Homilies on Romans 16 part 2/3

but that these things may also become clearer, let us make our examination of each of the things said, knowing this: that what blessed Paul was eager for was to teach through all that was said, that God alone knows those who are worthy, but no man does, even though he seem to know very well; rather, in many cases the votes of this judgment go astray.

For He who understands the secret things of the mind knows clearly of Himself which are worthy of crowns and which of chastisement and punishment.

For this reason He has both punished many who among men were reckoned to be good, having convicted them, and has crowned those suspected of being wicked, having shown that they were not such;

casting His vote not from the opinion of the servants, but from His own exact and incorruptible judgment, and not waiting to see from the outcome of deeds who is base and who is not such.

But nevertheless, that we may not again make the discourse more obscure, let us go to the very words of the Apostle.

'And not only this, but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac.'

'For I might indeed,' he says, 'have mentioned also those born of Keturah, but I do not;

rather, so as to win the victory with abundance to spare, I bring into the midst those born of one father and one mother.'

For both were from Rebecca, and from Isaac the true son, the approved one, the one preferred above all, concerning whom He said;

'In Isaac shall your seed be called,' he who became the father of us all.

But if that man is our father, then those born of him also ought to be fathers.

Do you see how this comes to pass not in the case of Abraham only, but also in the case of the son himself, and that everywhere it is faith and virtue that shine forth and mark out the true kinship? For from this we learn that the children are called his children not only by the manner of their birth, but also because they are worthy of the virtue of the one who begot them.

For if it were only from the manner of birth, then Esau too ought to have enjoyed the same things as Jacob;

for he too was from a deadened womb, and his mother was barren.

But this was not the only thing in question; rather, the manner also, which is no small matter and contributes to our instruction for life.

And he does not say, 'Because the one was good and the other wicked, therefore he was preferred,' lest this should straightway meet him with objection;

What then? Are those from the Gentiles rather good than those from the circumcision? For even if the truth of the matter were thus, yet he does not yet lay it down;

for indeed it seemed to be somewhat burdensome;

but upon the knowledge of God

he cast the whole matter, with which no one would have dared to contend, not even if he were exceedingly mad.

'For the children being not yet born,' he says, 'neither having done any good thing, it was said unto her, that The elder shall serve the younger;'

and he shows that the nobility according to the flesh profits nothing, but that one must seek the virtue of the soul, which even before the works God knows.

'For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, it was said unto her, that The elder shall serve the younger.'

For this belongs to foreknowledge, even to choose them out from their very birth-pangs;

'in order that,' he says, 'the election of God might be made manifest, which was according to purpose and foreknowledge;'

for from the first day He both knew and proclaimed both the good man and the one who was not such.

Do not therefore say to me, he says, that you read the law and the prophets, and served so long a time.

For He who knows how to test the soul, He also knows who is worthy to be saved.

Yield therefore to the incomprehensibility of the election;

for He alone knows how to crown with exactness.

How many at least seemed to be better than Matthew according to the visible display of works? But He who knew the secret things, and was able to test the aptitude of the mind, recognized even the pearl lying in the mire, and passing by the others and marveling at the beauty of this one, chose him, and adding His own grace to the nobility of his purpose, declared him approved.

For if in these perishable arts, and in all other matters, those skilled in judging do not choose the things set before them from what the laymen decree, but from what they themselves clearly know, and often have dishonored what was approved among the laymen, while approving what had been dishonored;

and horse-tamers have often done this in the case of horses, and the judges of precious stones, and the craftsmen of the other arts too;

much more will the God who loves mankind, the boundless Wisdom, the One who alone knows all things clearly, not tolerate the surmising of men, but will cast His vote concerning all things from His own exact and unerring wisdom.

For this very reason He chose both a tax collector and a robber and a harlot;

but priests and elders and rulers He dishonored and cast out.

This too one may see coming to pass in the case of the martyrs.

For many indeed of those who were utterly despised were crowned in the season of the contests;

and on the contrary, certain ones reckoned by many to be great were tripped up and fell.

Do not therefore demand an accounting from the Creator, nor say;

Why was the one crowned and the other punished? For He knows how to do these things with exactness;

'Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.'

For that it was justly done, you indeed knew from the end, but He knew clearly even before the end.

For God seeks not only the display of works, but also the nobility of purpose and a right-minded disposition.

For such a man, even if he should ever sin through some circumstance, will quickly raise himself up again;

and even if he should chance to be lingering in wickedness, he will not be overlooked, but God who knows all things will quickly draw him up;

just as the one corrupted in these ways, even if he should seem to do some good thing, will perish, working it with a wicked disposition;

since David too, though he had both murdered and committed adultery, because he was carried away by some circumstance and did not do these things from a deliberate practice of wickedness, quickly washed them away;

the Pharisee, on the other hand, who ventured none of these things, but even prided himself on other good deeds, destroyed everything by his wicked purpose.

What then shall we say? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.

Therefore neither in the case of us and the Jews.

Then he brings forward another matter more obscure than this.

And what kind? For He says to Moses;

'I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.'

And again he heightens the antithesis, breaking through it in the middle, and loosing it, and making yet another perplexity.

But that what is said may become clearer, it is necessary to interpret it.

'God said,' he says, 'that The elder shall serve the younger,' before the birth-pang.

What then? Is God unjust? By no means.

Therefore hear also what follows;

For there, at least, either virtue or vice made the distinction;

but here the transgression was one and the same among all,

the sin of all the Jews, namely the making of the calf; and yet some were punished, while others were not punished.

'I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.'

For it is not thine to know, O Moses, who are worthy of loving-kindness, but yield this to Me.

But if it was not for Moses to know, much less is it for us.

For this reason he did not set down what was said in a bare fashion, but also recalled to whom it was spoken;

for he says, 'He saith to Moses';

so that by the dignity of the person he might also put to shame the one who contradicts.

Having therefore stated the solution of the difficulties, he breaks off in the midst, again bringing in another objection, and saying:

'So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy.'

For the Scripture saith unto Pharaoh, 'Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might show My power in thee, and that My name might be declared throughout all the earth.'

For just as there, he says, some were saved and others were punished,

so also here this man was preserved for this very purpose.

Then again he introduces an objection:

'So then He hath mercy on whom He will, and whom He will He hardeneth.'

'Why doth He yet find fault? For who hath resisted His will?' Seest thou how he took pains to make the matter perplexing on all sides? And he does not at once bring in the solution, doing this also to good purpose;

but he first stops the mouth of the questioner, speaking thus:

'Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God?' And he does this to check his unseasonable curiosity and his great meddlesomeness, and to put a bridle upon him, and to teach him to know what God is and what man is, and how incomprehensible is His providence, and how it surpasses our reasoning, and how all things must yield obedience to Him;

so that when he has established this in the hearer, and calmed and smoothed his mind, then, bringing in the solution with much ease, he may render what is said readily acceptable to him.

And he does not say that it is impossible to solve such things, but what? That it is unlawful to inquire into such things;

for we must yield obedience to the things spoken by God, and not be over-curious,

even if we are ignorant of the reason of them.

'Who art thou that repliest against God?' Seest thou how he brought low, how he cast down the swelling of pride? 'Who art thou?' Art thou a partner in the rule? But hast thou seated thyself as a judge over God? For in comparison with Him thou canst not even be anything at all, not this or that, but not even anything whatever.

For than to say, 'Thou art nothing,' it is much more abasing to say, 'Who art thou?'

And in another way too he shows the greater indignation by the question.

And he did not say, 'Who art thou that answerest God?' but 'that repliest against Him,' that is, that contradicts, that opposes. For to say, 'It ought to have been thus,' and 'It ought not to have been thus,' belongs to one who replies against Him.

Seest thou how he struck fear, how he astounded, how he made him tremble rather than inquire and be over-curious? This is the mark of the best teacher: not to follow everywhere the desire of the disciples, but to lead them to his own purpose, and to pluck up the thorns, and then to cast in the seeds, and not always to answer straightway to the things asked.

'Shall the thing formed say to Him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Or hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?'

Here he says this, not doing away with free will, but showing to what extent one must yield obedience to God.

For as regards calling God to account, we ought to be disposed no otherwise than the clay.

For not only ought we not to contradict, nor to inquire, but not even to utter a word at all, nor so much as to conceive a thought, but to be like that lifeless thing which follows the hands of the potter, and is carried about wheresoever he wishes.

For only for this did he take the illustration, not for the display of a way of life, but for the subjection of obedience and silence.

And this must be observed everywhere, that we ought not to take all the illustrations in their entirety, but selecting the useful part of them, and that for which they were adduced, we should let all the rest go.

As therefore when it says, 'He couched, he lay down as a lion,' we take the unconquerable and fearful quality, not the savage nor any other of the things that belong to the lion;

'I will meet them as a bear bereaved of her whelps'—the punitive quality;

and when it says, 'Our God is a consuming fire,' the consuming quality that comes from chastisement;

so then here also we must needs understand the clay and the potter and the vessels in this way.

And when he goes on and says, 'Or hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?'—do not suppose that these things were said by Paul with reference to a principle of creation, nor to a necessity of moral choice, but to the authority and diversity of dispensations.

For if we do not understand it thus, many absurdities will follow.

For indeed, if the discourse here is about moral choice, then He Himself will be the maker both of the good and of those who are not such, and man will be free of all blame;

and Paul will be seen thus at variance with himself, he who everywhere crowns the freedom of choice.

He wishes therefore to establish nothing else here than to persuade the hearer to yield to God with all excess of submission, and never at any time to demand of Him an account.

For just as the potter, he says, out of the same lump makes what he wills, and there is none to contradict;

so also, when God out of the same race of men punishes some and honours others, do not be over-curious, nor meddlesome, but only worship, and imitate the clay;

and just as it follows the hands of the potter, so also do thou follow the purpose of Him who orders these things.

For He does nothing simply, nor at random, even if thou art ignorant of the hidden reason of His wisdom.

But thou allowest him to make different things out of the same lump, and dost not accuse him;

yet thou demandest of God an account of the punishments and the honours, and dost not concede to Him to know who is worthy and who is not such, but, because the same lump is of the same substance, thou deemest that the moral choices too are the same.

And of how great madness is this!

And yet, even in the case of the potter, the dishonoured and the honourable is not from the lump, but from the use of those who handle them, even as here also it is from the moral choice.

Nevertheless, as I said before, we must take the illustration in this one point only, that we ought not to contradict God, but to yield to the incomprehensibility of His wisdom.

For examples ought to be greater than the matters proposed, and than the things on account of which they are brought into the midst, so as the more to move the hearer;

since if it were not greater and did not have the more excess, it would not be able to strike home as it ought, nor to shame the one who contradicts.

So then he thus stopped their unseasonable contentiousness with the fitting excess;

and for the rest he brings in also the solution.

What then is the solution? 'What if God, willing to show His wrath and to make known His power, endured with much long-suffering the vessels of wrath fitted for destruction;

and that He might make known the riches of His glory upon the vessels of mercy, which He had before prepared unto glory;

even us, whom He also called, not only from among Jews, but also from among Gentiles?'

And what he means is somewhat of this kind:

that is, that man kindles the wrath of God through his own hardness;

for having enjoyed much long-suffering, he did not become better, but remained incorrigible.

Wherefore also he did not call him a vessel of wrath only, but also 'fitted for destruction';

that is, made complete, but from himself and by his own doing.

For neither did God leave undone any of the things fitted to lead to that man's correction, nor did the man himself leave undone any of the things that ruin him and deprive him of all pardon.

But nevertheless God, even knowing these things, endured with much long-suffering, wishing to lead him to repentance;

for if He had not wished this, He would not even have been long-suffering.

But since he was not willing to make use of the long-suffering unto repentance, but made himself complete unto wrath, He used him for the correction of others, by the chastisement inflicted on him making others more diligent, and by this displaying His own power.

For that God does not wish His power to be made known in this way, but rather in another way, through those whom He benefits, through those to whom He does good, this too He showed throughout, from the beginning.

For if Paul does not wish to appear powerful in this way,

For it is not that we may appear approved, he says, but that you may do what is good.

But since He was longsuffering, that He might lead him to repentance, and yet that man did not repent, He bore with him for a long time, at once displaying His own kindness and at the same time His power, in case that man might be willing to gain some profit from this great longsuffering.

Just as, then, by punishing this man who remained incorrigible He showed His own power,

so by having mercy on those who had sinned much and repented He made manifest His own love for mankind.

Yet he did not say 'His love for mankind,' but 'His glory,' showing that this above all is the glory of God, and that He was zealous for this before all else.

But when he says, 'Which He had before prepared unto glory,' he does not affirm that the whole is of God;

for if this were so, nothing would have prevented all men from being saved;

rather, he again points to His foreknowledge, and removes the barrier between Jews and Gentiles.

And from this too he furnishes the argument with no small defence once more.

For not only among the Jews did some perish and some were saved, but this also happened among the Gentiles;

wherefore he does not say 'all the Gentiles,' but 'from among the Gentiles';

nor 'all the Jews,' but 'those from among the Jews.'

As, then, Pharaoh became a vessel of wrath through his own transgression,

so these too became vessels of mercy through their own right disposition.

For even if the greater part is of God, nevertheless we too have contributed some little thing.

Therefore he did not say 'vessels of good deeds,' nor 'vessels of boldness,' but 'vessels of mercy,' showing that the whole is of God.

For even the saying, 'Not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth,' though it is spoken by way of contrast, yet being uttered by Paul, brings no perplexity at all.

For when he says, 'Not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth,' he does not take away free choice, but shows that the whole is not of man, but that he needs the grace from above.

For one must indeed both will and run, yet take confidence not in one's own labours, but in the love of God for mankind;

'Yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me.'

For since they were reproaching them with this, that they were saved by grace, and thought thereby to put them to shame, out of his great abundance he removes this suspicion.

For if the matter brought glory to God, much more did it bring glory to those through whom God was glorified.

Consider his right disposition and his unspeakable wisdom.

For though he might have avoided bringing forward Pharaoh in the discourse concerning those who are punished, and instead brought forward the sinners from among the Jews, and thus made the argument yet clearer, and shown that where the fathers are the same, where the sins are the same, some perished while others obtained mercy, and thus persuaded them no longer to be perplexed, even if some from among the Gentiles were saved while Jews perished—

yet, that he might not make the discourse burdensome, he introduces the proof of punishment from the barbarian, so as not to be compelled to call them vessels of wrath;

but those who obtain mercy he draws from the multitude of the Jews.

And yet he sufficiently makes his defence even on God's behalf, that although He knew full well that this man was fashioning himself into a vessel of destruction, nevertheless He brought forward what was His own—forbearance, longsuffering, and not simply longsuffering, but much longsuffering;

yet nevertheless He was unwilling to exercise it upon the Jews.

Whence, then, are some vessels of wrath, and others of mercy? From their own free choice.

But God, being exceedingly good, displays the same kindness toward both.

For He had mercy not only on those who are being saved, but also on Pharaoh, so far as His own part was concerned;

for both they and he enjoyed the same longsuffering.

And if he was not saved, the whole is contrary to His will;

for as far as it depended on God, he had no less than those who were preserved.

Having therefore rendered the solution to the question by means of the facts themselves, so as to make the argument trustworthy from another quarter also, he brings in the prophets foretelling these very things.

For Hosea also, he says, wrote these things of old, speaking thus:

'I will call them My people, which were not My people;

and her beloved, which was not beloved.'

For that they might not say, 'You are deceiving us by speaking these things,'

he summoned Hosea as a witness, crying aloud and saying:

'I will call them My people, which were not My people.'

For who were the 'not My people'? Plainly the Gentiles.

And who was the 'not beloved'? Again the same.

But nevertheless he declared that they should be both 'My people' and 'Beloved' and sons of God.

'For there,' he says, 'shall they be called sons of the living God.'

But if they should say that this was spoken concerning those who believed from among the Jews, even so the argument stands.

For if, upon those who had been unthankful after many benefits, and had been estranged, and had lost even the state of being a people, so great a change came to pass, what was there to hinder even those who had not been estranged after being made God's own, but were from the beginning aliens, from being called, and, upon obeying, being counted worthy of the same things? Having therefore brought forward Hosea, he is not content with this alone, but after him introduces Isaiah also, uttering things in harmony with this.

For Isaiah crieth, he says, concerning Israel;

that is, he proclaims with boldness, and does not shrink back.

'Why then do you accuse us, when they proclaim these things beforehand more clearly than a trumpet? What then does Isaiah cry? Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved.'

Do you see that he too says that not all shall be saved, but those worthy to be saved? For 'I am not abashed at the multitude,' he says, 'nor does the race, thus poured out abroad, put me to shame; but I save those alone who present themselves worthy.'

And he did not simply mention the sand of the sea, but was reminding them of an ancient promise, of which they had made themselves unworthy.

'Why then are you troubled, as though the promise had failed, when all the prophets declare that not all are of the number of those who are saved?' Then he also tells the manner of the salvation.

Do you see the prophetic exactness and the apostolic understanding—what a testimony he brought forward, how exceedingly fitting? For this passage shows us not only that there are some who are saved and not all, but it also adds how they shall be saved.

How then shall they be saved? And how will God count them worthy of the benefit? 'By finishing and cutting short the account in righteousness, for a short account will the Lord make upon the earth.'

There is no need of a circuit, nor of toils, nor of the hardship that comes from the works of the law, but with great brevity shall salvation come.

In a few words it holds salvation.

'For if thou shalt confess with thy mouth,' he says, 'the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God raised Him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.'

Do you see what it is, 'A short account will the Lord make upon the earth'? And the marvellous thing is that this short account brought not salvation only, but also righteousness.

'And as Isaiah said before, Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we should have been as Sodom, and been made like unto Gomorrah.'

Here again he shows something else, that not even those few were saved of themselves.

For these too would have perished and suffered the fate of Sodom—that is, they would have endured utter destruction.

For those others too all perished root and branch, and did not leave behind even the least seed of themselves;

and these likewise, he says, would have become as those, had not God used great goodness, and preserved them through faith.

And this happened also in the visible captivity;

for the greater part were led away and perished, and only a few were preserved.

'What shall we say then?' he says. 'That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith;

but Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.'

Here at length is the clearest solution.

For since he had shown it also from the facts—

For not all who are of Israel are Israel.

And drawing upon the ancestors of Jacob and Esau, and upon the prophets, he brings forward the most authoritative solution from Hosea and Isaiah, having first heightened the difficulty.

For there are two things in question: that the Gentiles attained, and that they attained without pursuing—that is, without striving for it.

And again, in the case of the Jews, the two difficulties are alike: that Israel did not attain, and that though striving it did not attain.

Wherefore also he expresses himself more emphatically in his very words.

For he did not say that they 'possessed' righteousness, but 'attained' it.

For this is what is chiefly new and paradoxical: that he who pursued did not attain, while he who did not pursue attained.

And he seems to grant them a favour by saying 'pursuing.'

But afterwards he deals the decisive blow.

For since he has a strong solution to bring forward, he is not at all afraid of making the objection more severe.

For this reason he does not even discuss faith and the righteousness that comes from it, but shows that, even before faith and in their own domain, they were defeated and condemned.

For you, O Jew, he says, did not even find the righteousness that is of the Law;

for you transgressed it, and became liable to the curse.

But these who came not by way of the Law, but by another road, found a greater righteousness than this—the one that is from faith.

which indeed is what he said above as well.

For if Abraham was justified by works, he has whereof to glory, but not before God;

showing that this righteousness is greater than that one.

Before, then, I was saying that there are two things in question; but now the points of inquiry have become three:

that the Gentiles both found righteousness, and found it without pursuing, and found one greater than that which is of the Law.

These same three points are again raised as difficulties, from the opposite side, in the case of the Jews: that Israel did not find, and though striving did not find, and did not find even the lesser righteousness.

Having therefore cast the hearer into perplexity, he next brings in the brief solution, and states the cause of all that has been said.

What then is the cause? Because it was not of faith, but as it were of works of the Law.

This is the clearest solution of the whole passage, which, had he stated it straightway at the outset, would not have been so readily received;

but since he set it down after many difficulties and demonstrations and proofs, and employed countless preliminary corrections, he thereby made it more easily grasped and more readily received.

For this, he says, is the cause of their ruin: that they willed to be justified not of faith, but as it were of works of the Law.

And he did not say 'of works,' but 'as it were of works of the Law,' showing that they did not possess even this righteousness.

For they stumbled at the stone of stumbling, as it is written:

Behold, I lay in Zion a stone of stumbling and a rock of offence;

and everyone who believes on him shall not be put to shame.

Do you see again how the boldness of confidence is from faith, and how the gift is universal? For it was spoken not of the Jews only, but of the whole race of mankind.

For 'everyone,' he says—be he Jew, or Greek, or Scythian, or Thracian, or whosoever else may believe—shall enjoy great boldness of confidence.

And the marvellous thing about the prophet is that he said not only that they would believe, but also that they would disbelieve;

for to stumble is to disbelieve.

As therefore above he made plain both those who perish and those who are saved, saying, 'Though the number of the sons of Israel be as the sand of the sea, the remnant shall be saved;'

and, 'Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we should have been as Sodom;'

and, 'He called not only from among the Jews, but also from among the Gentiles;'

so also here he says that some will believe, while others will stumble;

and stumbling comes from not giving heed, from gaping after other things.

Since therefore these too gave heed to the Law, they stumbled at the stone.

And he calls it a stone of stumbling and a rock of offence in respect of the mind and the end of those who did not believe.

Have then the things spoken become clear to you, or do they still need much explanation? For my part, I think they are easy to survey for those who have paid attention;

but if they have escaped any, it is possible, by meeting privately, to inquire and to learn.

For this very reason I have extended the exposition of the discourse to greater length, that I might not be compelled, by cutting apart the continuity of the sequence, to mar the clearness of what is said.