3. What might the Jews say to this? Here the accusation against them is irrefutable, the condemnation is merciless; they pronounced judgment on themselves. How? They considered John worthy of all faith and so truthful that they believed him not only when he testified about others, but also when he spoke about himself. If they had not had such an opinion of him, they would not have sent to inquire from him about himself. It is known that we believe only those people when they talk about themselves, whom we recognize as the most truthful people. But it is not only this that blocks their mouths, but also the very disposition with which they approached it; they came to him with special zeal, although later they changed, pointing to both, Christ said: "He was a lamp, burning and shining; but you wanted to rejoice in his light for a little while" (John 5:35). And John's very answer showed in him even more a man worthy of faith. Whoever does not seek his glory, it is said, is "true, and there is no iniquity in Him" (John 7:18). And he did not seek; but he sent them to another. Meanwhile, those sent were trusted and honorable, so that there was no refuge or justification for their unbelief in Christ. Why did you not accept what John said about Him? You sent your elders, through them you questioned him, you heard what the Baptist answered; they, on their part, showed all their zeal, all their curiosity, and pointed out all the persons whom you supposed in him, and yet he confessed with full freedom that he was neither Christ, nor Elijah, nor a prophet. Not limiting himself to this, he also said who he himself was talking about the essence of his baptism, namely, that it is unimportant and imperfect, and has nothing in it but water, thus showing the superiority of the baptism granted by Christ. He also added the testimony of Isaiah the prophet a long time before, and called one the Lord, and the other His servant and servant. What was left to do after that? Shall we not believe in Him of whom (John) testified, worship Him and confess Him to be God? And that this testimony was not a matter of flattery, but of truth, was shown by the temper and wisdom of the witness. This is also understandable because no one prefers his neighbor, and when he can get honor for himself, no one would want to give it to another, especially when the honor is so great. Thus John would not have given such a witness to Christ if He had not been God. If he had rejected this honor from himself, as one that was higher than his nature, he would certainly not have ascribed it to another, inferior being. "There stands among you [Someone] whom you do not know." He said this because (Christ) used to intervene in the crowd of people, as a simple man, and always taught against pride and vanity. And by knowledge here John calls precise knowledge, namely, who He is and whence He comes. And the expression: "He who comes after me" is often used by John, saying, as it were: "Do not think that everything consists in my baptism. If it had been perfect, then another would not have come after me with the establishment of another baptism. And my baptism is only a preparation and indication of the way to that baptism. Our business is a shadow and an image. Another person must come to show the truth." Thus, the words: "He who comes after me" most indicate His worthiness. If (the baptism of John) had been perfect, there would have been no need to seek a second. "He has gone before me," that is, He is more honorable, more glorious than I. And lest it should be thought that this superiority is only comparative, then, wishing to show His incomparable dignity, John adds: "I am not worthy to untie the strap of His shoes," i.e., He is not simply "standing before me," but in such a way that I am not worthy to be among even the last of His servants: to untie shoes is the work of the lowest service. If John is not worthy to untie the belt, John, "of those born of women there is no greater prophet," then where are we to place ourselves? If he who is worthy of the whole world, or rather greater than it (for it is said, "of which the whole world was not worthy"), if he acknowledges himself unworthy to be among His last servants, what shall we, who are burdened with a thousand vices, say, we who are as far removed from the virtue of John as the earth is from heaven?

4. Thus John says of himself that "I am not worthy to untie the strap of his shoes"; and the enemies of the truth go so mad that they consider themselves worthy to know Him as He knows Himself. What could be worse than such madness? What is more extravagant than such self-boasting? A wise man said it well: "The beginning of pride is the separation of a man from the Lord, and the turning away of his heart from his Maker" (Sir. 10:14). The devil, who was not a devil before, would not have been cast down and would not have become a devil if he had not fallen ill with this very disease. She deprived him of his former dignity, they brought him down to hell, she served as the cause of all evil for him. This vice in itself can damage any virtue of the soul, whether almsgiving, prayer, fasting, or anything else. It is said that the loftiness of people is not pure before the Lord.

It is not only fornication and adultery that defiles those who give themselves over to it, but also pride, and even much more. Why? For although fornication is an unpardonable evil, at least another person can refer to desire; and arrogance has no cause, no pretext under which to deserve even a shadow of excuse; it is nothing but the corruption of the soul and the most grievous disease, arising from nothing else but recklessness. Truly, there is no man more reckless than arrogant, even though he possesses great wealth, even though he receives a vast external education, even though he is placed in the highest degree of power, even though he has everything that seems enviable to people. If he who prides himself on real advantages is miserable and miserable, and loses the reward of all his perfections, is it not the most ridiculous of all who is puffed up with insignificant goods, the shade and the color of the grass (such is the glory of this age), since he acts as if a poor man, a beggar, constantly oppressed by hunger, happened to have a pleasant dream in one night, and thereby became vain? Miserable and miserable! Your soul is devoured by the most cruel illness, and you, wretched by extreme poverty, dream that you have so many talents of gold and a multitude of servants? It's not yours. And if you do not believe my words, then be convinced by the experiences of the former rich. If you are so intoxicated that you do not understand the adventures of others, then wait a little and you will learn from your own experience that there is no benefit for you from these blessings, when, with your last breath, not being in control of a single hour or a single minute, you will unwittingly leave them to the people around you and, as often happens, to people to whom you would not like to leave. Many did not even have the opportunity to dispose of them, but departed unexpectedly, still wishing to enjoy them, but they were no longer allowed to do so, and being carried away, departing from the world involuntarily, out of necessity, left their goods to those to whom they would not have wished. In order that this may not happen to us, we, while we are alive and well, will send them to our (coming) city. only in this way will we put them in a safe and secure place. Nothing, nothing can steal them from there: neither death, nor trust certificates, nor heirs, nor slander and slander; but whoever has brought with him as much as he departs from here will enjoy it all continuously. And who is so unhappy that he would not want to be forever consoled by his acquisition? Let us transfer our wealth and put it there. For this transfer we need neither donkeys, nor camels, nor chariots, nor ships — and God has delivered us from this trouble — we will only need the poor, the lame, the blind, the infirm. It is they who are entrusted with this transportation, it is they who send wealth to heaven, it is they who lead the owners of wealth into the inheritance of eternal blessings, which may we all attain, through the grace and love of mankind of our Lord Jesus Christ, through Whom and with Whom the Father, with the Holy Spirit, has glory now and ever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.

CONVERSATION 17

"It was at Bethabara by the Jordan, where John was baptizing. The next day John saw Jesus coming to him and said, 'Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world' (John 1:28, 29).

1. The words of St. John the Baptist as a testimony to his greatest reverence for Jesus Christ. — 2. Jesus Christ did not need to be baptized. — 3 and 4. The falsity of the assumption that Jesus Christ performed miracles in childhood. Why did the Jews not believe in Jesus Christ, although they heard the preaching of St. John the Baptist and saw so many signs and wonders? — The Reliability of the Evangelists. — Against the Gentiles. "There are defenders of spectacles, but truth and faith are not found. — Writings of philosophers of that time against Christians.

1. The great virtue is the bold, open confession of Christ, and the preference of this confession to all others; so great and wondrous that the Only-begotten Son of God confesses such a person before His Father, although this recompense is disproportionate. You confess on earth, and He confesses in heaven; you are before men, He is before the Father and all the angels. Such was John. He did not look at the people, nor at glory, nor at anything human, but, despising all this, with due freedom he preached to everyone about Christ. Therefore the Evangelist also signifies the very place (of his sermon) in order to show the boldness of the eloquent preacher. Not in a house, not around the corner, not in the wilderness, but on the Jordan, in the midst of a multitude of people, in the presence of all who had been baptized by him (and the Jews stood before John baptizing), he proclaimed this wondrous confession of Christ, filled with great, sublime and ineffable dogmas, and said of himself that he was not worthy to untie the strap of His boots. How does the Evangelist express this? Adding the words: "This happened in Bethany." And in the corrected lists it says: "in Bethabara." Bethany was not on the other side of the Jordan, nor in the wilderness, but near Jerusalem. But these passages mean (the evangelist) for another reason as well. He did not wish to relate events of antiquity, but events that had not happened long before, and therefore he calls as witnesses to his words people who were in those places and were eyewitnesses, and thus presents proofs from the very places. Being sure that he adds nothing of his own in his narrative, but speaks simply as it was, he borrows evidence from the very passages, which, as I have said, may be no small proof of the truth. "On the morrow John saw Jesus coming to him, and said, 'Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.'" The Evangelists, as it were, divided the times among themselves. Matthew, having briefly reviewed the time before the imprisonment of John the Baptist, hastens to the circumstances that follow; and the Evangelist John not only does not briefly represent this time, but dwells on it in particular. Matthew, after the coming of Jesus from the wilderness, having kept silent about intermediate circumstances, such as what John preached, what the Jews sent (to him) said, and having shortened everything else, immediately goes to prison. "And when Jesus heard," he says, "that John had been put [into custody], he departed" from there (Matt. 4:12). But John did not do so; and having kept silent about the departure into the wilderness, about which Matthew spoke, he tells about the circumstances after Jesus' descent from the mountain and, having told about many things, then adds: "For John was not yet locked up in prison" (John 3:24). But why, you will say, does Jesus now come to John, not once, but also another time? Matthew says He had to come to be baptized. Pointing to this, Jesus Himself adds: "For thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness" (Matt. 3:15). And John shows that He came again after His baptism, and this he remarks in the words of the Baptist: "I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and abiding upon Him" (v. 32). So, why does he come to John? After all, He did not just come there, but came to him. "John sees," it is said, "Jesus coming to him." Since John baptized Him with many others, and many could assume that he came to John for the same reason as the others, that is, to confess his sins and wash in the river with repentance, Jesus comes again to give John himself the opportunity to correct this situation. And indeed John, when he said, "Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world" (v. 29), completely destroyed this suspicion. If He is so pure that He can even absolve the sins of others, then it is clear that He does not come to confess His sins, but to give the miraculous preacher an opportunity to repeat what has been said before even more accurately to impress upon the hearers what was said about Him before, and to add to it something else. The particle: here is used because many have long wanted, as a result of John's words, to see Him. Wherefore John also points out Him when He appeared, and says, Behold, by this he signifies that he is the one whom they have long awaited. "Here is the Lamb." He calls Him the Lamb, reminding the Jews of the prophecy of Isaiah and the foreshadowing from the time of Moses, in order to bring them closer to the truth through the type. But the lamb of the Old Testament never took upon himself anyone's sins, but this one took upon himself the sins of the whole world, delivered him from the wrath of God when he was threatened with destruction. "This is the man of whom I said, A man comes after me, who is before me, because he was before me" (v. 30).

2. Do you see how the Evangelist explains the expression "ahead of me" here? Calling Him a lamb and saying that He will take away the sin of the world, then He says: "He has gone before me," and thus shows that "before me" means taking up the sins of the world, the baptism of the Holy Spirit. "My coming had no other purpose than to preach the common universe of the Benefactor and to communicate the baptism by water; and His coming has as its goal the purification of all people and the granting of the grace-filled powers of the Comforter." "He stood before me," that is, He appeared more glorious than I, "because He was before me." Let the followers of the folly of Paul of Samosata be ashamed, who oppose such an obvious truth. "I did not know Him" (v. 31). See how he deflects all suspicion from his testimony, showing that it was given to them not by human partiality, but by the revelation of God. "I did not know Him," says John. How can you be a reliable witness? How will you teach others if you don't know yourself? How could he be partial to someone he didn't know? "For this reason he came to baptize in water, that he might be manifested to Israel" (v. 31). Thus, He Himself had no need of baptism, and this washing had no other purpose, namely, to pave the way for others to faith in Christ. John did not say, "I have come to baptize to cleanse those who are being baptized, or to forgive sins," but "that He may be manifested to Israel." Tell me, then, was it really impossible to preach and attract people without baptism? It was not so convenient. If the sermon had been without baptism, then everyone would not have flocked like this; they would not know the superiority of one baptism over another without comparing them. The people came out to John not only to listen to what he said, but for what purpose? To be baptized with a confession of one's sins. Meanwhile, when they came to be baptized, they learned about Christ and about the difference between baptism. And although John's baptism was more important than the Jewish one, and therefore everyone hastened to him, nevertheless it was not perfect. But how did you recognize Him? Through the descent of the Spirit, says John. And lest anyone think that Christ, like us, had need of the Spirit, listen to how John destroys this suspicion as well, showing that the descent of the Spirit took place solely for the proclamation of Christ. Having said, "I did not know him," John adds, "But he who sent me to baptize in water said to me, On whom you see the Spirit descending and abiding upon him, he is he who baptizes with the Holy Ghost" (v. 33). Do you see that the purpose of the descent of the Holy Spirit was only to point out Christ? Of course, John's testimony was certain; but wishing to make it still more certain, he raises it to God and the Holy Spirit. As John testified to a subject so great and wondrous that it could astonish all his hearers, that is, that (Jesus) alone takes away the sins of the world, and that the greatness of (His gift) is sufficient atonement for this, he prepares for such a thought. And the preparation is the teaching that He is the Son of God, that He has no need of baptism, and that the Spirit descended only to indicate Him. John himself did not have the power to communicate the Spirit. This is shown by those who were baptized by him when they say: "Have you received the Holy Spirit when you believed" (Acts 19:2).

Christ did not need baptism, neither this nor any other, or rather, baptism had need of the power of Christ. For the most important of all blessings was that the baptized should be worthy of the Spirit. That is why Christ, when He came, added this gift of the Spirit. "And John testified, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and abiding upon him. I did not know Him; but He who sent me to baptize in water said to me, On whom you see the Spirit descending and abiding upon Him, this is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit. And I have seen and testified that this is the Son of God" (vv. 32-34). John often uses the words, "I did not know Him," not without reason or purpose, but because He was His kinsman in the flesh. "Behold, Elizabeth thy kinswoman, and she conceived a son" (Luke 1:36). Thus, in order not to give the impression that he has partiality for the sake of kinship, he often says: "I did not know Him." And indeed it was. All the time he lived in the wilderness, outside his father's house. But how did he keep Christ from being baptized, saying: "I must be baptized of Thee" (Matt. 3:14), if he did not know Him before the descent of the Spirit, and then recognized Him only for the first time? This was evidence that he knew Him well. However, it is true that he did not learn before or long before that time. The miracles that occurred in the childhood of Jesus, such as the events with the Magi and others, happened much earlier, when John himself was still in infancy. And for such a long time, of course, Jesus was not known to everyone. And if He had been known, John would not have said, "That He came to baptize in water, that He might be revealed to Israel."

3. Hence it is evident to us that the signs which are said to have been performed by Christ in childhood are false and invented by some deceitful people. If He had begun to perform miracles from the first age, then John could not have been unaware of Him, and the people would not have had need of a teacher who would point Him out. Meanwhile, John says of himself that he came "that He might be manifested to Israel," and also on another occasion he said: "I need to be baptized by You"; Later, having come to know Him better, he preached about Him to the people, saying: "A man is coming after me, Who has gone before me," and "He who sent me to baptize in water" sent "that He might be revealed to Israel," — thus the one who sent revealed Christ to John even before the descent of the Spirit. Therefore, even before His coming, John said: "A Man is coming after me, Who has gone before me." Thus John did not know (Jesus) before coming to the Jordan and baptizing all, but he knew Him when He wanted to be baptized, and at the same time he knew Him by revelation at baptism, by the direction of the Father and the Spirit to the Jews, for whom the descent of the Spirit was. In order not to neglect the testimony of John, when he said that "He was before me," that He baptizes with the Spirit, and that He would judge the world, for this purpose the Father gave a voice, announcing the Son, and the Spirit descended, bringing this voice down on the head of Christ. Since one baptized, the other was baptized, so that any of those present would not think that the words of the Father were spoken about John, the Spirit descends for this, removing such a supposition. So, when John says, "I did not know Him," he is talking about a time that has passed, not close to baptism. Otherwise, how did he restrain Jesus, saying, "I must be baptized of you"? How did he say such words about Him? Why did the Jews not believe, you will say, when John was not the only one who saw the Spirit in the form of a dove? If they have seen, it is not only bodily eyes that are needed for such objects, but primarily the eyes of the mind, so that the real object may not be recognized as an empty phantom. They also saw how Christ performed miracles and how, touching the sick and dead with His hands, He restored them to life and health, but they were so intoxicated with hatred that they imagined the opposite of what they saw. How could they abandon their unbelief by the descent of the Spirit alone? Some say that not everyone saw Him, but only John and some others who were more well-meaning. Although with the eyes of the senses it was possible to see the Spirit descending in the form of a dove, it was not necessary that this manifestation should be obvious to all. And Zechariah saw many things in a sensual image, and Daniel and Ezekiel; but they had no one as a participant in the vision. Moses also saw many things that no one else saw. Nor were all of Christ's disciples worthy to see His transfiguration on the mountain, nor did all participate in the vision of the resurrection, as Luke clearly shows when he says that the Risen One revealed Himself "to witnesses who were chosen from God" (Acts 10:41). "And I saw and testified that this is the Son of God." When did he testify that there is a Son of God? He called Him the Lamb, and said that He would baptize with the Spirit, but that He was the Son of God, He did not say this. The other Evangelists do not write that He said anything after His baptism, and keeping silent about the events of this time, they speak of the miracles of Christ that took place after John's imprisonment. From this we can surmise that they passed over this and many other things in silence, as this same Evangelist showed at the end of his writing. They were so far from intending to invent anything great about Him, that they all unanimously and with all accuracy set forth circumstances apparently unfavorable to Him, and you will not find that any of them kept silent about anything of the kind. As for miracles, some miracles were left to be described by one of them, and some were kept silent by all. I say this not without purpose, but with the shamelessness of the Gentiles in mind; This is sufficient proof of the truthfulness of the Evangelists and that they did not say anything out of partiality. With this proof, together with others, you can fight against the Gentiles. But listen, it would be absurd for a physician to advocate for his art with all zeal, and for the shoemaker and the weaver and all other artisans for their trade, and he who professes to be a Christian will not be able to say a word in defense of his faith. Neglect of those arts causes damage to property, and negligence of faith destroys our very soul. And we are in such a miserable state that we use all our efforts for these things, and we neglect the most necessary, that on which our salvation depends, as worthless.

4. Nor does this dispose the Gentiles to condemn their own errors.

A lover of dancing, or a runner, or a fighter with beasts, tries in every way not to give in to competing with them, lavishes praise on them, defends them against those who reproach them, and with a thousand curses smites their opponents. But when a speech in defense of Christianity is to be made, everyone lowers their eyes to the ground, scratches, yawns, and retreats in ridicule. What indignation does this deserve, when you present Christ as inferior to the dancer, when you collect thousands of arguments in defense of what you do for the dancer, do not look at the fact that they are the most contemptible people, and in defense of Christ's miracles, which have attracted the whole universe, you do not even want to think about anything, or take any care? We believe in the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, in the resurrection of bodies, in eternal life. Now, if any of the Gentiles asks, Who is this Father, who is the Son, who is the Holy Ghost? Or: how do you yourselves, recognizing the three gods, accuse us of polytheism? —

And what we have said is enough to drive sleep away from you.