ACC ~ John 10 v14 - 21

OVERVIEW:

The promises of the good Shepherd are already revealed in Ezekiel (CLEMENT). Jesus is as close to his sheep as he is to his own Father (CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA). His intimate knowledge of the Father makes it clear that he is of one substance with the Father (THEODORE). The fact that the Son lays down his life demonstrates not only that his love is freely given (CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA) but also that it is strong enough to pay the ultimate sacrifice. The Shepherd put his life in between the wolves and his flock (CHRYSOLOGUS).

Jesus came not only for the Jews, who are Israel according to the flesh, but also for the other sheep of his fold, that is, the Gentiles (THEODORE), who are Israel according to faith. The desire for unity among the flock means that all the shepherds should speak with the one voice of the one shepherd so that there will be one flock (AUGUSTINE).

The Father sees his own love active in his Son (CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA). The Son, in turn wins his Father’s love by dying for us (CHRYSOSTOM). No one took his life, but he rather demonstrates his divinity in having power to give his life (DIONYSIUS). Christ became one of us for our salvation, and by giving his flesh over to death and then raising it, he ensured that we would share in his immortality (ATHANASIUS). Christ’s death, however, was not a consequence of his having sin (AUGUSTINE). It is only Christ who has true power over life and death because he is God (CHRYSOSTOM). But how is it that the divine Word can lay down his life, that is, his soul (according to the Greek text [GREGORY OF NYSSA]) unless he is completely human as well as divine (AUGUSTINE, THEODORE)? Then again, death ultimately holds no power over Christ; from his perspective, death is only sleep (AUGUSTINE). He willingly accepts the command of his Father to die for us, not out of coercion but out of love. Despite this selfless act of love, they accuse him of having a demon; his works, however, prove otherwise (CHRYSOSTOM).

10:14 | The Good Shepherd Knows His Sheep, and They Know Him

THE PROMISES OF THE GOOD SHEPHERD

CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA: You may learn, if you will, the profound wisdom of the most holy Shepherd and instructor, the Lord of the universe and the Word of the Father. He presents himself to us by way of allegory as the shepherd of the sheep, and so in this way serves also as the teacher of children. [1] Speaking through Ezekiel to the Jewish elders, he gives them a salutary example of true care. “I will bind up the injured and will heal the sick; I will bring back the strays and pasture them on my holy mountain.” [2] These are the promises of the good Shepherd. Pasture us children like sheep, O Lord. Fill us with your own food, the food of righteousness. As our instructor, feed us on your holy mountain, the church above the clouds that touches the heavens. CHRIST THE EDUCATOR 1.9. [3]

[1] Gk paedagogue.

[2] Ezek 34:14-16.

[3] ANF 2:230-31**.

IN JESUS, HUMANITY IS UNITED TO GOD

CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA: When Jesus says, “I know my own and my own know me, as the Father knows me and I know the Father,” it is equivalent to saying, I shall enter into a close relationship with my sheep, and my sheep shall be brought into a close relationship with me, according to the manner in which the Father is intimate with me, and again I also am intimate with the Father. For God the Father knows his own Son and the fruit of his [i.e., the Father’s] substance because he is truly his parent. And again, the Son knows the Father, beholding him as God in truth, since he is begotten of him. In the same way, we also, being brought into a close relationship with God the Father, are called his family and are spoken of as children, according to what he himself said: “Behold, I and the children whom God has given me.” [1] Truly, we are called the family of the Son, and in fact we are part of his family. Through our relationship to the Son, we are related to God the Father, because the Only Begotten, who is God of God, was made man, and though separate from all sin, he assumed our human nature. COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 6.1. [2]

[1] Is 8:18.

[2] LF 48:83**.

10:15a | Mutual Knowing of Father and Son

MUTUAL KNOWING IMPLIES CONSUBSTANTIALITY

THEODORE OF MOPSUESTIA: There is a different way of knowing. You see, I made them my own, for they are my own possession, [1] … and they recognize me as the master. But then he also said, “Just as the Father knows me, I, also, know the Father,” as if to say, I know the sameness of the nature and of the substance of the Father, being consubstantial [2] with him, and he also knows mine. Nevertheless, I am not like the earlier teachers or like those who are teachers now, which is why I choose the danger on behalf of the sheep. COMMENTARY ON JOHN, FRAGMENT 76.10.14-15. [3]

[1] See 2 Tim 2:19.

[2] This is one of the three places where Theodore (if the Greek of his commentary is deemed reliable) demonstrates his orthodoxy by incorporating the Nicene-Constantinopolitan use of homoousios in his commentary. The other two are in 16:26-27 and 17:3.

[3] ECS 7:81.

10:15b | I Lay Down My Life

CHRIST’S LOVE FOR US FREELY GIVEN

CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA: Christ did not endure death against his will on our behalf and for our sakes. Rather, we see him go toward it voluntarily, although he could easily escape the suffering if he did not want to suffer. Therefore, in his willingness even to suffer for us, we shall see the excellent quality of his love toward us and the immensity of his kindness. COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 6.1. [1]

[1] LF 48:86-87**.

THE STRENGTH OF LOVE IN A SHEPHERD

PETER CHRYSOLOGUS: The force of love makes a person brave because genuine love counts nothing as hard, or bitter, or serious or deadly. What sword, what wounds, what penalty, what deaths can avail to overcome perfect love? Love is an impenetrable breastplate. It wards off missiles, sheds the blows of swords, taunts dangers, laughs at death. If love is present, it conquers everything.

But is that death of the shepherd advantageous to the sheep? Let us investigate. It leaves them abandoned, exposes them defenseless to the wolves, hands over the beloved flock to the gnawing jaws of beasts, gives them over to plunder and exposes them to death. All this is proved by the death of the Shepherd, Christ. From the time when he laid down his life for his sheep and permitted himself to be slain through the fury of the Jews, his sheep have been suffering invasions from the piratical Gentiles. Like prisoners to be slain in jails, they are shut up in the caves of robbers. They are torn unceasingly by persecutors who are like raging wolves. They are snapped at by heretics who are like mad dogs with savage teeth….

In the light of all this, does the Shepherd prove his love for you by his death? Is he proving his love because, when he sees danger threatening his sheep, when he cannot defend his flock, he prefers to die before he sees any evil done to the sheep?

But what are we to do, since the Life himself could not die unless he had decided to? Who could have taken life away from the Giver of life if he were unwilling?… Therefore, he willed to die—he who permitted himself to be slain although he was unable to die. And so, let us investigate the strength and the reason of this love, the cause of this death and the utility of this passion.

Clearly, there is an established strength, a true reason, a lucid cause, a patent utility in all this blood. For unique power sprang forth from the one death of the Shepherd. For the sake of his sheep the Shepherd met the death that was threatening them. He did this that, by a new arrangement, he might, although captured himself, capture the devil, the author of death; that, although slain himself, he might punish; that, by dying for his sheep, he might open the way for them to conquer death. SERMON 40. [1]

[1] FC 17:86-88.

THE GOOD SHEPHERD LAYS DOWN HIS LIFE BUT DOES NOT LOSE IT

PETER CHRYSOLOGUS: Therefore, by giving a pattern like this, the Shepherd went before his sheep; he did not run away from them. He did not surrender the sheep to the wolves, but he consigned the wolves to the sheep. For he enabled his sheep to pick out their robbers in such a way that the sheep, although slain, should live; although mangled, should rise again and, colored by their own blood, should gleam in royal purple and shine with snow-white fleece.

In this way, when the good Shepherd laid down his life for his sheep, he did not lose it. In this way he held his sheep; he did not abandon them. Indeed, he did not forsake them but invited them. He called and led them through fields full of death and a road of death to life-giving pastures. SERMON 40. [1]

[1] FC 17:88.

10:16 | One Flock, One Shepherd

THE CONVERSION OF GENTILES AND JEWS

THEODORE OF MOPSUESTIA: This sentence alludes to those among the Gentiles who will believe, because many among the Gentiles as well as many among the Jews are destined to gather together into a single church and to acknowledge one shepherd and one lord, who is Christ. This has indeed actually happened. But at that time the miracles confirmed the words; now the fulfillment of the words confirms the miracles accomplished then even though this did not appear at that time. COMMENTARY ON JOHN 4.10.16. [1]

[1] CSCO 4 3:204-5.

TWO ISRAELS

AUGUSTINE: So listen to this unity being even more urgently drawn to your attention: “I have other sheep,” he says, “who are not of this fold.” He was talking, you see, to the first sheepfold of the race of Israel according to the flesh. But there were others, of the race of the same Israel according to faith, and they were still outside, they were of the Gentiles, predestined but not yet gathered in. He knew those whom he had predestined. He knew those whom he had come to redeem by shedding his blood. He was able to see them, while they could not yet see him. He knew them, though they did not yet believe in him. “I have,” he said, “other sheep that are not of this fold,” because they are not of the race of Israel according to the flesh. But all the same, they will not be outside this sheepfold, because “I must bring them along too, so that there may be one flock and one shepherd.” SERMON 138.5. [1]

[1] WSA 3 4:387-88; see also Sermon 88.10 (WSA 3 3:425).

SHEPHERDS SHOULD SPEAK WITH ONE VOICE

AUGUSTINE: Let them all be in the one Shepherd and speak with the one voice of the Shepherd, which the sheep may hear and follow their shepherd, not this or that shepherd, but the one Shepherd. And in him let them all speak with one voice, not with conflicting voices. SERMON 46.30. [1]

[1] WSA 3 2:283. Clement speaks of the other sheep as those worthy of another fold and mansion in heaven. See Stromateis 6.14.

10:17 | The Father Loves Me Because I Lay Down My Life

THE FATHER SEES HIMSELF IN HIS SON

CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA: If we see ourselves in our own child, we are drawn to an intensity of love whenever we see that child. In the same way, I think God the Father is said to love his own Son, who lays down his own life for us and takes it again. For it is a work of love to have chosen to suffer—and to suffer shamefully—for the salvation of some. [1] It is a work of love not only to die but also to take again the life that was laid down in order to destroy death and to take away sorrow from corruption. Although the Son is always beloved by reason of his nature, it is evident that Christ is also beloved by God the Father because of his love toward us. Naturally, this gladdens the heart of God the Father since he can see the image of his own nature clearly and perfectly shining forth through Christ’s love for us. COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 6.1. [2]

[1] See Jn 15:13.

[2] LF 48:91**.

THE SON WINS THE FATHER’S LOVE BY DYING FOR US

CHRYSOSTOM: What could be fuller of humanity than when our Lord says that he is loved because he is dying for us? Wasn’t he loved before this? Is it only now that the Father begins to love him and are we the causes of that love? See how he condescends to our level. But what is he trying to prove here? They had said he was a stranger to the Father and a deceiver who had come only to ruin and destroy. And so he tells them: Even if there was nothing else that made me love you, the fact that you are loved by my Father in such a way that I win his love by dying for you—that alone is reason enough to love you. He also shows that he did not do this under compulsion. For if he did it under compulsion, how could love be the motive? And that willingness on his part was something especially known by his Father. HOMILIES ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 60.2. [1]

[1] NPNF 1 14:217-18**.

10:18a | No One Takes My Life

CHRIST IS DIVINE AND HUMAN

DIONYSIUS OF ALEXANDRIA: He shows that his passion was a voluntary thing; and besides that, he indicates that the life that is laid down and taken again is one thing and the divinity that lays that down and takes it again is another. FRAGMENTS 2. [1]

[1] ANF 6:115*.

ONLY GOD HAS SUCH POWER

ATHANASIUS: To be troubled was proper to the flesh, and to have power to lay down his life and take it again when he wanted was no property of people but of the Word’s power. For human beings die not by their own power but by necessity of nature and against their will. But the Lord, being himself immortal but having mortal flesh, had power as God to become separate from the body and to take it again when he wanted to. Concerning this David speaks in the psalm: “You shall not leave my soul in hades, neither shall you suffer your holy One to see corruption.” [1] For it was appropriate to the flesh, corruptible as it was, that it should no longer after its own nature remain mortal, but because of the Word who had put it on, it should remain incorruptible. For since he was conformed to our condition, having come in our body, so we when we receive him partake of the immortality that is from him. DISCOURSES AGAINST THE ARIANS 3.29.57. [2]

[1] Ps 16:10 (15:10 LXX).

[2] NPNF 2 4:424-25*.

10:18b | Christ’s Power over His Life and Death

CHRIST’S DEATH NOT A CONSEQUENCE OF SIN

AUGUSTINE: Here he shows that his natural death was not the consequence of sin in him but of his own simple will, which was the why, the when and the how [of his death]. For because the Word of God is so commingled [with the flesh] as to be one with it, he says, “I have power to lay it down.” ON THE TRINITY 4.13.16. [1]

[1] NPNF 1 3:77**.

ONLY CHRIST HAS TRUE POWER OVER LIFE AND DEATH

CHRYSOSTOM: Because they had often plotted to kill him, he tells them their efforts will be useless unless he is willing…. I have such power over my own life that no one can take it from me against my will. This power does not belong to human beings. We do not have the power of laying down our own lives unless we put ourselves to death…. Our Lord alone had the power to lay down his life, showing also that he was able to take it up again by that same power. Do you see how he proved from his death that his resurrection was indisputable? HOMILIES ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 60.2. [1]

[1] NPNF 1 14:218**.

HOW DOES THE WORD LAY DOWN HIS LIFE?

AUGUSTINE: How then does our Lord lay down his own life?… Christ is the Word and man, not man as flesh alone but as soul and flesh, so that in Christ there is a complete humanity…. This refutes the Apollinarians, who say that Christ did not have a human, rational soul…. Does the Word lay down his life and take it again; or does the human soul, or does the flesh?… If it was the Word of God that laid down his soul and took it again… that soul was at one time separated from the Word…. But, though death separated the soul and body, death could not separate the Word and the soul…. It is still more absurd to say that the soul laid down itself; if it could not be separated from the Word, how could it be separated from itself?… The flesh therefore lays down its life and takes it again, not by its own power but by the power of the Word. TRACTATES ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 47.9-13. [1]

[1] NPNF 1 7:263-65**.

CHRIST’S SOUL SEPARATED FROM BODY WITHOUT CHANGE IN GODHEAD

GREGORY OF NYSSA: He foretells that at the time of his passion he would voluntarily detach his soul from his body, saying, “No one takes my soul [1] from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again.”… For his Godhead, alike before taking flesh and in the flesh and after his passion, is immutably the same, being at all times what it was by nature and so continuing forever. But in the suffering of his human nature the Godhead fulfilled the dispensation for our benefit by severing the soul for a season from the body, yet without being itself separated from either of those elements to which it was once for all united. And it did so by joining again the elements that had been parted in this way so as to give to all human nature a beginning and an example that it should follow of the resurrection from the dead, that is, that all the corruptible may put on incorruption and all the mortal may put on immortality, our firstfruits having been transformed to the divine nature by its union with God. AGAINST EUNOMIUS 2.13. [2]

[1] Psychēn.

[2] NPNF 2 5:127**. See also Hilary of Poitiers On the Trinity 10.57-60, who furthers Gregory’s argument, and Augustine Tractates on the Gospel of John 47.9-13.

COMPLETELY HUMAN AND DIVINE

THEODORE OF MOPSUESTIA: To say that the body of the divine Logos also had a soul does not suggest the divinity of the soul…. In this context, when something like this is stated, we understand the statement to refer to the flesh, which had a soul and was united with the divine Logos…. After all, even when Peter says, “Now I will lay down my soul for you,” [1] just like the Lord did, there is no difference. You see, just as Peter, who was a man, composed of body and soul, said this, so too Christ, being one and not two, composed of divinity and humanity, says that he lays down his soul, which belongs to him and is part of him (although he was God in nature, assuming flesh—which had soul— and uniting it to himself). [2] COMMENTARY ON JOHN, FRAGMENT 78.10.18. [3]

[1] Jn 13:37.

[2] The insistence on the reality of the human soul of Christ and the union of the divine with the human without alteration of either is a direct attack against Apollinarianism, which taught that the divine Logos replaced Christ’s human soul. This is also an important indication of Theodore’s Christology, which, in this Greek fragment, if authentic, demonstrates he held to the hypostatic union that would later be enunciated at Chalcedon.

[3] ECS 7:82-83*.

DEATH IS ONLY SLEEP TO CHRIST

AUGUSTINE: So take a look at Christ: “I have authority to lay down my life, and I have authority to take it up again; nobody takes it away from me.” “I myself went to sleep”; that, you see, is what he says in the psalm: “I myself went to sleep.” As though to say, “Why are they so excited, why so exultant? Why are the Jews waving their arms with joy, as though they themselves had done anything?” “I myself went to sleep. I,” he says, “who have authority to lay down my life, by laying it down ‘I myself went to sleep, and took my rest.’” And since he had the authority to take it up again, he added, “I rose again,” but to give the glory to the Father, “since the Lord took me up.” [1] Do not let these words, where he says, “Since the Lord took me up…” strike your minds as meaning that Christ himself did not raise up his own body. The Father raised him up, and he also raised himself up. How shall we prove to you that he raised himself up? Call to mind what he said to the Jews: “Pull down this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” [2] SERMON 305.3. [3]

[1] HE WORD IN THE BEGINNING | JOHN 1:1

[2] Jn 2:19, 21.

[3] WSA 3 8:321.

10:18c | The Command from His Father

CHRIST’S WILLING ACCEPTANCE OF THE COMMAND TO DIE

CHRYSOSTOM: What commandment was this? It was the commandment to die for the world. Did Jesus then wait first to hear and then choose, and did he need to learn the commandment? Who (if he had any sense at all) would say something like this? But before, when he said, “Therefore my Father loves me,” he showed that the first motion was voluntary and removed all suspicion of opposition to the Father. And so here when he says that he received a commandment from the Father, he declared nothing except that “what I do seems good to him.”… For if he had needed a commandment, how could he have said, “the good Shepherd lays down his life” on his own? For he that lays his life down on his own needs no commandment. He also assigns the cause for which he does this. And what is that? That he is the shepherd, and the good Shepherd. Now the good Shepherd needs no one to arouse him to his duty. If this is the case with people, it is even more so with God. This is why Paul said that “he emptied himself.” [1] So the “commandment” put here means nothing else but to show his unanimity with the Father. And, if he speaks in such a humble and human way, the cause is the infirmity of his hearers. HOMILIES ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 60.2-3. [2]

[1] Phil 2:7.

[2] NPNF 1 14:218**.

10:20 | He Has a Devil

HIS WORKS PROVE HIS ORIGIN

CHRYSOSTOM: Because he spoke as one greater than human beings, they said he had a devil…. They had said this many times. [1] “Others said, ‘These are not the words of one who has a devil. Can a devil open the eyes of the blind?’” Since they could not silence their opponents by words, they now brought proof from his works. “Certainly neither are the words those of one that has a devil, and yet if you are not persuaded by the words, be persuaded by the works.”… Our Lord, having already given proof of who he was by his works, holds his peace because they were unworthy of an answer…. Indeed, as they disagreed among themselves, an answer was unnecessary. Their opposition only brought out, for our imitation, our Lord’s gentleness and long suffering. HOMILIES ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 60.3. [2]

[1] See Jn 7:20; 8:48.

[2] NPNF 1 14:218-19**.