Homilies on Acts 19.1–19.5

“An angel of the Lord spoke to Philip, saying, ‘Arise and go toward the south, on the road that goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza; this is desert.’ And he arose and went.” It seems to me that these orders were given while he was in Samaria, since from Jerusalem one does not go away south, but north; but from Samaria, south. “This is desert.” He says this so that he would not fear the Jews' attack. And he did not ask why, but arose and went. “And behold,” it says, “an Ethiopian man, a eunuch, a court official of Candace, queen of the Ethiopians, who was over all her [treasure, had come to worship in Jeru]salem. And he was returning, seated in his chariot, and was reading the prophet Isaiah.” Great are the praises spoken of this man: if indeed, while living in Ethiopia and surrounded by so many affairs, with no feast taking place, and living in a superstitious city, he came to worship in Jerusalem. Great too was his zeal, since even seated in his carriage he was reading. “And the Spirit said to Philip, ‘Go up and join this chariot.’ And Philip ran up and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet, and said, ‘Do you understand what you are reading?’ And he said, ‘How could I, unless someone guides me?’” See again another mark of piety. What is it? That though he did not understand, he was reading; and then, after reading, he inquires. “And he invited Philip to come up and sit with him. Now the passage of Scripture that he was reading was this: ‘As a sheep he was led to slaughter, and as a lamb before its shearer is silent, so he does not open his mouth. In his humiliation his judgment was taken away. Who will describe his generation? For his life is taken away from the earth.’ And the eunuch answered Philip and said, ‘I beg you, about whom does the prophet say this, about himself or about someone else?’ And Philip opened his mouth, and beginning from this Scripture he preached Jesus to him.” Do you see how his affairs are arranged? First he reads and does not understand; then he reads the very passage where the passion was, and the resurrection, and the gift. “And as they went along the road they came to some water; and the eunuch says, ‘See, water; what prevents me from being baptized?’” Did you see his eagerness? Did you see his exactness? “And he commanded the chariot to stop, and they both went down into the water, both Philip and the eunuch, and he baptized him. And when they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord snatched Philip away, and the eunuch saw him no more; for he went on his way rejoicing.” Why, someone says, did the Spirit of the Lord take him away? Because he was going to pass through other cities too and preach the gospel. This happened, then, so that he might be admired afterwards, so that the eunuch might think what concerned him not human but divine. “But Philip was found at Azotus, and passing through he preached the gospel to all the cities until he came to Caesarea.” From this too it is plain that he is one of the seven; for later too he is found there, in Caesarea. It was to the eunuch's advantage, then, that the Spirit snatched him away, since he would have asked him to go away with him; and Philip would have grieved him by declining and refusing, since it was not yet the time. Did you see angels assisting the preaching, not preaching themselves, but calling these men? The wonder is shown from this too: what was rare of old and hardly happened, happens here in great abundance. Besides, what happened was also a kind of foretelling that they would prevail over the foreigners. For the trustworthiness of those who believe is enough to persuade those who learn to rise up to equal zeal themselves. That is why he went on rejoicing; so that if he had understood, he would not have been glad. “And what prevented him,” someone says, “from learning everything exactly while he was in the carriage, and especially in the wilderness?” Because the thing was not a display. But let us look at what was read from the beginning. “And behold, an Ethiopian man, a eunuch,” it says, “a court official of the queen of the Ethiopians, Candace.” From this it is plain that they were ruled by her. For women ruled in old times, and this was a law among them. So Philip did not know for what reason he had come into the wilderness, since it was no longer an angel but the Spirit who snatched him away. The eunuch sees none of these things, being still imperfect, or because these things are not for … nor indeed does he learn what Philip is taught. And why does the angel not appear to him and lead him to Philip? Because perhaps he would not have been persuaded, but rather would have been struck with alarm. See Philip's philosophy: he did not accuse him, he did not say, “You are ignorant; I will teach you”; he did not say, “I know these things exactly”; he did not flatter him and say to him, “You are blessed for reading.” So his word was free from rashness and from flattery, and was rather that of one who cares and is kind. For the eunuch had to ask; he had to long. It is the mark of one who indicates that he saw that the man knew nothing, to say, “Do you understand what you are reading?”, and at the same time of one showing great …

But see how sensibly the eunuch too excuses himself: “How could I,” he says, “unless someone guides me?” He did not look at Philip's appearance, he did not say, “Who are you?”, he did not find fault; he does not boast, he does not say he knows, but confesses that he is ignorant; that is why he also learns. He shows the wound to the physician. He perceived that Philip both knew these things and wished to teach. He saw his lack of pride, for Philip did not wear a splendid dress. So fond of hearing was he, and so attentive to the words, that “He who seeks finds” was fulfilled in his case. “And he invited Philip,” it says, “to come up and sit with him.” Did you see the zeal? Did you see the longing? He invites him to come up and sit with him; so little did he know what Philip was going to tell him, but he expected to hear some prophecy. And this is a greater honor, not simply to take him up, but to invite him. “And Philip ran up and heard him reading.” The running is a sign of one who wished to speak, and the reading a sign of zeal. For he was reading at the time when the sun makes the heat most intense. “The passage was this: ‘As a sheep he was led to slaughter.’” This too is a proof of his love of learning, that he had in hand this prophet, who is loftier than the others. That is why Philip does not speak to him vehemently, but gently; or rather, he does not even speak first, until he was asked, until the other invited him; and as if doing the same again, he says, “I beg you, about whom does the prophet say this?” It seems to me that he did not know that the prophets speak about others; or if not this, he did not know that they speak about themselves in the person of another. Let us be ashamed, both poor and rich, before that treasurer. Then “they came to some water, and he says, ‘See, water.’” Do you see how strongly he desires it? He does not say, “Baptize me,” nor is he silent; but he says something between desire and reverence: “What prevents me from being baptized?” See how complete the doctrines he held were; for the prophet contained everything: the incarnation, the passion, the resurrection, the ascension, the judgment to come; and these above all created great desire in him. Be ashamed, all you who are still unbaptized. “And he commanded,” it says, “the chariot to stop.” At once he spoke and gave the order, before he heard. “And when they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord snatched Philip away.” Rightly, so that what happened might be shown to be divine, and so that he might not think Philip was simply a man. “And he went on his way,” it says, “rejoicing.” He said this to show that he would have been grieved if he had understood; so great was his joy that, though he had been counted worthy of the Spirit, he did not even see what was before him. “And he was found,” it says, “at Azotus.” Philip too gained much from this. For what he had heard of the prophets, of Habakkuk, of Ezekiel and the others, he saw happen in his own case; he is shown to have gone a long way in an instant, if indeed he was found at Azotus; and there he stops, where he had to preach the gospel. “But Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest and asked him for letters to Damascus, to the synagogues, so that if he found any belonging to the Way, both men and women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem.” He fittingly put in the account of Paul's zeal, to show that he was drawn in the very midst of his zeal. For not yet sated with the murder of Stephen, nor filled with the persecution and scattering of the church, he goes to the high priest. Here what was said by Christ to the disciples is fulfilled: “The hour is coming when everyone who kills you will think he is offering service to God.” This man did so, then, not as the Jews did, God forbid. That he acted from zeal is plain from his going even to the cities outside. But they did not care even about those in Jerusalem; they were intent on one thing only, enjoying honor. And why was he going to Damascus? It was a great city, a royal city; he feared lest it too should be taken first. And see the longing and the vehemence, how lawfully … He does not go to a ruler, but to the high priest. He asks letters from him, “so that if he found any belonging to the Way.” He calls the believers “the Way”, as they were then called by everyone, perhaps because they were cutting the way that leads to heaven. And why did he not receive authority to punish them there, but brings them to Jerusalem? So that he might carry out the punishment here with more authority. And see: though he was throwing himself into such danger, he is nevertheless afraid even so of suffering some harm. That is why he takes others with him, perhaps to cut short his fear; or, since he was going against many, he takes many, so as to … more boldly. “Whomever he found, both men and women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem.” Besides, he also wanted, through the journey, to show them all his whole …; so little were they eager about this. And see him casting people into prison even before this. Those could not do it, but this man could, from his eagerness. “And as he went, it happened that he drew near Damascus; and suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him, and falling to the ground … why are you persecuting me?” [3] Why not in Jerusalem, why did it not happen in Damascus? So that others might not be able to tell it in different ways, but he himself, who was going there for this purpose, might be trustworthy when he told it. This at any rate he says when making his defense before Agrippa. He suffers in his eyes too, because the excess of light is wont to strike them; for the eyes have their measures. And an excess of sound is said to make people deaf and stunned. But Christ maimed only this man, and quenched his anger with fear, so that … “why are you persecuting me?” He does not say to him, “Believe,” nor anything else of the kind, but reproaches him. By his reproach he all but says this: “What wrong, great or small, have you suffered from me, that you do these things?” “And he said, ‘Who are you, Lord?’” For the present he confessed himself a servant. “And the Lord said, ‘I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.’” As if he said, “Do not think that your war is with men.” “And those who were with him heard Paul's voice, but saw no one to whom he answered.” Fittingly; for he made them hearers of the lesser things. For if they had heard that voice, they might even have disbelieved; but seeing Paul answering, they wondered. “But arise and enter the city, and you will be told what you must do.” See how he does not reveal everything to him at once, but only softens his mind beforehand; and by what he urges him to do, he at once gives him good hopes, and that he will see again. “And the men who were traveling with him stood speechless, hearing the voice but seeing no one. And Saul got up from the ground, and though his eyes were opened, …” they bring him in, like a city or a capital that has been taken. And the wonderful thing is that his very enemies and foes brought him in, while everyone looked on. “And he was three days without sight, and neither ate nor drank.” What could equal this? The bringing over of Paul becomes a consolation that balances the despondency over Stephen; it had comfort in itself too, in that Stephen departed in such a way, and it received this besides; and the villages of the Samaritans that were brought over gave very great consolation. “And why,” someone says, “did this not happen from the beginning, but afterwards?” So that it might be shown that Christ truly rose. For the man who was driving out his followers, who disbelieved his death and resurrection, who persecuted his disciples, from where, tell me, would he have come to believe, unless the power of the Crucified was great? Granted that those men were favoring him; what will you say to this one? Besides, he came over after the resurrection, and not at once, so that his war might be shown more clearly. For the man raging so as even to shed blood and throw people into prison believes all at once. It was not enough that he had not been with Christ; the faithful also had to be fiercely warred against by him. He left no excess of frenzy untried; he was the most vehement of all. But when he had been maimed, then he recognizes the proofs of Christ's lordship and love for humankind; or else so that no one might say that he pretended. For how could he, the man thirsting for blood, the man who went to the priests, who threw himself into dangers, who drove out and punished even those outside? So this man, after all this, confesses the lordship. And why was he not surrounded by the light inside the city, but before it? Because the many would not have believed, but would have mocked; since even there, of old, when they heard a voice from above, they said, “It is thunder.” He was more trustworthy reporting what concerned himself. … he was led in bound, though no chains were around him, … they dragged him, the man who had expected [to drag] others. And for what reason did he not eat or drink? … himself for what had happened; he confessed; he entreated God. And if someone should say, “The thing was compulsion” (for Elymas too suffered the same …): yes, he suffered it, but he remained as he was. How was Paul compelled? And what is more compelling than … at the resurrection, the soldiers reporting it, the other signs, … risen? But these things do not compel; they instruct. Why did the Jews not believe when they heard? That he spoke the truth was plain. For he would not have … if this had not happened; so that all ought … He was no less than those who preached his resurrection, or rather more trustworthy, having been … He was not with any of the faithful … at Damascus he changed, or rather he experienced this before the … I ask the Jew: Whence was Paul changed? He saw so many signs and was not changed; who persuaded him? Or rather, [who] put such eagerness into him as even to pray to become [accursed] for Christ? … the truth of the facts. But, as I said, let us be ashamed before the eunuch, both … being enlightened and … See how he was in power, how in …, and not even on the road was he idle? Who then was he … at home, when not even on the roads did he bear [to be idle]? Who was he at night?

All you who are in high rank, hear, and … home, he did not say to himself, “I am going off to my homeland; there I will receive the washing” … of the many. He did not need signs, he did not need …; from the prophet alone he believed. … Paul mourns himself, saying, “… that in me first Jesus Christ might display all his patience.” Truly this … is worthy of wonder. He did not see Christ, he did not see …; he saw Jerusalem still standing, and he believed Philip. Whence then did he become such a man? … his soul was …, he attended to the Scriptures … readings. And yet the thief too saw signs, the magi saw a star; but this man saw nothing … and believed; so great a thing is the reading of the Scriptures. … What then of Paul? Did he not [study] the law? … It seems to me that he was held back on purpose, for the sake of … the Jews … of Christ. For if they had had sense, … nothing would have benefited them so much as this. For this, and …, and everything, was enough to draw them. … nothing is wont so to offend the … See at any rate, after the scattering of the apostles, … God working the signs. They accused the apostles, they threw them into prison; then God works wonders. And see how: bringing them out of the prison was his sign; leading Philip was his sign; bringing Paul over was his sign; showing himself to Stephen was his sign. And consider how Paul is honored, and how the eunuch. Here Christ himself appears, perhaps because of Paul's harshness, and because he would not have been persuaded otherwise. Let us too dwell on these wonders and make ourselves worthy. Many now, though they come into church, do not know what is said; but the eunuch, both in the marketplace and while riding in a carriage, gave his attention to reading the Scriptures. But not you: none of you has a book in his hands; you have everything rather than the book. And why does he see him not before the events in Jerusalem, but after them? He was not to see the apostles being driven out, because he was still weak; nor was he formerly as well disposed as when the prophet instructed him. So too now, if any of you will attend to the prophets, he will not need signs. And if you like, let us look at the prophecy itself, at what it says: “As a sheep he was led to slaughter; and in his humiliation his judgment was taken away.” From this he learned that he was crucified, that his life is taken from the earth, that he did no sin, that he had power to save others too, that his generation is indescribable, that rocks were split, that the veil was torn, that the dead were raised from the tombs; or rather, Philip told him all these things, taking only his starting point from the prophet. Truly the reading of the Scriptures is a great thing. So that saying of Moses was fulfilled: “Sitting and lying down and rising up and walking, remember the Lord your God.” For roads especially, when they are deserted, give us opportunity for reflection, since there is no one to disturb us. And this man believes on the road, and Paul on the road; but Paul no one draws but Christ. This was greater than anything the apostles did; and the greater thing is that, though the apostles were in Jerusalem and none of them in Damascus, he returned from there persuaded; and those in Damascus knew that he had not come from Jerusalem persuaded, for he was carrying letters in order to bind the believers. Like an excellent physician, while the fever was still at its height, Christ brought him help; for he had to … in the meantime he condemned himself as one who had dared terrible things. But again it is good to resume the discourse with you. For what reason, tell me, are the Scriptures? As far as your part goes, everything is taken away. For what reason is the church? Bury the books; perhaps there is not such a judgment, not such a punishment. If someone were to bury them in dung and not listen to them, he would not insult them so much as now. For what, tell me, is the insult there? That he buried them. And what here? That we do not listen to them. Tell me, when is a man most insulted: when he gets no answer while silent, or while speaking? Surely while speaking. So the insult is greater now, when you do not listen even while he speaks; greater the contempt. “Do not speak to us,” the Jews said of old to the prophets; but you do worse, saying, “Do not speak; we do not do it.” They turned them away so that they would not even utter a sound, as though they took from the voice some occasion for reverence; but you, out of great contempt, do not even do this. Believe me, if you had stopped our mouths, laying your hands on them, the insult would not be so great as it is now. For tell me, does the man who hears and does not obey show more contempt, or the man who does not even hear?

But come, let us examine the matter in the case of an insult. If one man restrains the person insulting him and stops his mouth, as one pained by the insults, while another neither cares nor takes any notice, which shows more contempt? Is it not the latter? For the former shows that he feels the blow, but the latter all but stops the mouth of God. Did you shudder at what was said? But hear how this comes about. The mouth through which God speaks is the mouth of God. For just as this mouth is our soul's mouth, though the soul has no mouth, so too the mouth of the prophets is the mouth of God. Hear and shudder. The deacon, the common minister, stands crying aloud and saying, “Let us attend!”, and this many times. That voice which he sends out is the common voice of the church, and no one attends. After him the reader begins the prophecy of Isaiah, and not even so does anyone attend, although prophecy has nothing human about it. Then he cries out for all to hear, “Thus says the Lord,” and not even so does anyone attend. What am I saying? He recites fearful and terrible things, and not even so is there anyone who attends. But what is the excuse of the many? “The same things,” they say, “are always read.” This above all is what destroys you. Even if you knew them, you ought not on that account to keep away; for in the theaters too the same things always take place, and yet you do not get your fill. What “same things” do you dare to speak of, you who do not even know the names of the prophets? Are you not ashamed to say that you do not listen because the same things are always read, when you do not even know the names of what is read, and that though you always hear the same things? For you yourself have admitted that the same things are said. If I were saying this to bring it as a charge, you ought to have turned to another defense, not to your own accusation. Tell me, do you not admonish your son? If then he says, “Always the same things,” do you not think it an insult? It would be possible not to say the same things only if we both knew them and showed them in our works; or rather, not even then is the reading superfluous. Who is the equal of Timothy? And yet, writing even to him, Paul said, “Attend to reading, to exhortation.” For it is not possible, it is not possible ever to exhaust the sense of the Scriptures; it is a spring that has no end. “I said, ‘I will be wise,’” it says, “‘and then it departed from me.’” Do you want me to show that they are not the same things? How many do you think have spoken on the Gospels? Yet all of them spoke in a fresh and new way. For the more one spends time in them, the more sharply one sees, the more one beholds the light in its purity. See how many things I ask: What is prophecy? Tell me. What are narratives? What is a parable? What is allegory? What is a type? What is a symbol? What are gospels? Just tell me this one plain thing: why are they called Gospels? Surely you have often heard that good news ought to have nothing gloomy in it; but these are full of much gloom. “Their fire will not be quenched,” it says, “and their worm will not die”; then, “He will cut him in two and put his portion with the hypocrites”; then, “He will say, ‘I do not know you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’” … to tell us. Or does none of this concern us? You have become deaf, and you stoop down like men struck senseless. Good news ought to contain nothing of things to be done, but only to advise good things; but these contain countless things to be done, such as these: “If anyone does not hate his father and mother, he is not worthy of me”; and, “I did not come to bring peace on earth, but a sword”; and, “In the world you will have tribulation.” Fine indeed; for these are not good news. For good news is this: “These good things will be yours”; as people say to one another in ordinary speech, “What good news have you for me?”, “Your father is coming, your mother.” It does not say, “Do this.” Again, tell me, how do these differ from the prophetic writings? Why are those not also called gospels? For they too say the same things, for example, “The lame shall leap like a deer”; “The Lord will give a word to those who preach good news”; “I will give you a new heaven and a new earth.” Why are those not also called gospels? Why is this not also prophecy? But if, without even knowing what gospels are, you so despise the reading of the Scriptures, what shall I say to you? Shall I say another thing too? Why four Gospels? Why not ten? Why not twenty? Why did many undertake to compose Gospels? Why not one? Why disciples? Why some who were not disciples? And why the Scriptures at all? And yet Scripture says the opposite: “I will give you a new covenant.” Where are those who say, “Always the same things”? If you knew these things, that even if a man lives ten thousand years they are not the same things, you would not have said this. Believe me, I will tell you none of these things, neither in private nor in public; but if anyone finds the answer, I will nod; if not, I will let it be. For in this way we have made you useless, always saying everything ready-made, and not refusing when we should. See, you have questions enough: consider them, tell the reason. Why gospels? Why not prophecies? Why are there things to be done in the Gospels? And if this one is at a loss, let another inquire, and bring together to one another what you each have; and from now on we will be silent. For if what has been said has profited you nothing, much less would we add anything more. Truly we are drawing water into a jar full of holes, and from this your punishment too is greater. So for this reason we will be silent. That this may not happen is in your power. For if we see your zeal, perhaps we will speak again, so that you may be more approved and we may rejoice over you, glorifying in all things the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom be the glory and the might and the majesty and the honor, with the Father who is without beginning and his Holy Spirit, now and always and to the ages of ages. Amen.