I read a lot about Ambrose of Milan while researching my books, including his own theological works.
It’s fascinating to read things in “his own words” (I’m sure a lot is lost in translation). One thing that became clear to me pretty early on is that Ambrose—Saint Ambrose, father and doctor of the church—had some pretty antisemetic messages for his congregation.
He seems to have brought the topic up in response to sincere questions.
People in his congregation would come to him with concerns. I imagine the conversation going something like this:
Sincere Congregant: Bishop? I get that Catholicism is the one and only true religion.
Ambrose: Good. You’ve been paying attention.
Sincere Congregant: And I get that means Catholicism has been around since the dawn of time—even if we didn’t know about it until quite recently.
Ambrose: That’s right. God bides his time with these things.
Sincere Congregant: Yeah . . . that seems kinda misleading and a little bitchy, but okay. My question is . . .
Ambrose: Ask your question, my child.
Sincere Congregant: Why do the Scriptures tell us that Moses and the Jews received food from Heaven while they wandered in the desert? Like, why would God give them heavenly manna and quail, but not do the same thing for us—the true believers in the TRUE faith? What do WE get?
Ambrose: ……
Sincere Congregant: And the Scriptures kinda make it sounds like Judaism is actually more ancient than Catholicism. But that can’t be right . . . right?
Ambrose: ……
*
Ambrose of Milan was really clever working around concerns that Judaism was more ancient—and therefore more valid—than Catholic Christianity.
Let’s take a look at a passage from his sermon on The Mysteries. Prepare thyself, pleb, cause Ambrose can get wordy with his rhetoric, oratory, and poetic interpretations. He was schooled and skilled in this stuff.
“Now let us consider this, lest anyone perchance seeing the visible—since the things that are invisible are not seen and cannot be comprehended by human eyes—may by chance say: ‘For the Jews God rained manna; He rained quail, but for this His Church well-beloved by Him, there are these things of which ‘Eye has not seen nor ear heard, nor has it entered into the heart of man what things God has prepared for those who love Him.'”
Ambrose kicks things off with a little dig.
He chastises people for only believing in the visible, and failing to have faith in the invisible like good obedient Catholics.
By “the visible,” I think he’s referring to the words of the Scripture itself, which the eyes can see and ears can hear. (Although most congregants wouldn’t have been allowed to actually read the Scriptures themselves. That privilege was reserved for holy men.)
He may also be referring to the manna and quail.
Even though the sincere congregant couldn’t see the manna and quail, he at least knew that manna and quail were real things.
Probably.
Still not sure what exactly manna is. My Catholic school teachers taught me was a kind of unleavened, flake-like bread that collected on the ground. Like a delicious layer of buttery pastry crust all over everything. (Mmm . . . pastries.)
Also—holy crap, it rained quail? The concept of manna coming down from Heaven is weird enough, but the idea of it raining quail is downright freaking terrifying. Wouldn’t they just fly away? Or was it a constant swarm of quail—like the birds?
I digress.
Back to Ambrose, who has more to say about why his Sincere Congregant is a an unworthy doubter, and why Catholicism is more ancient and blessed than Judaism.
Buckle up, kids. Things are about to get Old Testament up in here.
“We [Ambrose uses the royal “we”] wish to prove that the sacraments of the Church are more ancient than those of the synagogue and more excellent than manna is.
“Genesis teaches us that they are more ancient. For the synagogue took its beginning from the law of Moses, but Abraham was far earlier.”
You mean Genesis, the first book of the Hebrew Torah, of the Pentateuch, is actually talking about Christianity?
Oh, please. Do go on.
“Melchisedek met Abraham and brought forth those things, which Abraham venerated and received.”
And these things were the sacraments?
“Yes, do keep up. Abraham did not bring them forth, but Melchisedek—who is introduced ‘without father, without mother, having neither beginning of days nor end, but like to the Son of God,’ of whom Paul says to the Hebrews: ‘He continues a priest for ever,’ who in the Latin version is called King of justice, King of peace.
“Do you not recognize who this is?”
Let me think.
Are you trying to say Melchisedek is God? I thought Melchisedek was just a really really old priest of the Most High. You’re gonna have to convince me a little more.
“Okay, I will. ‘Without a mother’ according to Divinity, because He was begotten of God the Father, of one substance with the Father; ‘without a father’ according to the Incarnation, because He was born of the Virgin—“
Wait a minute, he’s both without a mother and born of the Virgin?
You’re just changing the context of each phrase to make it make sense! In the context of “according to Divinity,” he has no mother but he has a father. In the context of “according to the Incarnation,” it’s the opposite! But—
“I’m not finished. ‘Having neither beginning nor end,’ for He himself is the beginning and the end of all things, ‘the first and the last.’ Therefore, the sacrament which you have received is not a gift of man but of God, brought forth by Him who blessed Abraham the father of faith, him whose grace and deeds you admire.”
Okay, I’m pretty sure this is some kind of mental mind-fuckery where you try to convince me some random old guy is God.
I’m still not totally convinced that Melchisedek is God. I mean, you’re twisting the scripture to read a lot of meaning into things. But whatever. Let’s go with it for now.
I’m still hung up on the manna and quail thing. How do you explain that?
“It has thus been proven that the sacraments of the Church are more ancient [than Judaism]. Now realize they are more powerful.”
Oh no.
“In very fact it is a marvelous thing that God rained manna on the fathers, and they were fed by daily nourishment from heaven. Therefore, it is said, ‘Man has eaten the bread of the angels.’ But yet all those who ate that bread died in the desert.”
Not too impressive. You’d think God would provide sustenance that would actually, you know, sustain people.
Was manna like rabbit meat? They say rabbit meat is so lean that if you ate nothing but rabbit, you’d still die? I have no idea if that’s true.
Maybe angels just don’t need as many calories as humans. And God just kinda forgot about that.
“But this food that YOU receive, this ‘living bread, which came down from heaven,’ furnishes the substance of eternal life, and whoever eats this bread ‘will not die forever,’ for it is the body of Christ.
“Consider now whether the bread of angels is more excellent or the flesh of Christ, which indeed is the body of life.”
Wow. You REALLY don’t want us to think the Jews have it better.
“Yes, manna is just physical bread—“
Physical bread that the angels ate.
“YES.”
Got it.
“But our heavenly bread is the BODY OF CHRIST. It’s 100,000x better. For them, water flowed from the rock. For YOU, blood flowed from Christ. Water satisfied them for the hour, blood satiates you for eternity.”
This is getting kind of morbid.
“This is Catholicism.”
Point taken.
“The manna appeared in a shadow, YOUR nourishment is in truth. If that which you admire is a shadow, how great is that whose shadow you admire? Hear that what came to pass among the fathers is a shadow . . . You recognize more excellent things; for the light is more powerful than the shade, truth than figure, the body of its author than manna from heaven.”
*
Do you get now why Christians were more blessed than the Jews?
I gotta hand it to Ambrose—the guy was a master of rhetoric, poetic interpretation, and presentation. His language is beautiful. He was also said to have a compelling stage presence, and to be very charismatic.
This is how he was able to persuade the thinking—and questioning—ancient Catholic that their religion was both more ancient and more sacred than Judaism.
And Ambrose revisits this topic multiple times in other sermons. Apparently, people in his congregation were really concerned about the fact that Judaism pre-dated Christianity. He had to give some creative interpretations of the scriptures, and rain down some divine judgment on those who doubted the evidence of their senses and intellects.
I’ll explore his ongoing crusade against the Jews more in a future post.
For now, thanks to Ambrose of Milan for showing up and trying to razzle dazzle all of us with his cult-leader-style antics. 🙂
*
Love,
L.