John 6:46

The Jews, so long as they thought to get food for their carnal eating, had no misgivings; but when this hope was taken away, then, we read, the Jews murmured at Him because He said, I am the bread which came down from heaven. This was only a pretense. The real cause of their complaint was that they were disappointed in their expectation of a bodily feast. As yet however they reverenced Him, for His miracle; and only expressed their discontent by murmurs. What these were we read next: And they said, Is not this Jesus, the Son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that He said, I came down from heaven?

But they were far from being fit for that heavenly bread, and did not hunger for it. For they had not that hunger of the inner man. CHYRS. It is evident that they did not yet know of His miraculous birth: for they call Him the Son of Joseph. Nor are they blamed for this. Our Lord does not reply, I am not the Son of Joseph: for the miracle of His birth would have overpowered them. And if the birth according to the flesh were above their belief, how much more that higher and ineffable birth.;

He took man’s flesh upon Him, but not after the manner of men; for, His Father being in heaven, He chose a mother upon earth, and was born of her without a father. The answer to the murmurers next follows: Jesus therefore answered and said to them, Murmur not among yourselves; as if to say, I know why you hunger not after this bread, and so cannot understand it, and do not seek it: No man can come to Me except the Father who has sent Me draw him. This is the doctrine of grace: none comes, except he be drawn. But whom the Father draws, and whom not, and why He draws one, and not another, presume not to decide, if you would avoid falling into error. Take the doctrine as it is given you: and, if you are not drawn, pray that you may be.

, But here the Manichees attack us, asserting that nothing is in our own power. Our Lords words however do not destroy our free agency, but only show that we need Divine assistance. For He is speaking not of one who comes without the concurrence of his own will, but one who has many hindrances in the way of his coming.

Now if we are drawn to Christ without our own will, we believe without our own will; the will is not exercised, but compulsion is applied. But, though a man can enter the Church involuntarily, he cannot believe other than voluntarily; for with the heart man believes to righteousness. Therefore if he who is drawn, comes without his will, he does not believe; if he does not believe, he does not come. For we do not come to Christ, by running, or walking, but by believing, not by the motion of the body, but the will of the mind. You are drawn by your will. But what is it to be drawn by the will? Delight you in the Lord, and He will give you your heart’s desire. There is a certain craving of the heart, to which that heavenly bread is pleasant. If the Poet could say, “Trahit sua quemque voluptas,” how much more strongly may we speak of a man being drawn to Christ, i.e. being delighted with truth, happiness, justice eternal life, all which is Christ? Have the bodily senses their pleasures, and has not the soul hers? Give me one who loves, who longs, who burns, who sighs for the source of his being and his eternal home; and he will know what I mean. But why did He say, Except my Father draw him? If we are to be drawn, let us be drawn by Him to whom His love said, Draw me, we will run after You. But let us see what is meant by it. The Father draws to the Son those who believe on the Son, as thinking that He has God for His Father. For the Father begat the Son equal to Himself; and whoso thinks and believes really and seriously that He on Whom He believes is equal to the Father, him the Father draws to the Son. Arius believed Him to be a creature; the Father drew not him. Thomas says, Christ is only a man. Because he so believes, the Father draws him not. He drew Peter who said, You are the Christ, the Son of the living God; to whom accordingly it was told, For flesh and blood, has not revealed it to you, but My Father which is in heaven. That revelation is the drawing. For if earthly objects, when put before us, draw us; how much more shall Christ, when revealed by the Father? For what does the soul more long after than truth? But here men hunger, there they will be filled. Wherefore He adds, And I will raise him up at the last day: as if He said, He shall be filled with that, for which he now thirsts, at the resurrection of the dead; for I will raise him up.

Or the Father draws to the Son, by the works which He did by Him.

Great indeed is the Son’s dignity; the Father draws men, and the Son raises them up. This is no division of works, but an equality of power. He then shows the way in which the Father draws. It is written in the Prophets, And they shall all be taught of God. You see the excellence of faith; that it cannot be learnt from men, or by the teaching of man, but only from God Himself. The Master sits, dispensing His truth to all, pouring out His doctrine to all. But if all are to be taught of God, how is it that some believe not? Because all here only means the generality, or, all that have the will.

Or thus, When a schoolmaster is the only one in a town, we say loosely, This man teaches all here to read; not that all learn of him, but that he teaches all who do learn. And in the same way we say that God teaches all men to come to Christ: not that all do come, but that no one comes in any other way.

All the men of that kingdom shall be taught of God; they shall hear nothing from men: for, though in this world what they hear with the outward ear is from men, yet what they understand is given them from within; from within is light and revelation. I force certain sounds into your ears, but unless He is within to reveal their meaning, how, O you Jews, can you acknowledge Me, you whom the Father has not taught?

He uses the plural, In the Prophets, because all the Prophets being filled with one and the same spirit, their prophecies, though different, all tended to the same end; and with whatever any one of them says, all the rest agree; as with the prophecy of Joel, All shall be taught of God.

These words are not found in Joel, but something like them; Be glad then you children of Sion, and rejoice in the Lord your God, for He has given you a Teacher. And more expressly in Isaiah, And all your children shall be taught of the Lord.

An important distinction. All men before learnt the things of God through men; now they learn them through the Only Son of God, and the Holy Spirit.

All that are taught of God come to the Son, because they have heard and learnt from the Father of the Son: wherefore He proceeds, Every man that has heard, and has learned of the Father, comes to Me. But if every one that has heard and learnt of the Father comes, every one that has not heard of the Father has not learnt. For beyond the reach of the bodily senses is this school, in which the Father is heard, and men taught to come to the Son. Here we have not to do with the carnal ear, but the ear of the heart; for here is the Son Himself, the Word by which the Father teaches, and together with Him the Holy Spirit the operations of the three Persons being inseparable from each other. This is attributed however principally to the Father, because from Him proceeds the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Therefore the grace which the Divine bounty imparts in secret to men’s hearts, is rejected by none from hardness of heart: seeing it is given in the first instance, in order to take away hard-heartedness. Why then does He not teach all to come to Christ? Because those whom He teaches, He teaches in mercy; and those whom He teaches not, He teaches not in judgment. But if we say, that those, whom He teaches not, wish to learn, we shall be answered, Why then is it said, Will you not turn again, and quicken us? If God does not make willing minds out of unwilling, why prays the Church, according to our Lord’s command, for her persecutors? For no one can say, I believed, and therefore He called me: rather the preventing mercy of God called him, that he might believe.

Behold then how the Father draws; not by laying a necessity on man, but by teaching the truth. To draw, belongs to God: Every one that has heard, and has learned of the Father, comes to Me. What then? has Christ taught nothing? Not so. What if men saw not the Father teaching, but saw the Son. So then the Father taught, the Son spoke. As I teach you by My word, so the Father teaches by His Word. But He Himself explains the matter, if we read on: Not that any man has seen the Father, save He which is of God, He has seen the Father; as if He said, Do not when I tell you, Every man that has heard and learnt of the Father, say to yourselves, We have never seen the Father, and how then can we have learnt from Him? Hear Him then in Me. I know the Father, and am from Him, just as a word is from him who speaks it; i.e. not the mere passing sound, but that which remains with the speaker, and draws the hearer.

We are all from God. That which belongs peculiarly and principally to the Son, He omits the mention of, as being unsuitable to the weakness of His hearers.

Consider, therefore, how many passages present their prescriptive authority to you in this very Gospel before this inquiry of Philip, and previous to any discussion on your part. And first of all there comes at once to hand the preamble of John to his Gospel, which shows us what He previously was who had to become flesh. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God: all things were made by Him, and without Him was nothing made.” Now, since these words may not be taken otherwise than as they are written, there is without doubt shown to be One who was from the beginning, and also One with whom He always was: one the Word of God, the other God (although the Word is also God, but God regarded as the Son of God, not as the Father); One through whom were all things, Another by whom were all things. …

And yet the heretic still shrinks from urging that Christ is God, whom he perceives to be proved God by so many words as well as facts. If Christ is only man, how, when He came into this world, did He come unto His own, since a man could have made no world? If Christ was only man, how is the world said to have been made by Him, when the world was not by man, but man was ordained after the world? If Christ was only man, how was it that Christ was not only of the seed of David; but He was the Word made flesh and dwelt among us? For although the Protoplast was not born of seed, yet neither was the Protoplast formed of the conjunction of the Word and the flesh. For He is not the Word made flesh, nor dwelt in us. …

2. Let us commence here, accordingly, with the notice presented by Matthew, [which runs thus]: “And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to His disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body.” Both Mark and Luke also gave this section. It is true that Luke has made mention of the cup twice over: first before He gave the bread; and, secondly, after the bread has been given. But the fact is, that what is stated in that earlier connection has been introduced, according to this writer’s habit, by anticipation, while the words which he has inserted here in their proper order are left unrecorded in those previous verses, and the two passages when put together make up exactly what stands expressed by those other evangelists. …

[4.] But what say those who shrink from nothing? That the expression, “now I know in part,” is spoken in dispensations; for that the Apostle had the perfect knowledge of God. And now he calls himself a child? How sees he “in a mirror?” How “darkly,” if he hath the sum of knowledge? And why doth he refer to it as something peculiar to the Spirit, and to no other power in the creation, saying, “For who among men knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so the things of God none knoweth, save the Spirit of God.” ( 1 Cor. ii. 11 .) And Christ again sayeth that this belongs to Himself alone, thus saying, “Not that any man hath seen the Father, save He which is from God, He hath seen the Father,” ( John vi. 46 .) giving the name, “sight,” to the most clear and perfect knowledge.

Observe, therefore, with what fullness the Evangelist speaks; for having said that “no man hath seen God at any time,” he does not go on to say, “that the Son who hath seen, hath declared Him,” but adds something beyond “seeing” by the words, “Who is in the bosom of the Father”; because, “to dwell in the bosom” is far more than “to see.” For he that merely “seeth” hath not an in every way exact knowledge of the object, but he that “dwelleth in the bosom” can be ignorant of nothing. Now lest when thou hearest that “none knoweth the Father, save the Son,” thou shouldest assert that although He knoweth the Father more than all, yet He knoweth not how great He is, the Evangelist says that He dwells in the bosom of the Father; and Christ Himself declares, that He knoweth Him as much as the Father knoweth the Son. …

Ver. 46 . “Not that any man hath seen God, save He which is of God, He hath seen the Father.” “How then,” saith some one, “doth the Father draw?” This the Prophet explained of old, when he proclaimed beforehand, and said,

“But what of those,” saith some one, “who were before His time? Were not they taught of God? why then the special application of the words here?” Because of old they learned the things of God by the hands of men, but now by the Only-begotten Son of God, and by the Holy Ghost. Then He addeth, “Not that any man hath seen the Father, save He which is of God,” using this expression here not with reference to the cause, but to the manner of being. Since had He spoken in the former sense, we are all “of God.” And where then would be the special and distinct nature of the Son? “But wherefore,” saith some one, “did He not put this more clearly?” Because of their weakness. For if when He said, “I am come down from heaven,” they were so offended, what would they have felt had He added this?

[2.] And again, “If ye had known Me, ye should have known My Father also.” ( c. viii. 19 .) How then saith He, that they both “know Him,” and “whence He is,” and then, “that they neither know Him, nor the Father”? He doth not contradict, (away with the thought,) but is very consistent with Himself. For He speaketh of a different kind of knowledge, when He saith, “ye know not”; as when He saith, “The sons of Eli were wicked sons, they knew not the Lord” ( 1 Sam. ii. 12 ); and again, “Israel doth not know Me.” ( Isa. i. 3 .) So also Paul saith, “They profess that they know God, but in works they deny Him.” ( Tit. i. 16 .) It is therefore possible, “knowing,” “not to know.” This then is what He saith: “If ye know Me, ye know that I am the Son of God.” For the “whence I am” doth not here denote place. …

Orth. But the Lord said again, “Not that any man hath seen the Father save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father.” Wherefore the evangelist plainly exclaims, “No man hath seen God at any time,” and confirms the word of the Lord, for he says, “The only begotten Son which is in the bosom of the Father He hath declared Him,” and the great Moses, when he desired to see the invisible nature, heard the Lord God saying, “There shall no man see me and live.”

21. Therefore if they, as the others, make an excuse that the terms are strange, let them consider the sense in which the Council so wrote, and anathematize what the Council anathematized; and then if they can, let them find fault with the expressions. But I well know that, if they hold the sense of the Council, they will fully accept the terms in which it is conveyed; whereas if it be the sense which they wish to complain of, all must see that it is idle in them to discuss the wording, when they are but seeking handles for irreligion. This then was the reason of these expressions; but if they still complain that such are not scriptural, that very complaint is a reason why they should be cast out, as talking idly and disordered in mind. And let them blame themselves in this matter, for they set the example, beginning their war against God with words not in Scripture. …

It appears then that so far as these doctrines are concerned, these wonderful men have now joined themselves to the Manichees. For these also confess the existence of a good God, so far as the mere name goes, but they are unable to point out any of His works either visible or invisible. But inasmuch as they deny Him who is truly and indeed God, the Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things invisible, they are mere inventors of fables. And this appears to me to be the case with these evil-minded men. They see the works of the true Word who alone is in the Father, and yet they deny Him, and make to themselves another Word, whose existence they are unable to prove either by His Works or by the testimony of others. …

6. What then, some man will say, is it not written, The little ones’ Angels do always behold the face of My Father which is in heaven ? Yes, but the Angels see God not as He is, but as far as they themselves are capable. For it is Jesus Himself who saith, Not that any man hath seen the Father, save He which is of God, He hath seen the Father . The Angels therefore behold as much as they can bear, and Archangels as much as they are able; and Thrones and Dominions more than the former, but yet less than His worthiness: for with the Son the Holy Ghost alone can rightly behold Him: for He searcheth all things, and knoweth even the deep things of God : as indeed the Only-begotten Son also, with the Holy Ghost, knoweth the Father fully: For neither , saith He, knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal Him . …