Reading Summary: “Behold the Thief with the Eyes of Faith” by Mark Bilby
Seventeen brief sermons from patristic preachers on the good bandit.
Bilby, Mark G. Behold the Thief with the Eyes of Faith: Late Antique Greek and Latin Sermons on the Good Thief. Translated by Mark G. Bilby. First edition. Popular Patristics Series 4. Yonkers, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2024.
Overview
Mark Bilby has compiled and translated seventeen brief sermons from various patristic preachers (or at least attributed to them) that emphasize the “good” thief or “bandit” who responded with confession and faith as he hung beside the Lord Jesus Christ upon the Roman cross. The sermons are attributed to John Chrysostom (c. 347-407 AD), Ephrem Graecus (c. 306-373 AD), Severian of Gabala (c. 347-425 AD), Proclus of Constantinople (c. 390-446 AD), Maximus of Turin (c. 380-465 AD), Augustine of Hippo (354-430 AD), Fulgentius of Ruspe (c. 467-533 AD), and Caesarius of Arles (c. 470-542 AD). Bilby provides a brief textual critical analysis as part of an introduction to each one, which sometimes argues against the reliability of some of the attributions.
These sermons demonstrate what appear to be common themes and language as well as hermeneutical and homiletical methods among the preachers. The commonly perceive a biblical theological theme converge at Golgotha, including both Christ and the two thieves or “bandits.” One example is the biblical theological theme of the two trees: Adam stole from the “tree” in the garden of Eden, harvesting death and expulsion from paradise; whereas the good bandit stole from the “tree” of the cross upon which Christ was fixed, harvesting life and entrance to paradise. Another example is the biblical theological theme of the two peoples: Israel had all the benefits of God’s provision and were even visited by the Lord in the form of the Messiah, but (like the wicked bandit) they rebelled against God and blasphemed and condemned His Messiah; whereas the Gentiles had no knowledge of God and only saw Christ humiliated, but (like the good bandit) they confessed their guilt and entrusted themselves to Christ’s goodness and power to save.
Takeaways
There are a number of powerful uses of rhetoric and meter among these sermons. For example, in one of the sermons attributed to Chrysostom, the preacher focuses on the reality that Christ was crucified outside the temple, the place where priestly sacrifice was to be made. He says,
“‘And why not in the temple… but instead outside the city and its walls?’ So that it may be fulfilled that He was reckoned among the lawless (Lk. 22:37; cf. Is. 53:12)… So as to cleanse the nature of the air; for this reason on high, not covered by a roof, but covered by heaven… for this reason not under a roof, for this reason, not in the Judaic temple, lest the Judeans steal the sacrifice, lest you think it belongs to that people alone. For this reason outside the city and walls, so that you may learn that the sacrifice is catholic [i.e., universal], that the offering is for the whole world… Christ who has come has cleansed the whole inhabited world, every place has become a prayer-house.”[1]
So too, there are several moving uses of contrast or “paradox.” For example, in a sermon attributed to Augustine, the preacher contrasts the good bandit’s response to that of Christ’s disciples. He says,
“Why such beatitude for a bandit?… Do you wish quickly to hear his virtue? When Peter was denying [Christ] on earth, a bandit was confessing on a cross. [The] foremost disciple was not strong [enough] to withstand a most common girl, while a bandit who was suspended, looking down on people standing all around, with eyes full of faith recognized heaven’s Lord with a pure mind… [Christ] showed [the bandit] no wonder, did not resurrect the dead, did not put demons to flight, did not call forth martyrs, nor did [the] Lord produce for him a sermon on heavens’ kingdom; He spoke nothing of Gehenna; and [yet] he confessed His imperial power before everyone.”[2]
Such tools are employed as homiletical methods, and these are drawn from the hermeneutical method of what is commonly known today as biblical theology. Biblical theologians believe that the whole of Scripture is authored by God Himself, and as such, the entire narrative of the Bible is connected and harmonious. These patristic preachers exemplify the use of such methods (both in deriving homiletical substance and delivering it with style), which are common among the most compelling preachers from every generation.
Analysis
Each of these sermons are topical, in the sense that they focus on a particular topic that may be understood from various passages and angles throughout the entirety of Scripture. The first sermon, for example, is purported to center on Genesis, but it touches on Christ’s parable of the talents, the first sin of Adam and Eve, the good bandit, Christ’s teaching in His conversation with Nicodemus, and also the already-not-yet benefits of the gospel of Christ. Such sermons are wonderful for teaching Christians how to do systematic theology, to understand and apply the doctrines that form Christian faith and propel Christian living.
However, none of these sermons can rightly be called expositional, in the sense that they do not mean to draw out (or successfully arrive at) the main point of a particular passage. It is true that we can learn more from Genesis 1-3 than the nature of God’s relationship to man, the nature of man’s fall and ongoing condition in sin, and the setting of the whole biblical narrative. However, these are the main teachings of the early Genesis record. So too, one may conclude that the two bandits beside Christ at His crucifixion are indeed intended to be a picture of two responses to Christ’s person and work, but this conclusion should be demonstrated from the narrative of the Gospel of Luke if the sermon is to be expositional (rather than topical).
Questions
What are some advantages of topical preaching (in contrast to expositional)?
How might rhetorical methods be employed well in sermon composition and delivery, and how might the preacher avoid the “lofty speech or wisdom” that the Apostle Paul seems to deride (1 Cor. 2:1)?
How can biblical theology help the hearer better understand how the whole Bible fits together as one overarching narrative?
[1] Bilby, Behold the Thief with the Eyes of Faith. 33-34.
[2] Bilby, Behold the Thief with the Eyes of Faith. 167-168.