SOURCE: G. F. Browne, "The Homilies of Bede," in The Venerable Bede, E. & J. B. Young & Co., 1887, pp. 127-47.

[In the following excerpt, Browne examines the homilies of Bede, finding them devoid of rhetorical devices, helpful on problematic Latin translations of biblical passages, but characterized by "far-fetched figurative interpretation."]

The Homilies of Bede which have been preserved are in one sense disappointing; they throw little or no light upon the state of society in his time. There is no approach to anything at all resembling the personal interest of which the sermons of Chrysostom are so full. There is no rebuking of notorious sinners, no sarcastic scourging of fashionable follies and vices. The reason of this is obvious, even if we overlook the difference between the two men. Chrysostom preached in a great metropolis, full of luxury and dissipation. Bede read theological lectures in a quiet monastery, where he seems to have had no vices to rebuke, or where, if vices there were, he rebuked them tenderly in private. His Homilies reflect the quietness and confidence of the faithful Christian student, addressing a body of his brethren in good works and in a God-fearing life.

Like others of the early preachers, he supports his statements with texts of Scripture more often than is usual in the present time. The Bible was less familiar to ordinary people then than it is now. There was instruction in Christianity to be found in the quotation of texts possibly novel to some hearers. Many points of doctrine were much less assured then; they needed support from every quarter where it could be found, and no support was so good as that which was derived from apposite texts of Scripture.

There is a singular absence of rhetorical attempts in these Homilies. It would seem never to have been Bede's intention to work upon the feelings of his hearers by impassioned words. He said what he meant to say clearly and simply, and he left it to its own inherent force to make its way. It would be difficult to find, in the sermons of Bede, passages dwelling in vehement terms upon the horrors of hell and the happiness of heaven. Threats and profuse promises are no more parts of his teaching than are invective and sarcasm parts of his style.

As a rule, Bede took a passage of some considerable length,—one of the lessons for the day, for example, and went through it verse by verse, expounding rather than preaching. He frequently insisted upon the special doctrines which centre round the Incarnation, such as the two natures of Christ, and upon the relation of the Persons in the Blessed Trinity. Such themes suited him better than the more practical subjects which are fitted for those who are conversant with the world and have a mixed and secular congregation to address. It is to be feared that many of Bede's sermons would be stigmatized in these days as "doctrinal," or, by those who say more distinctly what they mean, as "dull."

There is very little indeed of criticism of the text in Bede's sermons. He takes it as he finds it, and he expounds it. This is only what might be expected in those early days; but from a theological student and scholar like Bede we might, perhaps, have expected more reference to the Greek text and to the manner in which the Latin text in use represented it. In some cases where the Greek has a special emphasis which the Latin has not, Bede's remarks take no account of the emphasis in the original. As an example of his textual criticism—there are very few indeed to be found in his sermons—the passage "He came into the parts of Dalmanutha" may be cited. On this Bede remarks that St. Matthew has "Magdala." He thinks that the same place is intended by both evangelists, for "many codices" have "Magedan" in St. Mark instead of "Dalmanutha." It may be noticed as typical of Bede's method of preaching that he makes no point of the emphatic ye in John iii. 7, "Marvel not that I said unto thee, ye must be born again," though the emphasis of the word is brought out in the Latin text as well as in the Greek original.

Bede's method as a commentator¹ was very different from his method as a preacher. In these days of critical study of the Holy Scriptures in the original languages, it is interesting to observe the manner in which he used the Greek of the New Testament in writing his commentaries. The Bible which was in the hands of his readers and hearers was of course the Latin Bible. Bede did not treat this as later writers treated it, as being sufficient in itself. He was careful to point out omissions, and to warn his readers against mistranslations into which the Latin might lead them if they were not warned. Thus, to take half a chapter as an example, on Acts ii. 20,² "the sun shall be turned into darkness," he tells them that though the Latin might suggest "darknesses," it was only because the Latin word had no proper singular; the Greek word, which he gives in his commentary, shows that the correct translation is "darkness." On Acts ii. 23, "Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken," where the Latin omits "ye have taken," he informs his readers that a very important word is omitted in their Latin version, very important because the Jews had the choice between the robber and Jesus, and they took Him. Again, in the 30th verse of the same chapter, "that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, He would raise up Christ to sit on his throne," where the Latin omits "according to the flesh, He would raise up Christ," he points out that there is more in the Greek than in the Latin, and tells them what should be added. Similarly in verses 33 and 34 he notes differences between the Latin and the Greek. On verse 41 he remarks that while the Latin text on which he was commenting seemed to say that all who gladly received the word were baptized, another manuscript gave more correctly the true force of the Greek, limiting the statement to the particular individuals who heard the word on that occasion.

On one point Bede was very careful to warn the readers of his commentaries, as careful as a member of the New Testament Revision Company could be. He constantly pointed out the ambiguities caused by the want of an article in the Latin. Thus on Acts i. 6, "Wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?" the Latin gives no hint to enable a reader to determine whether he shall translate it "restore the kingdom of Israel," or "restore the kingdom to Israel." Bede tells his readers that the Greek article decides the question in favour of the latter. Similarly in the 14th verse of the same chapter, "Mary, the mother of Jesus, and His brethren," the Latin leaves it open to any one to translate, "and her brethren," against which translation Bede gives a warning. And so, too, to take one more example from the same part of the Scripture, in Acts ii. 3, "there appeared unto them cloven tongues, as of fire," the Latin may be rendered "cloven tongues, as it were fire," where Bede informs them that in the Greek there is no ambiguity, the form of the genitive being different from that of the nominative, whereas in the Latin they are the same. An instance of another kind is found in the next verse, "began to speak in other tongues"; here the Latin has "in various tongues," but Bede corrects the translation, and says that it should be "other." From these numerous examples, taken from so small a portion of Scripture, it may be imagined how careful and close was Bede's study of his manuscripts. We feel that we are in the hands of a man who, at least so far as the desire to be accurate is concerned, may be trusted either as a commentator or as a historian.

He speaks in terms of the highest respect of the Virgin Mary, as blessed above all women. But he goes no further than that. His manner of speaking of her may be gathered from a remark which he makes in preaching on one of the festivals in her honour. A most excellent and salutary practice, he says, has long been established in the Church, that her hymn (he is speaking of the Magnificat) is sung by all every day at vespers. The object and use of this practice he believes to be that the continual commemoration of our Lord's Incarnation may incite us to deeper devotion, and the recollection of the example set by His mother may strengthen us in virtue. He is careful to explain that the expression "first-born son"—"she brought forth her first-born son"—in no way implies that there were other children born later; and he maintains the theory of the perpetual virginity of the Virgin Mary so strenuously that he prays God to avert from his hearers the blasphemy of holding otherwise. Of "Mariolatry" there is no sign in Bede's Homilies. In the Ecclesiastical History, Bede relates that Bishop Wilfrid was told by the archangel Michael, in a vision, that the prayers of his disciples and the intercession of the Virgin Mary had moved the Lord to grant Wilfrid a recovery from a dangerous illness.

There are frequent references to the two great Sacraments of Christ, Baptism and the Supper of the Lord. But there is a rather marked absence of any homily on one or other of these subjects specially. It would have been very interesting, and it might have been instructive, to read what Bede thought and taught in detail on these cardinal points of Christian faith and practice. His method of homiletic exposition was such that his views were stated rather incidentally and in passing, than in any very full and formal manner: we find nothing like an elaborate treatise on these and similar points. His mention of the validity of Baptism in the name of the Holy Trinity, by whomsoever administered, is a good example of this. He is preaching on the visit of Nicodemus to Christ, and in commenting on the words of the master in Israel, "How can a man be born when he is old?" he remarks that the same is true of spiritual birth, a man cannot be born again. "No one who has been baptized in the name of the Holy Trinity, even though by a heretic, a schismatic, or an evil person, may be rebaptized by good Catholics, lest the invocation of so great a name be annulled."³ Passing allusions to the necessity of Baptism will be mentioned when we come to speak of Bede's figurative interpretation of the parable of the Good Samaritan, and of the miracle of the Four Thousand. In another place, speaking on the words of St. Mark vii. 33, "He spit, and touched his tongue," &c, Bede says that from this passage a custom prevalent in his time grew up, the priests touching in like manner the nostrils and ears of those whom they were about to present for Baptism, saying at the same time the word Ephphatha. The touching of the nostrils he understood to be a sign that thenceforward they should be a "sweet savour of Christ" (2 Cor. ii. 15); and he urges all who had received the rite of consecration by Baptism, and all who were about to receive it at the forthcoming season of Easter, to avoid all occasion of falling back into that from which Baptism washed them. In this passage he speaks at some length on the subject of Baptism, and its cleansing power, and it is perhaps rather remarkable that he makes no reference to the question of original sin. In another homily he repeats his reference to the practice of baptizing at Easter; "rightly do we on this night"—the commencement of the festival of Easter—"hallow to the one true God in the font of regeneration the new people of His adoption brought out of the spiritual Egypt."

To the Sacrament of the Supper of the Lord the references in the Homilies are frequent and most reverential. English readers not familiar with the early names of things must not be surprised to find that Bede uses the ordinary name Missa, the Latin word for Mass, to describe the celebration of this Sacrament. In King Alfred's time, "mass-priest" was the accepted designation of officiating clergy in Priests' Orders. In speaking of this Sacrament, Bede uses stronger expressions than he might have done had he known what controversies would rage round almost every word that could be used in connection with it. He uses words well known in Eucharistic controversy, to a greater extent than he uses controversial words in speaking of Baptism. And the reason for this is clear. Our Lord Himself used words as strong as any that can be used when He said, "This is My Body," "This is My Blood," and any language framed on these two statements must seem strong, however free it may be in fact and in intention from any element of superstition. This is not true of the language used in baptismal controversy. But while it is true that Bede uses words which a cautious writer of the present day might avoid using in public utterances, because of the misconceptions to which his use of them might possibly give rise, it is at least as true that we search in vain for any sign of a belief on Bede's part in the doctrine of transubstantiation. It is so well known that transubstantiation did not appear as a doctrine till long after Bede's time, that it may seem unnecessary to remark that no sign of it is found in Bede. Since, however, some of his expressions have a recognised force in modern controversy, it is not out of place to preface a mention of them by some such caution.

In the passage quoted above from Bede's "Homily on the Eve of the Resurrection," after mentioning the Easter rite of baptism, he proceeds as follows:— "and rightly we celebrate the solemn mass, we offer to God for the advance of our salvation the holy Body and precious Blood of our Lamb, by whom we have been redeemed from our sins." And in another place, speaking of the "manger" of Bethlehem, he says, "He chose the manger, to which animals came to feed, as His resting-place, foreshadowing the refreshing of all the faithful, by the mysteries of His Incarnation, on the table of the holy altar." These are the words of a man who had not been taught by sad experience what mischief may be supposed to lurk under harmless expressions when once they have been appropriated by one side or another in a controversy. Against them we may set such words of his as the following, words which no one who held the views afterwards known as the doctrine of transubstantiation could have used:

The time of our Passover is at hand. Let us come holy to the Altar of the Lord, not to eat the flesh of a lamb, but to receive the sacred mysteries of our Redeemer. Let no one who abides still in death presume to receive the mysteries of life. Let us pray that He may deign to come to our feast, to illumine us with His presence, to hallow His own gifts to us.

And in another passage he tells his hearers that the sacrifices under the new covenant are spiritual:

The two altars in the Temple signify the two covenants. The first was the altar of burnt-offerings, covered with brass, for offering victims and sacrifices. This was the Old Covenant. The second was at the entrance of the Holy of Holies, covered with gold, for burning incense. This was the inward and more perfect grace of the New Covenant.

Something to the same effect is a passage on the priesthood after the order of Melchisedech:

Melchisedech, a priest of the most high God, offered to God bread and wine long before the times of the priesthood of the Law. And our Redeemer is called a Priest after the order of Melchisedech, because after the priesthood of the Law had come to an end, He established a similar sacrifice by offering the mystery of His Body and Blood.

Again, in preaching on the words, "Behold the Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world," in conjunction with the verse from the Apocalypse, "Who hath loved us and washed us from our sins in His blood, " Bede speaks in words which set his views before us in a clear and satisfactory manner.

He washed us from our sins in His blood, not only when He gave His blood on the cross for us, or when each one of us by the mystery of His holy Passion was washed clean by baptism of water, but He also daily takes away the sins of the world. He washes us from our sins daily in His Blood, when the memory of the same blessed Passion is renewed at the altar, when the creature of bread and wine is transferred into the sacrament of His flesh and blood by the ineffable sanctification of the Spirit; and thus His Flesh and Blood is not poured and slain by the hands of unbelievers to their own destruction, but is taken by the mouth of believers to their own salvation. The paschal lamb in the Law rightly shows forth the figure of this, the lamb which once freed the people from their Egyptian slavery, and in memory of that freeing was wont year by year to sanctify by its offering the same people, until He should come to whom such a victim bare witness; and being offered to the Father for us as a victim and a sweet-smelling savour, after He had offered the lamb, He transferred to the creature of bread and wine the mystery of His Passion, being made a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedech.

It may be worth while to quote on this point the words of a learned divine who presided over the Anglo-Saxon Church two centuries and a half after Bede's death, Ælfric, Archbishop of Canterbury. "When the Lord said, He that eateth My flesh and drinketh My blood hath everlasting life, He bade not His disciples to eat the Body wherewith He was enclosed nor to drink that Blood which He shed for us; but He meant that holy morsel which is in a ghostly way His Body and Blood; and he that tasteth it with believing heart hath everlasting life." Thus it would appear that neither early nor late in the history of the Church of England in Saxon times were erroneous views held by the chief divines on this cardinal point of Christian doctrine.

It has already been remarked that there is very little indeed of personal allusion in Bede's sermons. There is not, however, an entire absence of such allusion. In a remarkable sermon on the text, "Every one that hath forsaken houses, … shall receive an hundredfold," Bede refers to the high esteem in which those who professed the religious life were held by those who remained in the world, so that they actually did receive much more than they surrendered when they gave up their property and worldly prospects. The "hundred" he takes to be not a mere numeral but the symbol of perfection. He who gives up human possessions and affections will find an abundance of the faithful eager to receive him, to put their houses and goods at his disposal, to love him with a more perfect affection than wife or mother or child. He reminded those whom he addressed that they had practical proof of this. When they passed on rare occasions beyond the bounds of the monastery, they found welcome and support wherever they went. In another homily he speaks of the use of the intellect in a manner which shows how highly he estimated intellectual gifts, and how seriously he felt that he himself devoted to God the hours of study. The text was, "Wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business," or, as Bede completed the expression left indefinite in the Greek, "in my Father's house." This, Bede says, refers not only to the material temple in which Christ was, but also to that temple of the intellect in which He was exercising Himself when He heard the doctors and asked them questions, a temple constructed for the eternal praise of God.

We find Bede's views on what was afterwards changed into the doctrine of Extreme Unction, in his remarks on the Epistle of James, v. 14-20. The Gospels, he says, show us that the Apostles acted as Christians are there bidden to act. In his own time, the custom prevailed that sick men were anointed with oil by the priests, with prayer accompanying, that they might be healed. As Pope Innocent had written, not priests only but any Christians might use the oil for this purpose, in their own or their relations' need. But only bishops might make the oil, for the words "anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord" implied two things, the one that the name of the Lord was to be invoked when the oil was used, the other that the oil was to be "oil in the name of the Lord," i.e. made and consecrated in the name of the Lord. Of Confession he proceeds to say that many are in sickness and near death because of their sins. If such confess to the priests of the Church, and earnestly set about to amend, their sins shall be dismissed.

The views of Bede's time, and of Bede himself, on Purgatory, are clearly given in the account of a vision in the Fifth Book of the Ecclesiastical History. We have already seen in the life of Benedict Biscop some parts of this vision, but we have not seen all. In addition to the valley one side whereof was burning heat and the other was piercing cold, and to the flaming pit, the place of torment, the man to whom the vision or trance was vouchsafed saw also the abodes of blessedness of two degrees. After passing the place of utmost torment, his guide and he came to a wall whose height and length were infinite. Presently, by what means he knew not, they were on the top of the wall. At their feet lay a vast and joyous plain, full of so sweet a fragrance of vernal flowers as drove away the vile odours of the pit with which his senses had been impregnated. The light was clearer than the day, more splendid than the sun. On the plain were innumerable congregations of white-robed men, and crowds seated by companies rejoicing. Not unnaturally he thought within himself that these were the plains of Heaven. But his companion, knowing his thoughts, answered him, "Not this is the Kingdom of Heaven."

And then, as he moved on, there dawned upon him a yet fairer and more splendid effulgence, from out of which proceeded the sweetest strains of singers and a fragrancy so marvellous as far to transcend the exquisite fragrance of the former abode. His guide allowed him but to perceive these heavenly delights and then led him back to the lesser degree of bliss. Standing there, he expounded to him what he had seen. The valley of overpowering heat and cold was the place where the souls of those were tried and punished who had delayed to confess their sins and amend their lives, but who, having at the last moment confessed and repented, should enter into the kingdom of heaven at the day of judgment. Many of these, the guide declared, were so aided by the prayers and alms and fastings of living men, and especially by masses, that they would be released even before the day of judgment. The flowery plain on which he had seen the happy bands of youth bright and fair, this was the place to which the souls of those were sent, who, dying in good works, were yet not sufficiently perfect to pass at once to the plains of Heaven. At the day of judgment, they would pass to the higher glory.

It will be seen that while the latter class of souls represented men whose lives had been almost perfect, even those who were tormented in the valley had repented before death. For those who died without repentance, there was no hope from prayers or alms or fasting, not even from masses. A similar lesson is taught by another striking vision of which Bede tells. When Bede was about thirty years of age, there was in Mercia a man high in the military service of King Coenred, but he was a man of evil life. When he was very ill, indeed on his death-bed, the king came to exhort him to repent. The unhappy man said that he would amend his life if he recovered, but his companions should never have it to say that he repented under the fear of death. The king came to him again when he was much worse, and again exhorted him. It was too late, the dying man cried; he had seen a vision, and it was too late. There had come into his room two youths very fair to look upon; the one sat down at his head, the other at his feet. They produced a little book, very beautiful, but exceedingly small, and gave it him to read. He found written therein all the good deeds he had done; and behold they were very few and inconsiderable. They took back the book, and spake never a word. Then on a sudden there rushed in an army of malignant spirits, horrid to see, and they filled the whole house where he was. One among them, who seemed to be chief in horror and in place, brought out a book of terrible appearance and intolerable heaviness, and bade a satellite give it to the dying man to read. Therein was written, alas, all that ever he had done ill, in word or deed or thought. Then the prince of the demons said to the white-robed youths who sat at the head and the foot of the victim, "Why do ye sit here, whereas ye know of a surety that the man is ours?" And they said, "It is true; take him and cast him on to the heap of your damnation"; and having so said, they departed. Then there arose two of the worst spirits, having forks in their hands, and they struck him, the one in the head and the other in the feet. Such was the vision, but the wounds, the desperate man said, were real; they were spreading to meet one another in the midst of his body; and so soon as they should meet he would die, and the demons were at hand to drag him to hell. On which Bede, writing five-and-twenty years after, remarks, that the sinner was now suffering without avail in eternal torments that penance which he had refused to suffer for a brief period with its fruit unto forgiveness of sins.

The feature in Bede's Homilies which would probably seem the most prominent to a reader not very familiar with early compositions of the kind, is the somewhat far-fetched figurative interpretation in which he constantly indulges his imagination. To take first an instance of such interpretation which bears on a singular charge of heresy brought against him. The six waterpots at the marriage in Cana of Galilee were the six ages of the world down to the first showing forth of our Lord's divinity. The first was the age of Abel; the second commenced with the Flood; the third with the call of Abraham; the fourth with David; the fifth was the Captivity; the sixth was the birth of our Lord, His circumcision, presentation, and subjection to His parents. In connection with this subject Bede wrote a treatise, "On the Ages of the World." In an epistle to Plegwin, he refers to the charge of heresy of which mention has been made. Plegwin's messenger had come to him with pleasant greetings, but he had reported one dreadful thing, namely, that Plegwin had heard that Bede was sung among heretics by wanton rustics in their cups. Bede confesses that he was horrorstruck on hearing this. He turned pale. He asked, of what heresy was he thus accused. The messenger replied, "that Christ had not come in the flesh in the sixth age of the world." He breathed again. That Christ had come in the flesh no priest of Christ's Church could be supposed to have denied. That He came in the sixth age was another matter, and Bede traced the report to one of Plegwin's monks to whom he had shown his book, "On the Ages of the World." In this book he made it clear that the fifth age ended with the Incarnation, with which also the sixth began. Thus the question to which of the two ages the Incarnation was to be assigned might be resolved in either way. He had himself assigned it to the sixth age, both in the book and in a homily, so that the report was a calumny. What a curious picture of the age is this singing of heretics by rustics in their cups. It may remind us of the use made of popular songs by Arius in spreading his views and discrediting his orthodox opponents. That conjugal chastity is good, widowed continence better, virgin perfection best of all, Bede proves as follows, apparently on the assumption that those things which are symbolized by the earliest parts of our Lord's life on earth are more holy than those symbolized by parts more remote from His birth.

Jesus was born of a virgin; therefore virgin perfection is best of all. He was soon afterwards blessed by a widow; therefore widowed continence is next after virgin perfection. Later in His life He was present at a marriage feast; therefore conjugal chastity comes third only in order of merit.

In his "Homily on the Feeding the Four Thousand," he remarks that the seven baskets signified the sevenfold gifts of the Spirit. And he proceeds to say that baskets made of rushes and palm-leaves were employed, to signify that as the rush has its roots in water, so the Christian is rooted in the fountain of life; and as the palm-leaf is the symbol of a conqueror, so the Christian is a conqueror, and more than a conqueror. The two fishes were added to show by means of these creatures of the water that without the water of Baptism man cannot live.

The parable of the good Samaritan affords as good an example as any of Bede's figurative interpretations. The "certain man" is the human race in Adam. "Jerusalem" is the heavenly city of peace, from which Adam went down to "Jericho," that word (meaning "the moon," according to some early commentators) signifying the world with its changes and its wanderings. The "thieves" were the devil and his angels, who stripped him by taking from him the glory of immortality and the garb of innocence. His wounds were the blows of sin. He was left only "half dead," because while man was deprived of the gift of eternal life, there yet was left him sense to discern God. The Priest and Levite were the priesthood and ministry of the Old Covenant. The Samaritan, or "guardian"— Samaria is supposed to have taken its name from its admirable position as a place of observation, or watchtower—was the Lord Jesus. Binding up the wounds was restraining the sins of men. Pouring in oil was saying, "The kingdom of heaven is at hand"; pouring in wine was saying "Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down." The beast of burden was the flesh in which He deigned to come to us. The inn was the Church on earth, where pilgrims are refreshed on their way to heaven; the bringing to the inn is Baptism. The "next day" is after the resurrection of the Lord. The two pence are the two Testaments, said to be given to the innkeeper then, because then it was that He opened their eyes that they understood the Scriptures. The innkeeper had something over—"whatsoever thou spendest more"—which he did not receive in the two pence, something beyond the requirements of the two Testaments. This Bede illustrates by such passages as "Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord, yet I give my judgment"; and again, "The Lord hath ordained that they which preach the Gospel should live of the Gospel; but I have used none of these things." To those who obeyed these "counsels of perfection," who did more in such matters than the Scriptures actually required them to do, the debtor would come again, and would pay them, when the Lord came and said, "Because thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things; enter thou into the joy of thy Lord."

The Homilies contain incidental allusions which throw light upon some of the ceremonies of the time. In this way, for example, we learn that for the anniversary of the dedication day of the church of Jarrow, they adorned the walls of the church, increased the number of lights and of lections and the amount of singing, and passed the previous night in joyful vigils.

The best means of giving the English reader an idea of a sermon to an educated audience in England in Bede's time, will be to reproduce one of his Homilies entire in an English dress.

Notes

1. His commentaries on the Old Testament fill 1338 octavo pages, and those on the New Testament 1250.
2. The uncial MS. of the Acts known as E is believed to have been the actual manuscript used by Bede. It has a Latin rendering (not the Vulgate) in addition to the Greek text. It was given to the University of Oxford by Archbishop Laud, whence its name Laudiensis.
3. See Bede's account of Bishop John of Hexham rebaptizing a man who had been catechised and baptized by an ignorant priest, p. 174.