Homilies on Acts 34.1–34.5

[Lemma] “… the word of the Lord. And after some days … and visit the brothers in every city where we proclaimed the word of the Lord, how they are.” (Acts 15:35–36)

See again their humility, how they share the word with others too. And Luke has already described to us the character of the apostles, showing that the one was gentler and more indulgent, the other more exact and severe; for the gifts are different; and that this too is a gift is plain. But the one suits some characters of men, the other suits others; and if they are exchanged, they become useless. And it seems to be a sharp quarrel, but the whole is a providential arrangement. For it happens so that each may receive the places suited to him. Besides, it was necessary that all should not be of equal rank, but that one should lead and another be led; and this too is by design. For the Cypriots had shown nothing of the kind that those in Antioch and the rest had shown; and the former needed the gentler character more, the latter this one. “And Barnabas wanted to take with them also John called Mark; but Paul thought it best not to take with them one who had withdrawn from them in Pamphylia and had not gone with them to the work. And there arose a sharp disagreement, so that they separated from each other; … sailed to Cyprus; but Paul chose Silas and went out, being commended to the grace of God by the brothers.” So too among the prophets we find different minds and different characters: for example, Elijah severe, Moses meek. And here, then, Paul is the more vehement. But see his fairness even so. “He thought it best,” it says, “not to take with them one who had withdrawn from them in Pamphylia.” For as a general would not choose to have a good-for-nothing as his armor-bearer for ever, so neither would the apostle. This taught the others too, and set the man himself right. Was Barnabas bad, then, someone says? Not at all; it is quite absurd even to think it. For how is it not absurd to say that he became bad over so small a matter? But see: first, no evil came of it, if men sufficient for whole nations separated from each other, but even a great good; and next, if this had not been so, they would not easily have chosen to leave each other. And admire the writer for not hiding even this. But even if they had to separate, someone says, it should have been without a sharp disagreement. Even from this, above all, it is shown that they were human. For if this had to happen in the case of Christ, much more here. Besides, the sharp disagreement would not be base, when each disputes about such things, and with just reason. If either of them had been provoked in seeking his own interest and his own honor, you would be right; but if each, wishing to train and teach, took one road and the other another, what fault is there in this? They did many things with human understanding too; for they were not stones or logs. And see Paul accusing and giving the reason. For he respected Barnabas out of great humility, since he had shared so much with him and been with him; but he did not respect him so far as to overlook what was needful. Which of them judged better is not for us to declare; but meanwhile, a great providential arrangement took place, since these churches were going to be counted worthy of a second visit, but those not even of one. They did not simply stay in Antioch, but taught. What did they teach? What good news did they bring? Both to those already believers and to those not yet. For since there were countless scandals, their presence was needed. The point is not that they differed in opinion, but that they condescended to each other … So the separation became a greater good, and the matter took its occasion from this. What then? Did they part as enemies? God forbid. For you see that after this Barnabas receives many praises from Paul in the letters. A sharp disagreement, it says, took place, not enmity or contention. The sharp disagreement was strong enough to separate them; and rightly. For what each thought profitable, this afterwards he did not accept because of his fellowship with the other.

[2] It seems to me that the separation also took place by mutual understanding, and that they said to each other, “Since I do not wish it and you wish it, so that we may not fight, let us divide the places.” So they did this quite yielding to each other. For Barnabas wished Paul’s view to stand; that is why he withdrew; and Paul likewise wished Barnabas’s view to stand; that is why he too does the same and withdraws. Would that we too made such separations, so as to go off to preaching! “But Paul,” it says, “chose Silas and went out, being commended to the grace of God by the brothers.” This man is wonderful … and very great. This quarrel greatly benefited Mark. For Paul’s severity turned him round, and Barnabas’s kindness made him no longer be left behind; so they quarrel, but their gain comes to one end. For seeing Paul choosing to part from him, he would have been much afraid and would have condemned himself; and again, seeing Barnabas holding to him so firmly, he would have loved him greatly; and the disciple was set right through the quarrel of the teachers; so far was he from being scandalized. If they had done this for the sake of their own honor, there would be reason for blame; but if they did it for his salvation, and contend about one thing, so as to show that the one who had honored him had judged well, what is wrong in that?

[3] See Paul’s good judgment: he does not go to other cities before visiting those that had received the word. “And he went through Syria and Cilicia, strengthening … and Lystra.” For it is folly to run about at random. Let us too do this: let us train the first ones first, so that they may not become a hindrance to those who come after them. “Let us visit,” he says, “the brothers, how they are.” And he rightly did not know this, so that he might go and visit the brothers. See him always awake, anxious, not bearing to sit still, though he was undergoing countless dangers. Do you see that it was not from cowardice that he went back to Antioch? For like a physician he went to the sick, and showed the necessity of the visit by saying, “in which we proclaimed the word.” Barnabas withdrew and did not go with him any more. “Choosing Silas,” it says, “and being commended to the grace of God.” What is this? They prayed, he means; they besought God. See how everywhere the prayer of the brothers has great power. And henceforth he traveled on foot, wishing to benefit those who saw him by his journey too; and rightly. For when he was in haste, he sailed; but now no longer. “And behold, a disciple was there named Timothy, the son of a Jewish woman who was a believer, but his father was a Greek; he was well spoken of by the … him because of the Jews who were in those places; for they all knew that his father was a Greek.” One may well be astonished at Paul’s good judgment. He who had fought so hard about circumcision, who had set everything in motion and had not desisted until he succeeded, now, when the decree has been ratified, circumcises the disciple. He not only does not prevent others, but does it himself. Nothing is wiser than Paul; so in everything he looked to what was advantageous; he did nothing simply from a fixed opinion. “Him he wanted,” it says, “to go out with him.” The wonderful thing is that he even took him with him. “Because of the Jews,” it says, “who were in those places.” This is the reason for circumcising him; for they would not have borne to hear the word from an uncircumcised man. And what? See the achievement: he circumcised in order to abolish circumcision; for he was preaching the decrees of the apostles. Do you see a fight, and building up through the fight? Not only being warred against by others, but themselves doing opposite things, in this way they built up the church. “They increased,” it says, “in number daily.” Did you see the gain from the circumcision? Then he does not linger on these, since he had come to visit; but what? He goes on far … “And as they went through the cities, they delivered to them for observance the decrees decided on by the apostles and elders in Jerusalem. So the churches were strengthened in the faith, and increased in number daily. And they went through Phrygia and the region of Galatia, having been forbidden by the Holy Spirit to speak the word in Asia” — leaving Phrygia and Galatia, they hastened inland — “and when they had come opposite Mysia, they attempted to go into Bithynia, and the Spirit did not allow them.” Why they were forbidden he does not say; but that they were forbidden he did say, teaching us only to obey and not to seek the reasons, and showing that they also did many things in a human way. “… Mysia, they went down to Troas. And a vision appeared to Paul in the night: a man of Macedonia was standing, beseeching him and saying, ‘Come over into Macedonia and help us.’” Why a vision, and not the Holy Spirit commanding? God wished to draw them in this way too; since to the saints too he appeared in dreams; and at the very beginning Paul himself saw a vision, a man coming in and laying his hands on him. Then he draws him there for this reason too, that the preaching may be extended. Besides, he is prevented from lingering in the other cities for this reason, since Christ was urging him on. For those were going to enjoy John for a long time, and perhaps had no great need; but he had to go there. And so, crossing over, he goes out. “And when he had seen the vision, immediately we sought to go out into Macedonia, concluding that the Lord had called us to preach the gospel to them … Samothrace, and the next day to Neapolis, and from there to Philippi, which is a leading city of the district of Macedonia, a colony. We remained in this city some days.” So Christ too appears to him and says, “You must stand before Caesar.” Then he also gives the places, as one narrating a history, and showing where he stayed some time; and he shows that it was in the larger cities, while he passed by the others. A colony is a rank of city. But let us look at what was said from the beginning. “… let us visit the cities in which we proclaimed the word.” And yet he ought not to have asked Barnabas, since he was going to accuse him afterwards.

This happens also with God and Moses: the one entreats, the other is angry. As when he says, “If her father had spat in her face”; and again, “Let me alone, and in my anger I will blot out this people”; and Samuel, when he mourns for Saul; for through both great good things come about. So too here: the one is angry, the other no longer. This happens with us too. And the sharp disagreement rightly took place, so that Mark might be trained, and the thing might not seem to be play-acting. For he who yielded everywhere would not have refused to yield here: the man who loved Paul so much that before this he sought him out in Tarsus, and brought him to the apostles, and carried out the relief mission together with him, and accepted the matters of the decree together with him. He would not have become angry over such a thing; but they separate from each other in order to train and perfect, through the separation, those who needed their teaching; as he does elsewhere too, saying, “But you, do not grow weary in doing good.” He rebukes others, but commands that good be done to all. This we too do in daily practice. Here it seems to me that others too shared Paul’s indignation. And then, taking them aside privately as well, he does everything, exhorts and admonishes. Concord can do much, love can do much; even if you ask for something great, even if you are unworthy, you will be heard because of your intention; do not fear.

“He went through,” it says, “the cities. And behold, there was a disciple named Timothy, who was well spoken of by the brothers at Lystra and Iconium.” Great is Timothy’s faith, that he is well spoken of by all. When Barnabas withdrew, Paul finds another to balance him. Of him he says, “Remembering your tears and your sincere faith, which dwelt first in your grandmother Lois and your mother Eunice.” “And taking him,” it says, “he circumcised him.” For what reason, he himself adds, saying, “Because of the Jews who were in those places.” For this reason, then, he is circumcised; or also because of his father, for he had remained a Greek. So Timothy was not circumcised. See the law already being dissolved. Some think that he was born after the preaching; but perhaps this is not so: “From infancy,” he says, “you have known the sacred writings.” That, then, can be said; or, if not that, that Paul was going to make him a bishop, and he must not be uncircumcised. Meanwhile the Gentiles had to keep no such thing. Nor was this a small matter, since even after so long a time this too scandalized them. It was the beginning of the dissolution of the law that the Gentiles did not keep these things, and were in no way harmed, and had nothing less in respect of faith; then the Jews too willingly gave them up. Since, then, he was going to preach, so as not to strike the Jews with a double blow, he circumcised Timothy, though he was only half Jewish; for he was born of a Greek father and a believing mother. Nevertheless, since that achievement among the Gentiles was great, he did not trouble about this; for the word had to be sown; that is why he himself circumcised him. See here too a great good arising from opposition. “And they increased in number,” it says. Do you see that circumcision not only did no harm, but even brought the greatest benefit? “And when he had seen the vision, immediately,” it says, “we sought to go out into Macedonia, concluding that the Lord had called us.” See: no longer through an angel, as with Philip, as with Cornelius; but how? Through a vision God appears to him, henceforth in a more human way, no longer a more divine one. For where persuasion was easier, he acts in a more human way; but where there was much resistance, in a more divine way. For where he was only eager to preach, a dream appears to him for this; but where he had to refrain from preaching, which he could not bear, the Holy Spirit reveals it. So too there to Peter: “Rise, go down.” For the Spirit did not do the easy things as well; a dream sufficed for him. And to Joseph, who was readily persuaded, a dream appears, but to the others a waking vision. So too to Cornelius, and to Paul himself. “And behold,” it says, “a man of Macedonia standing, beseeching,” that is, on behalf of those who needed healing. What is “concluding”? Inferring, he means. From seeing Paul and no one else, from being prevented by the Spirit, and from being at the borders, from all these they understood this. Besides, the voyage too showed it; for no long time passed, and so they come to the very root of Macedonia. So the sharp disagreement is providentially arranged to happen for their advantage. For otherwise the Holy Spirit would not have acted, Macedonia would not have received the word. Such great progress is a sign that what happened was nothing human. And yet he did not say that Barnabas …, but, “A sharp disagreement arose between them.” If the one was not provoked, neither was the other.

Knowing these things, let us not read them carelessly; let us learn and be trained; for not in vain … It is a great evil not to know the Scriptures; we are harmed by the very things from which we ought to be benefited. So too medicines, though many of them have a healing nature, corrupt and destroy if those who use them do not know how to use them well; and weapons that are able to protect, if no one knows how to wield them, destroy their owner. The cause is that we seek … rather than the benefit of the soul, and look to other things rather than to our own advantage. We often seek the soundness of a house, and would not bear to see it grow old or fall down or be damaged by storms; but for the soul there is no care, but even if we see its foundations giving way, even if its walls and roof, we take no account. Again, if we have animals, we seek their welfare, and … grooms and horse-doctors … we leave no stone unturned; and we look after their stables, and exhort those to whom they are entrusted not to …, nor to drive them carelessly, nor to put a load on them …, nor to take them out at untimely hours of the night, nor to cut short their feed; and among us many rules are laid down for the welfare of animals; but of the soul there is no account. And why do I speak of animals that are useful to us? There are many who keep sparrows that are of no use, but only give pleasure, and there are many rules about them too, so that nothing is neglected or out of order; and we take care of everything rather than of ourselves. So we are held in less honor than all things. And if someone insults us in words, we are pained; but when we insult ourselves, not in word but in deed, and do not give our soul even as much care as we give our dogs, we think we suffer nothing. Do you see how full of darkness everything is? Men take care of their dogs, that they may not be filled more than is needful, so that they may be keen and good at hunting, driven on by hunger and want; but they take no care of themselves, nor do they order themselves not to live in luxury; they teach the irrational animals to practice philosophy, but they themselves … The thing is a riddle. And where do the irrational animals practice philosophy, someone says? Does it not seem to you a mark of great philosophy, when a dog, gnawed by hunger, after running and hunting, abstains from the food at hand, and, seeing the table set before it, though pressed by hunger, waits for its master? Be ashamed of yourselves; train your bellies to be as sparing as this … no account? …

You have no excuse. If you were able to instill so much philosophy into an irrational nature that neither speaks nor reasons, much more will you be able to instill it into yourself. For that this comes from human care and not from nature is clear; otherwise all dogs would have it. Become, then, like the dogs. You force me to bring my examples from there; for I ought to bring them from heavenly things; but since, if I say anything of that kind, you say that those things are great, for this reason I say nothing of heavenly things. And if I mention Paul, you say that he was an apostle; for this reason I do not mention Paul either. If I mention a man, you say that he was able to do it; for this reason I do not mention a man either, but a beast, and a beast that does not have this by nature, so that you may not say that it achieved this by nature and not by choice; and what is wonderful, not by its own choice, but by your care. It does not consider that it was cut, that it was torn in the chase, that it took the prey by its own labors; but casting all this aside, it keeps its master’s command, and rises above its belly. Yes, someone says, for it expects a share from the table. Then say to yourself too: the dog, in hope of a future pleasure, despises the present one; but you will not, in hope of the future good things, despise the present. That dog knows that if it tastes the food untimely and against its master’s will, it will be deprived of that food too and will not have even its allotted portion, receiving blows instead of food; but you cannot see even this, and what the dog learned from habit, you do not achieve through reason. Let us imitate the dogs. Hawks and eagles too are said to do this. What the dogs do with wild animals and gazelles, these do with birds; and these again by human training. These things are enough to condemn us, these to convict us. Let me mention another thing too: wild and untamed horses experienced men train in a short time so well that the rider who sits on them takes delight in the evenness of their gait; but no one takes care of the soul when it walks in disorder, but it leaps and kicks and is dragged on the ground like a child, and behaves indecently in countless ways, and no one puts a curb on it, or hobbles, or a bridle, or sets on it the experienced rider, I mean Christ. That is why everything has been turned upside down. For when you train dogs to master the belly, and tame anger in a lion, and unruliness in horses, and teach articulate speech to birds, how is it not absurd to implant rational achievements in irrational natures, but to bring the passions of irrational animals into rational ones? We have no excuse, we have no pardon. All who have succeeded will accuse us, believers and unbelievers alike; for unbelievers too have succeeded, and beasts and dogs, not men only; and we will accuse ourselves, since we succeed when we wish, but when we are lazy we are dragged down. For many even of those who were deep in wickedness have changed when they willed it. The cause, as I said, is that we go about seeking the advantage of other things, not our own. If you build a splendid house, you have looked to the advantage of the house, not your own; if you get a fine garment, to the body’s advantage, not your own; if a horse, likewise. No one considers how the soul may be beautiful; and yet if it is beautiful, there is need of none of those things; but if it is not, there is no benefit from them. For as with a bride: even if there are bridal chambers hung with golden curtains, even if there are choirs of the most comely and beautiful women, even if there are roses, even if there are garlands, even if the bridegroom is handsome, even if the maids, even if the friends, even if all are comely, but she herself is full of ugliness, there is no benefit; just as, if she is beautiful, no harm would come from the lack of these things, but rather the opposite. For with those things, if she is ugly, she would appear uglier; but without them she would appear more lovely. So too the soul, when it is beautiful, not only needs none of these things, but they even overshadow its beauty. For we shall see the philosopher shining not so much in wealth as in poverty. For there many will put it down to his money and to his not being in want; but when he lives with poverty and shines in everything and is forced into nothing shameful, then no one else any longer shares with him the crown for philosophy. Let us adorn the soul, then, if indeed we wish to be rich. What is the use, when the mules are white and sleek and well fed, but you who sit behind them are thin and mangy and ugly? What is the gain, when the coverings are soft and fine, full of rich embroidery and art, but the soul is ragged and naked and ugly? What is the gain, when the horse steps in good order, more like one dancing than walking, and is decked out for its dance with bridal ornament, while the rider limps more than the lame, and is more twisted in hands and feet than drunkards and madmen? Tell me, if someone gave you a fine horse and twisted your body, what would be the use? Now you have a twisted soul, and you care nothing? Let us at last take care of ourselves, I beg you. Let us not make ourselves held in less honor than all things. If someone insults us in words, we are stung and pained; but when we insult ourselves in deeds, we pay no heed. Let us come to our senses, late as it is, so that, taking great care of the soul and laying hold of virtue, we may be able to attain the eternal good things, by the grace and love for humankind of our Lord Jesus Christ, with whom to the Father together with the Holy Spirit be glory, might, honor, now and always and to the ages of ages. Amen.