Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John: Tractate XLVII
5. But perhaps some one thinks that, as He Himself came not to us, but sent, we have not heard His own voice, but only the voice of those whom He sent. Far from it: let such a thought be banished from your hearts; for He Himself was in those whom He sent. Listen to Paul himself whom He sent; for Paul was specially sent as an apostle to the Gentiles; and it is Paul who, terrifying them not with himself but with Him saith, “Do ye wish to receive a proof of Him who speaketh in me, that is, of Christ?” Listen also to the Lord Himself. “And other sheep I have,” that is, among the Gentiles, “which are not of this fold,” that is, of the people of Israel: “them also must I bring.” Therefore, even when it is by the instrumentality of His servants, it is He and not another that bringeth them. Listen further: “They shall hear my voice.” See here also, it is He Himself who speaks by His servants, and it is His voice that is heard in those whom He sends. “That there may be one fold, and one shepherd.” Of these two flocks, as of two walls, is the corner-stone formed. And thus is He both door and the corner-stone: all by way of comparison, none of them literally.
6. For I have said so before, and earnestly pressed it on your notice, and those who comprehend it are wise, yea, those who are wise do comprehend it; and yet let those who are not yet intellectually enlightened, keep hold by faith of what they cannot as yet understand. Christ is many things metaphorically, which strictly speaking He is not. Metaphorically Christ is both a rock, and a door, and a corner-stone, and a shepherd, and a lamb, and a lion. How numerous are such similitudes, and as many more as would take too long to enumerate! But if you select the strict significations of things as you are accustomed to see them, then He is neither a rock, for He is not hard and senseless; nor a door, for no artisan made Him; nor a corner-stone, for He was not constructed by a builder; nor a shepherd, for He is no keeper of four-footed animals; nor a lion, as it ranks among the beasts of the forest; nor a lamb, as it belongs to the flock. All such, then, are by way of comparison. But what is He properly? “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God [God was the Word].” And what, as He appeared in human nature? “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us [in us].”
7. Hear also what follows. “Therefore doth my Father love me,” He saith, “because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.” What is this that He says? “Therefore doth my Father love me:” because I die, that I may rise again. For the “I” is uttered with special emphasis: “Because I lay down,” He saith, “ I lay down my life,” “ I lay down.” What is that “I lay down”? I lay it down. Let the Jews no longer boast: they might rage, but they could have no power: let them rage as they can; if I were unwilling to lay down my life, what would all their raging effect? By one answer of His they were prostrated in the dust: when they were asked, “Whom seek ye?” they said, “Jesus;” and on His saying to them, “I am He,” they went backward, and fell to the ground. Those who thus fell to the ground at one word of Christ when about to die, what will they do at the sound of His voice when coming to judgment? “I, I,” I say, “lay down my life, that I may take it again.” Let not the Jews boast, as if they had prevailed; He Himself laid down His life. “I laid me down [to sleep],” He says [elsewhere]. You know the psalm: “I laid me down and slept; and I awaked [rose up], for the Lord sustaineth me.” What of that—“I lay down”? Because it was my pleasure, I did so. What does “I lay down” mean? I died. Was it not a lying down to sleep on His part, who, when He pleased, rose from the tomb as He would from a bed? But He loves to give glory to the Father, that He may stir us up to glorify our Creator. For in adding, “I arose, for the Lord sustaineth me;” think you there was here a kind of failing in His power, so that, while He had it in His own power to die, He had it not in His power to rise again? So, indeed, the words seem to imply when not more closely considered. “I lay down to sleep;” that is, I did so, because I pleased. “And I arose:” why? “Because the Lord sustaineth [will sustain] me.” What then? wouldst Thou not have power to rise of Thyself? If Thou hadst not the power, Thou wouldst not have said, “I have power to lay down my life, and I have power to take it again.” But, as showing that not only did the Father raise the Son, but the Son also raised Himself, hear how, in another passage in the Gospel, He saith, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” And the evangelist adds: “But this He spake of the temple of His body.” For only that which died was restored to life. The Word is not mortal, His soul is not mortal. If even thine dieth not, could the Lord’s be subject to death?
8. How can I know, thou wilt say, that mine dieth not? Slay it not thyself, and it cannot die. How, thou askest, can I slay my soul? To say nothing meanwhile of other sins, “The mouth that lieth, slayeth the soul.” How, thou sayest, can I be sure that it dieth not? Listen to the Lord Himself giving security to His servant: “Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do.” But what in the plainest terms does He say? “Fear Him who hath power to slay both soul and body in hell.” Here you have the fact that it dieth, and that it doth not die. What is its dying? What is dying to thy flesh? Dying, to thy flesh, is the losing of its life: dying to thy soul, is the losing of its life. The life of thy flesh is thy soul: the life of thy soul is thy God. As the flesh dies in losing the soul, which is its life, so the soul dieth in losing God, who is its life. Of a certainty, then, the soul is immortal. Manifestly immortal, for it liveth even when dead. For what the apostle said of the luxurious widow, may also be said of the soul if it has lost its God, “she is dead while she liveth.”
9. How, then, does the Lord lay down His life [soul]? Let us, brethren, inquire into this a little more carefully. The time is not so pressing as is usual on the Lord’s day: we have leisure, and theirs will be the profit who have assembled to-day also to wait on the Word of God. “I lay down my life,” He says. Who lays down? What lays He down? What is Christ? The Word and man. Not man as being flesh alone: but as man consists of flesh and soul, so, in Christ there is a complete humanity. For He would not have assumed the baser part, and left the better behind, seeing that the soul of man is certainly superior to the body. Since, then, there is entire manhood in Christ, what is Christ? The Word, I repeat, and man. What is the Word and man? The Word, soul, and flesh. Keep hold of that, for there has been no lack of heretics on this point also, expelled as they were some time ago from the catholic truth, but still persisting, like thieves and robbers who enter not by the door, to lay their snares around the fold. These heretics are termed Apollinarians, and have ventured to assert dogmatically that Christ is only the word and flesh, and contend that He did not assume a human soul. And yet some of them could not deny that there was a soul in Christ. See their intolerable absurdity and madness. They would have Him to possess an irrational soul, but deny Him a rational one. They allowed Him a mere animal, they deprived Him of a human, soul. But they took away Christ’s reason by losing their own. Let it be otherwise with us, who have been nourished and established in the catholic faith. Accordingly, on this occasion I would remind your Charity, that, as in former lectures, we have given you sufficient instruction against the Sabellians and Arians,—the Sabellians, who say, The Father is the same as the Son—the Arians, who say, The Father is one being, the Son is another, as if the Father and Son were not of the same substance—and also, provided you remember as you ought, against the Photinian heretics, who have asserted that Christ was mere man, and destitute of Godhead: and against the Manicheans, who maintain that He was God only without any true humanity: we may, on this occasion, in speaking about the soul, give you some instruction also in opposition to the Apollinarians, who say that our Lord Jesus Christ had no human soul, that is, a rational intelligent soul,—that soul, I mean, by which, as men, we differ from the brutes.
10. In what sense, then, did our Lord say here, “I have power to lay down my soul [life]”? Who lays down his soul, and takes it again? Is it as being the Word that Christ does so? Or is it the human soul He possesses that lays down and resumes its own existence? Or is it His fleshly nature that lays down its life and takes it again? Let us sift each of the three questions I have suggested, and choose that which conforms to the standard of truth. For if we say that the Word of God laid down His soul, and took it again, we should have to fear the entrance of a wicked thought, and have it said to us: Then there was a time when that soul was separated from the Word, and a time, after His assumption of that soul, when He was without a soul. I see, indeed, that the Word was once without a human soul, but only so, when “in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” But from the time that the Word was made flesh, to dwell amongst us, and manhood was assumed by the Word, that is, our whole nature, soul and flesh, what more could His passion and death do than separate the body from the soul? It separated not the soul from the Word. For if the Lord died, yea, because He died (for He did so for us on the cross), doubtless His flesh breathed out that which was its life: for a short time the soul forsook the flesh, although destined by its own return to raise the flesh again to life. But I cannot say that the soul was separated from the Word. He said to the soul of the thief, “To-day shalt thou be with me in paradise.” He forsook not the believing soul of the robber, and did He abandon His own? Surely not; but when the Lord took that of the other into His keeping, He certainly retained His own in indissoluble union. If, on the other hand, we say that the soul laid down and reassumed itself, we fall into the greatest absurdity; for what was not separated from the Word, was inseparable from itself.