Why was he not chosen to be an Apostle? 115 1.34-51. of the Truth. Because the Lord, even though He had not JOHN been commended to men's regard by the witness of John, Himself bare witness to Himself; for Truth suffices for its own witness. But because men were unable to receive truth, they sought it by means of a lamp: and therefore John was sent to shew them the Lord. Hear the Lord bearing witness to Nathanael; Nathanael said unto him, From Nazareth might John 1, good come. Philip saith unto him, Come and see. And $7. Jesus saw Nathanael coming unto Him, and saith of him, Behold an Israelite indeed in whom is no guile. Mighty witness! This was not said to Andrew, nor said to Peter, nor to Philip, which is said of Nathanael, Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile. 17. What make we then, brethren? ought this man to be the first among the Apostles? Not only is this man not found the first among the Apostles, but neither is he the middle one, no nor the last among the twelve, this Nathanael, to whom this great witness was borne by the Son of God, saying, Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile. Does any ask why? In so far as the Lord gives intimation, we find a probable reason. Namely, we are to understand that this Nathanael was well instructed and skilful in the law. For that reason the Lord was unwilling to place him among His disciples, because He made choice of unlearned men by whom to confound the world". Hear the Apostle P Just so in Enarr. in Psa. 65. §. 4. St. Aug. argues that the reason why Nathanael was not called to be an Apostle, was, that he was learned in the Law, and it was meet that the first Apostles should be unlearned men, 1 Cor. 1, 26-28. "Doubtless, the man who understood that from Nazareth there can some good thing come, was learned in the Law, and had looked well into the Prophets. I am aware that there is another way of pronouncing these words; but it is not approved by the more thoughtful interpreters: namely, that Nathanael should seem to have spoken despondingly, at hearing of Nazareth, A Nazareth potest aliquid boni esse? i. e. numquid potest? there cannot, can there?' spoken as a question, in the tone of one who gives up all hope. It follows, Come and see. These words may suit either way of reading. If 116 An Israelite without guile, not, without sin, HOMIL. Speaking in this wise, For ye see, saith he, your calling, VII. brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not 1 Cor. 1, 26-28. many mighty, not many noble, are called: but God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; and base things of the world, and things that are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, as though they were things that are, to bring to nought things that are. If a learned man had been chosen, perhaps he would have said, that he was chosen because his learning deserved to be chosen. Our Lord Jesus Christ, designing to break the necks of the proud, did not seek a fisherman by means of an orator, but with a fisherman gained an emperor. Mighty was Cyprian as an orator, but before him was Peter the fisherman, through whom, in after times, not only the orator but an emperor too should believe. At first, one that was noble, none learned, was chosen: because God chose the weak things of the world to confound the mighty. Nathanael then was great and without guile; for this only reason not chosen, lest any should imagine that the Lord had chosen the learned. And from this very learning which he had in have been proud, if He had not first of the despised Nazareth, a place of mixed heathen population, can any good thing come?" and similarly, Nonnus. S. Chrysostom, "Out of Nazareth? for Messias cometh of Bethlehem." Euthymius Zigabenus combines the interpretations of Theodore and S. Chrysostom. The opinion, which has found acceptance with many of the moderns, that Nathanael was an Apostle, (John 21, 1. 2.) namely, Bartholomew, who is paired with Philip in Matt. 10, 3. Mark 1, 18. Luke 6, 14. (see Lightfoot Hor. Hebr.) appears to have been unknown to the ancients. As St. Austin, so St. Chrysostom, St. Gregory Nyssen, and St. Gregory the Great, expressly deny that Nathanael was of the Twelve. Baronius, who disapproves the opinion, (Martyrol. Rom.) cites as its authors Abbas Rupertius and Cornelius Janssen, and Cave, (Lives of the Apostles,) who approves it, alleges no names of earlier date. Compare Assemanni Bibl. Or. i. 306; ii. 4. 9 St. Augustine constantly cites this text with the clause tanquam quæ sunt, or sint, or tanquam sint. but, without the duplicity which cloaks sin. 117 1.34-51. the law it came, that when he heard of Nazareth-for JOHN he had carefully searched the Scriptures, and knew that the Saviour was to be looked for from thence, which thing the other Scribes and Pharisees hardly knew;-this man, I say, excellently acquainted with the law, when he heard Philip say, We have found Him, of Whom Moses in the Law and the Prophets did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the Son of Joseph; this man, who knew the Scriptures exceedingly well, at hearing the name of "Nazareth," felt hope rise within him, and said, From Nazareth there can some good come. 18. Now let us see the rest concerning Nathanael. Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile. What is, In whom is no guile? Peradventure he was without sin? Peradventure he was not sick? Peradventure he had no need of a physician? God forbid. No one here is by nature such as not to need that Physician. What then doth this mean, In whom is no guile? Let us search a little more carefully: it will appear presently in the name of the Lord. The Lord saith Dolus, (Guile,) and whoever understands Latin, knows that dolus (guile) is when one thing is done, another pretended. Mark, beloved. Dolus (guile) is not dolor (pain). I say this, because many brethren, who are not very well skilled in Latin, say, "he is racked with dolus," instead of "with dolor." Guile is fraud, acting a part. When a man conceals one thing in his heart and speaks another, it is guile, and he has, so to speak, two hearts: one recess, as it were, of his heart where he sees truth, another where he conceives falsehood. And that ye may know that this is guile, it is said in the Psalms, Lips of guile. What means, Ps.12,3. lips of guile? It follows, with a heart and a heart have they spoken evil. What is with a heart and a heart, but with a twofold heart? If then Nathanael was without guile, the Physician judged him curable', not whole. For whole is one 'sanabithing, curable another, incurable another. He who is sick with hope of recovery is said to be curable; he who is sick without hope, incurable. But he who is whole already has no need of a physician. The Physician therefore, Who had come to cure, saw that he was curable, because he was without guile. How was he without guile? If he is a sinner, he acknowledges that he is a sinner. For if he is a sinner, and says that he is righteous, guile is in his mouth. lem non sanum VII. 118 Nathanael, called by Philip, foreknown of Christ, HOMIL. So then in Nathanael it was the acknowledgment of sin that Jesus praised; He did not pronounce of him that he was not a sinner. 11-13. 36-47. 19. Wherefore, when the Pharisees, who deemed themselves righteous, found fault with the Lord, because the Matt. 9, Physician mixed among the sick, and said, See with whom He eateth, with publicans and sinners: the Physician made answer to those madmen, They that are whole need not a physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners. As much as to say, While ye call yourselves righteous, though ye are sinners, while ye judge yourselves whole, though ye are faint with sickness, ye push away from you the medicine, not preserve soundness of Luke 7, health. Hence too the Pharisee, who had asked the Lord to dine with him, deemed himself whole: but that sick woman broke into the house to which she had not been invited; and grown bold and shameless through her earnest desire of health, drew nigh, not to the head of the Lord, not to His hands, but to His feet; washed them with tears, wiped them with her hair, kissed them, anointed them with ointment, made peace, sinful woman as she was, with the Lord's footsteps. The Pharisee who was sitting there at meat, as though whole himself, found fault with the Physician; saying within himself, This Man, if he were a prophet, would have known what woman touched His feet. He suspected that Jesus knew not, because He had not repulsed her as though to prevent His being touched with unclean hands. But Jesus did know, He permitted Himself to be touched, that the touch itself might make whole. The Lord seeing the Pharisee's heart, put forth a parable: There was a certain creditor, which had two debtors; the one owed five hundred pence, and the other fifty; and when they had nothing to pay, he frankly forgave them both. Which of them loved him most? He answered, I suppose, Lord, he to whom he forgave most. And turning to the woman, He said unto Simon, Seest thou this woman? I entered into thine house, thou gavest Me no water for my feet: but she hath washed My feet with tears, and wiped them with the hairs of her head: thou gavest Me no kiss; she hath not ceased to kiss My feet: thou gavest Me no oil; she hath anointed My feet with ointment. Wherefore I say unto thee, To her are represents the Elect, lying under sins, 119 I.34-51. forgiven many sins, for she loved much: but to whom little JOHN is forgiven, the same loveth little. That is to say, Thou art more sick, but thou thinkest thyself whole. Thou thinkest that thou hast little forgiven thee, though thou owest more. Right well did she, because there was no guile in her, deserve medicine. What is, " There was no guile in her?" She confessed her sins. The same doth He praise in Nathanael also, that there was no guile in him. For many Pharisees who abounded in sins, called themselves righteous, and brought guile with them, and so could not be made whole. 47-49. 20. Jesus then beheld this man in whom was no guile, and said, Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile. John 1, Nathanael saith unto Him, Whence knowest Thou me? Jesus answered and said, Before that Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig, (that is, under the fig-tree,) I saw thee. Nathanael answered and said unto Him, Rabbi, Thou art the Son of God, Thou art the King of Israel. It may have been some mighty meaning that Nathanael discerned in those words, When thou wast under the fig-tree, I saw thee, before that Philip called thee. For his answer, Thou art the Son of God, Thou art the King of Israel, was not unlike that which Peter made so long afterwards, when the Lord said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Mat. 16, Bar Jona, for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but My Father which is in heaven. There again He named the Rock, and lauded the strength of the Church's grounding in this faith. Nathanael here already saith, Thou art the Son of God, Thou art the King of Israel. Wherefore? Because he had been told, Before that Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig-tree, I saw thee. 17. 19. 7. 21. We must enquire whether this fig-tree here has any signification. Hearken, my brethren. We find the fig-tree Mat. 21, cursed, because it had leaves only, and not fruit. In the first beginning of the human race, Adam and Eve, when Gen. 3, they had sinned, made themselves girdles of fig-leaves. Fig-leaves therefore signify sins. Nathanael, then, was under the fig-tree, signifying, under the shadow of death. The Lord saw him, He, of Whom it is said, They that sat under the Is. 9, 2. shadow of death, unto them hath Light arisen. What then Et ibi nominavit petram, et laudavit firmamentum Ecclesiæ in istâ fide. |