstands late, when filthiness was already prevalent among men, of which both discipline and remembrance as we decline from the better to our confusion of night.<br/>Therefore, demonstrating the magnificence of our mystery from its very antiquity, John added that this is also life, and life measured not by time-based space, but having persistence and always existing with the Father, saying things that are in accordance with what was said in his Gospel. For there it is: \"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.\" (Jn. 1:1) However, this \"was\" does not designate a time-based subsistence, but is the essence of a lasting thing, and the principle, basis, and foundation of all that have come to be, without which not even these could exist. Each of them, as they are born, is said to be something determined, for example, to be an angel, to be the sun, to be the sky, and all other things. But the Son, being alone, comes to participate in all things for existence. Therefore, Paul says: \"In Him we live and move and have our being.\" (Acts 18:28)<br/>This to have heard according to the introductory doctrine, where one first receives, comes to live itself, not corporally, but perfectly knowing, after long exercise and consideration: which is also called contact with the Word of life, which said: \"I am the life.\" (Jn. 14:6) However, this can also be said about the Word that was in the beginning: namely, that we have heard it would come through the law and the prophets. Therefore, we have seen and touched this one coming in the flesh: \"for no one has ever seen God visibly.\" (Jn. 1:18, 1 Jn. 4:12) Nor did we hastily decide from the appearance, but after a long examination, that is, the mutual questioning of the law and prophetic testimonies concerning Him, we believed in the Word appearing in the flesh. But, what we have seen, that is, we have admired with our eyes. For Θεασθαι \"to have looked upon\" is to gaze with wonder and astonishment. Therefore, we have not perceived or touched what was there, for who can declare this generation? (Isa. 53:8) But what has happened: either through interactions of understanding, as has already been said, or also through the senses, as Thomas after the resurrection. (Jn. 20:26) For he was one and inseparable, the same both visible and invisible, both seized and unable to be comprehended, both touched and unable to be touched, speaking in a human manner and performing miracles as God.<br/>However, we say this because of the supreme union of the Word with the flesh. The series of words is this: 1:1-2c That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have touched, of the Word of Life; for the life was revealed, and we have seen it, and bear witness: And I declare to you the eternal life which was with the Father and was revealed to us: therefore, what we have seen, we also declare to you.<br/>Here therefore the discourse responds where it is said. What therefore we have seen. However, the discourse was not reported as we have: first indeed because of the use of abbreviated words, then also despising the trivialities of the Greeks, and showing that our salvation is not in words, but in works, and making us more attentive in these matters, lest we should immediately find what is proposed there and become negligent. Furthermore, dealing with divine matters, he wished to conceal in obscurity those things which were more uplifting than could be accepted by profane ears, nor should they be safely spread to them. For it is not the act of a sensible man, nor of a discerning consideration, to throw what is holy to dogs, and to cast pearls before swine. (Matt. 7:6)<br/><i>— Commentary on 1 John</i></p><p><b>Origen of Alexandria</b>: Concerning this more gracious touch John speaks: \"...and our hands have handled, concerning the Word of life.\"<br/><i>— DIALOGUE WITH HERACLIDES</i></p><p><b>Peter Chrysologus</b>: How can you believe that what always existed took a beginning later on?<br/><i>— SERMONS 57</i></p><p><b>Severus of Antioch</b>: Given that this same John also said, \"No one has ever seen God,\" how can he assure us that the living Word of life has been seen and touched? It is clear that it was in his incarnate and human form that he was visible and touchable. What was not true of him by nature became true of him in that way, for he is one and the same indivisible Word, both visible and invisible, and without diminishing in either respect he became touchable in both his divine-human nature. For he worked his miracles in his divinity and suffered for us in his humanity.<br/><i>— CATENA</i></p><p><b>Tertullian</b>: Read the testimony of John: \"That which we have seen, which we have heard, which we have looked upon with our eyes, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life.\" False, of course, and deceptive must have been that testimony, if the witness of our eyes, and ears, and hands be by nature a lie.<br/><i>— A Treatise on the Soul</i></p><p><b>Tertullian</b>: But the very same apostles testify that they had both seen and \"handled\" Christ. Now, if Christ is Himself both the Father and the Son, how can He be both the Visible and the Invisible? In order, however, to reconcile this diversity between the Visible and the Invisible, will not some one on the other side argue that the two statements are quite correct: that He was visible indeed in the flesh, but was invisible before His appearance in the flesh; so that He who as the Father was invisible before the flesh, is the same as the Son who was visible in the flesh? If, however, He is the same who was invisible before the incarnation, how comes it that He was actually seen in ancient times before (coming in) the flesh? And by parity of reasoning, if He is the same who was visible after (coming in) the flesh, how happens it that He is now declared to be invisible by the apostles? How, I repeat, can all this be, unless it be that He is one, who anciently was visible only in mystery and enigma, and became more clearly visible by His incarnation, even the Word who was also made flesh; whilst He is another whom no man has seen at any time, being none else than the Father, even Him to whom the Word belongs? Let us, in short, examine who it is whom the apostles saw.<br/><i>— Against Praxeas</i></p><p><b>Tertullian</b>: \"That,\" says John, \"which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life.\" Now the Word of life became flesh, and was heard, and was seen, and was handled, because He was flesh who, before He came in the flesh, was the \"Word in the beginning with God\" the Father, and not the Father with the Word.<br/><i>— Against Praxeas</i></p><p><b>Tertullian</b>: And this species of the divine patience indeed being, as it were, at a distance, may perhaps be esteemed as among \"things too high for us; \" but what is that which, in a certain way, has been grasped by hand among men openly on the earth? God suffers Himself to be conceived in a mother's womb, and awaits the time for birth; and, when born, bears the delay of growing up; and, when grown up, is not eager to be recognised, but is furthermore contumelious to Himself, and is baptized by His own servant; and repels with words alone the assaults of the tempter; while from being\" Lord\" He becomes\" Master,\" teaching man to escape death, having been trained to the exercise of the absolute forbearance of offended patience.<br/><i>— Of Patience</i></p><p><b>Tertullian</b>: To God their beauty, to God their youth (is dedicated). With Him they live; with Him they converse; Him they \"handle\" by day and by night; to the Lord they assign their prayers as dowries; from Him, as oft as they desire it, they receive His approbation as dotal gifts.<br/><i>— To His Wife Book I</i></p><p><b>Tertullian</b>: Did not certain of the disciples turn back from the Lord Himself, When they were offended? Yet the rest did not therefore think that they must turn away from following Him, but because they knew that He was the Word of Life, and was come from God, they continued in His company to the very last, after He had gently inquired of them whether they also would go away.<br/><i>— The Prescription Against Heretics</i></p>","source_html_sha256":"9246f1ffcde7a666b1afa65eadff5736ecd497fa4d3842fd1bc7528c07a7e809","source_module":"ECF","source_row_id":462,"source_url":"https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/ecf/","text_sha256":"c9c782a69284cf58d7efa20d486ee3a8d4d812209aaf03af771e8b4398a126df","translator":null,"work":null}