Homily on the Passage "Father, if it be possible . . ."

² Now observe I pray how each one of these writers speaks as if concerning things already past, signifying by the use of this tense the absolute inevitable certainty of the event. So also David, describing this tribunal, said, “Why did the heathen rage and the people imagine vain things? The Kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord and against his Christ.” And not only does he mention the trial, and the cross, and the incidents on the cross, but also him who betrayed him, declaring that he was his familiar companion and guest.

“For,” he says, “he that eats bread with me did magnify his heel against me.” Thus also does he foretell the voice which Christ was to utter on the cross saying “My God, My God why have you forsaken me?” and the burial also does he describe: “They laid me in the lowest pit, in dark places, and in the shadow of death.” And the resurrection: “you shall not leave my soul in hell, neither shall you suffer your Holy One to see corruption;” and the ascension: “God has gone up with a merry noise, the Lord with the sound of the trump.” And the session on the right hand: “The Lord said to my Lord sit thou on my right hand until I make your foes your footstool.” But Esaias also declares the cause; saying, “for the transgressions of my people is He brought to death,” and because all have strayed like sheep, therefore is he sacrificed. Then also he adds mention of the result, saying “by his stripes we have all been healed:” and “he has borne the sins of many.” The prophets then knew the cross, and the cause of the cross and that which was effected by it, and the burial and the resurrection, and the ascension, and the betrayal, and the trial, and described them all with accuracy: and is He who sent them and commanded them to speak these things ignorant of them Himself? What reasonable man would say that? Do you see that we must not attend merely to the words? For this is not the only perplexing passage, but what follows is more perplexing. For what does He say? “Father if it be possible let this cup pass from me.” Here he will be found to speak not only as if ignorant, but as if deprecating the cross: For this is what He says. “If it be permissible let me not be subjected to crucifixion and death.” And yet when Peter, the leader of the apostles, said this to Him, “Be it far from you Lord, this shall not happen unto You,” He rebuked him so severely as to say; “get you behind me Satan, you are an offense unto me, for you savour not the things which be of God, but those which be of men:” although a short time before he had pronounced him blessed. But to escape crucifixion seemed to Him so monstrous a thing, that him who had received the revelation from the Father, him whom He had pronounced blessed, him who had received the keys of Heaven, He called Satan, and an offense, and accused him of not savouring the things which be of God because he said to Him, “Be it far from you Lord, this shall never be unto You”— namely crucifixion. He then who thus vituperated the disciple, and poured such an invective upon him as actually to call him Satan (after having bestowed such great praise on him), because he said “avoid crucifixion,” how could He desire not to be crucified? And how after these things when drawing the picture of the good shepherd could He declare this to be the special proof of his virtue, that he should be sacrificed for the sake of the sheep, thus saying, “I am the good shepherd; the good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep?” Nor did He even stop there, but also added, “but he that is an hireling and not the shepherd sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep, and flees.” If then it is the sign of the good shepherd to sacrifice himself, and of the hireling to be unwilling to undergo this, how can He who calls Himself the good shepherd beseech that he may not be sacrificed? And how could He say “I lay down my life of myself”? For if you lay down your life of yourself, how can you beseech another that you may not lay it down? And how is it that Paul marvels at Him on account of this declaration, saying “Who being in the form of God counted it not a prize to be on an equality with God, but emptied Himself taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men, and being found in fashion as a man he humbled himself, becoming obedient even unto death, yea, the death of the cross.” And He Himself again speaks in this wise, “For this cause does my Father love me, because I lay down my life that I may take it again.” For if He does not desire to lay it down, but deprecates the act, and beseeches the Father, how is it that He is loved on this account? For love is of those who are like minded. And how does Paul say again “Love one another even as Christ also loved us and gave Himself for us?” And Christ Himself when He was about to be crucified said “Father, the hour has come: glorify your Son,” speaking of the cross as glory: and how then does He deprecate it here when He urges it there? For that the cross is glory listen to what the evangelist says “the Holy Ghost was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.” Now the hearing of this expression is “grace was not yet given because the enmity towards men was not yet destroyed by reason that the cross had not yet done its work.” For the cross destroyed the enmity of God towards man, brought about the reconciliation, made the earth Heaven, associated men with angels, pulled down the citadel of death, unstrung the force of the devil, extinguished the power of sin, delivered the world from error, brought back the truth, expelled the Demons, destroyed temples, overturned altars, suppressed the sacrificial offering, implanted virtue, founded the Churches. The cross is the will of the Father, the glory of the Son, the rejoicing of the Spirit, the boast of Paul, “for,” he says, “God forbid that I should boast save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ.” The cross is that which is brighter than the sun, more brilliant than the sunbeam: for when the sun is darkened then the cross shines brightly: and the sun is darkened not because it is extinguished, but because it is overpowered by the brilliancy of the cross. The cross has broken our bond, it has made the prison of death ineffectual, it is the demonstration of the love of God. “For God so loved the world that He gave His only-begotten Son, that every one who believes in Him should not perish.” And again Paul says “If being enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son.” The cross is the impregnable wall, the invulnerable shield, the safeguard of the rich, the resource of the poor, the defence of those who are exposed to snares, the armour of those who are attacked, the means of suppressing passion, and of acquiring virtue, the wonderful and marvellous sign. “For this generation seeks after a sign: and no sign shall be given it save the sign of Jonas;” and again Paul says, “for the Jews ask for a sign and the Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified.” The cross opened Paradise, it brought in the robber, it conducted into the kingdom of Heaven the race of man which was about to perish, and was not worthy even of earth. So great are the benefits which have sprung and do spring from the cross, and yet does He not desire to be crucified I ask? Who would venture to say this? And if He did not desire it who compelled Him, who forced Him to it? And why did He send prophets beforehand announcing that He would be crucified, if He was not to be, and did not wish to undergo it? And for what reason does He call the cross a cup, if He did not desire to be crucified? For that is the word of one who signifies the desire which he has concerning the act. For as the cup is sweet to those who are thirsty so also was crucifixion to Him: wherefore also He said “With desire have I desired to eat this Passover with you,” and this He meant not absolutely, but relatively, because after that evening the cross was awaiting Him.