In the way I think that the people of old, called [the people] of God, was divided into twelve tribes, and had, surpassing the rest of the tribes, the Levitical order -- which itself, according to several priestly and Levitical ranks, served the divine -- so I consider that, according to the hidden man of the heart, the whole people of Christ, being called in secret a Jew and circumcised in spirit, possesses the properties of the tribes in a more mystical way; as one may learn more plainly from John, from the Revelation, nor have the rest of the prophets kept silent about such things to those who know how to hear.
And John speaks thus: 'And I saw another angel ascending from the rising of the sun, having the seal of the living God; and he cried with a loud voice to the four angels to whom it was given to harm the earth and the sea, saying: Do not harm the earth, nor the sea, nor the trees, until we have sealed the servants of our God on their foreheads. And I heard the number of those who were sealed: a hundred and forty-four thousand were sealed, out of every tribe of the sons of Israel; of the tribe of Judah twelve thousand were sealed, of the tribe of Reuben twelve thousand'
And after having divided the rest of the tribes, apart from Dan, he goes on, after several more things, to add: 'And I saw, and behold, the Lamb standing on Mount Zion, and with him the hundred and forty-four thousand, having his name and the name of his Father written on their foreheads. And I heard a voice from heaven like the voice of many waters, and like the voice of great thunder; and the voice which I heard was like harpers playing on their harps. And they sing a new song before the throne, and before the four living creatures and the elders; and no one was able to learn the song except the hundred and forty-four thousand who had been purchased from the earth. These are they who were not defiled with women, for they are virgins; these are they who follow the Lamb wherever he goes; these were purchased from among men as firstfruits for God and for the Lamb; and in their mouth there was not'
a lie was found; for they are blameless.' Now that these things are said by John concerning those who have believed in Christ, and that they belong to the tribes -- even if their bodily lineage does not seem to trace back to the seed of the patriarchs -- one may reason as follows: 'Do not harm,' he says, 'the earth, nor the sea, nor the trees, until we have sealed the servants of our God on their foreheads. And I heard the number of those who were sealed: a hundred and forty-four thousand sealed out of every tribe of the sons of Israel.'
Therefore, those who are sealed on their foreheads out of every tribe of the sons of Israel number a hundred and forty-four thousand; and these hundred and forty-four thousand are said, further on in John, to have the name of the Lamb and of his Father written on their foreheads, being virgins and not defiled with women.
What else, then, could the seal on their foreheads be but the name of the Lamb and of his Father, since in both passages the foreheads are said to have -- in one place the seal, in the other the letters -- containing the name of the Lamb and the name of his Father?
But if indeed those from the tribes are the same as the virgins, as we have shown above, and since he who believes from Israel according to the flesh is rare, so that someone might perhaps venture to say that not even the number of the hundred and forty-four thousand is fulfilled by those who believe from Israel according to the flesh, it is clear that the hundred and forty-four thousand, who are not defiled with women, are made up of those who come to the divine Word from among the nations; so that one who declares the virgins of each tribe to be its firstfruits would not fall short of the truth.
For indeed it is written: 'These were purchased from among men as firstfruits for God and for the Lamb, and in their mouth was found no lie, for they are blameless.' But it must not be overlooked that the account concerning the hundred and forty-four thousand virgins admits of an anagogical [higher] interpretation. It is, however, superfluous at present, and not in keeping with the argument before us, to set forth prophetic sayings that teach us the same thing about those from the nations.
What then do all these things mean for us? You will say, as you read them, O Ambrose -- Ambrose, truly a man of God, and in Christ a man, yet hastening to be spiritual, no longer a man. Those who belong to the tribes offer tithes and firstfruits to God through the Levites and priests, not having all things as firstfruits or tithes; but the Levites and priests, since they make use of all things as tithes and firstfruits, offer tithes to God through the high priest -- and I think firstfruits as well.
Now, among us who come to the teachings of Christ, the majority -- who occupy themselves for the most part with [worldly] life and devote only a few actions to God -- would perhaps be those of the tribes, having little communion with the priests and nourishing the service of God only in small measure; but those who are wholly devoted to the divine word and who genuinely apply themselves solely to the service of God will not inappropriately be called, according to the difference of their movements toward this, Levites and priests.
And perhaps those who bear all things and possess, as it were, the first-fruits of their own generation will be high priests according to the order of Aaron, and not according to the order of Melchizedek. For if someone should object to this, thinking that we act impiously in applying the title of high priest to human beings, since in many places Jesus is prophesied as the great priest (for we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God), one must say to him that the apostle pointed out that the prophet spoke concerning Christ: 'You are a priest forever, according to the order of Melchizedek,' and not according to the order of Aaron. From this we too take it and say that, according to the order of Aaron, men can be high priests, but according to the order of Melchizedek, [only] the Christ of God.
Since, then, every action of ours and our whole life, insofar as we press on toward what is better, is devoted to God, and since we wish to have the whole of it as a firstfruit among the many firstfruits (if indeed we are not mistaken in thinking this), what distinguishing [firstfruit] ought there to be, after we have been separated from one another in body, other than the investigation concerning the Gospel? For indeed one must dare to say that the Gospel is the firstfruit of all the Scriptures.
As for the firstfruit of our activities, since we took up residence in Alexandria, what other one ought there to have been than [the activity directed] toward the firstfruit of the Scriptures? But we must know that firstfruit and firstborn-produce are not the same thing; for the firstfruit is offered after all the other fruits, whereas the firstborn-produce [is offered] before all of them.
Of the Scriptures, then, that are current and believed in all the churches of God to be divine, one would not be mistaken in calling the Law of Moses the firstborn-produce, and the Gospel the firstfruit. For after all the fruits of the prophets, up to the Lord Jesus, the perfect Word sprouted forth.
III. But if someone should raise a counter-objection, on account of the notion of the unfolding of the firstfruits, saying that after the Gospels come the Acts and the Epistles of the Apostles, and that on this account what was previously stated about the firstfruit -- that the Gospel is the firstfruit of every Scripture -- could no longer be maintained, one must reply that this is either the reasoning of wise men benefited in Christ [expressed] in the current Epistles, which need, in order to be believed, the testimonies laid down in the legal and prophetic writings; so that, while the apostolic writings may be called wise and worthy of belief and altogether well-achieved, they are nevertheless not comparable to 'Thus says the Lord Almighty.'
And in this connection, consider whether, when Paul says, 'All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable,' he includes even his own writings; or consider whether the statement 'I say, and not the Lord,' and 'In all the churches I so ordain,' and 'What things I suffered at Antioch, at Iconium, at Lystra,' and other similar things sometimes written by him, show the apostolic authority ...... yet not the purity of words that come from divine inspiration.
Or one must also establish this: that the Old [Testament] is not gospel, since it does not point out the one who is coming but only proclaims him beforehand, whereas the whole of the New is the Gospel -- not only in that it declares, like the beginning of the Gospel, 'Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world,' but also in that it contains various doxologies and teachings concerning him on account of whom the Gospel is a Gospel.
Furthermore, if God appointed in the church apostles and prophets and evangelists, and pastors and teachers, then when we examine what the work of the evangelist is -- namely, that it is not solely to narrate in what manner the Savior healed one blind from birth, or raised one already decaying from death, or performed some other wondrous deed -- we shall not hesitate, since the evangelist is also characterized by hortatory discourse aimed at establishing belief concerning the things about Jesus, to say that the writings of the apostles are, in a way, gospel as well.
But as far as the second explanation is concerned, to the one who objects, on the ground that the Epistles are not entitled 'gospel,' that we were wrong to name the whole New Testament 'gospel,' it must be said that in many places in the Scriptures, when two or more things are called by the same name, the name applies more properly to one of the things so named than to the other; for example, although the Savior says, 'Call no one teacher on earth,' the apostle says that teachers, too, have been appointed in the church.
These, then, will not be teachers as far as the strict sense of the word 'gospel' [teacher] is concerned. In the same way, every writing found in the Epistles will not be 'gospel' when it is compared with the narrative of the deeds, sufferings, and words of Jesus. Nevertheless, the Gospel is the firstfruit of every Scripture, and of all our activities, undertaken in accordance with our prayer, we make [this work] a firstfruit directed toward the firstfruit of the Scriptures.
But I think that, since there are four Gospels, which are, as it were, the elements of the faith of the Church (out of which, as elements, the whole world is constituted, having been reconciled to God in Christ, as Paul says: 'God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself' -- it is the sin of this world that Jesus took away, for the discourse concerns the world of the Church, as it is written: 'Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world') -- the firstfruit of the Gospels is that which you have commanded us, according to our ability, to investigate: the Gospel according to John, which, though speaking of him who is elsewhere genealogized, itself begins from him who has no genealogy.
For Matthew, writing for Hebrews who were expecting the one from Abraham and David, says: 'The book of the origin of Jesus Christ, son of David, son of Abraham.' And Mark, knowing what he writes, narrates the beginning of the Gospel -- perhaps because we find its end in John ...... the Word who was in the beginning, God the Word. But Luke too ...... nevertheless he reserves for the one who leaned on the breast of Jesus the greater and more perfect discourses concerning Jesus; for none of them manifested his divinity as purely as John did, who presents him saying: 'I am the light of the world'; 'I am the way and the truth and the life'; 'I am the resurrection'; 'I am the door'; 'I am the good shepherd'; and in the Revelation: 'I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end.'
...the first and the last.' One must therefore dare to say that the Gospels are the firstfruit of all the Scriptures, and that the firstfruit of the Gospels is the Gospel according to John, whose meaning no one can grasp who has not leaned on the breast of Jesus, nor received from Jesus Mary to become his mother also. And he who is to become another John must become so great that, like John, he might be shown, through Jesus, to be Jesus. For if, according to those who think rightly concerning her, no one is the son of Mary except Jesus, and Jesus says to his mother, 'Behold your son,' and not 'Behold, this one also is your son,' then he has said, in effect, the equivalent of, 'Behold, this is Jesus, whom you bore.' For indeed everyone who has been made perfect no longer lives [his own life], but Christ lives in him; and since Christ lives in him, it is said of him to Mary: 'Behold your son, the Christ.'
What need is there, then, to say how great an understanding we require, in order that we may be able to grasp worthily the Word laid up in the earthen vessels of common speech -- the Word that is present, as written text, read by all who come upon it, and, as perceptible sound, heard by all who lend their bodily ears to the voice of the discourse? For the one who is to comprehend these things accurately must say with truth: 'But we have the mind of Christ, that we may know the things freely given to us by God.'
It is also possible to adduce, from what is said by Paul, that the whole New [Testament] is the Gospels, whenever he writes somewhere: 'According to my gospel.' For in the writings of Paul we do not have a book customarily called 'gospel,' but everything that he preached and said was gospel. And what he preached and said, this he also wrote; and therefore what he wrote was gospel.
But if what belonged to Paul was gospel, it follows to say that what belonged to Peter was gospel as well, and, simply put, whatever establishes the coming of Christ and prepares his presence, producing it in the souls of those willing to receive the Word of God who stands at the door and knocks and wishes to enter into their souls.
It is now time to examine what the appellation 'gospel' means, and why these books bear this title. The Gospel, then, is a discourse containing an announcement of matters which, reasonably, on account of their benefit, gladden the hearer when he accepts what is announced; and such a discourse is no less a gospel even when it is examined with respect to the disposition of the hearer. Or, a gospel is a discourse containing the presence of a good thing for the believer, or a discourse promising that the expected good is present.
Now all the definitions we have given apply to the books entitled Gospels. For each Gospel is a compilation of things announced that are beneficial to the one who believes and does not misunderstand, and that produces benefit by gladdening him, teaching the saving coming, for the sake of human beings, of Christ Jesus, the firstborn of all creation. But also, that each Gospel is a discourse teaching the coming of the good Father in the Son to those willing to receive it is clear to everyone who believes.
That the good which was expected is also promised through these books is not unclear. For John the Baptist, taking up, as it were, the voice of the whole people, says, sending to Jesus: 'Are you the one who is coming, or do we look for another?' For the Christ was the good expected by the people, concerning whom, the prophets having proclaimed him even down to ordinary persons, all who were under the Law and the Prophets fixed their hopes upon him -- as the Samaritan woman testifies, saying: 'I know that the Messiah is coming, who is called Christ; when he comes, he will tell us all things.'
But Simon and Cleopas also, conversing with one another about all the things that had happened to Jesus, say -- to the Christ himself, now risen, though they did not yet know that he had been raised from the dead: 'Are you the only one sojourning in Jerusalem who does not know the things that have happened there in these days?' And when he said, 'What things?' they answer: 'The things concerning Jesus the Nazarene, who was a man, a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people; and how our chief priests and rulers handed him over to a sentence of death and crucified him. But we were hoping that he was the one who was going to redeem Israel.'
In addition to this, Andrew, the brother of Simon Peter, having found his own brother Simon, says: 'We have found the Messiah,' which is, being interpreted, Christ. And a little after, Philip, having found Nathanael, says to him: 'We have found him of whom Moses in the Law, and the Prophets, wrote -- Jesus, the son of Joseph, from Nazareth.'
One might seem to raise an objection against the first definition, since even books not entitled 'Gospels' fall under it; for the Law and the Prophets, too, are believed to be discourses containing an announcement which, reasonably, on account of their benefit, gladdens those who hear, when they accept what is announced.
To this it may be said that, before the coming of Christ, the Law and the Prophets, since he who clarifies the mysteries contained in them had not yet come, did not possess the promise implied by the definition of 'gospel.' But the Savior, having come, and having willed the Gospel to become embodied, has, by means of the Gospel, made everything, as it were, gospel.
And I would not be using the example 'A little leaven leavens the whole lump' beside the point. For ...... the sons of men by his divinity, having removed the veil that lay upon the Law and the Prophets, he demonstrated the divine element in all things, clearly showing to those who wished to become disciples of his wisdom what the true realities of the Law of Moses are, of which the ancients served [only] an example and a shadow, and what the truth is of the events recorded in the histories, which happened to them typologically, but were written for our sake, upon whom the ends of the ages have come.
Everyone, therefore, to whom Christ has come, worships God neither in Jerusalem nor on the mountain of the Samaritans, but, having learned that God is spirit, serving him spiritually in spirit and truth, no longer worships the Father and Maker of all things in a typological manner.
None, therefore, of the ancient things was gospel before the Gospel that came about through the coming of Christ. But the Gospel, which is the New Covenant, having removed us from the oldness of the letter, caused to shine forth, by the light of knowledge, the never-aging newness of the Spirit, which is proper to the New Covenant and which lay latent in all the Scriptures. And it was fitting that that which effects what is thought of as 'gospel' even in the Old Covenant should itself be called, pre-eminently, 'gospel.'
Nevertheless, it must not be overlooked that the intelligible coming of Christ, even before his coming in the body, took place for those who were more perfect and were not infants, nor still under tutors and guardians, for whom the intelligible fullness of time had arrived -- as it did for the patriarchs, and for Moses the servant, and for the prophets who beheld the glory of Christ.
But just as, before his manifest and bodily coming, he came to the perfect, so also, after his proclaimed presence, he comes to those who are still infants, since they are still under guardians and stewards and have not yet arrived at the fullness of time; to these the forerunners of Christ have come, discourses fitted to childlike souls, who might reasonably be called tutors; but the Son himself, the glorified God the Word, has not yet [come to them], awaiting the necessary preparation to take place for those human beings who are to become able to receive his divinity, [that they may become] of God.
And this too we ought to know: that just as there is a Law containing a shadow of the good things to come, which are made manifest by the Law that is truly proclaimed, so too the Gospel, as it is understood by all who read it, teaches a shadow of the mysteries of Christ.
But what John calls the 'eternal gospel,' which might fittingly be called 'spiritual,' clearly presents to those who understand all things directly concerning the Son of God himself: the mysteries set forth by his words, and the realities of which his acts were riddles. It follows from this to understand that, in the way there is a Jew in the open, and circumcision ...... and another in secret, so too there is a Christian and a baptism [in the open, and another in secret].
And Paul and Peter, being at first openly Jews and circumcised, later received from Jesus also to be such secretly; while their being Jews openly, they confessed -- for the salvation of the many, according to the [divine] economy -- not only in words but also demonstrated it through deeds. The same must be said also concerning their Christianity.
And just as it is not possible for Paul to benefit those who are Jews according to the flesh, unless, when reason so demands, he circumcises Timothy, and, when it is reasonable, having himself shaved and made an offering, and altogether having become a Jew to the Jews, in order that he might gain the Jews -- so too, for the one set forth for the benefit of many, it is not possible, by secret Christianity alone, to improve and advance to what is better and higher those who are being instructed in the elementary principles within open Christianity.
For this reason it is necessary to Christianize both spiritually and bodily; and where it is necessary to preach the bodily gospel, professing to know nothing among fleshly [hearers] except Jesus Christ, and him crucified, this must be done. But when they are found to be perfected in spirit and bearing fruit in it, and longing for heavenly wisdom, one must impart to them the Word as he returns from having become flesh to that which he was in the beginning with God.
In examining these matters concerning the Gospel, we consider that we have not spoken in vain, distinguishing, as it were, in thought, a perceptible gospel from an intelligible and spiritual one.
For indeed our present task is to transpose the perceptible gospel into the spiritual. For what benefit is there in the narrative of the perceptible, if it is not transposed into the spiritual? It is either none at all, or only slight, and belongs to ordinary people who have persuaded themselves to grasp what is signified from the mere wording.
But every struggle now confronts us as we attempt to reach the depths of the evangelic mind, and to search out within it the truth stripped bare of its types.
Now, since those who evangelize are understood [to do so] in the announcement of good things, the apostles evangelize Jesus; yet they are also said to evangelize the resurrection as a good thing, it too being, in a sense, Jesus -- for Jesus says: 'I am the resurrection.' And Jesus evangelizes to the poor the things laid up for the saints, exhorting them toward the divine promises.
And the divine Scriptures also bear witness to the gospel-proclamations made by the apostles and to that made by our Savior, David testifying concerning the apostles, and perhaps also concerning the evangelists, saying: 'The Lord will give a word to those who proclaim good tidings with great power: the king of the hosts of the beloved' -- teaching at the same time that it is not the composition of speech, nor the delivery of sounds, nor practiced fine phrasing, that accomplishes persuasion, but the supply of divine power. For this reason Paul too says somewhere:
'I will know not the word of those who are puffed up, but the power; for the kingdom of God is not in word but in power.' And elsewhere: 'And my word and my proclamation were not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power.'
Bearing witness to this power, Simon and Cleopas say: 'Was not our heart burning within us on the road, as he opened the Scriptures to us?' The apostles, moreover -- since there is also a certain quantity of power, supplied by God, differing among those who speak -- possessed, according to what is said in David, 'The Lord will give a word to those who proclaim good tidings with great power,' [that is,] great power. And Isaiah, saying:
'How beautiful are the feet of those who proclaim good tidings of good things' -- having understood the beauty and timeliness of the apostles' journeying, [as] proclaiming him who said, 'I am the way,' he praises the feet of those who walk by the intelligible way of Christ Jesus, and who enter to God through the door. And these, whose feet they are, proclaim good tidings -- namely, Jesus himself, as good things.
And let no one be surprised that we have understood Jesus to be proclaimed as good tidings under the plural name 'good things.' For, by grasping the realities corresponding to the names by which the Son of God is named, we shall understand how many good things Jesus is -- he whom these, whose feet are beautiful, proclaim as good tidings. For one good thing is life, and Jesus is life.
And another good thing is the light of the world, being the true light and the light of men -- all of which the Son of God is said to be. And another good thing, distinct in concept from life and light, is the truth; and a fourth, besides these, is the way that leads to it. All of these our Savior teaches himself to be, saying: 'I am the way and the truth and the life.'
And how is it not a good thing to rise, having shaken off the dust and mortality -- obtaining this from the Lord, inasmuch as he is resurrection, who also says: 'I am the resurrection'? But the door too, through which one enters into the highest blessedness, is a good thing; and the Christ says: 'I am the door.'
But what need is there to speak of Wisdom, whom God created as the beginning of his ways for his works, in whom her Father delighted, rejoicing in her manifold intelligible beauty, seen only by intelligible eyes, and calling forth to heavenly love the one who perceives the divine beauty? For the Wisdom of God is a good thing, which, together with the aforementioned things, is proclaimed as good tidings by those whose feet are beautiful.
Nor must we pass over in silence, either, God the Word, who [ranks] after the Father of all things; for this good thing, too, is inferior to none of the good things. Blessed, then, are those who have made room for these good things and have received them from the beautiful feet of those who proclaim them as good tidings.
Nevertheless, even if someone, being a Corinthian, in accordance with Paul's judgment to know nothing among them except Jesus Christ and him crucified, learns and receives him as the man [who came] for our sake, that person is at the beginning of the good things, becoming, through the man Jesus, a man of God, and dying to sin by his death; for indeed 'he who died, died to sin once for all.'
But from his life -- since 'the life that Jesus lives, he lives to God' -- everyone who has become conformed to his resurrection receives the [gift of] living to God. And who doubts that righteousness-itself is a good thing, and sanctification-itself, and redemption-itself? These very things, too, those who proclaim Jesus as good tidings proclaim, saying that he has become for us righteousness from God, and sanctification, and redemption.
And it will be possible, from these countless things written concerning him, which present how great a multitude of good things Jesus is, to conjecture, on the basis of these countless and recorded things, [the reality of] those good things which indeed exist in him, in whom it pleased [God] that the whole fullness of divinity should dwell bodily, yet which are not [fully] contained by written words.
And why do I say 'by written words,' when John says even concerning the whole world: 'I do not think the world itself could contain the books that would be written'?
It is, then, the same thing to say that the apostles proclaim the Savior as good tidings, and that they proclaim the good things as good tidings. For he is the one who has received from the good Father [the fact] of being good things, so that each person, receiving through Jesus whatever [single thing] or whatever [several things] he is able to receive, may find himself among the good things.