And as regards the aforesaid distribution, I would have no one placed before John Chrysostom, who both treats of it in many places and most diligently explains absolutely everything that conduces to its right understanding. For, after citing the words of Paul1, καθὼς ἐξελέξατο ἡμᾶς ἐν αὐτῷ πρὸ καταβολῆς2 κόσμου, εἶναι ἡμᾶς3 ἁγίους καὶ ἀμώμους κατενώπιον αὐτοῦ ἐν ἀγάπῃ, προορίσας ἡμᾶς, “as he (God) chose us in him (Christ) before the constitution of the world, that we should be (1) holy and immaculate in his sight in charity, who predestined us,” he immediately4 adds:
Οὐ γὰρ ἀπὸ πόνων, οὐδὲ κατορθωμάτων τοῦτο γίνεται, ἀλλ᾽ ἀπὸ ἀγάπης, οὔτε ἀπὸ ἀγάπης μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς ἡμετέρας ἀρετῆς· εἰ γὰρ δὴ ἀπὸ ἀγάπης μόνης, ἐχρῆν ἅπαντας σωθῆναι· εἰ δὲ ἀπὸ τῆς ἡμετέρας ἀρετῆς πάλιν μόνης, περιττὴ ἡ παρουσία αὐτοῦ, καὶ πάντα τὰ οἰκονομηθέντα, ἀλλ᾽ οὔτε ἀπὸ ἀγάπης μόνης, οὔτε ἀπὸ τῆς ἡμετέρας ἀρετῆς, ἀλλ᾽ ἐξ ἀμφοτέρων. Ἐξελέξατο γὰρ ἡμᾶς, φησίν. Ὁ δὲ ἐκλεγόμενος, οἶδεν ὅπερ ἐκλέγεται. Ἐν ἀγάπῃ, φησί, προορίσας5 ἡμᾶς. Οὐδένα γὰρ ἂν ἔσωσεν ἡ ἀρετή, τῆς ἀγάπης μὴ οὔσης· εἰπὲ γάρ μοι, τί Παῦλος ἂν ὠφελήθη, τί δὲ ἂν ἐπεδείξατο, εἰ μὴ καὶ ἄνωθεν αὐτὸν ἐκάλεσε, καὶ ἀγαπήσας εἵλκυσε πρὸς ἑαυτόν; Ἄλλως δὲ, καὶ τὸ τοσούτων ἀξιῶσαι, ἀγάπης ἦν, οὐ τῆς ἡμετέρας ἀρετῆς· τὸ γὰρ ἐναρέτους γενέσθαι, καὶ πιστεῦσαι, καὶ προσελθεῖν, καὶ τοῦτο μὲν αὐτοῦ ἦν τοῦ καλέσαντος· πλὴν ἀλλὰ καὶ ἡμέτερον· τὸ δὲ προσελθόντας τοσούτων ἀξιῶσαι τιμῶν, ὥστε εὐθέως ἀπὸ ἔχθρας εἰς υἱοθεσίαν ἀγαγεῖν, ὑπερβαλλούσης ὄντως ἀγάπης.
For (predestination) is not obtained by labors and right deeds, but by charity; nor by charity alone, but also by our virtue. For if it were obtained by charity alone, all would have to be saved. But if, again, by our virtue alone, Christ’s advent would have been superfluous, and all the things which he accomplished in his economy would have been superfluous. But it is obtained neither by charity alone nor by our virtue alone, but by both. For he chose us, he says; but he who chooses knows what he chooses. In charity, he says, he predestined us6. For virtue would have saved no one unless charity were present. For tell me, what would Paul have profited, and what would he have effected, if he had not called him from above and, having loved him, drawn him to himself? Moreover, that he deemed him worthy of so many things belonged to charity, not to our virtue. For that we became virtuous, believed, and approached was indeed the work of him who called, but also ours. But that, when we had approached, he deemed us worthy of so many honors that he immediately advanced us from enmity to the adoption of sons, is in very truth the work of surpassing charity.
Footnotes
-
Ephes. I. 4. ↩
-
“Excellently,” says Chrysostom, “he called constitution καταβολή, ὡς ἀπό τινος ὕψους καταβεβλημένον μεγάλου αὐτὸν δεικνύς, ‘showing it (the world) as though cast down from some great height.’ For the height of God is great and cannot be expressed, not in place, but because his nature is raised above, καὶ πολὺ τὸ μέσον κτίσματος καὶ κτιστοῦ, ‘and great is the interval between the created thing and the Creator.’” But much more simply, πρὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου, according to the manner of speaking of the Alexandrian interpreters and the Hebrew expression מני־קדם, is rendered “before the beginnings of the world.” ↩
-
“Lest therefore,” writes Chrysostom, “upon hearing that God chose, τὴν πίστιν ἀρκεῖν νομίσῃς μόνον, καὶ τὸν βίον προστίθησι, ‘you should think faith alone sufficient, he adds life also’… Καὶ τὸ ἐκλεγῆναι δὲ, καὶ τῆς τοῦ Θεοῦ φιλανθρωπίας τεκμήριον, καὶ τῆς αὐτῶν ἀρετῆς. ‘Being chosen is also an indication both of the benignity and clemency of God and, at the same time, of the virtue of the men themselves.’” ↩
-
In the Epistle to the Ephesians, homily I, no. 2. ↩
-
Chrysostom separates the words ἐν ἀγάπῃ from the preceding κατενώπιον αὐτοῦ and joins them to the following προορίσας ἡμᾶς. Theodoret, Theophylact, and Jerome likewise followed this mode of connection, and Bengel, Griesbach, and Koppe approved it. ↩
-
One of the Coislinian codices has προορίσας ἡμᾶς. καλῶς· οὐδένα γὰρ κ.τ.λ., a reading which Montfaucon judges ought by no means to be disdained. ↩