Homily 7 — Philippians 2, verses 5 to 11

“Have this mind in you which was also in Christ Jesus: who, being in the form of God, did not count it a prize to be equal with God, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself, becoming obedient to death, yes, the death of the cross. That is why God also highly exalted him, and gave him the name that is above every name, so that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things on earth, and things under the earth, and every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” [a]

I have set out the views of the heretics. It is fitting that I now speak of what is our own. They say that the words “He did not count it a prize” refer to seizing something wrongfully. We have shown that this is altogether empty and beside the point. No one would urge another to humility on such grounds, and this is not the way anyone praises God, or even a man. What, then, does it mean, beloved?

Pay attention to what I am about to say. Many people think that when they are humble they are robbed of their proper rights and lowered. To take away this fear, and to show that we must not feel that way, Paul says that God, the only Son, who was in the form of God, who was not the least bit inferior to the Father, who was equal to him, “did not count it a prize to be equal with God.” [c]

Now learn what this means. Whatever a man steals and takes against his right, he does not dare to lay aside, for fear it will be lost and slip out of his possession; he keeps hold of it constantly. But the man who has some dignity that is his by nature is not afraid to step down from it, because he is sure that nothing of the kind will happen to him. For example, Absalom seized the government, and after that he did not dare to lay it aside.

We will go on to another example. But if an example cannot set the whole matter before you, do not hold it against me; that is the nature of examples: they leave the greater part for the mind to reason out. A man rebels against his sovereign and seizes the kingdom. He does not dare to lay it aside and keep the matter hidden, for if he once hides it, it is gone at once. Let us take one more example. If a man takes anything by force, he keeps a firm hold on it all the time, because if he puts it down, he loses it at once. And in general, those who hold anything by plunder are afraid to put it aside, or to hide it, or to stop keeping up the position they have taken on.

Not so those whose possessions were not gained by plunder — man, for instance, who possesses the dignity of being a creature with reason. But here my examples fail me, for among us there is no preeminence by nature, since no good thing is ours by nature; good things belong to the very nature of God. What, then, are we to say? That the Son of God was not afraid to step down from his right, for he did not think of being God as a prize he had seized. He was not afraid that anyone would strip him of that nature or that right. That is why he laid it aside, confident that he would take it up again. He hid it, knowing that he was not made any less by doing so. For this reason Paul does not say, “He did not seize it,” but, “He did not count it a prize.” He did not hold that position by seizure. It was his by nature, not given to him; it was lasting and secure.

That is why he did not refuse to take the form of one lower than himself. The usurper is afraid to lay aside his purple robe in war, while the king does it in complete safety. Why? Because the king does not hold his power by seizure. So Christ did not refuse to lay it aside, as one who had seized it would have done. Since he had it as his own by nature, since it could never be parted from him, he hid it.

This equality with God he did not have by seizure; it was his own by nature. [d]

That is why “he emptied himself.” Where are those who claim that he acted under compulsion, that he was made subject? Scripture says, “He emptied himself, he humbled himself, and became obedient to death.” How did he empty himself? By taking “the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men, and being found in appearance as a man.” “He emptied himself” is written with the earlier words in view: “each counting the other better than himself.” For if he had been made subject, if he had not chosen it of his own accord and of his own free will, it would not have been an act of humility.

Consider: if he did not know that it had to be so, he would have been imperfect. If, not knowing it, he had waited for the time to act, then he would not have known the right moment. But if he knew both that it had to be so and when it had to be, why should he submit to being made subject? “To show the superiority of the Father.” That is what they say. But that does not show the Father’s superiority; it shows the Son’s own inferiority. Is not the name “Father” enough to show that the Father comes first? For apart from that, the Son has all the same things. This honor is not one that can pass from the Father to the Son.

What do the heretics say, then? The Marcionites, I mean: “See, he did not become man.” But why not? Because he was “made in the likeness of man.” But how can anyone be “made in the likeness of men”? By putting on a shadow? [e]

But that would be a phantom, and no longer the likeness of a man, for the likeness of a man is another man. And what will you answer John when he says, “The Word became flesh” (John 1, verse 14)? And this same blessed man, Paul himself, also says in another place, “in the likeness of sinful flesh” (Romans 8, verse 3).

“And being found in appearance as a man.” “See: both ‘in appearance’ and ‘as a man.’ To be as a man, and to be a man in appearance, is not to be a man in reality. To be a man in appearance is not to be a man by nature.” See how openly I set out what our enemies say. That is a brilliant victory, and fully won, when we do not hide what seem to be their strong points; hiding them is deceit rather than victory. What, then, do they say? Let me repeat their argument: “To be a man in appearance is not to be a man by nature; and to be as a man, and in the appearance of a man, is not to be a man.” Then to take the form of a servant is not to take the form of a servant! Here, then, is an inconsistency, and why do you not solve this difficulty first? For as you think that the one text contradicts us, so we say that the other contradicts you. He does not say, “as the form of a servant,” or “in the likeness of the form of a servant,” or “in the appearance of the form of a servant,” but “he took the form of a servant.” What, then, is this? “There is a contradiction.” There is no contradiction. Far from it! It is a lame and ridiculous argument of theirs.

“He took the form of a servant when he tied a towel around himself and washed the feet of his disciples.” So they say. Is that the form of a servant? No, that is not the form but the work of a servant. It is one thing to do the work of a servant, and another to take the form of a servant. Why did he not say, “He did the work of a servant,” which would have been clearer? But nowhere in Scripture is “form” used for “work,” for the difference is great: the one comes from nature, the other from action. In ordinary speech, too, we never use “form” for “work.”

Besides, on their view he did not even do the work of a servant, or even tie on the towel. For if everything was a mere shadow, there was nothing real. If he did not have real hands, how did he wash their feet? If he did not have a real waist, how did he tie a towel around himself? And what sort of clothes did he take? For Scripture says, “He took his garments” (John 13, verse 12). So not even the work turns out to have really happened; it was all a deception, and he did not even wash the disciples. For if that bodiless nature did not appear, it was not in a body. Who, then, washed the disciples’ feet?

Again, what are we to say against Paul of Samosata? What did he claim? The very same thing. But it is no emptying of himself for one who is of human nature, a mere man, to wash his fellow servants. What we said against the Arians we must repeat against these too, for they differ from one another only by a short space of time: both the one and the other say that the Son of God is a creature. What, then, will we say to them? If he, being a man, washed men, he did not empty himself; he did not humble himself. If he, being a man, did not seize equality with God, he deserves no praise. That God should become man is great humility, beyond words, beyond expression. But what humility is there in one who was a man doing the works of men? [g]

And where is the work of God ever called “the form of God”? If he was a mere man, and was called the form of God because of his works, why do we not say the same of Peter? For Peter did greater deeds than Christ himself. Why do you not say of Paul that he had the form of God? Why did Paul not give himself as the example? For he did a thousand servants’ tasks, and did not even refuse to say, “For we do not preach ourselves, but Christ Jesus as Lord, and ourselves as your servants for Jesus’ sake” (Second Corinthians 4, verse 5).

These are absurdities and trifles! Scripture says, “He emptied himself.”

How did he empty himself? Tell me. What was his emptying? What was his humbling? Was it that he worked wonders? Paul and Peter both did that, so it was not something peculiar to the Son. What, then, does “being made in the likeness of men” mean? He had many things that belong to us, and many he did not have. For instance, he was not born from the union of a man and a woman; he did no sin. These things he had that no man has. He was not only what he seemed; he was God as well. He seemed to be a man, but he was not like the mass of men, for it was in the flesh that he was like them.

Paul means, then, that he was not a mere man. That is why he says, “in the likeness of men.” For we are soul and body, but he was God, and soul and body; that is why he says, “in the likeness.” When you hear that he emptied himself, you might think that some change is meant here, some debasing, some loss. So that you will not, he says: while he remained what he was, he took what he was not; and having become flesh, he remained God, since he was the Word (John 1, verse 14).

In this, then, he was like a man, and that is why Paul says, “and in appearance.” Not that his nature was debased, or that any mixing of natures took place; he became man in appearance. For once he had said that “he took the form of a servant,” he was bold enough to say this too, since the first statement would silence every objector. So too when he says, “in the likeness of sinful flesh,” he does not say that Christ did not have flesh, but that this flesh did not sin, though it was like sinful flesh. Like in what? In nature, not in sin. So his soul was like a sinful soul. [i]

As in the former case the word “likeness” was used because he was not the same as us in everything, so here too there is likeness, because he is not the same in everything: he was not born from the union of a man and a woman, he was without sin, he was not a mere man. And he said well, “as a man,” for he was not one of the many, but “as” one of the many. The Word, who was God, was not debased into a man, nor was his essence changed; he appeared as a man, not to deceive us with a phantom, but to teach us humility. So when he says “as a man,” this is what he means; for elsewhere too he calls him a man, when he says, “There is one God, one mediator also between God and men, himself man, Christ Jesus” (First Timothy 2, verse 5).

So much against these heretics. Now I must speak against those who deny that he took a soul. If “the form of God” means “complete God,” then “the form of a servant” means “a complete servant.” [k]

Again, against the Arians. Here, concerning his divinity, we no longer find “he became” or “he took,” but “he emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men.” Concerning his humanity we find “he took,” “he became.” The latter he became, the latter he took; the former he was. So let us neither mix together nor divide the natures. There is one God; there is one Christ, the Son of God. When I say “one,” I mean a union, not a mixing together: the one nature was not debased into the other, but was united with it.

“He humbled himself, becoming obedient to death, yes, the death of the cross.” “See, he became obedient of his own will; he was not equal to the one he obeyed.” So one of them says. You stubborn and foolish people! This does not lower him at all. We too become obedient to our friends, and it has no such effect on us. He became obedient as a Son to his Father. He did not fall into a slave’s condition by this; rather, by this very act above all others he guarded his wonderful sonship, by honoring the Father so greatly. He honored the Father, not so that you would dishonor the Son, but so that you would admire him all the more, and learn from this act that he is a true Son, since he honors his Father more than anyone else does. No one has ever honored God like this. As great as his height was, so great was the humbling he underwent to match it. As he is greater than all, and no one is equal to him, so in honoring his Father he surpassed all — not by necessity, and not unwillingly; this too is part of his excellence. Words fail me.

Truly it is a great thing, beyond words, that he became a servant. That he underwent death is far greater. But there is something greater still, and more astonishing. What is it? Not all deaths are alike. His death seemed to be the most disgraceful of all, full of shame, accursed; for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree” (Deuteronomy 21, verse 23; Galatians 3, verse 13). That is why the Jews too were so eager to kill him in this way: to make him a thing of reproach, so that even if no one fell away from him because of his death, they might still fall away because of the manner of his death. That is why two robbers were crucified with him, with him in the middle, so that he might share their bad name, and so that the Scripture might be fulfilled, “And he was counted among the lawbreakers” (Isaiah 53, verse 12).

Yet the truth shines out all the more for it, and grows all the brighter. For when his enemies plot such things against his glory and it still shines out, the thing appears all the greater. It was not by killing him, but by killing him in this particular way, that they thought to make him detestable, to prove him more detestable than all men; but they achieved nothing. And both robbers were so wicked (for it was only afterward that one of them repented) that even on the cross they insulted him. Neither the awareness of their own sins, nor the punishment they were suffering, nor the fact that they were suffering the same things as he was, held back their madness. That is why the one spoke to the other and silenced him, saying, “Do you not even fear God, since you are under the same sentence?” (Luke 23, verse 40). So great was their wickedness.

That is why it is written, “God also highly exalted him, and gave him the name that is above every name.” Once the blessed Paul has mentioned the flesh, he speaks without fear of all his humbling. For until he had said that he took the form of a servant, while he was speaking of his divinity, see how loftily he speaks — loftily, I mean, as far as his powers allow, for he does not speak as Christ deserves, since he is not able to: “Being in the form of God, he did not count it a prize to be equal with God.” But once he had said that he became man, from then on he speaks without fear of his lowliness, confident that the mention of his lowliness would not harm his divinity, since his flesh allowed for it.

Verses 9 to 11: “That is why God also highly exalted him, and gave him the name that is above every name, so that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things on earth, and things under the earth, and every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” [m]

Let us say this to the heretics. If this is said of one who had not taken flesh, of God the Word, how did God highly exalt him? As though he gave him something more than he had before? Then he would have been lacking in this respect, and would have been made complete for our sakes. For if he had not done good to us, he would not have gained that honor! “And gave him the name.” See, by your account he did not even have a name! But if he received it as his due, how is he found here to have received it by grace, as a gift? And “the name that is above every name” — let us see what kind of name it is. “That at the name of Jesus,” he says, “every knee should bow.” They — the heretics — take “name” to mean glory. So this glory is above all glory, and this glory, in short, is that all worship him! But you who think you know God as he knows himself are far removed from the greatness of God, and from this it is plain how far you are from right thoughts about God.

And this is plain from what follows. Tell me, is this glory? Then before men were created, before the angels or the archangels, he was not in glory. If this is the glory that is above every glory (for this is the name that is “above every name”), then even if he was in glory before, he was in a glory lower than this. So it was for this, then, that he made the things that exist: so that he might be raised to glory, not out of his own goodness, but because he needed glory from us! Do you not see their folly? Do you not see their godlessness? [n]

Now if they had said this of him as one who had taken flesh, there would have been reason in it, for God the Word allows this to be said of his flesh. It does not touch his divine nature; it concerns the plan of salvation entirely. What does “of things in heaven, and things on earth, and things under the earth” mean? It means the whole world — angels, and men, and demons — or else the righteous and the living and sinners. “And every tongue” should “confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father”: that is, all should say so, and this is glory to the Father.

Do you see how wherever the Son is glorified, the Father is glorified too? In the same way, when the Son is dishonored, the Father is dishonored as well. If this is so among us, where the difference between fathers and sons is great, much more with God, where there is no difference, do honor and insult pass on to him. If the world is made subject to the Son, this is glory to the Father. And so when we say that the Son is perfect, lacking nothing, and not inferior to the Father, this is glory to the Father, that he begot such a Son. This is a great proof of his power too, and goodness, and wisdom: that he begot one in no way inferior, either in wisdom or in goodness. When I say that the Son is wise as the Father is, and in no way inferior, this is proof of the Father’s great wisdom. When I say that he is powerful as the Father is, this is proof of the Father’s power.

When I say that he is good as the Father is, this is the greatest evidence of the Father’s goodness, that he begot such a Son, in no way less than himself or inferior to him. When I say that he begot him not inferior in essence but equal, and not of another essence, in this again I marvel at God — at his power, and goodness, and wisdom — that he has shown us another from himself, such as he himself is, except that he is not the Father. So whatever great things I say of the Son pass on to the Father. Now if this small and light thing (for it is a light thing where God’s glory is concerned that the world should worship him) is to the glory of God, how much more are all those other things? [p]

Let us, then, believe to his glory, and let us live to his glory, for the one is of no use without the other. When we glorify him rightly but do not live rightly, that is when we insult him most, because we are enlisted under him as our Master and Teacher, and yet we despise him and have no dread of that fearful judgment seat. It is no wonder that the pagans live impure lives; that does not deserve such condemnation. But that Christians, who share in such great mysteries, who enjoy such great glory, should live so impurely — this is the worst of all, and unbearable.

For tell me: he was obedient to the uttermost, and that is why he received the honor on high. He became a servant, and that is why he is Lord of all, both of the angels and of everything else. So let us not suppose either that we step down from what is our due when we humble ourselves. For this is how we will be more highly exalted, and rightly so; this is when we become truly admirable. That the lofty man is really low, and that the lowly man is exalted, the saying of Christ makes plain enough. But let us examine the matter itself. What is it to be humbled? Is it not to be blamed, to be accused, to be slandered?

What is it to be exalted? It is to be honored, to be praised, to be glorified. Very well. Let us see how the matter stands. Satan was an angel, and he exalted himself. What then? Was he not humbled beyond all others? Does he not have the earth for his place? Is he not condemned and accused by everyone? [r]

Paul was a man, and he humbled himself. What then? Is he not admired? Is he not praised? Is he not extolled? Is he not the friend of Christ? Did he not do greater things than Christ? Did he not often command the devil like a captive slave? Did he not lead him about like an executioner? Did he not hold him up to scorn? Did he not hold his head crushed under his feet? Did he not, with great boldness, ask God that others too might do the same?

But why do I say this? Absalom exalted himself; David humbled himself. Which of the two was raised up? Which became glorious? What could show humility more plainly than the words that blessed prophet spoke about Shimei: “Let him curse, for the Lord has told him to” (Second Samuel 16, verse 11)? And if you like, we will examine the cases themselves. The tax collector humbled himself — though his case can hardly be called humility. But how?

He answered as a right-minded man should. The Pharisee exalted himself. What then? Let us look at the facts as well. Suppose there are two men, both rich, both highly honored, both raised high by wisdom and power and the other advantages of this world. Then let one of them look for honor from everyone, be angry if he does not get it, demand more than is due to him, and exalt himself. Let the other despise the whole business, hold nothing against anyone because of it, and slip away from honor when it is offered to him. [u]

For there is no way to gain glory except by running from glory. As long as we chase it, it flies from us; but when we run from it, then it chases us. If you want to be glorious, do not desire glory. If you want to be lofty, do not make yourself lofty. What is more, everyone honors the man who does not grasp at honor, and spurns the man who seeks it; for somehow the human race loves to be contrary and leans the opposite way. So let us despise glory, for this is how we will be able to become lowly — or rather, to become exalted. Do not exalt yourself, so that you may be exalted by someone else. The one who is exalted by himself is not exalted by others; the one who is humbled by himself is not humbled by others.

Haughtiness is a great evil. It is better to be a fool than to be haughty. In the one case the folly is only a disorder of the mind; in the other it is something worse still, folly joined with madness. The fool is an evil to himself, but the haughty man is a plague to others as well. This misery comes from senselessness. No one can be haughty without being a fool, and whoever is brimful of folly is haughty. Listen to the Wise Man, who says, “I saw a man wise in his own eyes; there is more hope for a fool than for him” (Proverbs 26, verse 12). Do you see that I had good reason to say the evil I am speaking of is worse than folly? For it is written, “There is more hope for a fool than for him.” That is why Paul too said, “Do not be wise in your own eyes” (Romans 12, verse 16).

Tell me, which bodies do we call healthy: those that are badly swollen, full inside of wind and water, or those that are kept lean, whose outline shows restraint? Plainly we would choose the second. So it is with the soul too. The soul that is puffed up has a worse disease than dropsy, while the one that is kept in check is free from every evil. How great, then, are the good things that lowliness of mind brings us!

What do you want? Forbearance? Freedom from anger? Kindness to others? A sober mind? Watchfulness? All these good things spring from lowliness of mind, and their opposites from haughtiness. The haughty man is bound to be insolent as well, quarrelsome, hot-tempered, bitter, sullen — a beast rather than a man.

Are you strong, and proud of it? That is a reason to be humble instead. Why are you proud of a thing of no account? A lion is bolder than you, and a wild boar stronger; next to them you are not even a fly. Robbers too, and grave robbers, and gladiators, and even your own slaves, and people perhaps still more stupid than they, are stronger than you. Is this, then, something to be praised for? Are you proud of such a thing? Bury yourself for shame!

Or are you handsome and good-looking? That is the boast of crows! You are no fairer than the peacock in either color or plumage; the bird beats you in plumage and far outdoes you in its feathers and its color. The swan too is exceedingly beautiful, and so are many other birds; compare yourself with them and you will see that you are nothing. Worthless boys, too, and unmarried girls, and prostitutes, and effeminate men have often had this boast. Is this a reason for haughtiness?

Or are you rich? Where did it come from? What do you have? Gold, silver, precious stones! This is the boast of robbers too, and of murderers, and of those who work in the mines. What criminals labor at becomes your boast! Or do you adorn yourself and dress yourself up? Well, we can see horses dressed up too, and among the Persians camels as well, and among people, everyone connected with the stage. Are you not ashamed to boast of these things, when animals without reason, and slaves, and murderers, and effeminate men, and robbers, and grave robbers share them with you? Do you build splendid mansions? And what of that? Many jackdaws live in more splendid houses and have nobler retreats. Do you not see how many who were mad after money have built houses in the fields and in lonely places that serve as homes for jackdaws?

Or are you proud of your voice? You can by no means sing with clearer, sweeter tones than the swan or the nightingale. Is it your skill in all kinds of crafts? But what is wiser in this than the bee? What embroiderer, what painter, what geometer can imitate her work? Is it the fineness of your clothes? Here the spiders beat you. Is it the speed of your feet? Again the first prize goes to the animals without reason — the hare, the gazelle, and all the beasts that are not lacking in speed. Have you traveled widely? Not more than the birds. Their journeys are made more easily; they need no supplies for the road and no pack animals, for their wings are all they need. These are their ship, their pack animal, their carriage, even their wind — in short, everything a person could name.

Are you sharp-sighted? Not like the gazelle, not like the eagle. Are you quick of hearing? The donkey is quicker. Of smell? The hound does not let you outdo him. Are you good at laying in supplies? You fall short of the ant. Do you gather gold? Not like the ants of India. Are you proud of your health? The animals without reason are far better off than we are, both in bodily condition and in needing nothing from anyone; they have no fear of poverty. “Look at the birds of the sky: they do not sow or reap or gather into barns” (Matthew 6, verse 26). “And surely,” he means, “God has not made the animals without reason superior to us.”

Do you see how thoughtless this is? Do you see how completely it lacks examination? Do you see how much we gain by looking into the matter point by point? The man whose mind is lifted up above everyone turns out to be lower even than the animals without reason.

But we will pity him and not follow his example. His opinion of himself finds the limits of our mortal nature too narrow, yet we will not for that reason go on to bring him down to the level of the animals without reason. We will lift him up from there — not for his own sake, for he deserves no better, but so that we may set forth God’s love for humankind and the honor he has granted us. For there are things — yes, there are things — in which the animals without reason have no share with us. What kind of things? Godliness, and a life built on virtue. Here you can never bring up the sexually immoral, or effeminate men, or murderers, for we have been separated from them. And what, then, is found here? We know God; we acknowledge his providence; we are steeped in the true philosophy concerning immortality. Here let the animals without reason give way. They cannot compete with us on these points. [v]

We live in mastery of ourselves. Here the animals without reason have nothing in common with us. Though we fall behind all of them, we rule over them; and this is what shows how great our rule is, that though we fall behind them, we still reign over them. It is so that you may learn that the cause of this is not you, but God, who made you and gave you reason. We set nets and snares for them, we drive them in, and they are at our mercy.

Mastery of oneself, a yielding temper, mildness, contempt for money: these are the privileges of our race. But since you, one of those blinded by presumption, have none of them, you are quite consistent in holding notions either above the level of human beings or beneath the very animals without reason. For this is the nature of folly and of audacity: it is either lifted too high or, just as much, sunk too low, and never keeps to the right measure. [w]

We are equal to the angels in this: a kingdom has been pledged to us, and the choir to which Christ is joined. Whoever is a man may be flogged, and still he does not give way. A man laughs at death; he is a stranger to fear and trembling; he does not desire more than he has. So all who are not like this are beneath the animals without reason.

For when you want the advantage in the things of the body but have no advantage in the things that concern the soul, how are you anything but inferior to the animals without reason? Bring forward one of the vicious and thoughtless, one of those who live in excess and for themselves alone. The horse outdoes him in fighting spirit, the boar in strength, the hare in speed, the peacock in grace, the swan in sweetness of voice, the elephant in size, the eagle in keenness of sight, all the birds in wealth. Where, then, do you get your right to rule the animals without reason? From reason? But you do not have it, do you?

For whoever stops making proper use of it is inferior to them once again. When a man who has reason is more unreasoning than they are, it would have been better for him never to have been capable of reasoning in the first place. It is not the same thing to receive a position of rule and then betray the trust, as to let the chance of receiving it go by. A ruler who falls below the level of his own guards would have been better off never putting on the purple. And it is exactly the same in this case. [y]

So, knowing that without virtue we are inferior even to the animals without reason, let us train ourselves in it, so that we may become men — or rather, angels — and may enjoy the blessings promised us, through the grace and love for humankind of our Lord Jesus Christ, with whom, to the Father, together with the Holy Spirit, be glory, power, and honor, now and forever and ever. Amen.